Posts by YoramEttinger:
Jewish settlements are legal
August 26th, 2016By Yoram Ettinger.
The misperceptions, misrepresentations and ignorance surrounding the general attitude toward the legal status of Jewish settlements in the disputed area of Judea and Samaria (the West Bank), reflects the general attitude toward the unique phenomenon of the reconstruction of the Jewish national home in the Land of Israel.
“Fidelity to law is the essence of peace” opined Prof. Eugene Rostow, a former Dean of Yale University Law School, Undersecretary of State and a co-author of the November 22, 1967 UN Security Council Resolution 242. Rostow resolved that under international law: “Jews have the same right to settle in the West Bank as they have in Haifa.”
(II) The April 24, 1920 resolution, adopted by the post-First World War San Remo Peace Conference of the Allied Powers Supreme Council, incorporated the Balfour Declaration, entrusting both sides of the Jordan River to the Mandate for Palestine: “the Mandatory will be responsible for putting into effect the [Balfour] declaration… in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.” It was one of over 20 Mandates (trusteeships) established following WW1, responsible for most boundaries in the Middle East.
(III) The Mandate for Palestine, ratified on July 24, 1922 by the Council of the League of Nations entrusted Britain to establish a Jewish state in the entire area west of the Jordan River, as demonstrated by article 6: “[to] encourage… close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands….” The Mandate is dedicated exclusively to Jewish national rights.
(IV) The October 24, 1945 Article 80 of the UN Charter incorporated the Mandate for Palestine into the UN Charter. Accordingly, the UN or any other entity cannot transfer Jewish rights in Palestine, including immigration and settlement, to any other party.
While the 1949 4th Geneva Convention prohibits the forced transfer of populations to areas previously occupied by a legitimate sovereign power, Israel has not forced Jews to settle in Judea and Samaria, and Jordan was not recognized, internationally, as its legitimate sovereign power.
Comments Off on Jewish settlements are legal
Israel’s BDS: Bounce, Develop and Surge
February 14th, 2015By Ambassador Yoram Ettinger.
In defiance of the anti-Israel BDS movement (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions), diplomatic pressure, regional and global geo-political instability, continued global economic uncertainties and the overall anti-Israel talk brouhaha, Israel demonstrates a robust walk, as evidenced (and impacted) by an expanding net-immigration and a faster-than-expected economic recovery from the 2014 war on Hamas terrorists in Gaza.
According to the February 3, 2015, Economist Intelligence Unit, “the July-August war in Gaza appears to have had only a transient effect on the economy…. Private sector job creation has played a more significant role with strong expansion. Employment in this relatively well-paid category rose by 5.2% year on year…. The fall in the unemployment rate comes despite a rise in the participation rate among the core 25-64 year age group from 75.1% in the third quarter of 2013 to 75.8% in the final quarter of 2014, and a modest increase in the share of full time employed persons…. The unemployment rate averaged 5.9% in 2014, compared with 6.3% in 2013, having fallen to a record low of 5.7% in the final quarter of 2014…. The unemployment rate in Israel compares well with the 7.2% among OECD member states….”
Israel is highlighted as the second most innovative country in the world following the USA, attracting an increasing number of global companies and investors. For instance, the most authoritative source on Israel’s high tech industries,IVC-KPMG, reported that in 2014, Israeli startups raised an all-time record of $3.4bn, compared with $2.3bn in 2013. Israeli startups raised $1.1bn during the last quarter of 2014 – a 58% rise over the third quarter of 2014, the most raised in one quarter since 1999. Moreover, in 2014, ten Israeli bio-med companies went public on NASDAQ. According to The Economist, Israel has the highest density of startups in the world, ranking second to the Silicon Valley in term of absolute number of startups.
In fact, Young Sohn, the President and Chief Strategy officer of the South Koreanelectronics giant, Samsung, opined: “Israel is second only to Silicon Valley in total investment by Samsung.” During 2014, Samsung invested heavily in Israeli startups, since “Israel is one of the global centers of entrepreneurship and innovations, a base for future technologies that can influence the lives of millions.” For example, Samsung invested in Israel’s StoreDot’s technology which charges smartphones in two minutes, RePlay’s development of a three dimensional 360 degrees video, EarlySense’s smartphone-related hardware which monitors a patient’s vital signs without attaching any device to the body.
On December 30, 2014, China (Israel’s leading Asian trade partner) and Israel launched a free-trade initiative. China has been aware of the Israel’s long term economic viability, expanding bilateral trade from $50mn in 1992 – when diplomatic ties were established – to $10bn in 2014, aiming at $20bn in a few years. Bloomberg News suggests that the China-Israel synergy is a derivative of “Israel’s leading research and development intensity and China’s manufacturing leadership.” Thus, China considers Israel a prime source of agricultural and irrigation technologies (e.g., a recent $300mn Israeli export of water technologies), required to sustain its urban and economic developments. In May, 2014, China’s Vice Premier, Liu Yandong, visited Israel with some 400 business and government officials. China’s Internet giants, Renre and Tencent led a $102mn investment in Israel’s SingulariTeam Fund; China’s giant, Guangxi Wuzhou Pharmaceutical, invested $3mn in the Hebrew University’s technology transfer company, Integra; Baidu, “China’s Google,” invested $3mn in Israel’s Pixellot; and, the electronic trade global giant, Alibaba, led a $5mn round of private placement by Israel’s Visualead.
Microsoft has expanded its reliance on Israel’s brainpower, beyond its two major research and development centers, which have enhanced its global competitiveness, increased its exports and expanded its employment base. In January, 2015, Microsoft acquired Israel’s Equivio for $200mn, following its November, 2014 acquisition of Israel’s Aorato for $200mn. Currently, it negotiates the acquisition of Israel’s N-trig.
During the first month of 2015, eight Israeli companies were acquired by global companies for $900mn: Amazon – Annapurna Labs ($360mn), Harman – Red Bend ($200mn), Dropbox – CloudOn ($100mn), Microsoft – Equivio ($200mn), etc.
Google Chairman, Eric Schmidt’s, private Innovation Endeavors Fund, co-led an $18mn round of private placement in Israel’s Team8 Incubator of cyber security technologies, along with Cisco Investment, France’s Alcatel-Lucent, BessemerVenture Partners and Marker Financial Advisors.
The American Treetop Realty is following in the footsteps of nine US real estate companies and funds – led by Extell ($1bn) and Lightstone ($480mn) – with bonds traded on the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange, leveraging the growing capital market in Israel.
Notwithstanding Turkey‘s Erdogan’s visceral, anti-Israel policy, Israel-Turkey trade balance has surged from $2.6bn in 2009 to $5.6bn in 2014.
Brazil has been a constant critic of Israel in the international arena, but Israel’s Elbit just won a $106mn bid to upgrade Brazil’s naval aircraft, which will be carried out by the San Antonio, Texas-based Elbit’s US subsidiary.
Despite Britain‘s prominence in the anti-Israel BDS movement, Britain’s top betting site, William Hill negotiates the acquisition of Israel’s 888 for some $1bn.
Irrespective of the BDS original meaning, Israel’s BDS features a Bouncing,Developing and Surging technology and economy, reflecting the brainpower and tenacity of the Jewish State, which has benefitted the world at-large and the USA in particular.
Wishing you Shabbat Shalom and a gratifying weekend,
Yoram Ettinger, Jerusalem, “Second Thought: US-Israel Initiative”
Comments Off on Israel’s BDS: Bounce, Develop and Surge
The myth of Palestinian centrality
January 25th, 2015By Yoram Ettinger.
The myth of Palestinian centrality has dominated Western policy in the Middle East, while contrasting the reality of the Middle East.
In 2015, following in the footsteps of Presidents Mubarak and Sadat, Egyptian President Al-Sisi does not subordinate Egypt’s national security ties with Israel to Egypt’s ties with the Palestinians.
President Al-Sisi – just like his two predecessors – considers the transnational Muslim Brotherhood and Palestinian terrorism mutual threats to Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and other Arab Gulf States, which have never regarded the Palestinian issue as a top priority, and have denied the Palestinian Authority their financial generosity. Notwithstanding Palestinian opposition, strategic cooperation between Israel and Egypt, as well as between Israel and Jordan and other moderate Arab regimes, has surged to an unprecedented level.
In 2014, Al-Sisi and most pro-US Arab regimes – which have never embraced the myth of Palestinian centrality – supported Israel’s war on Palestinian terrorism in Gaza, which also haunts Egyptian and Jordanian homeland security.
In 1977, Egyptian President Sadat embraced Israeli Prime Minister Begin’s peace initiative, in spite of stormy Palestinian opposition, and in defiance of President Carter’s initial objection to direct negotiation between Jerusalem and Cairo. Carter promoted the concept of an international conference, centering on the Palestinian issue, which he assumed was the chief axis of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He pressured Begin to highlight the Palestinian issue, but received no effective support from Sadat.
Israel-Arab relations, in general, and the Arab-Israeli conflict, in particular, have never revolved around the Palestinian axis, irrespective of Western conventional wisdom and political correctness, which have been shaped by Arab talk rather than Arab walk, by oversimplification and wishful thinking rather than Middle Eastern reality.
The 1948/49 War was launched by Arab countries, against the newly-born Jewish State, at the expense – and not on behalf – of a Palestinian cause, exposing the myth of Palestinian centrality. Thus, Iraq leveraged the war to advance its goal of intra-Arab hegemony and control the oil pipeline from Kirkuk to Haifa; Jordan joined the assault on Israel to expand all the way to the Mediterranean; Egypt was more interested in foiling Jordan’s expansionist plans than the annihilation of the Jewish State; and Syria aspired to advance its vision of Greater Syria.
The 1948 War was not a war of, for, or (mostly) by Palestinian Arabs. According toProf. Efraim Karsh, a leading Middle East expert from London’s Kings College, “the 1948 pan-Arab invasion of Israel was a classic scramble for territory and not a battle for Palestinian national rights. As the first Secretary General of the Arab league, Abdel Rahman Azzam, admitted, the goal of Jordan was to swallow up the central hill regions of Palestine…. The Egyptians would get the Negev. The Galilee would go to Syria, except that the coastal part as far as Acre would be added to Lebanon.”
Upon the conclusion of the war, Iraq occupied Samaria (the northern West Bank), but transferred the area to Jordan, not to the Palestinian Arabs. Jordan occupied Judea (the southern West Bank) and annexed Judea and Samaria to the East Bank of the Jordan River. Egypt occupied Gaza and did not transfer it to the Palestinian Arabs. Just like Jordan, Egypt prohibited Palestinian national activities and expelled Palestinian activists. In 1959, Egypt and the Arab League dissolved the ineffective provisional Palestinian (“All Palestine”) government, which was established by them in 1949.
The 1956 (Sinai) War was also not triggered by the Palestinian issue. It was a derivative of Egyptian-sponsored terrorism (activated by Palestinian Arabs in Gaza), aimed at undermining Israel’s sovereignty in the Negev; Egypt’s nationalization of the British and French-owned Suez Canal; and Egypt’s support for anti-French elements in Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia.
The 1967 Six Day War erupted as a result of Egyptian President Nasser’s aggression, aimed at advancing his pan-Arab megalomaniac aspiration, which were unrelated to the Palestinian issue: Egypt’s blockade of Israel’s southern (oil and commerce) waterway; Egypt’s violation of the 1957 Sinai Peninsula demilitarization agreement; the Egypt-Syria-Jordan Military Pact.
The 1969-70 Egypt-Israel war of attrition along the Suez Canal took place irrespective of the Palestinian issue. And, the 1973 War (the most recent Arab-Israel war) was initiated by Egypt, Syria, Jordan and Iraq, independent of the Palestinian issue.
Since 1973, there have been a number of wars between Israel and Palestinian Arabs, none evolved into an Arab-Israeli war. Arabs have been aware of thesubversive/terrorist track record of Palestinian Arabs, and therefore have showered them with rhetoric, not resources, and certainly not on the battlefield.
For example, the 1982 Israel war on PLO terrorism in Lebanon was launched on June 5, but the Arab League did not convene until September, following the PLO expulsion from Beirut. The 1987-1992 and the 2000-2003 waves of Palestinian terrorism were quelled by Israel’s defense forces with no Arab intervention, as were Israel’s wars on Palestinian terrorism in Gaza (2008, 2012 and 2014).
Unlike Arab policy makers Western policy makers and public opinion molders are preoccupied with the Palestinian issue, misperceiving it as the root cause of Middle East turbulence, the crown jewel of Arab policy making and the crux of the Arab –Israeli conflict.
This Western-formulated myth of Palestinian centrality has led to an oversimplification of Middle East complexities, corrupting Western policy, undermining vital Western interests, exacerbating problems rather than advancing solutions, intensifying terrorism, diverting attention away from major obstacles to peace, thus creating another major obstacle to peace.
Comments Off on The myth of Palestinian centrality
Israel’s defiant economic growth
November 29th, 2014By Yoram Ettinger.
The assumptions that Israel’s economic growth depends on the conclusion of peace accords, and that Israel’s economy cannot withstand BDS pressure (boycott, divestment and sanctions) are inconsistent with reality.
In fact, Israel’s unique economic growth – from $1.5bn GDP in 1949 to $300bn in 2014, from $50mn annual exports in 1949 to $97bn in 2014, and from no foreign exchange reserves in 1949 to $92bn in 2014 – has been driven by Aliyah (Jewish immigration), fiscal responsibility, brain power, cutting-edge commercial and defense technologies, exports, military posture of deterrence and (most recently) natural gas; not by the peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan, or the Oslo Accord with the PLO.
For example, Israel’s GDP surged by 8%-14% annually following Israel’s victory in the Six Day War (1967-1972), and by 9% upon the launching of the Aliyah wave of one million Olim from the USSR in 1990. On the other hand, the post Oslo (1993-1996) economic growth of 4%-7% was triggered, mostly, by the Aliyah ripple effect, but was marred by rapidly worsening budget and trade deficits.
In addition, Israel’s 42.5% annual inflation in 1977 – when the Begin-Sadat peace initiative was launched – galloped to 111.4% in 1979 and 445% in 1984. Inflation was reduced to 19.7% in 1986, and to the current low single digit levels through an unprecedented policy of fiscal responsibility; not through the Israeli-Egyptian peace treaty.
The BDS impact on Israel’s economy is minor as demonstrated by the improved trade balance between Israel and Turkey and Britain, independent of the Turkish government and British Parliament support of BDS. Moreover, Israel’s vulnerability to BDS is highly constrained since 90% of Israel’s exports are business-to-business, enhancing the cost-effectiveness and the level of health, medicine, irrigation, science, education and national security of Israel’s trade partners. Furthermore, Israel’s trade is trending away from Europe – the epicenter of BDS – towards India, China, Russia, Japan, South Korea and the former Soviet Republics.
Thus, according to the August 11, 2014 issue of the Turkish daily, Today’s Zaman, “It is said that there has been a serious crisis between Turkey and Israel…. But, the foreign trade volume between the two countries rose from $4bn in 2011 to $4.86bn in 2013…. Giant ferries depart from Turkey’s port of Iskenderun and anchor at Israel’s port of Haifa, carrying Turkish semi-trailer trucks which then travel to Arab countries…. [Israeli] Defense exports to Turkey were never halted…. Oil coming from Iraq’s Kurdistan to Turkey is indirectly sold to Israel…. Prime Minister Erdogan’s son, Burak, shuttles his cargo ships between Israel’s port of Ashdod and Turkey….”
The November 18, 2014 issue of the Times of India opined that “despite its burgeoning ties with China, Israel doesn’t look at Beijing as a strategic partner the way it does at India, Israel’s number one buyer of military systems…. [India’s] Prime Minister Modi commits himself to taking ties with Israel to a new level…. With an annual trade volume of over $10bn, China is Israel’s largest trading partner in Asia…. India’s annual trade with Israel is still around $5bn, but this could double with the signing of a free trade agreement….”
The Asian Defense News reported that Israel’s Rafael won a $525mn bid to supply India with over 8,000 laser-guided, man-portable, anti-tank Spike missiles and more than 300 launchers. The Defense Industry Daily announced a successful test of the Israel-India “Barak8” medium range, land and ship-borne air and missile defense system, which followed a $300mn Indian acquisition of Israel’s “Barak1” supersonic, vertically-launched, short-range air defense system. “Israel may be on its way to surpassing Russia as India’s largest partner.”
Irrespective of recent assessments of Israel’s economic slowdown, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) expects a 3% growth in 2015 and 3.5% in 2016, “which should avert any rise in unemployment [5.7% in October, 2014].” The November 25, 2014 issue of the Economist Intelligence Unit maintains that Israel’s recent manufacturing and export data “seem to confirm that the rebound in activity in September was sufficient to offset the impact on the Israeli economy of the July and August Gaza hostilities….”
Indeed, foreign entrepreneurs express their confidence in Israel’s long-term economic viability, which is increasingly acting as a critical pipeline of cutting-edge technologies to the high tech industries in the USA. They seek to leverage Israel’s unique brain power, which is equipped with minimal natural resources, having to produce solutions to unique agriculture, irrigation, energy, medical, health, homeland security and military challenges.
For instance, Lockheed Martin plans to hire about 1,000 employees for its new subsidiary in Israel’s Beer Sheba Cyber Park (next to a subsidiary of another US giant, EMC), which has concluded cyber cooperation agreements with Ben Gurion University, the Technion in Haifa and Hebrew University. Redmond, WA-basedMicrosoft – which operates two research and development centers in Israel – acquired Israel’s Aorato for $200mn. South Carolina-based 3D Systems acquiredIsrael’s Cimatron for $97mn. China’s Long Tec Venture led a $10mn round of private placement in Israel’s RealView, South Africa’s Naspers and Britain’s Lord David Alliance Venture Fund led a $15mn round in Israel’s Similarweb,Singapore’s Temasek and India’s Tata investment funds are co-leaders of the Tel Aviv University $23.5mn technology transfer fund. Private US investors led a $15mn round by Israel’s AposTherapy, etc.
These companies, along with 250 US high-tech giants operating in Israel, concur with the assessment made on November 26, 2014 by Greg Case, President and CEO of AON, the leading global provider of risk management solutions: “Our clients are aware of the risks and the opportunities of doing business in Israel…. Risks in Israel are similar to other parts of the globe…. Israel is a vital, growing and innovative economy.”
Comments Off on Israel’s defiant economic growth
Ceasefire/Containment is no longer an option
July 12th, 2014
By Yoram Ettinger.
The goal of Israel’s war against Hamas’ terrorism – which has systematically and deliberately launched missiles at civilians – must not be another ceasefire, but the devastation of the entire infrastructure of Hamas’ fire – logistically, operationally, financially, educationally and politically.
The goal of Israel’s war against Hamas’ terrorism – which has grown in power following each round of clashes and ceasefire – must not be an end to the current cycle of violence, but ending the cyclical pattern of violence, by destroying Hamas’ terrorist capabilities.
The goal of Israel’s war against Hamas’ terrorism – which directly impacts Israel’s confrontation with Iran, regional Islamic terrorism, Hezbollah and other enemies – must be the restoration of Israel’s posture of deterrence, which has been severely undermined by the twenty-one year-old Oslo-driven policy of engagement and containment – rather than devastating – the dramatically expanding Palestinian and Hezbollah infrastructures of hate education, terrorism, in general, and missile capabilities, in particular. Israel’s posture of deterrence has also been crippled by putting up with systematic Palestinian non-compliance, while rewarding Palestinian belligerence and terrorism with territorial, diplomatic and economic concessions; tolerating the deliberate and extensive Palestinian destruction of Temple Mount archeology; and the massive release of Palestinian arch-terrorists.
Israel’s posture of deterrence constitutes the most crucial axis of Israel’s national security in the face of the rising tide of Islamic terrorism, the Arab Tsunami and increasingly violent Muslim intolerance towards the “infidel” Christians and Jews, contending that the Middle East (as well as Spain, Portugal, Southern France, Sicily and parts of Italy’s mainland) is divinely-ordained to Muslims.
A national posture of deterrence is doubly crucial in the Middle East, the world’s leading breeding ground of terrorism, where compromise, concession, retreat and the lack of unyielding posture are perceived by the Muslim/Arab street as indecisiveness, insecurity and weakness, thus fueling further radicalism, violence, terrorism and war.
For example, the murder of almost 3,000 Americans on 9/11 was ignited by the frail US response to a systematic campaign of Islamic terrorism, beginning with the 1983 murder of 300 US Marines at the US Embassy and Marines Headquarters in Beirut, Lebanon (while the US brutally opposed Israel’s war on the PLO); the 1988 murder of 270 PanAm-103 passengers (a few months after the US recognition of the PLO); the 1993 murder of six and injuring of over 1,000 Americans in the first attempt to blow up the Twin Towers; the 1995 failed attempt to simultaneously blow up eleven US airliners over the Pacific; the 1995/6 murder of 19 US soldiers in Riyadh and Khobar Towers (while Clinton courted Arafat); the 1998 murder of 257 people at the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania (while Clinton pressured Netanyahu); and the October, 2000 murder of seventeen USS Cole sailors (when Clinton brokered unprecedented Israeli concessions to the Palestinians).
Today’s unprecedented Hamas’ firepower – including underground missile manufacturing capabilities – was facilitated by Prime Minister Sharon’s 2005 “disengagement” from Gaza, which catapulted Hamas to power and drastically undermined Israel’s personal and national security, holding millions of Israelis hostage to Hamas’ terrorism.
The unprecedented boost to Hezbollah’s terrorist infrastructures, including missiles capabilities, and the October, 2000 unprecedented Israeli Arab violence and wave of Palestinian terrorism (the Second Intifadah), were triggered by Prime Minister Barak’s May, 2000 reckless flight from Southern Lebanon, exacerbated by his unprecedented concessions offered to Arafat at Camp David in July 2000.
The unparalleled scope of Palestinian terrorism, hate-education and non-compliance has been the result of a series of groundbreaking Israeli ideological and territorial concessions since the launching of the 1993 Oslo Process, which transferred most Palestinian terrorists from Sudan, Yemen, Libya, Tunisia, Syria and Lebanon to Judea, Samaria and Gaza, while transforming Israel’s policy from “no Palestinian state” to the “two state solution” and from security-driven peace to the delusional peace-driven security state of mind. The Oslo Process also introduced a restrained unilateral Israeli political/military action, while seeking political/military coordination with the Palestinian Authority and the USA. This paved the road to Hamas’ takeover of Gaza and potentially dominating Judea and Samaria.
The well-intentioned Oslo-driven peace process has been hijacked by Palestinian terrorists, while Israeli and American policy-makers subordinate national security, in general, and war on terrorism, in particular, to self-destructive oversimplification and wishful-thinking. Thus, it has promoted the gullible notion that “talking minimizes shooting.”
An effective war on terrorism must be offensive and military rather than defensive and diplomatic; preemptive and preventive, not retaliatory; comprehensive, disproportionate and sustained, not surgical, restrained and limited; preventing the gun from reaching the hand, not waiting for a smoking gun; long term security-oriented, not short term convenience-driven; overriding and facilitating the peace process, not subordinated by the “peace process”; at any price and not deterred by the price (no pain, no gain); operating at the breeding ground of terrorism, not through remote-control; in defiance of global pressure and condemnation, not subdued by Western policy and public opinion; a war pursued until total submission by terrorists, not a war of attrition. Ceasefire/containment is no longer an option!
Wishing you Shabbat Shalom and a rewarding weekend,
Yoram Ettinger, Jerusalem, “Second Thought: A US-Israel Initiative”
Comments Off on Ceasefire/Containment is no longer an option
Israel embraced by the global business community
June 6th, 2014
By Yoram Ettinger.
1. The mega-billion dollar Chinese food conglomerate, Brightfood ($17bn annual sales) acquired 56% of the Israel-based Tnuvah – Israel’s largest food/dairy company – for $1.4bn, aiming to dramatically expand Tnuvah’s global market (Globes Business Daily, May 23, 2014). China’s giant, Shenyang Yuanda ($4bn annual sales) signed a joint venture agreement with the Israel irrigation and fertilizer company, AutoAgronom, including a $2mn investment in expanding AutoAgronom’s marketing posture in China (Globes, May 23). Liu Yandong, Vice Premier of China’s State Council: “[Israel reflects] diligence, wisdom, creativity and perseverance…. China and Israel signed science and technology cooperation agreements in 1993 and 2010…. China and Israel cooperation in science, technology and innovations (STI) has taken deep roots, blossoming and yielding fruitful results…. China is Israel’s largest trading partner in Asia and Israel’s third largest trading partner globally…. Enhancing China-Israel STI cooperation will bring more benefits to the peoples of both countries….” (Jerusalem Post, May 17).
2. Singapore’s holding company, Kusto ($1.4bn annual sales), acquired Israel’s Tambour paint manufacturer for $140mn (Globes May 28).
3. ”South Korea will host during July 14-16, 2014 a South Korea-Israel conference, upgrading bilateral cooperation in the area of industrial technology, including information security and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV). Israel is the world’s second technology leader – following the USA – in the area of UAV technologies. Israel is recognized as one of the world’s best developers of cyber threat response systems.
In 1999, South Korea and Israel signed a cooperation agreement; in 2001, they established the Korea-Israel Industrial Research & Development Foundation, a $2mn annual venture financing (so far) 132 joint industrial R&D activities. Israel is our great benchmarking model, as it has set an example by developing a creative economy and leading the global market and technology through innovation-based entrepreneurship (South Korea Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy, April 18).”
4. France’s Alcatel-Lucent plans to open a Bell Labs research center in Kfar Saba, Israel – in a building housing an existing Alcatel-Lucent cloud-band technology facility – in order to upgrade its cloud-band technology in face of global competition. Bell Labs is Alcatel’s research arm. Alcatel’s CEO, Michel Combes: “Israel was the first country to really innovate the interaction between telecommunications and Internet technologies…. Alcatel may invest in Israeli cyber technologies.” Israel is one of three-four peak sites for Alcatel’s investments. According to the San Francisco-based Compass, Inc., Israel’s commercial hub is the world’s second-best startup area behind Silicon Valley (Bloomberg, May 20).
5. The Mountainview, California-based Intuit acquired Israel’s Check for $360mn (The Marker, May 27). Israel’s Marimedia raised $50mn on AIM, thesecondary stock exchange in London (Globes, May 23).
6. The three leading global credit rating companies reaffirm Israel’s solid rating, while lowering the rating of most developed countries. Standard & Poor’s (S&P): “Israel’s economy is doing well enough that the country can now be considered high income…. S&P expects per capita income (almost $40,000) to grow to almost $42,000 by 2017. Just five years ago it was about $28,000. S&P affirmed its long and short term foreign and local currency sovereign credit ratings for Israel at A+ and A-1.
Israel’s economy is stable and its prospects for growth are good. Aiding that growth is the extra effort the government to reduce debt as a percentage of GDP (2.5% budget deficit during the first third of 2014). Currently that figure is at67% and is expected to drop to 61% by 2017. Inflation is expected to remain low (currently at 1.5%). Unemployment is at 5.6% (Times of Israel, March 28). Fitch reaffirmed Israel’s credit rating at A, joining Moody’s (A1) and S&P (A+), reflecting global confidence in Israel’s long-term viability.
Shabbat Shalom and a rewarding weekend,
Comments Off on Israel embraced by the global business community
Who are you, Mahmoud Abbas?
May 7th, 2014
By Yoram Ettinger.
Will the April, 2014 accord between Mahmoud Abbas, Hamas and Islamic Jihad transition these two Islamic terrorist organizations to moderation, or does it shed light on Mahmoud Abbas’ core ideology?
Unlike Western policy-makers and public opinion molders, Arab leaders never doubted Mahmoud Abbas’ core ideology. Therefore, they deny him adequate financial support, while the Arab oil-producing countries provide Egypt multi-billion dollar assistance. Similarly, during the 1980s, Saudi Arabia provided Afghanistan’s Muslim rebels a billion dollars in annual aid, while extending Arafat a mere $100 million annually, which was cut off following Arafat’s and Mahmoud Abbas’ betrayal of Kuwait in August 1990, when they collaborated with Saddam Hussein’s invasion of the Sheikhdom. Moreover, Arab countries did not support the PLO and Hamas during their grand confrontations with Israel: the 1st and 2nd Intifadahs, the Lebanon War and the series of wars in Gaza.
The Arab attitude towards Abbas is driven by Abbas’ track record of intra-Arab subversion and terrorism. For example, during the late 1950s, Abbas and Arafat fled Egypt because of their subversive and terrorist activities, carried out as key Muslim Brotherhood operatives. In 1966, they fled Syria to Jordan, following their murders of a number of Syrian intelligence officers. In 1970, they were expelled from Jordan to Lebanon, following their attempt to topple Jordan‘s Hashemite regime, which ignited a brutal civil war. By 1975, they had plundered large parts of Southern Lebanon, attempting to overthrow the central regime in Beirut, which triggered the Syrian invasion of Lebanon, a series of civil wars and the destruction of Lebanon. In 1990, Palestinian intelligence cells in Kuwait and Palestinian battalions in Iraq facilitated Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait, which since 1960 had been the preferred safe haven for 300,000 Palestinian relatives and allies of Arafat and Mahmoud Abbas. As a result of that egregious betrayal, Kuwait expelled over 200,000 Palestinians. No Arab leader protested that expulsion!
While Egypt is cracking down on Hamas and its affiliates, Abbas – an ally of Saddam Hussein, North Korea, Iran, Cuba and Venezuela – provides Hamas with a vital tailwind.
On March 15, 2013, Mahmoud Abbas, the Russian-speaking graduate of KGB courses and the Moscow University, the former steward of PLO ties with the ruthless East European Communist regimes, and (since 1993) the lead PLO negotiator with Hamas, told the Russian Today TV: “As far as I’m concerned there is no difference between the policies of the Palestinian Authority and Hamas.” The frequent attempts to form the PLO-Hamas axis are based on their common strategic goal, while maintaining their tactical differences. Abbas’ strategic goal (the eradication of the Jewish state) and tactics(gradually, via diplomacy and terrorism) are specified in the 2009 Fatah platform, the PLO’s 1974 Phased, Step-by-Step Plan and the 1964 PLO Covenant (two thirds of its articles are dedicated to the destruction of the Jewish state). Both terror organizations are chaired by Abbas, who – according to the 1993 Oslo Accord – derives his power as the Chairman of the Palestinian Authority from the PLO, which is the highest Palestinian authority! Fatah was established in 1959 and the PLO in 1964, before Israel reasserted itself in Judea and Samaria and before the establishment of the first modern-day Jewish settlement in Judea and Samaria. Thus, the strategic goal of Abbas has been directed at pre-1967 Israel. On November 29, 2012,Mahmoud Abbas told the UN General Assembly that “occupation” and ”injustice” began in 1948, not in 1967!
Abbas highlights the claim of return to the “1948 occupied areas,” which explains his insistence to represent and release Israeli Arab terrorists. Being a devout Muslim, and a former top Muslim Brotherhoodactivist, Abbas adheres to cardinal principles of Islam. For example, Waqf, the supposedly divinely-ordained Muslim right over any area previously controlled by Muslims, including the Land of Israel. Also, theHudaybiyyah Treaty, which considers agreements concluded with “infidels” a pragmatic, provisional agreement to be breached whenever possible to bring the infidel” to submission, and not to peaceful co-existence.
In order to achieve the strategic goal, Mahmoud Abbas has spoken softly, while carrying a horrendous stick of hate-education in schools, mosques and media, brainwashing Palestinian society: the most effective production-line of terrorists. One’s education is the most authentic reflection of one’s values, ideology and strategic goal. Hence, the popularity of the anti-Semitic Mein Kampf and The Protocols of the Elders of Zion on the Palestinian Street. Thus, the Mahmoud Abbas-driven Palestinian conventional wisdom: It’s not the size – but the existence – of the Jewish state, which is the crux of the conflict with Israel.
The central role played by terrorism in shaping Abbas’ worldview is highlighted by his demand to release Palestinian terrorists, who deliberately and systematically murdered, maimed and intimidated Israeli civilians; by providing monthly allowances to families of terrorists; and by naming streets, squares and soccer tournaments after terrorists; and by featuring terrorists as role-model to Palestinians.
Germany and Japan were transformed from hateful – to peaceful – countries by uprooting hate-education and terror regimes, not by engaging and funding them.
Should the US taxpayer continue funding the hate-education system of Mahmoud Abbas, who caused the flight of Christians from the Bethlehem area, and is known as “Mr. 20%” for his corruption?
Should Israel accept Mahmoud Abbas in view of the ferocity of Hamas’ terrorism? Only if Jack the Ripper’s vicious style made the Boston Strangler an acceptable member of society!
Comments Off on Who are you, Mahmoud Abbas?
Is Israel Isolated?
April 6th, 2014
Is Israel Isolated?
According to Secretary John Kerry, “if we do not resolve the issues between Palestinians and Israelis; if we do not find a way to find peace; there will be an increasing isolation of Israel.”
However, a thorough examination of Israel’s international standing reveals an increasingly splendid global integration of the Jewish state – economically, technologically and scientifically – irrespective of the Palestinian issue.
Contrary to the Kerry school of thought – and based on a reality check – the Palestinian issue has never been a core cause shaping the Middle East, a crown-jewel of Arab policymakers or the crux of Israel’s relations with Arab countries and the international community. While diplomatic talk highlights the Palestinian issue,the diplomatic, commercial and industrial walk reveals that policy-makers and the international business community do not embrace Kerry’s “Palestine First” assessment and his “Isolation Warning/Threat.”
Thus, the Turkish Statistics Institute documented an expansion of the Turkey-Israel trade balance, despite the brutal anti-Israel ideology of President Erdogan. The Institute reports a 56% export increase, to Israel, during the first five months of 2013, compared with January-May, 2012, while the imports from Israel were increased by 22% during the same period. The Israel-Turkey trade balance was $3.4BN in 2008 and exceeded $4BN in 2012. Turkey’s requirements in the areas of industry, medicine, health, agriculture, irrigation, education, science, technology and defense – and Israel’s unique innovations in these areas – have prevailed over Erdogan’s anti-Western, anti-Israel and pro-Hamas Islamist orientation.
The London Financial Times reported: “in six hours of [Prime Minister Netanyahu’s] talks with the Chinese leadership, they spent roughly ten seconds on the Palestinian issue, while revealing an unquenchable thirst for Israeli technology.” Highlighting Israel’s intensified and diversified global integration, the China-Israel 2013 trade balance exceeded $10BN, providing a tailwind to the currently negotiated free trade agreement, and enhanced by Chinese investments in some fifty Israeli high tech companies. The Japan Times reported the growing Japanese interest in Israeli business opportunities, tripling the number of reviews of Israeli companies.
Moreover, foreign investments in Israel catapulted in 2013, achieving a seven- year high of $12BN, including $4BN in acquisition of Israeli companies by global giants such as Google, IBM, Cisco, AOL, Facebook, Apple and EMC. Furthermore, since January 2014, Israeli companies have rised over $500MN on Wall Street. Deloitte Touche – one of the top CPA firms in the world – crowned Israel as the fourth most attractive site for foreign investors, trailing only the USA, China and Brazil. According to the BritishEconomist Intelligence Unit, “Israel’s cluster of high tech companies, investors and incubators is enjoying a boom which has not been witnessed since the global tech bubble burst more than a decade ago.” NeitherKazakhstan‘s billionaire Kenges Rakishev, nor Mexico‘s billionaire, Carlos Slim allowed the “Isolation Warning/Threat” to stop their flow of investments in Israel’s high tech sector.
In fact, Israel, the Startup Nation, has become a critical Pipeline Nation that transfers to the American high tech industry a plethora of cutting edge technologies and applications, developed by Israel’s brain power. This provides some 200 US high tech giants an edge over their global competitors, thereby contributing to US employment, research, development and exports. As stated by Microsoft’s new CEO, Satya Nadella, “The two Microsoft research and development centers in Israel constitute a strategic factor, enhancing Microsoft’s capabilities in many areas.” This was echoed by Google’s Chairman, Eric Schmidt, who also invests in Israel through his private venture capital fund, Innovation Endeavors: “Israel will have an oversized impact on the evolution of the next stage of technology. Israel has become a high tech hub. Israel is the most important high tech center in the world after the US.”
Unlike Secretary Kerry, Warren Buffett does have confidence in Israel’s long term viability, realizing that Israel’s economic and technological capabilities are the derivatives of Israel’s brainpower and fiscal responsibility (since 1985), independent of the Palestinian issue. Hence, on the eve of Israel’s 2006 war against Lebanon’s Hizballah, Buffett invested $4BN in an Israeli company – located next to the Lebanese border – recently expanding that investment by $2BN. Buffett followed in the footsteps of Intel, which has invested $11BN in its four research and development centers and two manufacturing plants in Israel; IBM, which just acquired its 13th Israeli company; Motorola, which established in Israel a research center second only to its Houston center; Hewlett-Packard, which owes 55% of its 2012/3 development to its seven Israeli research and development centers; and the leading Silicon Valley venture capital funds, Sequoia, Benchmark, Greylock and Accel, which operate successful Israel-dedicated funds.
Astute observers of the Middle East – who do not subordinate reality to wishful thinking – are aware that the Arab Tsunami is not an Arab Spring; that the Arab Street in general, and Egypt in particular, are not transitioning towards democracy; that Iran is committed to the pursuit of military nuclear capabilities; that Assad has not been forsaken by Russia and Iran; and that Arab leaders are apprehensive of Palestinian subversion and terrorism.
Likewise, astute investors have realized that the ongoing wars and terrorism, challenging Israel since 1948, have been but bumps on the road of Israel’s unprecedented surge and integration into the global economy and technology, now bolstered by Israel’s Leviathan-size offshore natural gas explorations.
Comments Off on Is Israel Isolated?
Congressional Muscle and US Foreign Policy
March 31st, 2014
By Embassador Yoram Ettinger.
On March 5, 2014, the US House of Representatives voted 410:1 to upgrade Israel from a “Major Non-NATO Ally” to a “Major Strategic Partner” – a congressional initiative, significantly expanding the mutually-beneficial US-Israel strategic cooperation in the areas of missile defense, intelligence, national security at-large, technology, energy, cyber security, irrigation, space satellites, defense industries, etc. The Senate is expected to overwhelmingly support the US-Israel Strategic Partnership Act of 2014, highlighting the systematic bi-cameral, bi-partisan consensus support of Israel by the US constituent, and therefore by its most authentic representative: Congress – the independent, co-equal, co-determining branch of the US government.
For instance, when Senator Daniel Inouye (D-HI), Chairman of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, was asked by the Secretary of the Navy to rescind an amendment to the Defense Appropriations Bill – upgrading the port of Haifa facilities for the Sixth Fleet – the Senator responded: “According to the US Constitution, the Subcommittee on Defense supervises the Department of the Navy and not vise versa….” The amendment remained intact, in defiance of the Administration, enhancing the operations of the Sixth Fleet in the eastern flank of the Mediterranean.
When requested to support initiatives of Democratic presidents, based on partisan loyalty, Senator Robert Byrd (D-WV), who was an arch-defender of congressional power, stated: “I am the obedient servant of the Constitution, not the President!”
When asked whether President Clinton was guaranteed the backing of the 1993 Democrat- controlled House and Senate, Speaker Tom Foley (D-WA) advised: “The President should not take congressional support for granted, because our political life expectancy is different than his….” Ignoring Foley’s advice during Clinton’s initial two years in office led to the devastating Democratic defeat in the 1994 mid-term election.
Following a meeting with an Israeli dignitary, who contended that the president was supreme in the area of foreign policy, Senate Majority Leader, George Mitchell (D-ME) quipped: “Yoram, didn’t you tell our distinguished guest that the US is not a monarchy?!”
Contrary to conventional wisdom, the inherently pro-Israel Congress possesses the muscle to check, defy, oversee, overrule, direct, fund and defund the Administration, including in the arenas of foreign policy and national security. Congress prefers to focus on district, state and national domestic priorities,which preoccupy the constituency and, therefore, dominate the congressional reelection process. Therefore, Congress tends to be deferential to the president on external issues, but reveals formidable muscle when presidents assume an overly imperial posture, outrageously usurping power, disregarding Congress, violating laws, pursuing strikingly failed policies, or dramatically departing from public consensus (e.g., Vietnam, Watergate, Irangate).
The power of the US legislature is unique among western democracies. It reflects the intent of the Founding Fathers to secure civil liberties by highlighting the centrality of the constituent and precluding excessive executive power, by constraining unilateral presidential maneuverability. Hence, the fundamental tenets of limited government, the separation of shared, overlapped and conflicting power, an elaborate system of checks and balance (e.g., treaty ratification, confirmation of senior appointments, veto and veto override), the congressional power of the purse, oversight, declaration of war, establishment/abolishment of executive departments and agencies, impeachment, etc.. The president proposes, but Congress disposes. The president is the commander-in-chief, but only as authorized and appropriated by Congress.
Moreover, Congressional independence is bolstered by prescribing House Members and Senators – as well as Governors – different constituency, term, timetable and agenda than those assigned to the president. Thus, the president constrained by a two-term-limit, rushes to accomplish his nation-wide agenda within 4-8 years. On the other hand, House Members and Senators benefit from two and six year unlimited terms, which enable them to adopt a long-term, gradual approach, advancing their district and state-wide agenda, which may not be consistent with the President’s nation-wide agenda and timetable.
For example, on February 17, 2011, Obama reluctantly vetoed a UN Security Council condemnation of Israel’s settlements policy, due to pressure exerted by Democrats and Republicans on Capitol Hill. The Senate defied both Clinton and Obama, refusing to ratify the 1999 Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. Majority Leader, Harry Reid (D-NV) foiled Obama’s attempts to close down the Guantanamo detention camp.
In 2009, House and Senate bi-partisan leadership prevented the appointment of Chas Freeman to chair the National Intelligence Council, because of Freeman’s close business and political ties with China and Saudi Arabia. Congress ended US military involvement in Vietnam (the Eagleton, Cooper and Church amendments), Angola (the Clark Amendment) and Nicaragua (the Boland Amendment); overrode Reagan’s veto and brought down the white regime in South Africa; halted the supply of AWACs to Iran on the eve of the Khomeini revolution; overhauled the US intelligence (Church/Pike Committees); and forced the USSR/Russia (Jackson-Vanik amendment in defiance of the president) to allow emigration of one million Jews to Israel; etc..
In 1957, bi-partisan congressional leadership (especially, Senators Lyndon Johnson and William Knowland) was about to force President Eisenhower to refrain from imposing sanctions on Israel, unless it withdrew from the Sinai Peninsula. However, Prime Minister Ben Gurion pulled the rug from under the feet of Congress, by announcing full withdrawal. In 1990-92, Senators Daniel Inouye (D-HI), Ted Stevens (R-AK) and Bob Kasten (R-WI) initiated a series of amendments, expanding US-Israel strategic cooperation, despite presidential opposition.
While a congressional challenge to presidential foreign and national security policies constitutes an uphill battle, Congress has demonstrated its capability to flex effective muscle, especially when it comes to an issue – such as Israel – which benefits from bi-partisan, bi-cameral, consensus support.
Comments Off on Congressional Muscle and US Foreign Policy
Americans: Israel is the MVP
February 24th, 2014
By Yoram Ettinger.
At a time when the White House is pressuring Israel to make dramatic concessions, the Jewish State enjoys an all-time high popularity among Americans, and therefore among their representatives in the US House of Representatives and the US Senate.
According to a February 18, 2014 Gallup Poll, Israel is the MVP (most favorite player) in the Middle East –72% very/mostly favorable – leading all other Middle East countries by a dramatic margin: Egypt – 45%, Saudi Arabia – 35%, etc.
Israel’s popularity is at the highest since 1991, when Gallup first polled Americans on foreign countries, compared to 2009 (63%), 2010 (67%), 2011 (68%), 2012 (71%) and 2013 (66%).
Israel is more popular than most Western democracies, while the Palestinian Authority is ranked among the least favorable (19% favorability), along with North Korea (11%), Iran (12%), Syria (13%) and Iraq (16%). Thus, when President Obama delivered the 2014 State of the Union Address, he was greeted with indifference when stating: “American diplomacy [aims] to achieve dignity and an independent state for Palestinians.” However, the president triggered resounding applause when continuing: “…and lasting peace and security for the state of Israel – a Jewish state that has known that America will always be at their side.”
The Gallup findings reveal that the more experienced and mature Americans are, the higher is Israel’s favorability: 81% among those 55 or older (who tend to be more knowledgeable about international relations, in general, and Israel in particular), 72% among those in the 35-54 age group and 64% among those between the ages of 18-34.
The Gallup data highlights the fact that Americans in general, rather than US Jewry, are the main source of intense identification with the Jewish State. That is also the case on Capitol Hill, where the key US-Israel initiatives have been conceived/led by Christian legislators (most notably, the late Senator Daniel Inouye). In fact, the vast majority of Americans has embraced the idea of a Jewish State since the 17thcentury Pilgrims – long before the integration of the Jewish community into American society, and many years before the founding of AIPAC.
Such determination was underlined by the October 3, 2013 Pew Research Center: 55% of America’s Christians (and 82% of Evangelicals) – compared with 47% of American Jews – asserted that Israel was given to the Jewish People by God. The April, 2010 Quinnipiac Institute poll documented an overwhelming majority of Americans (66%:19%) urging President Obama to be more supportive of Israel.
While President Obama suffers from erosion of support by an increasing number of legislators from his own party – as has been the case with all second term Presidents – while his approval rating drops to 40%, according to a February 16, 2014 Gallup poll, and while polarization among constituents and legislators has been dramatically intensified, the all-time high support of the Jewish State has been one of the few bipartisan consensus issues in America.
The support of Israel has been enhanced by the anti-US Arab Tsunami on the Arab Street from the Persian Gulf to Northwest Africa, the rising threat of Islamic terrorism – which has penetrated the US mainland through hundreds of sleeper cells – and the rapidly expanding mutually-beneficial cooperationbetween the US and Israel, commercially and militarily.
Moreover, support for Israel has been bolstered despite the tension between the White House and Jerusalem, due to the fact that most Americans do not consider the Jewish State a classic foreign policy issue. Americans have always considered the Jewish State an integral part of the American story, morally, culturally and politically.
The February 18, 2014 Gallup poll reflects the healthy tissue and the potency of the US-Israel covenant, which has withstood wars, crises and pressure, constituting a robust tailwind behind the surge of the Jewish State from a remnant of the Holocaust to the prime ally of the US.
Comments Off on Americans: Israel is the MVP
Secretary Kerry, It’s Not the Demography!
January 29th, 2014
By Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger.
Is Secretary of State, John Kerry correct, or incorrect, when exhorting “the demographic time bomb” to scare Israel into a retreat from geography (Judea and Samaria), in order to, supposedly, secure demography? According to Kerry, “There is an existential threat to Israel…. I am referring to the demographic dynamic that makes it impossible for Israel to preserve its future as a democratic, Jewish state without resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in a two-state solution.”
Are Jews doomed to become a minority in the combined area of Judea, Samaria and the pre-1967 Israel?
According to the 2013 CIA World Factbook, Judea and Samaria Arabs experienced a dramatic decline in fertility rate (the average number of births per woman): from five births in 2000 to 2.91 in 2013. On the other hand, in 2014, Israel’s Central Bureau of Statistics documents a 3.04 Jewish fertility rate and 3.42 when both Jewish spouses are Israeli-born.
“A new Palestinian generation opts for fewer children” is the title of an article by Rasha Abou Jalal, a Gaza journalist: “While Islam calls for believers to bear many children and prohibits the use of birth control, new Palestinian generations are defying tradition and leaning toward limiting the number of children they have…. The new generation takes into consideration various economic and cultural factors before deciding to have children. The idea of limiting childbearing has, therefore, garnered more supporters than before…. The more Palestinians become aware and rational, the less they will procreate, as they pursue a level ofeducation and knowledge that suits them and increases their chances of having a better life….
The Westernization of Muslim demographic trends, from Iran (1.8 births per woman), through Saudi Arabia (2.3), Syria and Egypt (2.9) and North Africa (1.8) has also characterized Muslim women in Judea, Samaria, Gaza and pre-1967 Israel. The unprecedented decline in Muslim fertility has been driven by modernity: accelerated women’s rights, urbanization, education, career mentality and family planning (72% of 15-49 year old married Palestinian women prefer to avoid pregnancy). Thus, contemporary young Muslim women are reluctant to get married at the age of fifteen and start reproducing at the age of sixteen. They tend to postpone marriage until after the age of 20 and prefer limited reproduction.
On the other hand, in 2014, the Israeli Jewish fertility rate (three births per woman and trending upwards)is higher than in any Arab country, other than Yemen, Iraq and Jordan. Jewish demography has been enhanced by a high level of optimism, patriotism, communal responsibility and attachment to roots among religious and secular, hawks and doves, conservative and liberal Israelis, bolstered by economic progress. While the annual number of Arab births – west of the Jordan River – has stabilized since 1995, the annual number of Jewish births has surged from 80,000 in 1995 to about 132,000 in 2013 – a 65% increase! This dramatic leap occurred despite declining fertility among ultra-orthodox Jews, but due to the substantial rise of secular Jewish fertility. In 1995 there were 2.3 Jewish births per one Arab birth in Israel; in 2014 – 3.3 births. In 1995, the number of Jewish births constituted 69% of total Israeli births; in 2014 – 77% and rising.
In 2014, there is a robust 66% Jewish majority in the combined area of Judea, Samaria and pre-1967 Israel – compared with a 9% and 39% in 1900 and 1947 – benefitting from a tailwind of fertility and net-immigration. This contrasts with declining Arab fertility and annual Arab net-emigration (in 2014, 20,000 from Judea and Samaria). In 2014, Israel’s Jewish population has reached 6.5 million people, next to 1.7 million Israeli Arabs and 1.7 million Judean and Samarian Arabs – one million less than the number claimed by the Palestinian Authority. The misrepresentation was conceived in the late 1990s, in response to the arrival of one million Soviet Jews to Israel. It consists of overseas residents, overseas births, by double-counting Jerusalem Arabs as Israeli Arabs (by Israel) and West Bankers (by the Palestinian Authority), etc..
According to a March 17, 2006 Gallup Poll survey, preferred family size has a strong bearing on actual fertility rates: Israeli Jews aspired to 3.7 births per woman, while Palestinians aspired to 4.7 births. Although, 2014 indicates compatibility with Jewish preference, Palestinian fertility is decreasing much faster than expected by Gallup.
All doomsday demographic projections have failed due to their reliance on past demographic data, underestimating Jewish fertility, overestimating Arab fertility and discarding the feasibility of significant waves of Aliyah (Jewish immigration). Since 1898 and 1944, the demographic establishment has issued multiple projections on the ostensible inevitability of an Arab majority in the Land of Israel, attempting to scare Zionist leaders into inaction and retreat. In 1967, Prime Minister Eshkol was urged to evacuate Judea and Samaria, lest there be an Arab majority by 1987. On July 6, 1987, Prof. Arnon Sofer contended that an Arab majority was expected by 2000. Together with Prof. Sergio DellaPergolla, they dismissed any prospect of Jewish immigration from the USSR. In fact, one million Jews arrived! A pro-active Aliyah policy could produce 500,000 Olim in the next ten years, catapulting the Jewish majority in Judea, Samaria and pre-1967 Israel to 80% by 2035.
The demography of doom distorts reality, instills pessimism, subordinates long-term strategic vision to baseless fatalism, rationalizes a policy of submission to pressure and self-destructive retreat, intensifies global pressure and radicalizes Arab demands, thus promoting violence and undermining peace.
Will Secretary Kerry embrace demographic reality, which highlights a robust Jewish demographic tailwind and not an Arab demographic time bomb?!
Comments Off on Secretary Kerry, It’s Not the Demography!
The Iran Nuclear Agreement and the Common Sense Test
December 2nd, 2013
By Yoram Ettinger.
Contrary to conventional “wisdom,” Iran considers the US and the Arab oil-producing Gulf States – not Israel – the primary target for its nuclear capabilities. Iran pursues mega (nuclear) capabilities in order to advance its mega goal (domination of the Gulf and Sunni Islam), by removing the mega obstacle (US power projection), irrespective of Israel’s existence and policies, the Arab-Israeli conflict or the Palestinian issue.
In the pursuit of agreements and peace with rogue regimes, the Free World must overcome its inherent temptation to subordinate common sense and reality-check to delusion and wishful-thinking, lest such agreements minimize the Free World’s posture of deterrence and the prospects of peace, while maximizing lawlessness, terrorism and the prospects of war.
Irrespective of President Rouhani’s ostensible pledges to end abuse of human rights in Iran, the minority regime of the Ayatollahs and Mullahs persists in oppressing the majority of Iranians and the number of executions since the rise of Rouhani has increased. According to Reuters, November 19, 2013, “The U.N. envoy on human rights in Iran, Ahmed Shaheed, said last month that Iran’s human rights record should not be overlooked amid overtures to the West by Rouhani. He criticized Tehran for executing 724 people in 18 months, including dozens after Rouhani was elected in June.” Rouhani’s intolerance of civil liberties – such as freedom of religion, press, speech and association and equal rights for women and ethnic minorities – reflects his genuine values and worldview.
But, Rouhani is expected to comply with agreements…
The diplomatic option is appropriately applied to rogue regimes that abandon violence and embrace peaceful-coexistence. The military option of deterrence should be appropriately applied toward rogue regimes that adhere to violence. While negotiating with the US, Iran is the leading sponsor of anti-US Islamic terrorism; the chief axis of unprecedented terrorism in Iraq; the key perpetrator of subversion and terrorism in the pro-US Arab oil-producing Gulf States; the top supporter of Jihadist movements in Africa and the killing of US GIs in Iraq and Afghanistan; a collaborator with the anti-US regimes in Venezuela, Bolivia and Ecuador; and the anti-US hate-educator of Iranian youth.
But, Rouhani is expected to comply with agreements….
Rouhani has intensified technological, scientific, economic, diplomatic and military cooperation with North Korea. The leading Washington Times’ military correspondent, Bill Gertz, reported on November 26 that the two are currently engaged in the joint development of a new long-range missile, capable of carrying nuclear warheads, which could reach the United States, “the Great Satan” according to both Iran and North Korea.
But, Rouhani is expected to comply with agreements….
A Free World which is overly-anxious to conclude an agreement with rogue regimes is destined to pay a heavy price. Moreover, the assumption that rogue regimes would not sacrifice the welfare of their people on the altar of military superiority dooms the Free World to learn from history by repeating past critical mistakes. In 2009, North Korea welcomed President Obama by flexing its nuclear muscle (test), highlighting the dereliction by Wendy Sherman, who led Clinton’s failed negotiation with North Korea, and is currently heading the negotiation with Iran. Sherman deluded herself that the North Korea dictator supposedly recognized that the adverse economic consequences of pursuing nuclear capabilities could topple his regime. Fifty years of diplomacy, economic sanctions and agreements – loaded with verifications, sticks and carrots – to test North Korean intentions paved the road to another anti-US nuclear rogue regime. Thirty years of US sanctions and diplomacy have not transformed Iran, which is at the last lap of the nuclear marathon.
But, Rouhani is expected to comply with agreements….
Rouhani was not elected democratically, but was handpicked by the Supreme Leader, Khamenei, the omnipotent Shiite Muslim ruler of Iran. Khamenei adheres to the Quran-based Taqiyya, Kitman and Do-Pahlu concepts, which were introduced by the Shiites, shielding Muslims from the “infidel” and from each other via double-talk and deception-based provisional agreements, which are abrogated once conditions are ripe.
But, Rouhani is expected to comply with agreements….
Rouhani (just like Bashar Assad upon succeeding his father) is considered a reformer by Western policy makers and media. However, Rouhani demonstrated his own Taqiyya capabilities, while serving as Iran’s chief negotiator with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). He systematically violated commitments made, providing Iran with extra time to acquire nuclear capabilities. In September, 2002, while serving as the Chairman of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, Rouhani stated : “When we sign international treaties, it means that we are not pursuing nuclear weapons. We are not pursuing chemical weapons. We are not pursuing biological weapons.” Rouhani was one of the planners of the 1994 “AMIA terrorism,” responsible for the murder of 85 civilians in Buenos Aires.
But, Rouhani is expected to comply with agreements….
Iran’s track record of systematic non-compliance is consistent with Middle East reality, which has never experienced intra-Muslim compliance with most intra-Muslim agreements, domestically and regionally. Unlike the Free World, which considers agreements as a means to advance peaceful-coexistence, rogue regimes with megalomaniacal-imperialistic aspirations consider agreements a means to enhance their capabilities, in order to eventually overcome partners to such agreements.
But, Rouhani is expected to comply with agreements….
The November 23, 2013 agreement with Iran provided Iran with the most essential resource – time – to attain nuclear capabilities, transforming Iran from a tactical – to a strategic – threat. Unlike the USSR, the apocalyptic regime in Iran was ready to sacrifice some 500,000 youngsters, in order to clear minefields during its war against Iraq, signaling its defiance of Mutually-Assured-Destruction. The nature of the Iranian regime on the one hand and compliance with agreements on the other hand constitute a classic oxymoron.
But, Rouhani is expected to comply with agreements….
The November 23, 2013 agreement subordinated common sense and reality-check to oversimplification and wishful-thinking. It follows in the footsteps of a policy which provided a tailwind to the anti-US Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, facilitated the replacement of Qaddafi’s tyranny with a worse anti-US regime, handed Putin a major gain in Syria, instills panic in Saudi Arabia and other pro-US Gulf States and funds hate-education in the Palestinian Authority.
But, Rouhani is expected to comply with agreements….
The Oslo state of mind
November 6th, 2013By Yoram Ettinger.
On October 24, 2013 (the Diplomatic Conference) and October 16, 2013 (the memorial ceremony for Prime Minister Rabin), President Peres, the architect of the September, 1993 Oslo Accord, claimed that the Israeli-Palestinian accord was the “opening to dialogue and peace.” Is Peres’ claim vindicated by a reality check?
The Oslo state of mind
The Oslo state of mind was most accurately pronounced by Peres, at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, on Sept. 16, 2000, on the eve of the 2nd Intifada, 2000-2005 wave of Palestinian terrorism: “I believe that the previous borders, made of barbed wire, minefields, military positions, are irrelevant to our life…. I sincerely believe that a good hotel on the border will provide more peace and security than a military position…. I can see very little use for the past. Two things lose their importance: land and history. … To imagine is more important than to remember…. War is out of the question now…. I doubt very much if the Palestinians will go back to terror. … Once a nation’s economy turns from a focus on land to a focus on brains, borders are irrelevant….”
The blueprint for the Oslo Accord was documented by Peres in his October, 1993 book, The New Middle East: “The international political setting is no longer conducive to war (p. 80)…. Peace is the means for security (p. 84)…. We need soft – not rigid – borders…. While signing the documents on the lawn of the White House… you could almost hear the heavy tread of boots leaving the stage…. You could have listened to the gentle tiptoeing of new steps making a debut in the awaiting world of peace (p. 194)…. ”
The new – VS the real – Middle East
The Oslo Accord state of mind, and the new Middle East vision, have been trounced by the Arab Tsunami, which imploded the real Middle East, transitioning the region toward further fanaticism, terrorism, tyranny and anti-“infidel” sentiments, away from moderation, peace, democracy and tolerance.
The Oslo state of mind underestimated the potency of the deeply-rooted 1,400 year old fundamentals of the real Middle East, which are sweeping the combusting Arab Street in Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, Yemen, Bahrain, Syria and other Arab countries: violent unpredictability, uncertainty, unreliability, instability and shifty regimes and policies; religious, ethnic, ideological and geographic fragmentation; violent intolerance toward other Muslims and the “infidel;” no freedom of speech, religion, press and association and no gender equality; no intra-Arab comprehensive peace and no compliance with most intra-Arab agreements, which are tenuous in nature.
Has Oslo transformed Israel and the Palestinians?
Ariel University’s Dr. Yuval Arnon-Ohanna, formerly with the Mossad and one of Israel’s leading experts on the Palestinian issue, documented in Line of Furrow and Fire– the conflict for the Land of Israel, 1860-2013 (Achiasaf Publishing, 2013) that the 1993 Oslo Accord snatched the PLO from the jaws of oblivion. Arab regimes severed financial assistance to – and most contacts with – the PLO, due to the PLO’s collaboration with Iraq’s 1990 invasion of Kuwait. The US suspended its dialogue with the PLO in 1990. The 1st Intifadah – wave of Palestinian terrorism – was largely subdued by Israel in 1991. The PLO lost two key co-founders, Khalil al-Wazir (1988) and Salah al-Khalaf (1991). Its popularity, among Palestinians, was significantly marred by corruption and embezzlement, attributed primarily to Arafat and his wife, Suha, Mahmoud Abbas and his sons, Yasser and Tareq, Arafat’s financial advisor, Muhammad Rashid, and the Tsumud (steadfastness) Fund. The Oslo Accord resuscitated the PLO, which still oversees the Palestinian Authority, legally and operationally.
The Oslo Accord transformed Israeli policy dramatically, strategically and tangibly. Israel made concessions to the Palestinians, never extended by the Ottoman Empire, the British Mandate or the Arabs, transferring parts of Israel’s own cradle of history to its arch-enemy and advancing Palestinian sovereignty. Israel imported some 70,000 Palestinian terrorists from Sudan, Yemen, Iraq, Lebanon, Syria and Tunisia to Gaza and the mountain ridges of Judea and Samaria – the door steps of their intended victims – arming them with weapons and lobbying on their behalf in Washington, DC.
Contrary to Israel, the PLO was transformed tactically and intangibly, while sustaining its strategy, as enunciated by its 1964 Covenant, considering the Land of Israel a divinely ordained Muslim land (Waqf). Arafat stated that the Oslo Accord was provisional, aiming to destroy Israel, triggering an unprecedented level of Palestinian non-compliance with agreements. Mahmoud Abbas established a hate-education system. And, an unprecedented wave of Palestinian terrorism erupted in April, 1994, producing so far over 1,600 Israeli fatalities, five times as large as the toll of the twenty years prior to Oslo. 160 Israelis were murdered during the pre-Oslo 1st Intifadah, compared with 1,000 during the post-Oslo 2nd Intifadah. In June 2001, Faisal Husseini, the PLO darling of the Western media, clarified that the Oslo Accord provided the Palestinians witha Trojan horse in the heart of Israel.
The Oslo-driven Palestinian conduct has been consistent with the Palestinian intra-Arab track record of subversion and treachery, which caused Arafat’s and Mahmoud Abbas’ expulsion from Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and Kuwait. It has also been consistent with the Palestinian collaboration with the Nazis, the Communist Bloc, Khomeini, Saddam Hussein and Bin-Laden.
The Oslo Accord reality check documents that contrary to the hope of its architects, the Palestinian leopard does not change spots, only tactics.
The Wall Street Journal praises Israel’s high tech
October 29th, 2013
By Yoram Ettinger.
1. Nicola Mendolsohn, Facebook Vice President: “Facebook was amazed by the amount of talent in a small country like Israel [5,000 tech companies]. It was a momentous decision for Facebook to open its first R&D center outside the US in Israel. We chose Israel in the knowledge that the best talent is found here. Onavo, the Israeli company that we acquired [for $150MN] will help Facebook achieve its vision of linking the largest number of users possible (Jerusalem Post, Oct. 16, 2013).” The German global software giant,SAP invests $75MN in a new building for its Israel Center (Globes, Oct. 15).
2. Intel Capital, Intel’s investment arm, is expanding its portfolio of over-60-Israeli-companies, investing $10MN in three additional Israeli companies (Globes Business Daily, Oct. 24).
3. The Boston-based HarbourVest led a $35MN round of private placement by Israel’s Outbrain, joined by the Menlo Park-based Lightspeed Venture, Geneva-based Index Ventures and leading Israeli VC funds (Globes, Oct. 24).
4. Israel is a global leader in the development of water technologies. Export of water technologies was $2BN in 2012, 170% increase in six years, expected to reach $2.2BN in 2013. 280 Israeli companies develop water technologies, 150 are export-oriented (Globes, Oct. 22).
5. Wall Street Journal (Ben Rooney), Oct. 24: It is extremely hard not to be a bit star-struck by the Israeli technology scene…. ‘It is Silicon Valley for the rest of the world‘ said Saul Klein, a London-based venture capitalist…. ‘On a scale of one to 10, the innovation I see in Germany would be close to zero. In Israel, it is a 10,’ said Mark Tluszcz, co-founder of Mangrove Capital Partners, a Luxembourg-based venture firm…. What’s the secret? Reasons include the role of the Israeli Defense Forces, and in particular the high-tech Unit 8200; the unique cultural values of a country forged from centuries of oppression; and Jewish mothers…. The link with America remains as strong as ever. If you look at the flight schedules into Tel Aviv, there are just three direct flights a week from Beijing, and another three from Seoul. There are at least that many a day from the U.S.”
Yoram Ettinger, Jerusalem, Israel, “Second Thought: a US-Israel Initiative”
A robust Jewish majority/demographic trend west of the Jordan River
October 17th, 2013
By Yoram Ettinger.
The following are excerpts an essay by Yakov Faitelson, the lead expert on the Jewish-Arab demographic balance:
“Since 2003, the annual population growth rate [birth, mortality and migration rates] of IsraeliJews has grown steadily from 1.48 percent to 1.81 percent while the aggregated annual increase of the Arab Middle Eastern countries has decreased to 1.45 percent….
“While the natural increase rate [birth and mortality rates] for Israeli Jews rose by 41.6 percentfrom 1995 to 2012, the Arab natural increase rate declined during the same time by 30.6 percent – due to rapid modernity [e.g. urbanization, family planning, expanded education among women, higher wedding-age] with the rate in 2012 at its lowest level since 1955.
“For example, in 2000, the number of Israeli Arabs born was 39,579 (including 34,667 Muslims). By 2012, the number of Israeli Arab newborns was 40,080 (35,730 Muslim). The number of children born within the Jewish population rose from 90,900 in 2000 to 125,492 in 2012 and in the expanded Jewish population [including Olim from the USSR who are not yet recognized as Jews by the Rabbinate] from 94,327 to 130,460 in 2012. Thus the share of babies born to Jews increased from 67.9 percent in 2000 to 73.6 percent and of expanded Jewish population from 70.4 percent to 76.5 percent in 2012 [The trend persists during 2013]….
“From the beginning of the twenty-first century the TFR [number of births per woman] of Israeli Muslims decreased considerably, from 4.7 in 2000 to 3.5 children per woman in 2011. The TFR of all Arabs decreased still further to 3.3 children per woman, very close to the 3.09 for Jewish women born in Israel….
“The shape of Israel’s age-pyramid clearly shows that the younger the age, the more the number of Jews increases while the number of Arabs either decreases or remains stable. During the last ten years, the share of Israeli Jews versus Israeli Arabs within the overall young Israeli population has increased, indicating that the Jewish population has started to become younger while the Israeli Arab population is getting older. With existing life expectancies factored in, the natural aging of Israeli Arab ‘baby boomers’ will significantly increase their mortality level over the next two decades, causing an accelerating decline in the overall Arab natural increase rate.
“Continuation of current trends will result in a convergence in 2025 of the natural increase rate [which does not include migration!] for Jews and Arabs in Israel. For the first time in the modern history of the Land of Israel, the Arab natural increase rate may not be higher but rather equal to the natural increase rate of the Jews. Given the possibility of continued Jewish immigration, one can expect an intensification of the steadily rising Jewish share of the total population of the Land of Israel.
“The decline in the Palestinian natural increase rate in Judea and Samaria [caused by modernity] is accelerating even faster than among Israeli Arabs. Combined with a massive emigration of Arab youth from these territories, especially from Judea and Samaria, the size of the younger age group will be reduced and coincidentally, the elderly age cohort of the population will increase, resulting in an increased mortality rate in the near future. Following these trends, the natural increase rate of Arabs in Judea and Samaria will be decreasing even faster.
“Any proper analysis of demographic developments in the Land of Israel must take into accountthe critical role of the migration balance. Aliya—Jewish repatriation—has been a significant factor in narrowing the difference between Jewish and Arab natural increase rates. Israel may experience a substantial Aliya wave into the near future, including an influx of skilled professionals, a welcome addition to Israel’s fast developing economy. The recent discoveries of huge gas deposits create an enormous momentum for the Israeli economy that is bound to change the geopolitical situation in the Middle East.
Many Israeli expatriates may also seriously consider returning to the Jewish state. During the years 2000-10, the number of returning Israelis was 21.3 percent higher than the previous decade. These developments would lead to a further increase in the annual growth of the Jewish population.
Of equal importance are emigration trends of the Arab population that began long before the 1967 Six-Day War. Demographer Justin McCarthy has estimated that about 200,000 Arabs emigrated from Judea and Samaria between 1949 and 1967. ‘After 1948, Palestinian high fertility and the limited economic potential of the land led to out-migration. The West Bank, in particular, had sizable out-migration from 1948 to 1967… Emigration was now large-scale and directed mainly to the Arab world.’ Migration rates from Gaza were much lower because until the 1960s, the Egyptian government, which controlled the territory, restricted emigration.
“According to Mustafa Khawaja, director of the Jerusalem Statistical Department of the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics (PCBS): ‘The net balance of arrivals and departures for the West Bank in the period 1967 to the present has been consistently negative, with an average of about 10,000 leaving annually…. The main reason for migration by Palestinians relates to the economic factors resulting from the political instability and the infighting between the Palestinian parties.” Egyptian journalist, Bissan Edwan, stated that ‘according to Jordanian statistics, at least 150,000 Palestinians left the West Bank during the intifada years from 2000 to 2002 and did not return,’ concluding that the economic situation in the Palestinian Authority territories could lead to new waves of emigration. Arab emigration from Judea and Samaria increased even more in 2007-09. During the first seven months of 2008, the Jordanian-Palestinian border-crossing point located near the Karame bridge registered a negative migration balance of 63,386 people while in the first eight months of 2009, there was reported a negative migration balance of 44,000 people.
“World Bank figures also indicated a decrease in the size of the Palestinian population, by 0.45 percent in 2009 and by 0.37 percent in 2010. Thus, in 2009-10, the negative migration balance was higher than the natural increase of the Arab population in Judea, Samaria, and the Gaza Strip.
“In December 2006, the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics (PCBS) proclaimed that the ‘Palestinian population and the Jewish population [east of the Jordan river] will be equal in 2010 … the Palestinian population will increase to 5.7 million in mid-2010.’ The reality was different: At the end of 2010, the PCBS issued a press release claiming that there were actually 4,108,631 Arabs in Palestinian-administered territories, 918,949 less than it had projected in 2001. Similarly, a PCBS press release on December 31, 2012, estimated the Arab population at 4.4 million, a number smaller by 955,000 than it had previously predicted. The recent PCBS projection made at the end of 2012 stated that ‘the number of Palestinians in historical Palestine [including Israeli Arabs] will total 7.2 million….This estimate is 1,362,439 less than projected by PCBS in 2001.
“Population growth for the Land of Israel at the end of the second decade of the twenty-first century will be influenced by the Arab and Jewish natural increase rates reaching a convergence point based on similar live birth and mortality rates. It will also likely be influenced by continued Jewish immigration, including a new, possibly strong wave in the near future following the prolonged world economic crisis and manifestations of rising anti-Semitism around the globe.Repatriation will also be encouraged if the Israeli economy continues to be strong in the near future, an increased likelihood based in part on the huge gas and shale oil fields recently discovered in Israel. The share of Jews in the total population of the Land of Israel may also increase as a result of continued Arab emigration that may include Israeli Arabs as well.”