news analysis

Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu announced a settlement freeze this week. Obama has been asking for this for at least six months. What prompted Netanyahu to make this announcement? Why now?

At first I thought maybe Netanyahu's announcement had something to do with the White House's appointment of an envoy on antisemitism. But this was an implausibly small concession for Obama to make in exchange for a settlement freeze.

On Friday the answer revealed itself:

The International Atomic Energy Agency's board of governors voted 25-3 to censure Iran for developing a uranium enrichment site in secret in a motion that gained rare backing from Russia and China, which have in the past blocked attempts to isolate Iran, a trade partner for both. (Haaretz)

Why did Russia and China give this "rare backing"? Obama visited Russia and China about a week ago.

It seems likely to me that Obama and Netanyahu made a deal in May. Obama said he'd push Russia and China to support an IAEA censure of Iran over its uranium enrichment. Netanyahu said that if the IAEA censures Iran with support from Russia and China, he'd announce a settlement freeze.

A censure is just a censure and this settlement freeze is only partial (construction in progress will continue, and the freeze excludes East Jerusalem, which Israel annexed). Will the Palestinians see Netanyahu's announcement as a legitimate concession or as an empty gesture? I expect that Obama recognizes that it is a significant step for Netanyahu to take, and that his foreign policy energy will soon be focused on prodding the Palestinians to make a reciprocal concession.

I hope reports of Gilad Shalit's imminent return are true, but we've heard this tune before. Even if he does return, I am not sure that could be considered a Palestinian concession, given that Israel will probably be releasing hundreds of prisoners in exchange for Shalit.

Maybe Hamas's announcement of a deal with Gaza factions regarding rocket fire could be considered the reciprocal concession:

According to the announced deal, rocket fire will only be allowed in retaliation for Israeli military offences within the Strip. (ynet)

Will Israelis see this as a legitimate concession or as a self-interested pause allowing Hamas to prepare for the next barrage? Probably the latter.

jordan and new apartment

I moved into an apartment in Ramat Gan. I love the new place. It has plenty of space, decent furniture and lots of light. As of yet, it does not have internet, which is partially why its taken me so long to post these pictures from my trip to Jordan with my family earlier in November. The highlights were Petra and Wadi Rum. The people in the pictures are my parents, my aunt and uncle, my dad's cousin and her husband, and two Brits (Steve and Emma) who were on the tour with us.

rabin rally

Last night I went to the rally marking the 14th year since the assassination of Yitzchak Rabin. It was well attended by the blue shirt movements. The rally was demoralizing. What has changed in fourteen years? Rabin was a "soldier in the army of peace" who was murdered before he could complete his mission. Weren't there any other soldiers? Why didn't they complete his mission?

The youth movement hanoar haoved v'halomed distributed signs at the rally that said "lo nishkach v'lo nislach" -- we will not forget and we will not forgive. That's a rather uncompromising stance, especially for a leftist group. It would be natural to think that it refers to the assassin, Yigal Amir, but it actually refers to the atmosphere created by right wing groups leading up to the assassination. A few weeks before the assassination, Rabin was called a traitor, depicted in a Nazi SS uniform and burned in effigy at a rally attended by Ariel Sharon and Bibi Netanyahu. Rabbis like Avigdor Neventzal compared Rabin to a rodef, suggesting that it would be halachically permissible (or obligatory?) to kill him. The atmosphere that existed before Rabin's assassination was swept under the rug by public demonstrations of unity, but it would be easy to recreate because the underlying cause still exists: a significant number of Israelis think that civil laws are subordinate to halacha and that halacha permits political violence.

So Rabin's mission is unfinished and the societal factors that contributed to his death still exist. Will it help to listen to the sticker song and sing shir lashalom?

siyur

Today I helped lead a trip to the First Aliyah Museum in Zichron Ya'akov and the Pioneer Settlement Museum at Kibbutz Yifat. In the early 1800s a large number of Jews spoke yiddish and lived in eastern Europe -- mostly Poland and Russia. Many Jews left beginning in the 1880s because of anti-Semitic laws and pogroms (riots targeting Jews). Between 1880 and 1910, three million Jews immigrated from that region to the United States. Tens of thousands immigrated from that region to Palestine.

From about 1880 to 1903, the immigrants were mostly religiously motivated. This is labeled the first wave, or the First Aliyah. The second wave was from about 1904 to 1914, these immigrants were mostly motivated by ideology. The third wave was also ideologically motivated, from 1919 to 1923. As far as I can tell the main difference between the so called second and third waves is that one was before World War I and the other was after. In most meaningful respects they were part of the same phenomenon.

That's what I did today. Back to the grindstone.