text:
MEPIN™
Middle East Political and Information Network
Tag Archives: The Jerusalem Post
Unity Missing Ingredient for Success
{Previously published in The Jerusalem Post}
I have come away convinced that whether by design or accident, sooner rather than later, Israel could be faced with its most significant war since 1973, whether on its own terms or not.
When I arrived in Israel this month for meetings with thought leaders in intelligence, politics, history and security, I thought I knew most of the logistical and strategic challenges they would face in the near future. But I had a blind spot for the challenge of keeping the nation unified.
Depending on how the next election cycle is handled, Israel's esprit de corps could be its most important asset, or its Achilles' heel.
Israel has an incredibly strong and well-prepared military that is light years ahead in preparation, munitions, technology, and capabilities compared to previous wars.Iran's race toward nuclear arms and its desire to turn Syria into a second Hezbollah are serious challenges facing Israel. The possible use of Iraqi and Yemini launching pads for precision-guided long-range missiles aimed at Israel adds to the menace of the Iranian threat.
The urgency for Israeli national solidarity for the success of the next war has moved into the top tier of my list. A war with Iran will likely be on three fronts, with unprecedented missile attacks throughout the whole country. Even a small number of terrorists on land or through tunnels who kill or kidnap civilians or soldiers would raise the nation's anxiety to unprecedented levels.
The best way for Israel to deal with those challenges is for the next government to be one of national unity. No matter how capable Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is, or what he has accomplished both diplomatically and militarily, it is unlikely that he could form a national-unity government after the March election, the third in less than a year. His path to power is most likely a razor-thin majority right-wing coalition government, a poor choice when the nation needs as much as ever to have its sense of purpose.
Bibi will be prime minister through March and perhaps much longer, if there is a fourth election and his trial drags on until 2021 – a crazy scenario for a nation that could be in an unprecedented war for its survival against an Iranian regime whose Shi'ite revolutionary Islamism demands the annihilation of the Jewish state as its raison d'etre.
Let's hope that if the next election ends in another coalition paralysis, Bibi allows a unity government to form whether or not he is to be its prime minister.
No one leader is indispensable for a nation's survival, but unity of the nation is required if Israel is to win its next war and deal with its repercussions. It is hard for any nation to imagine being led by someone else after so many years, but even the United States during World War II survived and thrived after the death of Franklin D. Roosevelt, and an untested president Harry S. Truman took the reins of government.
According to the Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security's National Security Policy for Israel, "The most important challenge facing any government in Israel is nurturing cohesion in Israeli society; ensuring unity in the face of tests that may be posed to Israel by the violent Mideast environment…. Deterrence is based not only on sheer military might… [but] above all on the capacity to bear loss and pain both at the front lines and on the home front."
With so many potential threats looming against Israel even beyond Iran, including the possible fall of the Jordanian monarchy, a Russia that does not give Israel the freedom of the skies to strike Iranian targets in Syria, a civil war in the post-Abbas era with the emergence of Hamastan on the Jordan, a national-unity coalition government may be the secret sauce Israel needs.
The writer is the director of the Middle East Political Information Network. He regularly briefs members of the Senate, House, and their foreign policy advisers, as well White House advisers.
This entry was posted in Israel and tagged Israel, MEPIN, The Jerusalem Post, World News on January 9, 2020 by mepin.
Examining Israel's Security Challenges with Blue and White's Ya'alon
How will Israel know when Iran will cross the threshold for nuclear weapons, and will it act?
One casualty of Israel's electoral deadlock is the absence of a budget for the Israeli military. The current five-year plan, Gideon, negotiated by former defense minister Moshe "Bogie" Ya'alon and Finance Minister Moshe Kahlon almost five years ago is ending without a new military plan to replace it. Although the IDF can continue to act against imminent threats, it is dangerous to hamper long-range planning.
So I decided to speak with Israel's former defense minister, who presided over the last five-year plan when things in the government were more normal, to see how he analyzes Israel's current security challenges. His perspective should be seen not only through his years of military service culminating as the IDF chief of staff, but as a leader of Israel's Blue and White Party that may lead the next coalition government. I thought it would be instructive to ask Ya'alon to comment on some of the topics I discuss in Washington with foreign policy experts and members of Congress.
First, I wanted to know how Israel will fight a multi-front war with thousands of missiles aimed at Israeli communities and strategic locations, some with precision guidance that could overwhelm its current missile defenses.
Ya'alon said that it must be remembered that the strategy of Israel's enemies like Hezbollah and Hamas is to use missile attacks to target and terrorize Israeli civilians. They know Israel is militarily superior and cannot be defeated conventionally, so their strategy is to break the will of the Israeli people. He said Israelis have repeatedly stood the test of time under threat, revealing Israel's true strength, combining the Jewish heart with Jewish values, intelligence and the spirit of Zionism.
However, the best defense is still a good offense provided by Israel's superior intelligence gathering, which is also an indispensable American security asset. For Israel, this allows missiles, as well as precision-guided missile factories to be precisely targeted.
I asked whether Israel needs more anti-missile systems like Iron Dome. He said Israel could certainly use more anti-missile systems, but without an approved military plan and budget, it cannot happen.
I moved onto Israel's northern Iranian border with Syria and Lebanon, and wanted to know if it is possible, short of a massive ground invasion, to diminish the Iranian presence.
Ya'alon said you need to begin by thinking of Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Iranian controlled Shi'ite militias in Syria not as independent entities, but as parts of a whole entity, with its brain center for all of its nefarious activities located in Tehran. The supreme leader has not changed his spots, and when the West claims Iran has become more moderate under its current President Rouhani compared to his predecessor, Ahmadinejad, it's like thinking Jack the Ripper is more moderate than the Boston Strangler.
I told him that there is a debate in the US whether it is wise to publicly support the protesters in Iran, Iraq and Lebanon, as some say overt US support would allow the Iranian regime to claim this is all an American plot to overthrow the regime, which would resonate with the Iranian people. He answered that supporting the protesters is the right thing to do for both of our countries' interests, and America shouldn't fail the Iranian people again as they did 10 years ago during the Green Revolution.
Ya'alon added that regime change by the people of Iran would create more stability in the region. However, economic pressure via sanctions is not enough to stop Iran; they need to be politically isolated. Unfortunately, Europe is reluctant, but must be convinced that this is in their interest, as they did before agreeing to the flawed Iran nuclear agreement (JCPOA), to reinstate political isolation.
It should be noted that no one I spoke to throughout the Israeli security or political establishment ever even hinted that America should consider boots on the ground to cause regime change, something that is disingenuously alleged by many of the supporters of the JCPOA.
Ya'alon said Iran's leaders ultimately want to survive, and even if there is not a popularly inspired regime change, the regime can feel enough economic and political pressure to halt some of their expansionist activities, but only if both political isolation and hard-hitting sanctions are combined.
I ASKED if Israel is forced into a large-scale war with Iran from Syria and Lebanon, would Israel consider attacking Iran proper. Ya'alon didn't answer directly but said it is counterproductive to speak openly about Israeli strikes against Iranian interests, as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu does now, finding it counterproductive, as ambiguity about military options better serves Israeli interests.
So how will Israel know when Iran will cross the threshold for nuclear weapons, and will it act?
Israel leaves all options on the table, and only a credible military threat will dissuade Iran. America, by not responding to the Iranian downing of its $100-million drone, or the unreciprocated attacks by Iran on international shipping in international waterways, or the lack of response to the Iranian attack on the Saudi oil facilities, has invited further Iranian aggression and increased instability in the region, undermining both American and Israeli interests.
The best way to decrease Iran's threats is to respond with consequences when Iran acts. He wants America not to forget that it still has interests in the Middle East and that if it creates vacuums, it will eventually endanger America itself. America must remember that 9/11 came from the Middle East and that many attacks against American interests have come from the region.
Taking a step back to view the situation on a macro level, Ya'alon said there are three great threats in the Middle East: Iran; the Muslim Brotherhood, best exemplified by Turkish President Recep Erdogan; and Sunni Wahhabi radicalism in the form of al-Qaeda or Daesh (ISIS) that are both now somewhat in retreat. The only way America can counter these threats without sending in troops is to be supportive of Israel, which holds the front line against all the forms of radical Islam, from Shi'ite to Sunni jihadism.
Ya'alon is the number three in the Blue and White Party and is reportedly its choice for education minister. After his time as defense minister, he emphasized Israel's internal challenges, so I asked him, if he became education minister, how he would approach the subject of Zionism in the secular Jewish school system.
As chief of staff of the IDF, Ya'alon made it a priority to teach young soldiers about the foundational core values of Zionism, defining Judaism as a religion, a national aspiration, a civilization and a people. He said these core values must be part of the educational system, as the nation must be rooted in a solid foundation to withstand its challenges. Israel's four school systems: secular Jewish, religious Zionist, Arab and haredi (ultra-Orthodox), also need to be more integrated for both their benefit as well as the country's. He emphasized the importance of avoiding confrontational coercion of the ultra-Orthodox and Arabs, but his party is in favor of some form of mandatory civil service.
Let's hope Israel's politicians will put the people's interest ahead of their own and finally form a government after this unprecedented third election. Everyone I spoke to, Right and Left, agreed that having to endure a third election is unfortunate, and Israelis need to agree to disagree where necessary, maintain their sense of unity and move forward, as a genuine, vibrant democracy requires.
The writer is the director of MEPIN, the Middle East Political Information Network. He regularly briefs members of the Senate, House and their foreign policy advisers, as well as White House advisers. He is a columnist for The Jerusalem Post, and a contributor to The Hill, i24TV, JTA, TheDefensePost.com, JNS, The Forward and has appeared on RealClearWorld.com.
This entry was posted in Israel and tagged Blue and White Party Platform, Israel, Israel National Security, Israel Security Challenges, MEPIN, The Jerusalem Post, World News on January 2, 2020 by mepin.
Two States for Two Peoples Requires Recognizing Israel's Legal Rights
Ten years ago, I was briefing a senator and her chief of staff about the complex nature of international law regarding the building of Israeli communities, i.e., settlements over the 1949 Armistice line (1967 Line or Green Line), in land claimed by the Palestinian Arab people as their future national home. They thanked me for new information, which surprised me, telling me that the leading pro-Israel groups almost never mention anything about settlements, not even the militarily essential ones in the Jordan River Valley that are supported by many Israelis. So I filled in the blanks.
Does Israel have any legal rights over the 1967 Line?
Is every Israeli settlement over the 1967 line a violation of the international law, including Judaism's holiest site, the Western Wall?
What does international law say about settlement in non-populated areas of disputed territory acquired in a defensive war?
When I was a guest lecturer in a Middle East Studies class at a major university and when I began explaining what I thought was a straight-forward explanation of UNSC Resolution 242, the basis for all international agreements and negotiations between the Israelis and Palestinians, the Lebanese professor who invited me to speak told me that I mistranslated the text. I said the text said Israel was to withdraw from "territories" it captured during the 1967 Six Day War, the authors specifically leaving out the indefinite article "the" to imply it didn't have to return from 100% of the occupied area.
The professor said the correct translation in Arabic was "the territories" meaning Israel must completely withdraw, so I retorted that it was written in English, citing the words of the authors of the resolution who explained that it was written purposely without "the," as they never expected or required Israel to return to the indefensible borders of 1967. He was unpersuaded, but students who came up to me afterward thanked me for adding some gray to the black or white picture the professor had painted regarding Israel and the territories in question.
When US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo recently announced that Israeli settlements are not per se illegal, it touched off a political firestorm with partisans going into their corners citing international law without actually looking at the complexities of the issue or what a non-politicized version of international law actually says.
Whether it is wise for Israel to have their current settlement policy is a different question. But not differentiating between settlements based on security issues like the Jordan River Valley, or rather, as defined by the professor as any Jewish presence over the '67 line, which would include the Western Wall of the old Jewish quarter of Jerusalem, makes an eventual resolution of the conflict almost impossible.
Adding to the complexity was President Barack Obama's parting shot at the end of his term to Prime Minister Netanyahu, with the American orchestration of UNSC Resolution 2334, which declared an Israeli presence of one centimeter over the 1967 line as a "flagrant violation of international law," contradicting UNSC 242, and hardening the Palestinian position.
SO WHAT does international law actually say about the issue? A recent Democrat-penned letter that garnered more than 100 signatures cited a 1978 opinion by State Department legal counsel Herbert Hansell that said Israel's settlements violate Article 49 of the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention, prohibiting the deportation of its civilian population into the disputed area.
What he chooses to ignore is that this prohibition was specifically written because of what the Nazis did during World War II, where they forcibly transferred their populations into occupied lands that they ethnically cleansed of Jews for colonization and for racial reasons. Comparing Israel's settlement policy to a policy designed to prevent a recurrence of Nazi fascism is not only inaccurate but obscene.
According to Alan Baker, defenders of Israel's settlement policy have international law on their side, citing Article 80 of the UN Charter, which memorialized the Balfour Declaration, the San Remo Declaration and the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine, granting Israel rights in today's contested territories over the 1967 Line (West Bank or Judea and Samaria).
In addition, from 1949 to 1967, the area was claimed by Jordan, but the international community, with the exception of Pakistan and Britain, did not recognize that claim. Since the last legal stakeholder of the land was the Ottoman Empire, which had dissolved after World War I, the land was best described as disputed after Israel captured the territory during the Six Day War.
Why is this important even if you believe the eventual resolution of the conflict is two states for two peoples and an Israeli return to the 1967 lines with land swaps, which is what many of those who signed Congressional letter believe?
Because if Israel in a negotiated settlement with the Palestinian Authority is ceded any territory over the 1967 line, whether for defensive reasons or part of a land swap, it will always be viewed as a burglar returning only part of his ill-gotten gains, setting up a pretext for future generations of Palestinians to undermine any settlement in the future.
Israel's legal rights over the 1967 line must be recognized for there to be a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Counterintuitive, yes, but considering the failures of all previous negotiations, it is something that should be championed for those who want both a Jewish state and an Arab state.The writer is the director of MEPIN, the Middle East Political Information Network. Dr. Mandel regularly briefs members of the Senate, House, and their foreign policy advisers, as well White House advisers. He is a columnist for The Jerusalem Post, and a contributor to The Hill, i24TV, JTA, Defense Post, JNS, The Forward and has appeared in RealClearWorld.
This entry was posted in Israeli - Palestinian Conflict, Uncategorized and tagged Israel, Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, Palestine, The Jerusalem Post, Two-State Solution, World News on December 12, 2019 by mepin.
Reevaluating America's Foreign Policy for Iraq, Kurdistan and Syria
You can replace Afghanistan with Iraq, Kurdistan or Syria in the title and ask: Can they survive America's exit, and does it serve America's interests to hand them over to enemies of the West?
Americans are in no mood for new entanglements in the Middle East. The politically expedient choice for the US Congress and the president is to follow the nation's mood – by not only avoiding any new potential areas of conflict arising with the aggressions of Iran and its proxies, but maybe by also abandoning allies who have worked side-by-side with American soldiers in Iraq and Syria against ISIS, leaving Afghanistan to the mercy of the Taliban, and forgetting their savage misogyny and its place as a safe haven where al Qaeda brewed its attacks on 9/11.
The Wall Street Journal's Saturday Essay by Yaroslav Trofimov was titled, "Can the New Afghanistan Survive America's Exit? An exhausted America, no longer determined to bring democracy to the Muslim world, just wants to leave."
American foreign policy operates under a hundred-year-old construct based on the misguided belief that we must keep artificially constructed Middle East nation-states like Syria and Iraq whole, even when it flies in the face of reality – or of what is best for American interests or the people who live there.
Sixteen years ago, I recommended that Iraq be turned into three states, Sunni, Kurdish and the largest, Shi'ite. I was not alone. This was based on the obvious religious animosity, ethnic divisions and tribal nature of the country that had no historical antecedent, whose people value clan, tribe and religion rather than allegiance to the state itself.
The core American belief that dividing up Iraq or Syria is a bad idea because it will lead to failed states ignores the more plausible concept that, if put back together, it will not only be less sustainable as a whole state but, more consequentially, it may be more dangerous whole than divided – especially if the US abandons the region.
Today, the failed Iraqi state has been taken over by Iran, America's most dangerous Middle East adversary, which not only has political parties allied with it in the Iraqi government but, more consequentially, controls the nation's most powerful force: the Shi'ite militia al-Hashd al-Sha'bi, which has ethnically cleansed Sunni areas for an Iranian land corridor to the Mediterranean and answers only to the supreme leader and his Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps. How does this serve American interests?
In 2006, Joe Biden, then the ranking Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee – and Leslie Gelb, the former president of the Council on Foreign Relations – penned an op-ed in The New York Times recommending Iraq be divided into three autonomous regions, "giving each ethno-religious group… room to run its own affairs, while leaving the central government in charge of common interests."
In 2015, president Barack Obama's defense secretary Ash Carter, speaking before Congress, said that Iraq is so broken that maybe it shouldn't be put back together: "The question [is] what if a multi-sectarian Iraq turns out not to be possible?"
In 2016, CIA director John Brennan said: "I don't know whether or not Syria and Iraq can be put back together again. There's been so much bloodletting, so much destruction."
MOST AMERICANS have no knowledge that most of the nations of the Middle East are artificially constructed entities based on the interests of the French and British after the First World War, when they divided the region not according to its natural tribal divisions, but according to their own economic interests, forcing antagonistic groups to live together in authoritarian regimes.
It didn't work, and we have rarely stopped to ask why we want to keep putting these broken nation-states back together. How does this serve American interests?
Iraq was a dysfunctional nation long before it collapsed after the 2003 US invasion. Saddam Hussein's Baath Party repressed and terrorized the Sunni majority and the Kurdish North. After US president George H.W. Bush allowed Saddam to remain in power after America's Gulf War in 1991, he took his vengeance out against the Shi'ites of the South and the Kurds of the North, who deserve as much as anyone to have their own independent state. He may not have had nuclear weapons in 2003, but he did use chemical weapons against his adversaries and still remained in power.
America, with good intentions, thought that all of the world's people wanted Western style democracy, but soon learned that in the Middle East, other than Israel and the Kurds of northern Iraq, autocracy and Islam rule the day.
We live in a world where politicians are afraid to speak honestly to the American people for fear that they will lose their popularity and their ability to remain in office, especially those who seek our highest office.
Maybe it's time for our political leaders to explain the world to our nation in something more than sound-bites and tweets that pollsters tell them will raise their numbers.
US President Donald Trump seems to believe that we should return to an isolationist strategy. That, despite his bellicose talk, is not very much different from Obama's actions not to confront aggression even when justified. Obama's great foreign policy fault was that he didn't realize you couldn't change the spots of the Iranian tiger; abandoning allies to realign with Iran; undermining American foreign policy by making America look unreliable to the world; and let everyone, friend and foe, come to see us as a paper tiger.
WHICH BRINGS US to America's Kurdish allies in Syria and Iraq. These two Kurdish peoples share the same ethnicity but are very different. What they do share in common is that they were at the front lines of defeating Islamic State, helping the US achieve its primary strategy in the Middle East under both Obama and Trump. They also both live in states that are artificially constructed and, if put back together, will sow the seeds for more sectarian violence, pulling the US back to region it so wants to leave.
Now there is a call to withdraw American forces from both northern Syria and northern Iraq, abandoning important allies and forcing them, for their own survival, to make deals and to ally with America's enemies. The Kurds of Iraq may have to cut a deal with Iran and the Iranian-controlled Iraqi government in Baghdad to survive, while the Syrian Kurds may have to work with their adversaries – the Syrian regime, Iran and Russia – in order not to be ethnically cleansed by Turkey. Millions of new Sunni refugees may flow from Syria to Turkey into Europe and onto our shores. How is this in America's interest?
I recently interviewed American soldiers working with the Kurdistan military force, the Peshmerga, who are still fighting ISIS. Their unreserved clarity of purpose and their importance as American allies was striking – something Congress, the State Department and the president need to hear.
America's chances for a new war in the Middle East are greatly increased by withdrawing from the Middle East; becoming isolationist as we did after the First World War, since we were totally unprepared when we were dragged into the Second World War.
A modest American presence remaining in Afghanistan, Syria, Kurdistan and Iraq creates leverage for American interests far beyond the small number of troops remaining in harm's way.
We certainly cannot cure the ills of the Middle East, but our goal should be to strengthen our allies and lower the flames that would certainly erupt with an American withdrawal. America's primary goal is not only to prevent the resurgence of ISIS, but – more importantly – to create a long-term strategy to stop Iranian expansionism that endangers not only our allies, but also the world at large. Sorry, Mr. Obama, the Iranian Islamist regime is a leopard that will not change its spots – no matter how many pallets of cash we give them.
The writer is the director of MEPIN, the Middle East Political Information Network, and regularly briefs members of the Senate, House and their foreign policy advisers. He is a columnist for The Jerusalem Post, and a contributor to i24TV, The Hill, JTA, JNS and The Forward.
This entry was posted in U.S. Foreign Policy and tagged American Foreign Policy, Eric Mandel, Iraq, Kurdistan, MEPIN, Middle East, Syria, The Jerusalem Post on October 10, 2019 by mepin.
Israel's Self-Destructive PR Must Change in its Next Government
Wouldn't be great if Isrotel worked with StandWithUs like El Al, to empower their employees, helping them to realize they are the face of Israel.
American supporters of Israel have complained for years that Israel's public relations, hasbara, has been ineffective, counter-productive, and its importance for strengthening the US-Israeli relationship unappreciated by Israelis as a core national security interest.
This all came to mind during a wonderful weekend wedding at one of Israel's leading hotels, when I went to breakfast and the only newspaper available to read was the Haaretz/New York Times edition. This was not the first time this has happened to me in Israel.
Haaretz's Hebrew-language readership is dwarfed by other Israeli print dailies, but you would never know that if you were a visiting American tourist or English-speaking journalist staying at some of Israel's many fine hotels, reading the Haaretz English edition that is combined with The New York Times, another paper that has a long history of harshly critical views of Israeli policy.
Within Israel, the newspaper is widely known as being to the hard-left of the political spectrum, representative of a small segment of the Israeli population, although it is influential within Israeli academia and intelligentsia. It is a legitimate and important viewpoint, but not one representative of the majority of the Israeli people based upon election results and surveys over many years.
When an English-speaking journalist, organizational leader or businessperson visits Israel, if they receive only one critical viewpoint to start their day, does this matter? It does, and it is representative of the greater problem of Israel's approach and investment in projecting a positive image, and explaining its policies to a world that is increasing hostile to its very right to exist.
There is little doubt that some of the news writers for Haaretz, not only its editorial and opinion-page journalists, are profoundly hostile to Israeli policy. When I brought this up with then chief political columnist, editorial writer and US bureau chief, Akiva Eldar, at his Haaretz office about 10 years ago, complaining that news articles shouldn't be editorialized and should strive to present a factually balanced news story, he simply told me to go read another paper.
So when a hotel offers only Haaretz to its guests, it's representative of a pervasive Israeli attitude that stretches from the halls of the Knesset to Israeli companies to the Prime Minister's Office that they are indifferent or exasperated, that they need to continually plead to the world for understanding of their precarious situation.
But when you are a lonely democracy living in a very bad neighborhood, you'd better start caring.
Haaretz is a legitimate view of Israel but not the only one. If during your time in Israel when impressions are formed and this is the only newspaper you read, as it is for too many foreign journalists, it will present a distorted and biased view. In short, it feeds the echo chamber for those who see Israel responsible for all the problems of the Middle East and the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict – a brutal, undemocratic, colonialist occupier.
BUT FOCUSING the blame for bad public relations on Israeli businesses is just the tip of the iceberg, as Israel's government has slashed its investment into its Foreign Ministry that is tasked with explaining its case to America and to an unsympathetic world. Instead of expanding and increasing consulates in the United States, there are plans to close consulates.
This month Israel ordered most of its overseas embassies to stop work due to a "grave deficit" of its Foreign Ministry budget.
According to the Foreign Ministry, "The main effect is that during this sensitive time, when faced with diplomatic and strategic challenges… foremost among them the threat by Iran… and on the eve of a UN General Assembly – the Foreign Ministry and its missions abroad will be almost entirely paralyzed."
This is insanity.
PM Netanyahu bears responsibility as he has overshadowed his own foreign ministers, when he has appointed them at all, choosing inexperienced lightweights, the most recent having made too many mistakes since filling the vacancy earlier this year.
Sometimes Israelis do get it, as when StandWithUs partnered with El Al pilots and flight attendants, helping them use their two-to-three day layovers overseas to educate people about the real Israel, sharing their personal stories.
Which brings us back to the wedding at one of Israel's best hotels owned by one of Israel's leading hotel chains, Isrotel. The assistant manager told me that offering Haaretz was the way it has been for years. I explained why multiple viewpoints are important for their guests and for Israel's hasbara, or public diplomacy.
The guests at the wedding included many distinguished young American and Europeans from the world of governments, business and NGO'S.
When they walked into the dining room and picked up their English-language newspaper, they were presented with a one-sided minority Israeli view, but most were completely unaware of this.
Israel is about to form a new coalition government. Whether it is led by incumbent Prime Minister Netanyahu or Blue and White's Benny Gantz, both need to realize that Israel's security is not just in the hands of its very capable defense forces, but needs the help of all of its people, companies and government to present the real Israel in all its beauty and complexities.
It's about time Israel started putting its best face forward with increased government expenditures for its Foreign Ministry overseas, and work in partnership with Israeli companies and their employees, who very often are the only face that the world sees representing Israel.
Criticism is great for the health of a democracy. Thank you Haaretz. But if you have only criticism reinforced by poor hasbara, then at the end of the day instead of debating Israeli policy with the world, you will continue to simply fight to explain why you have a right to exist at all.
The writer is the director of the Middle East Political Information Network who regularly briefs members of the Senate, House and their foreign policy advisers. He is a columnist for The Jerusalem Post, and a contributor to i24TV, The Hill, JTA, and The Forward.
This entry was posted in Israel and tagged Eric Mandel, Israel, Israel News, Israel PR, MEPIN, The Jerusalem Post, World News on September 26, 2019 by mepin.
A Year of Weaponized Words, Antisemitism, and Revisionist History
Another misused word directed at Israel is the charge of apartheid. Anyone opening up a real dictionary would see that the true meaning of the word has nothing to do with anything in Israel.
A year ago I didn't know that "it's all about the Benjamins" was an antisemitic slur. I could never have predicted that a self-identified group of "Justice Democrats" who would call themselves "the Squad," would become a virtual seminar in antisemitic rhetoric, and the voice of an intolerant intersectional movement that disparages anyone who crosses them as a racist, Islamophobic or a bigot.
The appropriation and distortion of words like concentration camps, apartheid, Nazi and martyr is bad enough coming from the Squad, but over the last year, the words have been weaponized and have become part of mainstream discourse, exemplified by the antisemite UK Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, some mainstream media outlets, Palestinian leadership and on college campuses where it flourishes in academia and in "social justice" movements.
Words are mightier than the sword, and in the history of Jew hatred, they have led to Inquisitions, Crusades, pogroms, discrimination, delegitimization, expulsions and the Holocaust.
This has been a big year for the misappropriation of the word martyr, whose meaning was twisted by PA President Mahmoud Abbas after the US Congress withdrew American taxpayer funds under the Taylor Force Law for those we call terrorists in a "Pay to Slay" scheme, but are called glorious martyrs by the Palestinian Authority. This month, Abbas said "We reject [the] designation of our martyrs as terrorists… they are 'the most sacred thing we have.'" In what sick universe are suicide bombers, kidnappers and killers of children martyrs?
One member of the Squad opened their Orwellian vocabulary to misappropriate the word massacre to describe Israeli soldiers killing terrorists who were targeting Israeli civilians along the Gaza border, as a "massacre of protesters."
Another misused word directed at Israel is the charge of apartheid. Anyone opening up a real dictionary would see that the true meaning of the word has nothing to do with anything in Israel, but since the term is so heinous, it has been appropriated as a tool to delegitimize Israel's right to exist.
This year has been a big year for the term "dual loyalty." Minnesota Justice Democrat Ilhan Omar charged Jewish legislators with dual loyalty, by "hav[ing] allegiance… to a foreign country [Israel]."
Democratic chairwoman of the House Appropriations Committee Nita Lowey, who will be challenged by a Justice Democrat next year, confronted Omar's antisemitic smear, reminding her "throughout history, Jews have been accused of dual loyalty, leading to discrimination and violence."
US President Donald Trump also inappropriately used words evoking dual loyalty this summer, when he charged Jews who vote Democrat as being disloyal to Israel. As a supporter of Israel, he should have been more sensitive to those dangerous words with a history of too many antisemitic associations.
However, the most egregious abuse of words this summer was by the Squad's Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a Justice Democrat from New York, who shamelessly appropriated the words "never again" and "concentration camps" to advance her agenda against American immigration policy.
"The United States is running concentration camps on our southern border and that is exactly what they are," said AOC.
When AOC uses the words "concentration camps" to describe border detention facilities, you have to be tone deaf or a Holocaust denying revisionist historian not to understand that to almost every person in the United States since the end of World War Two, the words "concentration camp" are identified with the Holocaust and genocidal death camps. Her goal was not to have a legitimate policy debate, but to demonize opponents with incendiary language.
Whatever one thinks about the conditions of detention facilities for illegal aliens and their children, it is a travesty to liken them to the Nazi concentration camps where people were used as slave labor, starved, beaten, raped, dehumanized and degraded – both Jews and other persecuted minorities – led like sheep to slaughter in an organized mass extermination. She and those who defend her use of the term concentration camps in this context insult the memory of those who were rounded up, deliberately treated as vermin and massacred in the Holocaust.
SOMETIMES, THE most dangerous words are the ones that are left out, distorting the context of a story. CAMERA reported that The New York Times and The Washington Post choose to inaccurately describe the organization that sponsored Omar and Tlaib's trip to the disputed territories. The organization Miftah has a long history of antisemitic associations, but a Times editorial referred to it as "a Palestinian organization… that promotes 'global awareness and knowledge of Palestinian realities.'" The Washington Post said Miftah is "headed by Palestinian lawmaker and longtime peace negotiator Hanan Ashrawi."
So how could anybody take issue with a nonprofit run by a peacemaker, sponsoring a fact-finding trip to the Middle East?
New York Times columnist Bari Weiss wrote other words that the Times editorial board and The Washington Post refused to include, that Miftah is "an organization that has proudly praised female suicide bombers, and pushed the medieval blood libel," which is alive and well in Ms. Tlaib's Palestinian Arab society.
Even the term antisemitism is selectively used. For the Squad and its ilk, antisemitism is the realm of the Right. No one can deny that Jew hatred from the Right has a long history, and its contemporary white supremacist followers have committed despicable hate filled violence to this day.
However, the words that are left out, a form of political revisionism, is that on today's college campus, antisemitism comes primarily from the Left. In Europe, according to a recent survey by the European Union's Agency for Fundamental Rights, Muslim and left-wing antisemitism was more prevalent especially against young European Jews.
Words matter.
With three months before the 2020 presidential year, we already have had more than our share of trivializing the Holocaust, weaponized words and mainstreaming of antisemitism through a media that is so fearful of not being politically correct that it seems to have lost its moral compass.
Let's hold our presidential candidates, politicians, clergy, media and even our friends accountable for what they say and write.
The writer is the director of MEPIN, the Middle East Political Information Network. He regularly briefs members of the Senate, House and their foreign policy advisors. He is a columnist for The Jerusalem Post, and a contributor to i24TV, The Hill, JTA and The Forward.
This entry was posted in Anti-Semitism and tagged Antisemitism, Israel, MEPIN, The Jerusalem Post, The Squad, World News on September 4, 2019 by mepin.
What Freshman Members of Congress Should Learn on Their Trip to Israel
How does one reconcile this moral dilemma if you believe Israel has a right to exist as the home of the Jewish people but believe in two states for two peoples?
This year's August congressional trip to Israel is different from previous years, as so much attention is focused on who is not joining, specifically the members of the pro-BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions) "Squad," Reps. Rashida Tlaib, Ilhan Omar, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
However, most members who come to Israel do have an open mind and can grasp the difficulties that have thwarted decades of efforts at resolution of the conflict between Israel and its enemies, some who will not be satisfied until there is no Jewish state and no Western-oriented presence in the region.
Some say the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is all about the occupation, and Israel for its own good should unilaterally withdraw to the pre-1967 lines, and that the Jews of all peoples, after centuries of oppression, should not be occupying another people's land.
Yet if there is to be created an autonomous Palestinian state adjacent to Israel, is it reasonable to expect that missiles won't be exploding in Tel Aviv, or that they won't have to run their children into bomb shelters all the time everywhere in Israel?
Israel withdrew completely from Gaza in 2005. Its reward was three wars launched from the coastal enclave and plenty of indignant international condemnation for Israel defending itself against forces launching missiles from school yards and hospitals, and digging tunnels under borders to sneak across and murder civilians.
Some advocate that the two peoples should have their own states based on the pre-1967 lines. Aside from the technicalities of armistice lines and borders, what if an objective analysis of Israel's legitimate security concerns and the current pathology of the Palestinian leadership leads to the conclusion that the Palestinian Authority remains in power only because of the help it receives from Israel's security forces? What if an Israeli withdrawal would likely lead to the creation of a "Hamastan" on the Jordan, a proxy of Iran backed with money and armaments?
Groups like J Street and their congressional supporters preach that the corrosive effect of occupation is worse than the security risk of withdrawal, finding a small group of former IDF officers to support their claim. All will be well if the cause of the conflict, the "illegal" occupation," disappears.
If that were so, then how would one explain PA President Mahmoud Abbas walking out in 2007 when more than 100% of the disputed territory was offered with land swaps? In December 2018, Palestinian chief negotiator Saab Erekat confirmed that this was indeed the Israeli offer, and they turned it down.
If you are a congressional representative who prioritizes security considerations, the question to ask is: What do secure boundaries mean for Israel in the 21st century?
Those who advocate for a complete Israeli withdrawal minimize the importance of strategic depth in the age of missiles, as missiles fly over borders in a split second while Israel has the proven capabilities to intercept projectiles at a rate of 80%-90%, mitigating the need to have more territory. This argument rings hollow as territorial depth is essential for a country the size of New Jersey, 11 miles wide at its narrowest point.
The minimal Israeli mainstream security consensus, considering current logistics, is control of the Jordan River Valley, especially with Iran already having a military presence in Iraq and Syria, a demilitarized Palestinian state with defensible borders, and control of airspace.
Unfortunately, Palestinians were encouraged to become even more intransigent by former president Barack Obama's parting gift to Israel in 2016, UN Security Council Resolution 2234, when the US abstained and joined for the first time with the UN claque of Israel-bashers.
It labeled any Israeli presence over the Green Line, including the vital Jordan River Valley and the Western Wall of the Jewish Temple, as illegal. This undermines the legitimacy of any land swaps, as Israel would be retaining, according to it, stolen land, a pretext for future conflict no matter what the Palestinians sign onto now. The only saving grace of 2234 is that it was adopted under the sixth chapter of the UN Charter, so it is considered a non-binding resolution.
Suppose the Palestinians again remain intransigent. What would members of Congress who want an end to the occupation propose then?
Since the Palestinians will remain the perpetual righteous victims to the Squad, while Israel remains a Western colonial occupier, we can expect from some quarters more clamoring for BDS. Never mind that Israel is the only real democracy in the region with rights for all its citizens and the one steadfast ally of the US in the region.
Israelis have enough on their plate with Iran threatening from the north, east and south, so the status quo, in spite of everyone's distaste for the current situation, is the only logical choice until a durable Palestinian leadership is willing to sign an end of conflict agreement that credibly won't endanger Israel's existence as a Jewish State.
The writer is the director of Middle East Political and Information Network™ and a regular columnist to the Jerusalem Post and i24TV, and contributes to JNS, The Hill, the Forward, and JTA. MEPIN™ research analysis is read by members of Congress, their foreign policy advisers, Knesset members, journalists and organizational leaders.
This entry was posted in Israel and tagged Congress, Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, MEPIN, The Jerusalem Post, World News on August 15, 2019 by mepin.
SPOTLIGHT ON MOSHE 'BOGIE' YA'ALON
I had a long discussion this week with Moshe Ya'alon.
"Bogie" is a self-described defense hawk, whose strategic vision, especially regarding the dangers of Oslo and Sharon's disengagement from Gaza, was prescient. When asked if he is on the Right or Left politically, he said he is not on either side, but only for what is right for Israel.
In 2015 when Ya'alon was still defense minister, I had the opportunity to speak with some members of the opposition parties, including Yesh Atid and the Zionist Union, about Ya'alon. The consensus said they might agree or disagree with his position on an issue, but they knew they could trust him to keep his word and be an honest partner.
He is not the most charismatic political leader, as he reminded me that modern democratic leaders don't wear glasses and have much more hair than he does. He said Harry Truman was the last leader he can remember who wore glasses. His self-effacing personal warmth is clearly present in person, but less appreciable by those who have seen him only on TV.
He stands out in one respect that is as rare as hen's teeth among politicians – honesty and integrity. Add to that a keen insight with a strong Jewish moral compass, and you have an unusual description of a political leader in the 21st century.
I have spoken with Ya'alon at length before, but never when he was the political leader of a party, now a joint party with Benny Gantz. So why did he choose to align himself with Gantz's party, as there were other suitors for his talents and security credentials?
He said he surveyed the political landscape and was most comfortable with Gantz's integrity, realizing it is not about who leads the top of the ticket, but what is best for the Israeli people. He said that anyone who challenges Netanyahu's monarchy is portrayed as a leftist, an epithet he says the prime minister uses to delegitimize his adversaries.
Although senior to Gantz, who served under him in the IDF, Ya'alon has no trouble being No. 2, and would consider becoming defense minister again, if asked. He has publicly called for another popular former IDF chief of staff, Gabi Ashkenazi, to join the team, but when pressed about other politicians joining, such as Yair Lapid, he preferred not to speculate.
It should be remembered that Ya'alon did coauthor an op-ed with Lapid last July titled "Will the West Cede the Golan Heights to a Psychopath?" It called on the US to begin the process of recognizing Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights. Recent polls have shown that if Gantz, Ya'alon, Ashkenazi and Lapid form a coalition, it could oust the long-reigning Likud grip on power, replacing Netanyahu, which up until now seemed unlikely.
Ya'alon came to the conclusion a couple of years ago that Netanyahu should resign, because of his interference in the government's procurement of submarines and frigates from Germany. At first he didn't understand why Netanyahu was bypassing the usual process for purchasing billions of dollars in armaments by not bringing it to the cabinet, but when he understood that there were serious conflicts of interests involving his associates, he asked Netanyahu to resign for the good of the country and the rule of law.
Although Netanyahu has a range of alleged corruption charges against him, Ya'alon spoke about the submarine case involving the German manufacturer ThyssenKrupp, and the allegation that Netanyahu's personal attorney David Shimron used his relationship with the prime minister for financial gain. Police have claimed there is enough evidence to charge Shimron with money laundering. As for Netanyahu, Ya'alon has previously stated that there was no way that Netanyahu didn't know.
Ya'alon choose to leave the Netanyahu government when he was replaced as defense minister rather than accept the offer to become foreign minister, which would have left him as the likely heir apparent, if the prime minister were to be forced to resign over his alleged corruption.
I asked Ya'alon if Attorney-General Avichai Mandelblit would indict Netanyahu before the election; he said doesn't know, but he did say that he trusts the attorney-general.
WE MOVED on to his true area of expertise, the security of the State of Israel.
When asked who is Israel's No. 1 threat, he said Iran. On this he agrees with Netanyahu.
We first discussed the proposed American withdrawal from Syria, which he said was a poor decision. It is not so much about boots on the ground as it is the abandonment of the Kurds. He said that the previous American president, Barack Obama, who withdrew from the region (Iraq), was forced to return to fight ISIS, which was a consequence of that poor decision.
He said President Donald Trump should learn a lesson from his predecessor's mistake. It is important for America to be involved in the region for its own interests. Ya'alon said, just look around: Except in Israel, all the governments in the region are under stress, from Amman to Cairo to Riyadh, and a withdrawal of American forces would destabilize the region.
When asked about the population transfer in southern Syria orchestrated by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps and Hezbollah, placing a permanent hostile force on Israel's Syrian border, he responded by saying Israel has a very strong destructive power that has and will keep Iran in check. Up until now, it has not allowed advanced weapons or permanent Iranian bases to remain undamaged. A future defense minister Ya'alon would have to deal with a permanently entrenched Iranian presence in Syria.
Ya'alon took Netanyahu to task for his new strategy to publicly claim every Syrian strike with video as an open provocation that serves no purpose, but in fact removes the helpful façade of plausible deniability that had restrained Iranian and Syrian responses. He said this was done only for Netanyahu's political advantage, not for Israel's strategic benefit.
What about the new Russian S-300 antimissile system, which the Russians gave to Syria, after Syria mistakenly shot down a Russian aircraft – will the Russians use this system against Israel?
Ya'alon said the Russians and Israel are not on the same page in Syria; we are not even in the same book. However, they are a dominant power in control, with influence on Israel's enemies. He said we have open lines of communication with them, and they have worked until now, hopefully also in the future.
So why did they give the S-300 missile system to the Syrians? According to Ya'alon, it is another card that Russia played that could be used against Israel for leverage in any future negotiations.
On the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, what about the collapse of security cooperation between Israel and the PA, due to the loss of American funding because of the Taylor Force Act, and the Palestinian fear that accepting American money opens them up to American lawsuits for complicity in terrorism?
According to Ya'alon, it is in the Palestinians' interest, with or without funding, to continue the security coordination with Israel. If the Palestinians stop coordinating with Israeli security, they know that the likely outcome will be the same as what happened to them in Gaza after the Israeli withdrawal – a total Hamas takeover.
Right now Israel performs 70% of the security operations for the Palestinian Authority in Judea and Samaria (West Bank), while the Palestinian security forces do 30% of the work. He says it is definitely a challenge for the cooperation to continue without funding, but on principle, terrorists and their families cannot be rewarded with funding, as it encourages and promotes more terrorism. He also had harsh words for UNRWA as a corrupt and complicit international organization.
I mentioned that American Jews want to know if he is for a two-state solution. Ya'alon said the two-state solution is something that is not possible at this time, because the Palestinians cannot even accept Israel's right to exist. In the meantime, he would like to give them more autonomy, separate from them, and would consider giving up some additional territory, if it serves Israel's purpose for calm, as long as it does not affect Israeli security.
What about the Qatari money to Hamas? He disagrees with Netanyahu's approach of giving millions in a lump sum and trusting that international organizations will not let Hamas siphon off money for terrorism. Ya'alon says there is experience in transferring funds to banks that can be withdrawn only by noncombat civil servants with proper IDs, which he believes is a better although not perfect option to buy calm in Gaza.
WE NEXT touched on the relations between Israel and its Diaspora Jewish population, many of whom are critical of Israel. Ya'alon said we must be more tolerant of, and sensitive to, our Diaspora brothers' Jewish religious practice, as Israel is the homeland of all the Jewish people.
What about Israel's minority population, many whom call themselves Palestinian citizens of Israel, and whose narrative is now aligned with Palestinians of the West Bank?
Regarding Israeli Arabs, Ya'alon wants to integrate them more and says they would like that, but for the malevolent role their political leaders play, which he believes hurts their genuine aspirations to be part of the state. He wants these Palestinian citizens of Israel to be required to do civil service and believes most would want this, despite what their political leaders say.
As for domestic and socioeconomic issues, Ya'alon has previously spoken about leading the fight against racism and sexism in society, and has said the Nation-State Law should be nullified, as it has done damage to the country.
What you see is what you get with Ya'alon: something refreshing in a world of cynicism, where one expects the worst of elected leaders.
The author is the director of the Middle East Political and Information Network and a regular contributor to The Jerusalem Post.
This entry was posted in Israel and tagged Israel, Moshe Ya'alon, The Jerusalem Post, World News on February 11, 2019 by mepin.
AMERICAN JEWS AND THE UPCOMING ISRAELI ELECTION
But do American Jews know the difference between Bibi, Bogie, Benny and Bugie?
{Previously published by The Jerusalem Post}
Israelis will go to the polls this spring to cast their ballots for a myriad of competing parties, one of which will then be asked to try to stitch together an unruly coalition, highlighting how very democratic and disorderly Israel's parliamentary system is. This is not necessarily the best system for a nation that is in a constant state of war.
American Jews of all stripes are also gearing up to support or demonize their preferred or hated candidates and parties. Actually, it is not so different from what Israelis do themselves. But in the age of US President Donald Trump, where Israelis generally appreciate his support if not his style, many American Jews viscerally hate anything he does, even if it's something in their interest.
Leaving aside the funny nicknames, this is a deadly serious question as Americans want to weigh in on this pivotal election, while the growing Iranian menace threatens Israel from three sides, and Trump plans to announce a peace plan right after the election, which some in the know say might involve some difficult or even unacceptable demands on Israel.
What are the effects, in Israel, in the US, and the rest of the world, of the perceived opinions of American Jewry?
What could be worse for Israel's international reputation than to have it perceived that the Jews of America on the whole believe the nation; the people of Israel are the intransient party and deserve to be punished?
Weighing in on the Israeli election from 8,000 kilometers away highlights the conflicting perspectives of the 21st century's two largest Jewish populations.
If Israel is the home of the Jewish people, should American Jews deserve a voice, if not a vote, and be taken seriously? If American Jews don't put their children in harm's way, how much should their concerns be considered? After all, it is Israelis who have to live with the consequences.
Yossi Klein Halevi, in a Moment Magazine interview, said that the divide between the communities was inevitable.
"Israelis live in the most dangerous… neighborhood in the world; American Jews live in the most hospitable environment that Jews have ever lived in… Too many American Jews speak of ending the occupation as if Israel were an island in the South Pacific… not a miniscule country surrounded by some of the most lethal terrorist groups in the world… For Israelis, the essential element is Jewish solidarity and self-protection. For American Jewish liberals, it's empathy for the other, especially the oppressed."
American Jews are overwhelming liberal, live in economic and physical security, and haven't changed their political affiliations despite their changing socio-economic status over generations. Israelis, on the other hand, were much more liberal 25 years ago during the euphoric but illusory days after the Oslo Accord.
All that changed for Israelis with the Second Intifada, as they shifted to the center and right. Even after the Intifada subsided, those still hoping for a reasonable Palestinian partner were disabused of the idea when Abbas refused to even respond to Olmert's offer of 100% of the disputed territory with land swaps.
American Jews who didn't suffer the physical and emotional consequences of the Second Intifada didn't shift their perspective, remaining convinced that this conflict is still simply about territory and an occupation, victimizer and victim. Today many still judge Israel as the primary intransient party, as though this is still 1995.
American Jews do not understand that for most Israelis, security will be their primary concern when they go to the ballot box, not pluralism, even if they abhor the disproportionate influence of ultra-Orthodoxy.
As important as socioeconomic issues are to Israelis – and they are – they take second place to life-and-death security concerns in a society where every citizen is supposed to serve in the armed forces. In America, 1.4% of women and 13.4% of men have ever served in the military, a humbling difference.
When Israelis go to vote, they must balance lives that respect their Jewish values, but can never forget they live in a neighborhood where the weak are slaughtered and the world turns a blind eye to genocide. That is the reality they live in, and which too many Americans ignore. It explains to some extent why Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has endured for so long.
Americans who are interested in the upcoming Israeli election will read about it in their own echo chambers that reinforce their pre-determined points of view, rarely challenging ourselves with different opinions, usually dismissing them because they come from non-trusted sources.
American liberal Jews will read Haaretz and The New York Times, listen to NPR, watch MSMBC/ CNN and think they know what is really happening in the fistfight of the upcoming April election. Meanwhile, American conservatives will read National Review, the editorials of the Wall Street Journal, watch Fox and think they have all the answers.
From so far away, when American towns and cities are not in the crosshairs of Hamas, Iran and Hezbollah, it is easy to pontificate and give advice to Israelis, claiming your objective perspective and harsh medicine are needed for Israel's benefit. Some even claim to be pro-Israel, rationalizing that boycotting products from Judea and Samaria (West Bank) is for Israel's own benefit, while ignoring the incessant and unrelenting Jew hatred from Israel's erstwhile peace partners.
This is the reality for far too many American Jews, who weigh in and think they know all about the Middle East. They tell me that this is what they have heard from their rabbis, who heard it first hand from Rabbis for Human Rights, or a speaker from J Street, an NGO that claims Israel is not a democracy, or have visited Ramallah with a trip organized by a group like Breaking the Silence, to listen to PA officials who claim it is all the occupation, not their incitement and kleptocracy.
Let's be clear… Israel has thrown kerosene into the fire of civil relations between the communities by not figuring out some way to respect American Jewish religious denominations, allowing the ultra-Orthodox to disenfranchise the largest Diaspora Jewish community in the world.
Israelis seem unaware that American Jewish organizations are vital for their security interests by educating members of Congress about the role of Israel as a bulwark of American national security.
Which brings us to the upcoming Israeli election.
Too many American Jews cannot differentiate between Netanyahu, his policies and the State of Israel. They wouldn't say America doesn't have a right exist because they hate Trump; we organize and vote for an alternative in the next election.
But they are angry that the Israeli people have continued to support their current government, so they advocate "tough love" things like BDS that would do serious damage to the nation of Israel.
When the world's major forces decide whether or not to throw Israel under the bus, economically or militarily, it does matter what are perceived to be the voices of American Jewry, too often saying that Israel deserves or needs to be punished.
Netanyahu may lose, be indicted, or win, but Israel will remain the democratic nation of the Jewish people long after his political life expires. So to all American Jews across the political spectrum, if you don't like an Israeli candidate or a government policy, please speak out loud and clear. But don't mistake a party or candidate for Israel the country, joining those who want to delegitimize Israel the nation.
Too many American Jews don't seem to mind throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
The author is the director of Middle East Political and Information Network™ (MEPIN™), and is a regular contributor to The Jerusalem Post. MEPIN™ is a Middle East research analysis read by members of Congress, their foreign policy advisers, members of the Knesset, journalists, and organizational leaders.
This entry was posted in Israel and tagged Israel, Israeli Election, The Jerusalem Post, World News on February 5, 2019 by mepin.
Will America Reevaluate Ties with Turkey as Part of Middle East Vision?
Will America Reevaluate Ties with Turkey as Part of Middle East Vision?
Does the administration also realize that Turkey under Erdogan is no different from the Muslim Brotherhood's ideology that Sisi overthrew?
America's reinvigorated role in the Middle East," laid out a new American vision in sharp contrast to President Barack Obama's speech 10 years ago.
Pompeo described Obama's vision as distancing America away from its traditional allies, Israel and the Sunni Gulf States, his goal being a path to a new relationship with the Islamic Republic of Iran that culminated with the JCPOA (Iran Nuclear Deal). Notably absent from Pompeo's speech was any mention of Turkey as an American ally.
How significant this speech will be as a turning point in America's engagement with its allies and adversaries in the region remains to be seen. According to the New York Times, Pompeo "vowed to increase the pressure until Iran halts… its 'malign activities' throughout the Mideast." Critics have claimed the speech lacked details and was hyper-partisan.
Although National Security Advisor John Bolton and Pompeo mean what they say, it is ultimately the commander in chief who will decide American policy. One speech will not reassure America's allies in the region, especially after the president decided to take the advice of President Erdogan of Turkey over his own foreign policy team regarding withdrawal of US troops from Syria.
The continued mixed messaging, even after Bolton said the Syrian policy had changed to a conditional withdrawal, has left allies unsure whether they can rely on US assurances in planning for their future security. Keeping your enemies guessing is a legitimate strategy, but it is unhelpful to do that to your allies and your own foreign policy advisers.
In his Cairo speech, Pompeo said, "We grossly underestimated the tenacity and viciousness of radical Islamism," while praising Egyptian President Sisi for confronting this threat.
But this begs the question; does the administration also realize that Turkey under Erdogan is no different from the Muslim Brotherhood's ideology that Sisi overthrew?
Clearly, Iran is enemy number one for this administration, but how concerned is the President about Turkey's nearly twenty-year Islamist rule that has been undermining our security interests?
As Tom Rogan wrote in the Washington Examiner, "Where Turkey was once a reliable Eurasian center for free trade, the rule of law and secular democracy, Erdogan has built an Islamist authoritarian state driven by corrupt patronage… At present, Turkey is extracting the benefits of its alliance with America without any responsibility."
Trump Expected To Propose Weakening Obama-era Wetland Protections
Erdogan may feel immune to any consequences for his behavior, because he believes the United States needs Turkey as a counterweight to Syrian President Assad, and to reign in ISIS and al-Qaeda aligned militias.
SO DOES a president who values transactional negotiations see Erdogan as a friend, an enemy or something in between, a frenemy?
Erdogan's public humiliation of Bolton and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff John Dunford, by canceling their scheduled meeting, was a slap in the face to America. Perhaps it should be the tipping point to re-evaluate the stability and reliability of the relationship.
Getting this relationship right is crucial for stability in the region. Turkey has the second largest armed force in NATO, houses a pivotal but not vital American air base in Incirlik, is a crucial part of the production line for America's next generation F-35 fighter, yet still desires to purchase the Russian S-400 anti-missile system. If Turkey incorporates a Russian system into NATO defenses, this relationship's status will rise to the level of a crisis for American security.
In theory, Turkey as a Sunni state should be helpful in confronting Iran, a Shi'ite state, that like Turkey harbors grandiose desires to control the whole Middle East. But Turkey has gotten into bed with Russia and Iran, whose primary goal is to undermine American interests. Turkey has also pledged to destroy America's only true ally in Syria, the YPG Kurds.
Pompeo said, "President Trump has reversed our willful blindness to the danger of the (Iranian) regime and withdrew from the failed nuclear deal, with its false promises."
The question going forward is, will the president end our "willful blindness" to the dangers of an Islamist Turkey?
Trump needs to tell Erdogan that it's time for Turkey to choose which side it is on, and act accordingly.
The author is the director of MEPIN™ (Middle East Political and Information Network™), and is a regular contributor to The Jerusalem Post. MEPIN™ is a Middle East research analysis read by members of Congress, foreign policy advisers, Knesset members, journalists and organizational leaders.
This entry was posted in Turkey and tagged The Jerusalem Post, Turkey, World News on January 24, 2019 by mepin.
Thank you, you've been added to the list!
By submitting this form, you are consenting to receive marketing emails from: MEPIN, at, New York, NY, 10075, http://www.mepinanalysis.org. You can revoke your consent to receive emails at any time by using the SafeUnsubscribe® link, found at the bottom of every email. Emails are serviced by Constant Contact
Democratic Think Tanks on the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict
A Public Service: Dissecting a 'NYT' Article on Israel
Thoughts on Yesterday's Capitol Riots
Blog Archives Select Month January 2021 (4) December 2020 (3) November 2020 (2) September 2020 (2) August 2020 (5) July 2020 (3) June 2020 (1) May 2020 (1) April 2020 (2) February 2020 (2) January 2020 (3) December 2019 (2) November 2019 (1) October 2019 (6) September 2019 (3) August 2019 (3) July 2019 (2) June 2019 (2) May 2019 (2) April 2019 (3) March 2019 (2) February 2019 (2) January 2019 (3) December 2018 (1) November 2018 (2) October 2018 (2) September 2018 (2) August 2018 (3) July 2018 (3) June 2018 (1) May 2018 (2) April 2018 (5) March 2018 (4) February 2018 (1) January 2018 (2) December 2017 (3) November 2017 (1) October 2017 (1) September 2017 (2) August 2017 (3) July 2017 (4) June 2017 (3) May 2017 (1) April 2017 (1) March 2017 (3) February 2017 (1) January 2017 (2) December 2016 (2) November 2016 (2) October 2016 (3) September 2016 (1) August 2016 (2) July 2016 (4) June 2016 (2) May 2016 (1) April 2016 (2) March 2016 (4) February 2016 (2) January 2016 (3) December 2015 (4) November 2015 (1) October 2015 (2) September 2015 (4) August 2015 (6) July 2015 (1) June 2015 (3) May 2015 (1) April 2015 (3) March 2015 (3) February 2015 (4) January 2015 (2) December 2014 (7) November 2014 (2) October 2014 (2) September 2014 (3) August 2014 (2) July 2014 (3) June 2014 (1) May 2014 (2) April 2014 (1) March 2014 (1)
Copyright © 2015-2021 MEPIN™. All rights reserved.


text:
Q: linux-image-generic seems to be broken I'm using Ubuntu 12.04. Recently I can't install anything anymore. I always get the following error message:
Setting up linux-image-3.2.0-34-generic (3.2.0-34.53) ...
Running depmod.
update-initramfs: deferring update (hook will be called later)
Use of chdir('') or chdir(undef) as chdir() is deprecated at /var/lib/dpkg/inf/linux-image-3.2.0-34-generic.postinst line 235.
Failed to symbolic-link /boot/initrd.img-3.2.0-34-generic to initrd.img:File exists at /var/lib/dpkg/info/linux-image-3.2.0-34-generic.postinst line 614.
dpkg: error processing linux-image-3.2.0-34-generic (--configure):
 subprocess installed post-installation script returned error exit status 17
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of linux-image-generic:
 linux-image-generic depends on linux-image-3.2.0-34-generic; however:
  Package linux-image-3.2.0-34-generic is not configured yet.
dpkg: error processing linux-image-generic (--configure):
 dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of linux-generic:
 linux-generic depends on linux-image-generic (= 3.2.0.34.37); however:
  Package linux-image-generic is not configured yet.
dpkg: error processing linux-generic (--configure):
 dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
Setting up dselect (1.16.1.2ubuntu7) ...
No apport report written because the error message indicates its a followup error from a previous failure.
                                                                                No apport report written because the error message indicates its a followup error from a previous failure.
Errors were encountered while processing:
 linux-image-3.2.0-34-generic
 linux-image-generic
 linux-generic
E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1)

The output of dpkg -C is:
The following packages have been unpacked but not yet configured.
They must be configured using dpkg --configure or the configure menu option in dselect for them to work:
 linux-image-generic  Generic Linux kernel image
 linux-generic        Complete Generic Linux kernel

The following packages are only half configured, probably due to problems configuring them the first time. The configuration should be retried using dpkg --configure <package> or the configure menu option in dselect:
 linux-image-3.2.0-34-generic Linux kernel image for version 3.2.0 on 32 bit x8

but dpkg --configure linux-image-3.2.0-34-generic linux-image-generic linux-generic results in the following error message:
Setting up linux-image-3.2.0-34-generic (3.2.0-34.53) ...
Running depmod.
update-initramfs: deferring update (hook will be called later)
Use of chdir('') or chdir(undef) as chdir() is deprecated at /var/lib/dpkg/inf/linux-image-3.2.0-34-generic.postinst line 235.
Failed to symbolic-link /boot/initrd.img-3.2.0-34-generic to initrd.img:File exists at /var/lib/dpkg/info/linux-image-3.2.0-34-generic.postinst line 614.
dpkg: error processing linux-image-3.2.0-34-generic (--configure):
 subprocess installed post-installation script returned error exit status 17
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of linux-image-generic:
 linux-image-generic depends on linux-image-3.2.0-34-generic; however:
  Package linux-image-3.2.0-34-generic is not configured yet.
dpkg: error processing linux-image-generic (--configure):
 dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of linux-generic:
 linux-generic depends on linux-image-generic (= 3.2.0.34.37); however:
  Package linux-image-generic is not configured yet.
dpkg: error processing linux-generic (--configure):
 dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
Errors were encountered while processing:
 linux-image-3.2.0-34-generic
 linux-image-generic
 linux-generic

I would be very glad if someone could help me with this problem!

A: You have a bogus pwd (print working directory) command, somehow. I took a look at the referenced line in the postinst script. It is trying to "save" the working directory by storing the output of pwd in a variable, and then, on the referenced line, switching back to this directory after doing a few things in other directories. The problem happens because the pwd called somehow has empty output.
Run the command which pwd. If the output isn't /bin/pwd, find out why and fix it.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


For additional information regarding our worship ministry email us here, or call the office.
When you visit our church, expect to be energized and uplifted by our modern style of worship. Our worship band strives for excellence in musicianship and reaches to touch the heart of God week after week. As soon as the first note is hit, you will see that we believe that worship can be exciting and relevant in this modern age. Then, as we progress in the worship service, you will also experience the fact that we "set the stage" for each person to experience the intimacy of relationship that God desires for us. There have been countless times that God has demonstrated his presence and power to individuals and the group as a whole during worship. It is our job as a worship team to simply usher each one to "sit at the feet" of God and experience Him in a fresh and impacting way.


Fingerprint Cards announced today that Mobylabs, a UK based developer of payment-related software and devices, has integrated an FPC touch sensor in the new AIRTAG Sense, a compact keyfob that allows its user to securely store any contactless product like a public transit card, payment or loyalty card and access it with a simple touch. A crowdfunding campaign is underway for AIRTAG at Indiegogo.
Fingerprint Cards has also announced that its Annual General Meeting will be held at 3.00 p.m. on Wednesday, May 22, 2019 in Gothenburg, Sweden. The proposed agenda is available on the company website.


Prepared in one pound bags, our all-natural medium cut pecan pieces are perfect for all of your topping needs. We only offer Fancy-grade pecan pieces to ensure that you are getting the very best pecan pieces on the market. These golden pieces are given an extra step and "cut" to perfection. Enjoy them in salads, on ice cream or in trail mix for quick, nutritious snacking.
LOVE these pecan pieces!! I use them whenever I bake cookies, cakes, pies, etc, etc. They are the best tasting pecans you will ever find, hands down!!


text:
New Chris Matthews Promo: American Revolution Proof That 'Liberalism Always Wins . . . Eventually'
Brendan Bordelon Contributor
A new promotional segment for MSNBC's "Hardball" program took the network's "Lean Forward" advertisement campaign to new heights of progressivism, with host Chris Matthews citing the American Revolution as proof that "liberalism always wins — eventually."
The commercial, which appears to have first aired Tuesday on MSNBC, shows a thoughtful-looking Matthews strolling through Philadelphia's Independence Hall.
"It took 22 months of men debating in this room to achieve the Declaration of Independence," he intoned. "Progressive change takes time."
"Abolition would take a great civil war, but it came," Matthews continued. "Women's suffrage would take a crusade, but it became part and parcel of our democracy. Voting rights have taken a brutal fight, as will the case for marriage equality and equal pay for men and women."
"Liberalism always wins EVENTUALLY," he declared, "just as it did in the sweltering summer of 1776."
On its face, the ad is a rallying cry for an American Left sorely disenchanted by the lack of progress on, and stiff opposition to, their domestic agenda. "Do not despair!" Matthews urges. "You follow in a long American tradition begun by our progressive Founding Fathers!"
But was the American Revolution really a win for liberalism? Perhaps classical liberalism — today identified primarily with libertarianism — but surely that's not what Matthews meant.
Many historians argue that — contrary to society-shifting upheavals like the French and Russian revolutions — the American Declaration of Independence was driven by measured conservative opposition to an overreaching monarch.
The fact that the Revolution was debated and declared by monied, powerful and well-respected men rather than exploding in the streets — like the fight for women's suffrage, voting rights and other movements Matthews cites — belies the MSNBC host's attempt to appropriate the Founders as part of a broader progressive American history.
Follow Brendan on Twitter
Tags : american revolution chris matthews liberalism msnbc
Brendan Bordelon

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Regulation of Lobbying Bill 2014: From the Seanad
The Dáil went into Committee to consider amendments from the Seanad.
Seanad amendment No. 1: Section 12: In page 14, line 6, after "been" to insert "(whether before or after the passing of this Act)".
Brendan Howlin (Minister, Department of Public Expenditure and Reform; Wexford, Labour)
Amendments Nos. 1 and 2 are minor technical amendments. Amendment No. 1 provides clarity around the provision in section 12(4)(f) and adds after the word "been" the words "(whether before or after the passing of this Act)". The Office of the Parliamentary Counsel advised that in order to clarify that this provision applies to whether the person was a designated public official before or after the passing of the Act. It was always assumed that would be the case but for the avoidance of doubt, it suggested I add that. That is the import of the first amendment.
Seanad amendment agreed to.
Seanad amendment No. 2: Section 26: In page 24, between lines 12 and 13, to insert the following:"Delegation of functions by Commission 26. Such functions of the Commission under this Act as may be specified by the Commission may be performed, under the supervision and subject to the general direction of the Commission, by members of the staff of the Commission duly authorised in that behalf by the Commission.".
I made this amendment at the request of the Standards in Public Office Commission. The Ethics in Public Office Act 1995 provides the commission with authority to delegate its function to staff of the commission. The commission itself is strongly of the view that to avoid any possibility of future legal challenges, the question of its powers of delegation should be put beyond doubt by the inclusion of a formal delegation provision in this Bill.
Seán Fleming (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
We agree to this amendment and have no issue with what is before us. However, on a point of clarification, in local authorities managers must formally sign a delegation order or note for directors of services to carry out functions. Will the people in the commission have formally to sign a delegation order to a staff member or will it just be a word of mouth delegation?
I will clarify that with the Standards in Public Office Commission directly but our understanding is that it would be a formal delegation.
Seanad amendments reported.
Marcella Corcoran Kennedy (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)
A message will be sent to Seanad Éireann acquainting it accordingly.


IIQ, UMSA, La Paz, Bolivia.
KTH, School of Architecture and the Built Environment (ABE), Sustainable development, Environmental science and Engineering, Land and Water Resources Engineering. Instituto de Investigaciones Químicas-UMSA.
The Bolivian Altiplano (BA) is a high plateau located in the western part of the country at an altitude of 3,600 to 3,900 meters above sea level and is bordered by the Eastern and Western Cordillera. Within the BA there is a large endorheic hydrologic system linking the Titicaca Lake in the north the Desaguadero River, lakes Uru-Uru and Poopó in the central part; and the Lacajahuira River and Coipasa and Uyuni salt pans in the south. Several mineralized areas, especially in the Eastern Cordillera, have been intensively exploited for centuries for the extraction of silver, gold, and tin from polymetallic sulfide ore deposits. Presently many urban centers are also contributing for an extensive contamination in localized areas; especially the Poopó Lake and some rivers are affected by high loads of wastewater and solid waste, in addition to the release of heavy metals and arsenic (As) due to acid mine drainage.
The presence of As in the BA was known to be related to mining only, but recent studies revealed that As of geogenic origin also contributing to the elevated concentration of As in surface and groundwater. The Poopó Lake basin is characterized by a semiarid climate. Geologic formations predominantly are of volcanic origin and groundwater flow is sluggish in nature. These environmental settings have generated substantially elevated concen- trations of geogenic As and other trace elements in surface and groundwater. Both surface and groundwater used for drinking water have high concentrations of As that by far exceed the World Health Organization (WHO) guideline. The overall objective of the present study has been focused on the determination of the sources and principal mechanisms for mobilization of geogenic As into surface and groundwater of the Poopó Lake basin area. More specifically, this study has determined the spatial distribution and the extent of As contamination in surface and groundwater; chemical composition of surface and groundwater, rock and sediment; major geochemical mechanisms for As mobilization from solid phase to aqueous phases. This study also made an assessment of drinking water quality in rural areas within the Poopó Lake basin.
Arsenic concentration exceeded the WHO guideline and national regulations for drinking water of 10 µg/L in 85% of the samples collected from the area around the Poopó Lake (n=27) and 90% of the samples from the southern part of the lake basin (n=42). Groundwater samples collected from drinking water wells had As concentrations up to 623 µg/L, while samples collected from piezometers had even higher up to 3,497 µg/L. Highest concentration in river water samples was observed 117 µg/L. Alkaline nature of water (median pH 8.3 for groundwater and 9.0 for surface water), predominance of Na-Cl-HCO3 water type and elevated Eh reflecting oxidized character has been revealed by As(V) as the major species in As speciation. Different rock types were analyzed for their As content and the highest concentration of 27 mg/kg was found in a coral limestone sample. In evaporate it was 13 mg and 11 mg As/kg was measured in calcareous sandstone. Elevated concentration of As was also observed in sediment cores collected from two drilling sites; 51 mg/kg in Condo K and 36 mg/kg in Quillacas. Physical and chemical weathering of volcanic rocks, limestone, carbonates and plagioclase minerals enhance the supply of Na+ and HCO3- into solution and as a consequence pH and alkalinity increase, which in turn, favor As desorption from solid mineral surfaces (especially Fe(III) oxyhydr- oxides) and therefore dissolved As in water is increased.
KTH, School of Architecture and the Built Environment (ABE), Sustainable development, Environmental science and Engineering. Instituto de Investigaciones Quimicas-UMSA.
Numerous hot springs and fumaroles occur along the Andes Mountains, in the Bolivian Altiplano, where people use thermal springs for recreational purposes as pools, baths and also for consumption as drinking water and irrigation once it is mixed with natural surface waters; most of these thermal springs emerge from earth surface and flow naturally into the rivers streams which drain further into the Poopo Lake. Physicochemical characteristics of the thermal water samples showed pH from 6.3 to 8.3 with an average of 7.0, redox potential from +106 to +204 mV with an average of +172 mV, temperatures from 40 to 75 °C with an average of 56 °C and high electrical conductivity ranging from 1.8 to 75 mS/cm and averaged 13 mS/cm. Predominant major ions are Naþ and Cl and the principal water types are 37.5% Na-Cl type and 37.5% Na-Cl-HCO3 type. Arsenic concentrations ranged from 7.8 to 65.3 μg/L and arsenic speciation indicate the predominance of As(III) species. Sediments collected from the outlets of thermal waters show high iron content, and ferric oxides and hydroxides are assumed to be principal mineral phases for arsenic attenuation by adsorption/co-precipitation processes. Arsenic concentrations in cold water samples from shallow aquifers are higher than those in thermal springs (range < 5.6-233.2 μg/L), it is likely that thermal water discharge is not the main source of high arsenic content in the shallow aquifer as they are very immature and may only have a small component corresponding to the deep geothermal reservoir. As people use both thermal waters and cold waters for consumption, there is a high risk for arsenic exposure in the area.
Groundwaters from shallow aquifers and surface water from rivers of the southern part of Poopó Lake basin within the Bolivian Altiplano have significant quality problems such as high salinity and high concentrations of arsenic (As). The extent of As contamination is observed in the studied groundwater over large parts of the study area. Surface-waters are generally alkaline (pH 8.2–8.7) and oxidizing with dissolved oxygen (DO) concentrations in a range of 2.5–6.6 mg/L The water chemistry is predominantly of Na–Cl–HCO3–type, with concentrations of dissolved As in the range of 8.6–117 µg/L with As(V) as the main aqueous species. The concentration of Li varies in the range of 1.1–4.4 mg/L, while other trace elements occur in low concentrations. Groundwaters have a very large range of chemical compositions and the spatial variability of As concentrations is considerable over distances of a few km; dissolved As in groundwater spans over 4 orders of magnitude (3–3497 µg/L), while concentrations of Li have a range of 0.05–31.6 mg/L. Among the investigated drinking-water wells, 90% exceed the WHO guideline value of 10 µg As/L. Electrical conductivity ranges between 295 and 20,900 µS/cm; high salinity is resulting from evaporation under ambient semi-arid climatic conditions. The pH values of the groundwaters are generally slightly alkaline (5.5–8.7) and universally oxidizing, under these conditions As(V) is the prevalent specie. Groundwater As correlates positively with pH, electrical conductivity, Cl−, Na+, HCO3 −, Ca2+ and SO4 2−. Weathering/dissolution of carbonates, evaporites, halite and plagioclase minerals incorporate Na+ and HCO3 − in solution with consequent pH and alkalinity increase; these are favorable conditions for high mobility of As species. Stable isotopic signatures indicate recharge at the Altiplano with seasonal effects. All surface water and some groundwater samples are enriched due to evaporation, which probably increased concentration of dissolved As.
KTH, School of Architecture and the Built Environment (ABE), Sustainable development, Environmental science and Engineering. Universidad Mayor de San Andrés, Bolivia .
Environmental settings in the southern area of Lake Poopó in the Bolivian highlands, the Altiplano, have generated elevated amounts of arsenic (As) in the water. The area is characterised by a semiarid climate, slow hydrological flow and geologic formations of predominantly volcanic origin. The present study aimed at mapping the extent of the water contamination in the area and to investigate the geogenic sources and processes involved in the release of As to the groundwater.Ground- and surface-water samples were collected from 24 different sites, including drinking water wells and rivers, in the southern Poopó basin in two different field campaigns during the dry and rainy seasons. The results revealed variable levels of As in shallow drinking water wells and average concentration exceeding the WHO guidelines value. Arsenic concentrations range from below 5.2μg/L (the detection level) to 207μg/L and averages 72μg/L. Additionally, high boron (B) concentrations (average 1902μg/L), and high salinity are further serious concerns for deteriorating the groundwater quality and rendering it unsuitable for drinking. Groundwater is predominantly of the Na-Cl-HCO3 type or the Ca-Na-HCO3 type with neutral or slightly alkaline pH and oxidising character. While farmers are seriously concerned about the water scarcity, and on a few occasions about salinity, there are no concerns about As and B present at levels exceeding the WHO guidelines, and causing negative long term effects on human health.Sediment samples from two soil profiles and a river bed along with fourteen rock samples were also collected and analysed. Sequential extractions of the sediments together with the calculation of the mineral saturation indices indicate that iron oxides and hydroxides are the important secondary minerals phases which are important adsorbents for As. High pH values, and the competition of As with HCO3 and dissolved silica for the adsorption sites probably seems to be an important process for the mobilisation of As in the shallow groundwaters of the region. Continuous monitoring and expansion of monitoring systems are necessary prerequisites for better understanding of the pattern of As mobilisation in the Southern Poopó Basin.
Water management in semiarid and arid catchments such as the Poopó Lake Basin requires improved understanding of the complex behavior of the various contaminants, which affect the drinking water quality and considered as crucial for sustainable development of the region. Mechanisms of arsenic (As) release in the surface and groundwater were studied. Hydrochemical data for surface water (4 samples) and groundwater (28 samples) were collected in a small watershed in the Poopó catchment at the highland of the Bolivian Andes (Altiplano). All of them show high electrical conductivity values and moderately oxidizing conditions. The surface water contains high concentration of sulfate and the trace elements As, Zn and Pb in the zone affected by acid mine drainage. There is a large variability of the concentration of As and of the trace elements in the groundwater in the five different regions within the Poopó catchment. The metal concentrations sensitive to changes of redox state and results of speciation modeling suggest that As (V) is a predominant aqueous species, which conforms to the prevailing oxidizing conditions in the shallow groundwater environment. Two generalized trends for As distribution were identified in groundwater: (a) high concentrations are found in the arid zone (100-250 Όg/L) in the southern (region III) and in the northwestern (region V) regions, and (b) low concentrations (< 50 Όg/L) are found in the remaining part of the basin (region I, II and IV). However, the spatial distribution within these regions needs to be investigated further. A conclusion from the present study is that there are multiple sources of As as well as other trace elements (such as Cd, Mn and Zn) in the Poopó Lake Basin. Among the sources and the processes which led to the mobility of As and other trace metals in the region are: (a) weathering of sulfide minerals, (b) oxidation of pyrite and/or arsenopyrite in mineralized areas and (c) desorption from hydrous ferric oxide (HFO) surfaces. In non-mining areas, volcanic ash is suggested to be a significant source of As.


In a continuation of the client's series, we delivered another upbeat Fast Sketch video to raise awareness amongst veterinarians and pet owners about the dangers of kennel cough and increase use of the vaccine. For the sake of consistency and recognition, we used the familiar and endearing characters from the earlier project, introducing new "friends" for the dachshund protagonist in order to create an easy-to-understand, catchy, and informative animation. The recognition factor heightened a sense of trust in the marketing campaign in both professionals and pet owners, ultimately increasing the chances of more pets being vaccinated. Because of the light narrative tone and hand-drawn style, the resulting video felt less like promotional material than an enjoyable presentation of useful facts, informing viewers about the specific bacteria involved in the infection and the vaccine's easy application method and long duration.


Seth B recently took a summer road trip to the oldest, and one of the wildest, National Parks in the United States. That of course is Yellowstone National Park.
Check out some of Seth's favorite pics from his adventures in Yellowstone and make sure you stay up to date to all of his trips HERE.
The Grand Prismatic Hot Spring in Yellowstone is one of the wildest to photograph, and witness, nature phenomenon in the world. It's the largest hot spring in the United States.
Yellowstone is a place where the buffalo roam free. Please treat them with the utmost respect as that hasn't happened recently with the gentlemen taunting and harassing the buffalo.
It's hard to visit Yellowstone without seeing Old Faithful and walking the boardwalk of the geysers, it must be witnessed in person!
The wildlife roam in ample space at Yellowstone.
The Grand Canyon of the Yellowstone is as advertised!
Baby bears abound, both black and grizzly roam in Yellowstone.
Mammoth Hot Springs: another can't miss of Yellowstone.
It's one of the largest, most crowded, yet one of the best parks in America. Make sure you get up to Wyoming (and Montana and Idaho) to witness this picturesque piece of land with your own eyes and have your own experiences.


text:
Proxy
-----

A python proxy (Flask-server) to elasticsearch.

### Installation and running with virtualenv

This will create a virtualenv-directory in `env`, install required packages
and run the Flask server:

    virtualenv env
    env/bin/pip install -r requirements.txt
    env/bin/python server.py

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub