Hebrew newspaper The American and Israeli security services: Yes The West Bank ignition is a matter of time Hebrew newspaper The American and Israeli security services: Yes The West Bank ignition is a matter of time

Hebrew newspaper The American and Israeli security services: Yes The West Bank ignition is a matter of time

Hebrew newspaper The American and Israeli security services: Yes The West Bank ignition is a matter of time  The head of the CIA, William Burns, has joined a long line of intelligence men and experts who warn that a third intifada will soon break out in the territories [the West Bank]. Burns, a seasoned diplomat with experience, followed the second intifada closely as US ambassador to Jordan, and later as assistant secretary of state for Middle Eastern affairs under the governments of Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush. He said these words in Washington, in a speech he delivered at Georgetown University, a few days after his return, worried about a comprehensive visit to Israel and the territories of the Palestinian Authority. The escalation in the West Bank, Burns said in his speech, reminded him of the period before the outbreak of the second intifada in September 2000. History does not accurately repeat itself, and even between the two uprisings there were clear differences.  The first, which erupted in December 1987, began as a clear popular struggle that drew the Palestinian public behind it. A few months later, armed cells began to join them. In the second intifada, the public was almost out of the picture. However, it was enough for smaller blocs of armed youth, some of whom were members of “Fatah” and activists in the security services affiliated with the Authority, and some of them were members of the Islamic organizations, in order to drag Israel and the territories into a deadly bloodbath, which took five years to extinguish. In 2015, a wave of “lone wolf” terrorism erupted, which for a moment was called an intifada, but it subsided within half a year, thanks to the tireless efforts of Israel and the Palestinian Authority. Since last March, there has been a sharp increase in the number of operations in the West Bank and within the Green Line. The Shin Bet described it as a steady trend and not as a short wave, but the security apparatus hesitates to use the word intifada, and they are right. Not because the Palestinian public does not participate in the meantime, but rather its contribution to terrorizing Hamas and Islamic Jihad activists is limited, and the PA security forces, with the exception of individual activists, do not participate in violence. This time, too, the talk is mainly about individual terrorists and local cells, most of which have no organizational affiliation.  What turns the current wave into a more disturbing wave is the use of weapons. The terrorists of 2015 used knives and ran over soldiers and citizens. They equipped themselves with improvised weapons here and there. The terrorists of 2023 set out armed with advanced weapons, most of which were stolen from the Israeli army or fled to the West Bank from Jordan or Lebanon. So far, bomb engineers who can install a lethal explosive belt have not joined the fray. What worries Burns is what seems to have been bothering all the senior officers in Israel's security services for the past few months.  An explosive mixture of factors is now operating in the “regions,” which may exacerbate the seriousness of the situation to the point of direct and widespread confrontation. The continuing weakness of the Palestinian Authority under the rule of the old Mahmoud Abbas, the rise of an extreme right-wing government in Israel, the entry of well-known arsonists into the Israeli cabinet, the series of operations that have been going on for almost a year, and the absence of any specific political horizon - all this increases the risk of a major escalation. Things did not reach here in the meantime, due to the success of the Israeli security forces in thwarting a large part of the most ambitious operational plans, and because the military response is dictated by a relatively disciplined axis that includes the prime minister, the defense minister, and senior officers in the Israeli army and the Shin Bet. But it is no coincidence that an air train of American dignitaries landed here at the end of last month. The US administration, which reads the picture well, is aware of the extent of the escalation that will be the result of a specific local factor. As usual in the region, the most effective explosive material is hidden in the religious sphere. A major fire may break out if friction is renewed on the Temple Mount or other holy sites of the two religions in Jerusalem. Prime Minister Netanyahu realizes how sensitive the current circumstances are with the Americans, and that caution is required now, and this realization also appears in today's Supreme Court decision.  The judges ordered the state to submit a response to the petition calling for the evacuation of the Bedouin village of Khan al-Ahmar by April 2, and adjourned discussion of the petition for three months. The judges also criticized the state’s behavior and decided that they were “completely dissatisfied with the behavior of those responding in the name of the government, and that it is a response that we do not accept.” Netanyahu and Defense Minister Galant signed a request to postpone giving the state's response to the petition for the ninth time. In the request, he wrote that the political echelon adheres to its position that the orders to demolish the village must be implemented, but some of the office holders who are required to preoccupy themselves with the issue are new to their positions. The government's procrastination reflects Netanyahu's fear of confrontation in this regard with the United States and European Union countries, who have expressed their concern about the move. Without Biden's help  Against the backdrop of Burns' statements and frequent visits from the United States, it is important to see how long Netanyahu's invitation to the White House will be delayed. Despite expectations, the US Secretary of State's visit here last week did not include an official invitation to Netanyahu. The prime minister, who did not face any such difficulty in his previous terms, did not succeed in obtaining approval to visit the White House. It seems that the required step, given Washington's concern about the growing tension between Israel and the Palestinians, is for Netanyahu to be invited to Washington (perhaps individually also Abbas) as soon as possible. The main reason this has not happened yet seems to be related to Israel's domestic politics. Blinken previously expressed publicly and in a closed meeting with Netanyahu the US administration's fears of the coup led by Netanyahu and the harm to Israeli democracy. It now appears that the US president and his entourage are in no hurry to provide a cover of legitimacy for Netanyahu at a time when he is making great efforts to sabotage what Americans have always described as the common core values ​​of the two countries. {Written by: Amos Harel  (Haaretz 8/2/2023)}

The head of the CIA, William Burns, has joined a long line of intelligence men and experts who warn that a third intifada will soon break out in the territories [the West Bank]. Burns, a seasoned diplomat with experience, followed the second intifada closely as US ambassador to Jordan, and later as assistant secretary of state for Middle Eastern affairs under the governments of Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush. He said these words in Washington, in a speech he delivered at Georgetown University, a few days after his return, worried about a comprehensive visit to Israel and the territories of the Palestinian Authority. The escalation in the West Bank, Burns said in his speech, reminded him of the period before the outbreak of the second intifada in September 2000.
History does not accurately repeat itself, and even between the two uprisings there were clear differences.

The first, which erupted in December 1987, began as a clear popular struggle that drew the Palestinian public behind it. A few months later, armed cells began to join them. In the second intifada, the public was almost out of the picture. However, it was enough for smaller blocs of armed youth, some of whom were members of “Fatah” and activists in the security services affiliated with the Authority, and some of them were members of the Islamic organizations, in order to drag Israel and the territories into a deadly bloodbath, which took five years to extinguish.
In 2015, a wave of “lone wolf” terrorism erupted, which for a moment was called an intifada, but it subsided within half a year, thanks to the tireless efforts of Israel and the Palestinian Authority. Since last March, there has been a sharp increase in the number of operations in the West Bank and within the Green Line. The Shin Bet described it as a steady trend and not as a short wave, but the security apparatus hesitates to use the word intifada, and they are right. Not because the Palestinian public does not participate in the meantime, but rather its contribution to terrorizing Hamas and Islamic Jihad activists is limited, and the PA security forces, with the exception of individual activists, do not participate in violence.
This time, too, the talk is mainly about individual terrorists and local cells, most of which have no organizational affiliation.

What turns the current wave into a more disturbing wave is the use of weapons. The terrorists of 2015 used knives and ran over soldiers and citizens. They equipped themselves with improvised weapons here and there. The terrorists of 2023 set out armed with advanced weapons, most of which were stolen from the Israeli army or fled to the West Bank from Jordan or Lebanon. So far, bomb engineers who can install a lethal explosive belt have not joined the fray.
What worries Burns is what seems to have been bothering all the senior officers in Israel's security services for the past few months.

An explosive mixture of factors is now operating in the “regions,” which may exacerbate the seriousness of the situation to the point of direct and widespread confrontation. The continuing weakness of the Palestinian Authority under the rule of the old Mahmoud Abbas, the rise of an extreme right-wing government in Israel, the entry of well-known arsonists into the Israeli cabinet, the series of operations that have been going on for almost a year, and the absence of any specific political horizon - all this increases the risk of a major escalation.
Things did not reach here in the meantime, due to the success of the Israeli security forces in thwarting a large part of the most ambitious operational plans, and because the military response is dictated by a relatively disciplined axis that includes the prime minister, the defense minister, and senior officers in the Israeli army and the Shin Bet. But it is no coincidence that an air train of American dignitaries landed here at the end of last month. The US administration, which reads the picture well, is aware of the extent of the escalation that will be the result of a specific local factor. As usual in the region, the most effective explosive material is hidden in the religious sphere. A major fire may break out if friction is renewed on the Temple Mount or other holy sites of the two religions in Jerusalem.
Prime Minister Netanyahu realizes how sensitive the current circumstances are with the Americans, and that caution is required now, and this realization also appears in today's Supreme Court decision.

The judges ordered the state to submit a response to the petition calling for the evacuation of the Bedouin village of Khan al-Ahmar by April 2, and adjourned discussion of the petition for three months. The judges also criticized the state’s behavior and decided that they were “completely dissatisfied with the behavior of those responding in the name of the government, and that it is a response that we do not accept.”
Netanyahu and Defense Minister Galant signed a request to postpone giving the state's response to the petition for the ninth time. In the request, he wrote that the political echelon adheres to its position that the orders to demolish the village must be implemented, but some of the office holders who are required to preoccupy themselves with the issue are new to their positions. The government's procrastination reflects Netanyahu's fear of confrontation in this regard with the United States and European Union countries, who have expressed their concern about the move.
Without Biden's help

Against the backdrop of Burns' statements and frequent visits from the United States, it is important to see how long Netanyahu's invitation to the White House will be delayed. Despite expectations, the US Secretary of State's visit here last week did not include an official invitation to Netanyahu. The prime minister, who did not face any such difficulty in his previous terms, did not succeed in obtaining approval to visit the White House. It seems that the required step, given Washington's concern about the growing tension between Israel and the Palestinians, is for Netanyahu to be invited to Washington (perhaps individually also Abbas) as soon as possible.
The main reason this has not happened yet seems to be related to Israel's domestic politics. Blinken previously expressed publicly and in a closed meeting with Netanyahu the US administration's fears of the coup led by Netanyahu and the harm to Israeli democracy. It now appears that the US president and his entourage are in no hurry to provide a cover of legitimacy for Netanyahu at a time when he is making great efforts to sabotage what Americans have always described as the common core values ​​of the two countries.
{Written by: Amos Harel  (Haaretz 8/2/2023)}
Previous Post Next Post