Did Hezbollah really lose?

This account of the Hezbollah victory in Lebanon, Armed and Dangerous, like many others, attempts to be optimistic about the final outcome: Hezbollah will be exposed as a group that is not really interested in fighting Israel so much as in taking over Lebanon. By using their arms against other Arabs, they forfeited their legitimacy and will eventually fail.

David Kenner writes in the New Republic article:

But by turning their weapons on their fellow countrymen earlier this month, Hezbollah has violated the "grand bargain" with the Lebanese public that has allowed them to remain militarized. And by targeting Sunni areas of Beirut and Druze villages in the Chouf, Hezbollah has revealed itself to be, at its heart, a sectarian militia after all, provoking new hostility among non-Shia Lebanese. "The street is very angry about what has happened," says Yehya Jaber, a journalist for The Future, a newspaper owned by Sunni leader Saad al-Hariri whose offices were ransacked and set aflame during the clashes. "No matter what the politicians do, this is a temporary peace."
....
If Hassan Nasrallah had kept his weapons aimed solely at Israel instead of involving them in Lebanon's sectarian struggle, he may still have won Rabih's grudging respect. But local threats weigh heavier on his mind than geopolitical concerns. "It's two different worlds," Rabih explains, gesturing towards Barbour, no more than a minute's stroll away. "There is a deep hatred between these neighborhoods now."

The resentment is even deeper among the few Sunnis who live in Barbour. "The army tried to come in [during the first day of clashes], but Amal humiliated them and told them to leave," says Sana, a Sunni shopkeeper whose son had to change his identifiably Sunni name to something more generic. "I used to have a picture of [assassinated former prime minister and Sunni leader] Rafik Hariri in my home," she continues, lamenting the need to adjust to life under Shia domination. "But I took it down when the fighting began, because I live next to one of the bodyguards of [Amal leader] Nabih Berri."

As the terror of last month's attacks subsides, the fear of Hezbollah among Lebanon's Sunni, Christian, and other minority communities is quickly turning to anger. By alienating the other sects, Hezbollah's short-term military victory seems to be turning into a long-term threat to its weapons and its autonomy. Their violation of the unspoken bargain of their militarization last month is a significant turning point in Lebanon's precarious sectarian balance--a move that has already started to undermine Hezbollah's special status among the Lebanese population.

Losing their weapons would be a major--and possibly fatal--blow to the group. Without its weapons, Hezbollah would probably lose the support of its Iranian sponsors (whose primary goal is to use the group as a front against Israel), making it difficult for the organization to maintain its patronage networks, and thus allowing space for new Shia leaders to emerge.


"It is difficult for me to imagine Hezbollah [surviving very long] as a toothless organization," Safa says. In light of this month's violence, that day may now be closer than ever before.

It might happen. The flaws in the above logic are legion however. Hassan Nasrallah and the Hezbollah are not stupid and they understood exactly how far they could go. They have engineered the takeover in such a way that from now on they no longer need force. They have veto power over any government decision according to the terms of the agreement. Therefore, it is almost inconceivable that they will be induced to lay down their arms. Moreover, while their might be a lot of dissatisfaction with the Hezbollah in Lebanon, this is meaningless unless it can be translated into armed force. How many divisions has Future TV? None. It was shut down in fact by Hezbollah thugs. In the showdown, the army sided with Hezbollah, working out a near-bloodless capitulation to Hezbollah demands, that only required that they remove their troops from the streets. Saad Hariri had no say in the matter. He was a prisoner in his own house, and his Future TV was put off the air. As Hezbollah had won all their demands, there was no reason for them to keep their troops in the streets. The Qatar agreement simply put the seal of approval on the Hezbollah victory. Moreover, Kenner ignores the huge capacity of Lebanese and their politicians to delude themselves. One has only to read the Beirut Daily Star to understand that a significant element of Sunni Arabs and Christians are willing to make believe that the Hezbollah are really working for the unity of Lebanon and that the Qatar agreement is a "good thing." This is no doubt preferable to opposing the Hezbollah, which has often proven to be very bad for the health of journalists and politicians.

Hebollah has managed to take power by assassinating its most important enemies and then using just enough armed force to make clear who is boss. It is far more likely that if Hezbollah ever "surrenders its arms" it will be because its own troops have been absorbed in, and have come to dominate the Lebanese army. At that point, there will be nothing left of Lebanese sovereignty. The issue of popular support doesn't matter. Islamic Republics like Iran are not dependent on the support of a democratic electorate. They maintain their rule at gun point. The AK-47 and the explosive device, rather than the ballot and the public opinion polls, will decide the future of Lebanon, just as they have now decided the Qatar "agreement."

Ami Isseroff

Continued (Permanent Link)

Ahmadinejad predicts: Israel will disappear again - but Ha'aretz got it wrong

Ha'aretz's story Ahmadinejad predicts Israel will be 'swept away' by Palestinians is wrong. It states:

 

It is the second time within less than three years that the Iranian president predicted the eradication of Israel.

The first time was in 2005 when Ahmadinejad hoped that Israel would be eradicated from the Middle East map.

 In the first place, Ahmadinejad didn't say in 2005 that he hoped Israel would be eradicated from the Middle East map (or "wiped off"). What he said was that Imam Khomeini said there would be a world without Zionism and America, and Ahmadinejad believes this goal is feasible. This can be checked easily, though there is not really much difference between what he did say, and what he was widely reported as saying.

 

Secondly, Ahmadinejad has predicted the demise of Israel several times since then:

 

Jerusalem Post, Dec 2, 2006:

 

 

Ahmadinejad went on to say that, "Today scores of Western politicians are in doubt as to the future of this illegitimate regime and its existence has come under question.

 

"There is no doubt the Palestinian nation and Muslims as a whole will emerge victorious," the Iranian president told Haniyeh.

"The continued commission of crimes by the Zionist regime will speed up the collapse of this fictitious regime," said Ahmadinejad.

And Ynet, November 13, 2006:

 

 

Ahmadinejad: Israel's destruction near

Published:  11.13.06, 08:53 / Israel News

According to the Iranian media Monday, Iranian President Mahoud Ahmadinejad declared that Israel was destined to 'disappearance and destruction' at a council meeting with Iranian ministers.

"The western powers created the Zionist regime in order to expand their control of the area. This regime massacres Palestinians everyday, but since this regime is against nature, we will soon witness its disappearance and destruction," Ahmadinejad said. (AFP)

 

On June 3, 2007, Foxnews reported:

 

"God willing, in the near future we will witness the destruction of the corrupt occupier regime," Ahmadinejad was quoted as saying during a speech to foreign guests who attended ceremonies marking the 18th anniversary of the death of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, who is known as the father of Iran's 1979 Islamic Revolution.

 

 

Compare the above with the current story:  

 

"This terrorist and criminal state is backed by foreign powers, but this regime would soon be swept away by the Palestinians," Ahmadinejad said in a press conference in Tehran.

 

Ami Isseroff

Continued (Permanent Link)

Remember that Olmert said this: Iran will not have nuclear capabiliy

 

PM Olmert said:

 

"I want to tell the citizens of Israel: Iran will not have nuclear capability," said Prime Minister Ehud Olmert in a pre-Passover interview.

Forgive me if I am a bit skeptical about that promise. I remember when Olmert promised to wipe out Hassan Nasrallah and the Hezbollah, and before that, when he promised that Israel would be a "fun place to live."

 

Ami Isseroff

---

Last update - 09:03 17/04/2008    

 

 PM: Iran will not be nuclear 

 

By David Landau and Yossi Verter, Haaretz Correspondents 
 
"I want to tell the citizens of Israel: Iran will not have nuclear capability," said Prime Minister Ehud Olmert in a pre-Passover interview. According to Olmert, the international community is making an enormous effort, in which Israel has a part, to prevent Iran from attaining nonconventional weapons capabilities. "And I believe, and also know, that the bottom line of these efforts is that Iran will not be nuclear," Olmert said.

 

In his holiday interview, his first to the print media in a year, Olmert declared that since the Annapolis summit in November, the possibility of reaching an understanding between Israel and the Palestinians during 2008 has grown. The prime minister said that the issue of Jerusalem has not yet been discussed at all, neither in his talks with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas nor as part of the talks headed by Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni with Ahmed Qureia.

 

As to Syria, Olmert said: "I know exactly what the Syrians want and I think the Syrians know what the State of Israel and I expect from the peace process."
 
Olmert said he intented to run again for the leadership of Kadima and to lead the party in the next elections. He did not rule out the possibility of a merger between Kadima and the Labor Party prior to elections.

 

Likud chairman Benjamin Netanyahu is not suitable for the post of prime minister, Olmert said, because of his positions. "We remember what happened here when he was prime minister."

 

Olmert also voiced unequivocal, public backing for Justice Minister Daniel Friedmann, calling him devoted to the rule of law. Olmert revealed that a few months ago he asked former Supreme Court president Aharon Barak to head up a committee that would be charged with drafting a law aimed at guaranteeing the independence of the Supreme Court, with Friedman's agreement. According to Olmert, Barak agreed, but later changed his mind.

Continued (Permanent Link)

Rice: IAEA report bosters case for Sanctions against Iran nuclear program

What is happening: Iran is defying the UN, and diplomats are finding ways of papering it over.

 

Last update - 02:22 23/02/2008       
Rice: UN nuclear watchdog report bolsters case for tighter Iran sanctions
By Yossi Melman, Haaretz Correspondent and News Agencies

 

The United States wants quick action to punish Iran for refusing to roll back its disputed nuclear program, and a new report by the United Nations nuclear watchdog strengthens the case for additional sanctions, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Friday.

 

The report, released Friday by the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency, confirmed that Iran has continued to enrich uranium in defiance of repeated UN Security Council resolutions demanding that it suspend the uranium centrifuge program, which could produce both civilian nuclear fuel and the material for a nuclear bomb.

 

Tehran insists it is interested only in civilian nuclear energy, but the U.S. and others contend it harbors ambitions for a bomb.
 
"The United Nations has a very strong case for passing a third Security Council resolution imposing sanctions on Iran after the new report from the IAEA found that Tehran failed to cooperate fully with its investigators and left unanswered crucial questions about its nuclear past," Rice said.

 

"There is very good reason after this report to proceed to the third Security Council resolution," Rice told reporters at the State Department.

 

"This report demonstrates that whatever the Iranians may be doing to try to clean up some elements of the past, it is inadequate, given their current activities, given questions about their past activities and given what we all have to worry about, which is a future in which Iran could start to perfect the technologies that could lead to nuclear weapons," she said.

 

Rice spoke ahead of a meeting between senior diplomats from the five permanent members of the UN Security Council and from Germany, scheduled for Monday in Washington to discuss the new resolution. The six powers have agreed on a draft.

 

Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns, the third-ranking U.S. diplomat, will represent the United States at the meeting. He said Friday there is all the more reason now for the Security Council to pass a third sanctions resolution.

 

The United States wants the Security Council to begin debate next week. Burns would not predict how long debate would last and would not rule out that the current package of proposed punishments might change. The proposed package slightly expands and strengthens previous penalties but is weaker than the United States had wanted.

 

Burns is the top U.S. negotiator on a carrot-and-stick package proposed by the UN Security Council's five permanent states, all of which are nuclear powers, plus Germany. Iran has rebuffed the offer and has brushed off the Security Council's penalties.

 

Iran's trade partners and sometime allies on the council, Russia and China, which hold Security Council veto power, oppose very harsh measures. Burns said the new round of sanctions would pinch Iran, but he argued more strongly that failing to act would make the Security Council look weak.

 

Earlier Friday, U.S. ambassador to the UN Zalmay Khalilzad expressed sentiments similar to those of Rice, saying that the IAEA report should pave the way for new tighter sanctions against Iran.

 

"They're increasing their capabilities," Khalilzad noted. "Not only have the number of centrifuges increased, but they're working on a second-generation, if you like, a more capable centrifuge. Things are getting worse in terms of the enrichment part."

 

He said he believed some were hoping the IAEA report would eliminate the need for the next resolution - by assessing Iranian cooperation with the UN nuclear watchdog more positively.

 

"The IAEA report does give us very important points to make," Khalilzad said. "They [Iran] did not come clean."

 

The report states that Iran has carried out a series of experiments associated with the production of nuclear weapons, high velocity explosives, and uranium enrichment. Teheran has also reportedly carried out simulations of warhead detonations and tests involving Polonium 210, a material used to develop nuclear weapons.

 

IAEA chief Mohammed ElBaradei writes in the report that some of the data they received on Iran's activities came from countries that were interested in increasing IAEA scrutiny of Iran's nuclear program.

 

Teheran has stated that the data in question, which includes documents, is fabricated.

 

The report did detail areas of greater Iranian cooperation, and said Teheran has produced documents detailing research and experiments carried in Iranian academic institutions, activities which were previously thought to be a front for the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI).

 

ElBaradei on Friday said his agency had made "quite good progress" in clarifying Iran's nuclear program thanks to increased Iranian cooperation, but serious doubts persist.

 

"We are at it for the last five years. In the last four months, in particular, we have made quite good progress in clarifying the outstanding issues," he said in a statement accompanying a new report on Iran's behavior.

 

"On that score, Iran in the last few months has provided us with visits to many places that enable us to have a clearer picture of Iran's current program. However, that is not, in my view, sufficient," he said.

 

ElBaradei called on Iran to follow UN Security Council Resolution 1696, which said Iran must suspend uranium enrichment or face diplomatic sanctions. Nonetheless, the report states Iran has stocked its Natanz reactor with new, gas-powered centrifuges which are reportedly more advanced and able to enrich more uranium than their predecessors.

 

The report was welcomed by Iran's top nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili, who said it provides "more evidence proving Iran's truthfulness on the nuclear issue."

 

"This victory is the result of resistance by the Iranian nation in insisting on its rights," Jalili said.

Source

Continued (Permanent Link)

Black Humor in Iranian Statecraft

Consider the following quote, from a leader of one the most vicious and intolerant regimes of state terrorism in the world:

 

Also on Thursday, Iran's former President Mohammad Khatami said Iran is the most democratic state in the Middle East.

Addressing the 38th World Economic Forum in Davos, Khatami said, "Obviously, opposition against Iran is politically motivated. Extremists in any religion always consider everything in black and white and have no tool but violence."

Noting that love is at the core of Islam and Christianity, he said, "Extremists in both the religions want to turn love into hatred."

Note that Judaism was not included as a religion with a core of love.  Iran's "tolerance" for Bahai, homosexuals and other minorities is surely famous around the world. They love them to death  (see Iran's human rights record).

 

Some recent news from the "most democratic state in the Middle East" is below.

 

Ami Isseroff

---

Thousands of Iran election candidates face ban
Mon Jan 21, 2008 4:11pm ET147
International News

 

TEHRAN (Reuters) - About 40 percent of the 7,200 people who have registered to run in Iran's March parliament election "have a record" with the authorities, a senior official said Monday, an indication they would not be allowed to run.

 

Alireza Afshar, head of election headquarters, did not elaborate on what kind of record they had, but hopefuls in past votes in a similar position were barred.

 

A pro-reform politician said having a record meant being blocked from standing.

 

---

Iran jails Bahai 'propagandists'

Iran has sentenced three members of the Bahai faith to four years in jail for security offences and 51 others to suspended prison terms.

They were convicted for propaganda against the system in the southern city of Shiraz, a judiciary spokesman said, without giving details.

Bahaism is a branch of Islam viewed as heresy by Iran's religious authorities.

The spokesman said the 51 suspended sentences were conditional on attending courses by state propaganda officials.

---

 Iranian government intensifies crackdown on left-wing opposition

SEP and ISSE demand immediate release of arrested students

By Joe Kay
28 January 2008

On January 15, as part of a brutal crackdown on domestic opposition, the Iranian government arrested another 10 members of the Students for Freedom and Equality in Iran (also known as the Radical Left). Two more students were arrested on January 24. More than 40 members of the group are now behind bars at Iran's notorious Evin prison or have been released on bail

On December 4, Iranian police forces arrested 33 students who were participating in demonstrations marking "Students Day." The day commemorates the deaths of three students who were killed by the government of the US-supported Shah of Iran on December 7, 1953, while they protested the visit of then-US Vice President Richard Nixon.

---

Ahwazi: Detainees Remain on Death Row

2008-02-01

Ahwaz Human Rights Organization is appealing for international action to save the lives of three Ahwazi-Arab detainees after the execution of a fellow detainee today.

Below is an appeal by Ahwaz Human Rights Organization:

To: World Leaders, International Human Rights Organizations and Media

Despite our appeal of 1/14/2008 and the appeals of the international community and a large number of international human rights organizations, this morning at 4 AM, the Iranian regime executed  Mr. Zamel Bawi, , 29 years old, married with one child, resident of Ahwaz, a small business owner and the son  of Ahwazi Arab tribal leader Hajj Salem Bawi. This execution took place in Karoon prison in Ahwaz (Zamel's 4 brothers remain in jail).  This has come after the execution of four other Ahwazis on 12/30/2007: Ahmad Marmazi, Abdolhussein Harabii, Hussein Asakereh, and Mehdi Haidari.

In the 12 months, at least 19 Ahwazi-Arab activists have been publicly hanged (three were executed just days after UN Human Rights Commissioner, Ms. Arbour, visited Tehran in September 2007).

Cross posted: Israel News  Middle East Analysis

Continued (Permanent Link)

Columbia professors will apologize to Ahmadinejad

Columbia professors plan to visit Iran to apologize to Ahmadinejad

NEW YORK (MNA)

--- An academic delegation of Columbia University professors and deans of faculties plans to visit Tehran to officially apologize to Iranian President Mahmud Ahmadinejad.

The delegation plans to express regret for the insulting remarks Columbia University President Lee Bollinger directed at Ahmadinejad on September 24 in his introductory speech, the Mehr News Agency correspondent in New York reported.

Since the incident, the deans and professors from the faculties of history, anthropology, Middle Eastern studies, philosophy, and Islamic studies have criticized Bollinger's behavior toward Ahmadinejad.

A member of the delegation, who requested anonymity, said the main goal of the visit is to meet the Iranian president and officially apologize to him.

"The delegation has also prepared its itinerary," he noted.

He went on to say that the delegation also plans to visit Iranian universities in various cities and to hold talks with professors and students, and may even sign memoranda of understanding with some universities. He also said the delegation is interested in visiting seminaries and the shrine city of Qom.

However, Bollinger has warned the delegation that their trip to Iran should be a private visit and should not be undertaken as an official visit endorsed by the university.

Bollinger has so far refused to meet the Mehr News Agency correspondent to explain his disrespectful behavior toward Ahmadinejad when introducing him to the students and professors at Columbia.

Source

Continued (Permanent Link)

Is Iran testing the envelope?

Is this probing of the US and Britain going to be gradually ramped up?

 

 Last update - 17:45 07/01/2008       
U.S. Navy comes within seconds of opening fire on Iranian boats
By The Associated Press

In what is being called a serious provocation, Iranian Revolutionary Guard boats harassed and provoked three U.S. Navy ships in the strategic Strait of Hormuz, officials said Monday.

 

U.S. forces were on the verge of firing on the Iranian boats in the early Sunday incident, when the boats ended the incident and turned and moved away, said a Pentagon official.

 

"It is the most serious provocation of this sort that we've seen yet," said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak on the record.

 

The incident occurred at about 5 a.m. local time Sunday as a U.S. Navy cruiser, destroyer and frigate were transiting the strait on their way into the Gulf.

 

"Five small boats were acting in a very aggressive way, charging the ships, dropping boxes in the water in front of the ships and causing our ships to take evasive maneuvers," the Pentagon official said.

 

"There were no injuries but there very well could have been," he said, adding that the Iranian boats turned away literally at the very moment that U.S. forces were preparing to open fire in self defense.

 

He said he did not have the precise transcript of communications that the two forces exchanged, but the Iranians radioed something to the effect that "we're coming at you and you'll explode in a couple minutes."

 

Historical tensions between the two nations have increased in recent years over Washington's charge that Tehran has been developing nuclear weapons and supplying and training Iraqi insurgents using roadside bombs - the number one killer of U.S. troops in Iraq.

 

In another incident off its coast, Iranian Revolutionary Guard sailors last March captured 15 British sailors and held them for nearly two weeks.

 

The 15 sailors from HMS Cornwall, including one woman, were captured on March 23. Iran claims the crew, operating in a small patrol craft, had intruded into Iranian waters - a claim denied by Britain.

 

Source

 

Continued (Permanent Link)

BESA: The Middle East Axis of Destabilization

BESA: The Mideast Axis of Destabilization

Ely Karmon

Perspectives Paper No. 36, December 26, 2007

"[T]he only vital and effective axis in the region is that between Tehran and Damascus. They are the two capitals which enjoy a degree of strength and a measure of independence that allows them to remain unaffected by direct political pressure." Hizballah Voice of the Oppressed (radio station), 27 April 1991.

The "Axis of Destabilization" in the Middle East

The Iran-Syria-Hizballah-Hamas alliance has acted during the last 15 years as an "axis of destabilization" in the Middle East, achieving major strategic victories at the expense of moderate Arab states, and US, European, and Israeli interests.

The Damascus regime, weakened by the withdrawal of its army from Lebanon and international pressure after the assassination of Rafik Hariri, still maintains a firm grip on the Sunni majority population at home, plays a strong hand in Lebanon, and supports radical Palestinian groups.

With Syrian support, Hizballah (Tehran's closest ally) has become a state-within-a-state potentially able to become Lebanon's arbiter if not actual ruler. Syria is actively involved in the destabilization of the Palestinian arena and has a growing role in supporting the Shi'a anti-American forces in Iraq. Iran also flexes its muscle in the Iraq arena, as most of Iraq's territory and major oil resources are controlled by Shi'a movements with historic and ideological links to the Tehran regime.

The "Axis" significantly influences Israel's relations with its neighbors. The inconclusive results of the Second Lebanon War of July-August 2006 and the continuous bombing of Israeli cities and villages from Gaza have diminished Israel's deterrence versus Hizballah, Hamas, Iran and Syria. Similarly, the peace process between Israel and the Palestinians, despite the Annapolis gathering, is essentially paralyzed. Hamas is in control of the Gaza Strip, threatens the Fatah-controlled West Bank, and is able to derail any negotiation in the peace process by terrorist attacks.

An Unnatural Alliance: What Makes it Work?

The alliance should hardly function due to Sunni-Shi'a historical rivalries:

1. Iran's Shi'a theocratic regime allied with Syria's Baathist secular "socialist" regime, a country where some 80 percent of the population is Sunni.
2. Syria's Baathist secular regime cooperated with a Shi'a radical Islamist movement, Hizballah, while the natural ally of Syria in Lebanon is the Shi'a Amal secular organization.
3. The Palestinian Hamas, a branch of the Sunni Muslim Brotherhood (MB) is allied with Iran's Shi'a theocratic regime.
4. The Palestinian Hamas is allied with Syria's Baathist secular regime, which killed some 20,000 Syrian MB members in 1982.
5. The Sunni Palestinian Hamas cooperated with the Shi'a Hizballah (in the Palestinian Authority and in Lebanon, where hundreds of thousands of Palestinians live) while in Iraq the Sunni and Shi'a radicals fight each other ferociously.

This alliance works because of the strong religious ideologies that shape the strategy of three of the actors: Iran, Hizballah and Hamas. The Tehran regime, based on the revolutionary doctrine of Ayatollah Khomeini, has implemented its creed through an aggressive strategy after silencing all internal dissent. The apocalyptical overtone of Mahdism in its leadership circles makes this ideology even more dangerous. Hizballah, as proven by its covenant and the open declarations and deeds of its leaders, closely follows the religious ideology and the strategy of export of the Khomeini revolution. Hamas, as a branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, the oldest Sunni Islamist movement, sees jihad as a general duty of all Muslims and is the only MB group involved in systematic warfare against Israel and "world Zionism." Different from the other three, Syria is still driven by Pan-Arabism and the concept of Greater Syria.

The alliance has a strong determined leader: Iran. The country serves as the conductor of the "quartet." Iran, a major regional power, has a leadership with a regional hegemonic vision, a huge oil resource, a large army, and an advanced military industry. Most importantly, Iran is to acquire a nuclear arsenal.

The alliance has succeeded in obtaining most of its objectives because its members have no moral constraints in using terrorism and subversion against their adversaries, challenging the same major enemies: the United States as a global and regional power but also as epitome of Western liberal values; Europe as a democratic bloc; Israel; and Iraq until Saddam Hussein's removal from power. At the same time they have displayed tactical pragmatism and skills of manipulating leaders of great powers and heads of international organizations.

The US, Europe and Israel Didn't Challenge the Alliance

However, the victories of this alliance are not only the result of the robust and durable cooperation between its four members, but also in great measure the consequence of the US, European and Israeli leaderships' lack of strategic vision and political courage.

The United States and France (the major European country challenged by the axis) did not inflict any serious damage on Iran and its operational arm Hizballah, for the long series of terrorist attacks against their citizens, soldiers and interests. Nor has Syria paid a real price for the direct and indirect support to Iranian and Hizballah anti-Western terrorism. Not only has Iran not suffered any consequences for 20 years of lying about its nuclear program, but the West is still willing to offer ever-greater incentives, strengthening Iran's leaders' sense of self-confidence that they can achieve nuclear military capability.

The West has forced Bashar al-Asad to withdraw the Syrian army from Lebanon, but it has stopped short of endangering his regime at home or curtailing his influence in Lebanon. The continuous political killings there are designed to intimidate those working courageously to end Syria's interference in Lebanon's internal affairs.

Since 1982, Israel has permitted Syria to support Hizballah attacks and Palestinian proxy against its territory. Israeli leaders did not have the courage to challenge Damascus. Even during the July-August 2006 War, when Hamas leader Khaled Mashal was running the kidnapping of the Israeli soldier from Damascus and Syria continued to provide heavy military hardware and ammunition to Hizballah, the Israeli government sent the message that it had no intention to bother Syria.

By giving Hizballah the credit for the Israeli disgraceful withdrawal from southern Lebanon in 2000, by permitting its consolidation as a state-within-a-state and the building of a small modern guerrilla-army, the various Israeli governments have preferred tactical political gains at home to real strategic long-term interests. In the 2006 war in Lebanon, Israel paid a high price not only in human lives and material damage, but also in its regional standing and its deterrent power versus its enemies.

The Israeli leadership also failed to recognize the real long-term goals of Yasser Arafat when signing the Oslo agreements and did not challenge his double game, which led to the violent Second Intifada.

Moreover, the United States and the West permitted Hamas, a terrorist organization committed to the destruction of the Jewish state, to take over the government in the Palestinian Authority through democratic elections.

The Threat of a Nuclear Iran

The dangerous destabilizing effect of the Iran-Syria-Hizballah-Hamas alliance on the Middle East and beyond and the leadership role of the Tehran regime in this coalition place the prevention of the Iranian nuclear military program as first priority for the international community.

The US, the international community and Israel face a daunting challenge: how to prevent a nuclear Iran. After 20 years of futile diplomatic dialogue and a year of mild international sanctions, three options remain: severe economic sanctions, military operation against the Iranian nuclear facilities, or laissez faire tactics that allow the Iranians to achieve their goal and devise a deterrent strategy for the future.

As a global power, the Bush Administration needs to find a grand strategic compromise with Russia to display a common front against Iran and thus considerably enhance the success of the sanctions. Russia could have a crucial role in convincing the ayatollahs of the seriousness of their situation. Russia has redefined the limits of its nuclear cooperation with Iran: it has halted Russian work on the construction of the Bushehr nuclear reactor and is procrastinating in transferring the nuclear fuel required for its activation. However, in light of the growing tension between the US and Russia on important strategic issues, such as the building of the missile defense system in Poland and the radar station in the Czech Republic or the expansion of NATO into the old Eastern Bloc on Russia's western border, President Putin is less willing to cooperate on the Iranian file.

There is the possibility to isolate Tehran by breaking the alliance with Syria, which is key in isolating and disarming Hizballah and reducing the influence of radical Palestinians on the peace process with Israel. Israel cannot defeat Hizballah if it does not occupy most of Lebanon, which it is reluctant to do. Therefore, the best way to change the equation in Lebanon is to challenge Syria. The carrots the European leaders proposed President Bashar al-Asad have not convinced him to join the moderate Arab camp. These incentives should perhaps be improved, but the stick should be waved higher. Currently, there is no reasonable hope that negotiations or economic sanctions can turn Tehran's rulers away from the dream of great-power status and Islamic revolution.

Iran and the Alliances' Retaliation Capabilities

In the case of a US or Israeli strike on Iranian nuclear facilities, Iran and the alliance can retaliate in force. Iran could stage an immediate missile counterattack on Israel and on US bases in the Persian Gulf with its 500 Shihab ballistic missiles, with ranges varying from 300 to 2,000 kilometers and capable of carrying warheads of up to 1,000 kg.

Iran can also retaliate against energy targets in the Gulf and the flow of oil through the Strait of Hormuz. Ayatollah Khamenei warned the US that "if the Americans make a wrong move toward Iran, the shipment of energy will definitely be in danger, and the Americans will not be able to protect energy supplies in the region." Consequently, oil prices would increase dramatically.

One of the strongest cards against the United States is Iran's capacity for wreaking havoc in Iraq and provoking a confrontation between US troops and the Shi'a majority. Tehran has already activated this option; currently it is on a low burner. The regime is also preparing an army of suicide bombers to be sent to Iraq, on the model of the Basij suicide soldiers used in the Iraq-Iran war.

Hizballah will be the main tool to attack Israeli territory with rockets and guerrilla commandos. Iran and Syria have rearmed the organization and Nasrallah boasted that Hizballah has 20,000 rockets. Iran can target Israeli and Jewish targets abroad, as it did in 1992 and 1994 in Buenos Aires. As for the Palestinians, Khaled Mashal declared that "if Israel attacks Iran, then Hamas will widen and increase its confrontation of Israelis inside Palestine."

A US or Israeli attack on Iran's nuclear sites could enhance the appeal of extremism in the Muslim world, at the expense of the moderates. It would be perceived by Muslims worldwide as another assault on Islam, as was the case in Iraq and in Lebanon. The promised retaliation by Iran must be taken very seriously.

A Nuclear Iran?

There is also no doubt that a nuclear Iran would provoke nuclear proliferation throughout the Middle East, as already hinted at by Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Turkey.

A recent collective study by the Washington Institute for Near East Policy investigating the challenges posed by deterring a nuclear Iran in the case diplomacy might not succeed suggests that deterring Iran might prove much more difficult than deterring Russia during the Cold War, because of the nature of the regime in Tehran, the regional security environment, and the challenges of coalition formation. Moreover, Iran's nuclear weapons could be controlled by some of the most radical elements in the regime and some of these weapons might find their way into the hands of terrorists.

A nuclear Iran will strengthen the radicalization/Islamization process. In Iraq, at least in Shi'a-controlled areas, the potential for radicalization/Islamization could quickly materialize and result in a more bloody sectarian war involving neighboring Sunni countries. This could be a major step in the formation of the dreaded Shi'a Crescent. In Lebanon, Hizballah would have an influence on accelerating a more radical population. The process of radicalization/Islamization in Palestine, which begun by the takeover of Gaza by Hamas, would also be accelerated, with immediate influence on the Muslim Brotherhood and other radical Islamist groups in Egypt and Jordan and even the Islamist movement in Israel.

A nuclear Iran, with Hizballah and Iraqi Shi'a radicals' support, could open a new front in the Gulf countries by inciting the Shi'as who live in the oil rich provinces in Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Oman, the UAE and Yemen, to revolt against their governments.

Similarly, a nuclear Tehran would be tempted to spread its revolutionary message towards the Muslim republics in Central Asia and in Turkey.

There is No Happy End in Sight!

President Bush said that the international community must keep pressuring Iran to give up its nuclear weapons program. To this end, the US is working with allies to send a consistent message to the Iranians. Bush has not ruled out the possible use of force against Iran, but believes it is still possible to resolve the dispute diplomatically. This is true even after the release of the recent US National Intelligence Estimate.

Israel's air raid on Syria on September 6, 2007 has broken the immunity of the Damascus regime without provoking a European or Arab outcry. Israel should decide on a more forceful Syrian strategy, based on the Turkish example of 1998 (and 2007), and seek US and European support for it. Israel's air raid also proved that if a country does act against a clear and present danger, the Muslim world will not erupt. Moreover, Iranian aspirations should be viewed in proper proportion. Iran is not an international superpower and it has its own domestic, economic and military vulnerabilities.

If the military option is the last resort, it is imperative to dissuade the Tehran regime from retaliation. Ex-French President Jacques Chirac gave the example when he said that France was prepared to launch a nuclear strike against any country that sponsors a terrorist attack against French interests. "The leaders of states who would use terrorist means against us, as well as those who would envision using . . . weapons of mass destruction, must understand that they would lay themselves open to a firm and fitting response on our part."

The US, the European Union and Israel have the duty to protect their citizens and interests, as well as those of their allies in the Middle East. They must stand firm against the "axis of destabilization" and the apocalyptic plans of the radicals in Tehran.

Dr. Ely Karmon is a Senior Research Scholar at the International Institute for Counter-Terrorism at the Interdisciplinary Center (IDC) in Herzliya, Israel, and a Senior Research Fellow at the Institute for Policy and Strategy at IDC. He lectures at the Interdisciplinary Center, Herzliya and at the National Security Seminar of the Galilee College. This article is a summary of a monograph under the title "Iran - Syria - Hizballah - Hamas: A Coalition against Nature. Why does it Work?" forthcoming in the Proteus Monograph Series Fellows Program, US War Academy, Carlisle, Pennsylvania.

Continued (Permanent Link)

Iran opposition group: Iran Resumed Weapon Program

Group Says Iran Resumed Weapon Program

By MARC CHAMPION in Brussels and JAY SOLOMON in Washington
December 11, 2007; Page A4

 

The Iranian opposition group that first exposed Iran's nuclear-fuel program said a U.S. intelligence analysis is correct that Tehran shut down its weaponization program in 2003, but claims that the program was relocated and restarted in 2004.

 

The claim, to be made public today by the National Council for Resistance in Iran, joins a broad pushback by conservative hawks who say the U.S. analysis has wrongly given the impression that Iran's nuclear-fuel program doesn't present an urgent threat.

 

In recent days, Republican lawmakers have called for a review of the process that created the U.S. National Intelligence Estimate, a nonclassified version of which was released last week. Senior U.S. officials have been consulting with allies in Israel and Europe to explain why the estimate differed so drastically from previous assessments.

 

A former U.S. intelligence official who works closely with the White House on Iran said that all the intelligence related to the NIE was being reassessed and that information coming from sources such as the NCRI would be included. "You have to take seriously what they say, but you also have to realize that they have gotten things wrong," the official said.

 

Representatives of the National Security Council and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence both said they wouldn't speculate on how any new intelligence on Iran may be utilized. "We stand by the NIE assessment, which is the consensus view of all our intelligence agencies," said Ross Feinstein, a DNI spokesman.

 

The NCRI is the political wing of the Mujahedin e-Khalq, a group that still has as many as 4,000 members in a disarmed military camp just inside Iraq's border with Iran. The MEK has its roots as a Marxist-Islamist body that fought to overthrow the Shah and has been seeking to overthrow the current government since the mid-1980s. The U.S. and the European Union list both the NCRI and Mujahedin e-Khalq as terrorist organizations. The NCRI has had a mixed record in the accuracy of its claims concerning Iran's nuclear program.

 

U.S. intelligence officials have declined to comment on what role the NCRI or other Iranian dissident groups may have played in developing the new intelligence estimate. The NCRI first identified Iran's covert nuclear-fuel facilities in 2002, and the White House and State Department have credited the group with helping to expose the program.

 

The intelligence estimate by 16 U.S. government agencies concluded with "high confidence" that Iran shut its weaponization program in 2003, and with "moderate confidence" that it has remained frozen since. Diplomats say that because the report makes the need for action seem less urgent, it is likely to be harder for the U.S. and European Union to secure international support for tougher sanctions against Iran, aimed at pressuring it to suspend its nuclear-fuel program, which can be used for civilian or military purposes.

 

According to the NCRI, Iran's Supreme National Security Council decided to shut down its most important center for nuclear-weapons research in eastern Tehran, called Lavisan-Shian, in August 2003.

 

The NCRI, which claims to have intelligence sources inside Iran, said Lavisan was broken into 11 fields of research, including development of a nuclear trigger and of the technology to shape weapons-grade uranium into a warhead. But at the same meeting, the council decided to disperse pieces of the research to a number of locations around Iran, according to the NCRI. By the time international nuclear inspectors were allowed to get access to the Lavisan site, the buildings allegedly devoted to nuclear research had been torn down and the ground bulldozed.

 

"What the first part of the NIE says is right, that they halted their weaponization research in 2003," said Mohammad Mohaddessin, foreign-affairs chief for the NCRI. "But the second part, that they stopped until at least the middle of 2007, is wrong. They scattered the weaponization program to other locations and restarted in 2004."

 

Equipment was relocated first from Lavisan-Shian to another military compound in Tehran's Lavisan district, the Center for Readiness and Advanced Technology, Mr. Mohaddessin said. Two devices designed to measure radiation levels were moved to Malek-Ashtar University in Isfahan and to a defense ministry hospital in Tehran, he said. Other equipment was sent to other locations the NCRI hasn't been able to identify, he said.

 

"Their strategy was that if the IAEA found any one piece of this research program, it would be possible to justify it as civilian. But so long as it was all together, they wouldn't be able to," Mr. Mohaddessin said.

 

The NCRI said in a report on Iran's nuclear program in September 2005 that the Lavisan facility had been closed, setting back the regime's weaponization program by approximately one year. Mr. Mohaddessin said his group was certain no other Iranian nuclear facilities were closed in 2003.

 

A representative of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the United Nations nuclear watchdog in Vienna, declined to comment on the claims, but said the agency would consider seriously any NCRI information. A spokesman for the Iranian government couldn't be reached for comment.

 

Write to Marc Champion at marc.champion@wsj.com and Jay Solomon at jay.solomon@wsj.com

Source

Continued (Permanent Link)

Preparing for the worst: Israel's missile defense

Israel To Develop Top-Tier Missile Interceptor
By BARBARA OPALL-ROME Posted 10/22/07 18:22

TEL AVIV - While Israeli political leaders may still harbor hope of diplomatically dismantling Iran's nuclear program, Ministry of Defense (MoD) officials are forging ahead with plans to develop new top-tier defenses against doomsday-like threats should diplomacy fail.

"Unlike the diplomats and politicians, we don't have the luxury of hope," a senior military planner here said. "Our job is to anticipate the most extreme, worst-case scenarios and make sure we're prepared to handle them."

Defense and industry officials say the prospective top-tier defensive layer - known here as Arrow-3 - requires development of an entirely new interceptor capable of blunting potentially devastating salvo attacks by nuclear-tipped Iranian missiles. Preliminary MoD plans envision the exo-atmospheric Arrow-3 as the nation's future front line of active defense, with the operational Arrow-2 deployed as a second-echelon guard against lesser threats and so-called leakers.

The planned upward extension of Israel's defensive envelope promises more opportunities to intercept incoming missiles, thereby boosting success rates - or so-called kill probabilities - from current levels of more than 80 percent to "somewhere in the very high 90s," said the planner, a general officer in the Israel Defense Forces.

"After careful analysis, we've come to the conclusion that we need an upper layer," said Arieh Herzog, director of the MoD's Israel Missile Defense Organization. "Our requirement is now quite clear: We need to give ourselves more chances to intercept the threats we will face."

Herzog said he is confident that existing Block 3 and new Block 4 upgrades of the Arrow-2 are now capable of defending against current and projected near-term threats. But for the longer term, given the specter of synchronized launches of increasingly high-performance nuclear-tipped missiles, the top tier becomes imperative, he said.

Looking at All Threats

In a preliminary conceptual design study conducted over the past year or so, Herzog's team and experts from the Israel Air Force examined options for defending against future threats. Options included more Arrow-2 upgrades and the U.S.-planned Theater High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system."What we discovered is that THAAD is an excellent system, and I'm sure
whoever uses THAAD will derive great benefit from it. But in our specific case, it cannot fit our requirements," Herzog said.

According to Herzog, Israel's operational force of Arrow-2 and PAC-2 systems now provide the type of high-low mix that the MoD plans to recreate - through Arrow-2 and the proposed Arrow-3 - for future, far more sophisticated threats.

"Right now, with Arrow-2 and existing Patriot systems, we have a good solution against the Scud-family of threats from Iran, Syria and other points in the region," he said.

The Israeli missile defense boss said security classification prevented him from discussing specific reasons that his evaluation team ultimately disqualified the THAAD. He said, however, Israeli professionals are discussing the top-tier report and the new Arrow-3 with counterparts from the U.S. Missile Defense Agency (MDA).

He said MDA support for the prospective interceptor is critical, not only for the considerable funding anticipated from Washington, but because of the need to share data and subsystem technologies over the life of the program.

"We've not yet decided how much year-by-year funding each side must earmark for the program, and we'll probably need to sign new documents about how technical information should be handled," Herzog said. "But I hope by the end of this year, all these details will be sorted out and we'll be able to say we have a real program."

He estimated it would take at least five years and "several hundred million dollars" for the first Arrow-3s to become operational.

Herzog said the new interceptor would use the same radar, battle management and other supporting systems developed for Arrow-2, helping to keep interoperability up and costs down.

Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) will remain the prime contractor and lead integrator for the prospective Arrow-3 program, Herzog said.

In interviews here, industry sources said IAI has already begun negotiations with Boeing Missile Defense Systems to extend the co-production partnership begun in 2003. Boeing produces nearly 40 percent of Arrow-2 components under a complex, U.S.-funded government-to-government teaming agreement managed by Israel's MoD and the Arrow program office in Huntsville, Ala.

Two-Part Iran Strategy

Israel's two-pronged strategy for countering the Iranian threat was clearly evident last week, with Prime Minister Ehud Olmert in Moscow pushing harsher sanctions on Tehran and Defense Minister Ehud Barak in Washington drumming up support for strategic cooperative initiatives.

In an Oct. 16 Pentagon meeting focused largely on the Iranian threat, Barak and U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates agreed to collaborate jointly on multiple layers of anti-rocket and anti-missile defense. Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said the two sides agreed to establish a committee to evaluate Israel's proposed Arrow-3, as well as new developments aimed at halting "Palestinian rockets coming from Gaza."

Barak also reaffirmed Israel's "understanding" of multibillion-dollar arms packages planned for Arabian Gulf states as part of Washington's Iran-focused Gulf Security Dialogue, Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said. The Iranian threat also dominated discussions Barak held with U.S. President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley and key congressional leaders, Israeli sources here said.

Meanwhile, Olmert was attempting to persuade Russian President Vladmir Putin of the need for get-tough sanctions favored by Israel, the United States and many leading European states. In three hours of one-on-one deliberations - which included presentation of the latest Israeli intelligence on the Iranian nuclear program - Olmert managed to offset some of the Russian-Iranian solidarity exhibited during the Russian leader's visit to Tehran earlier last week, an Olmert aide said.

Yet key issues remain open, including pending Russian arms sales to Iran and Syria, the aide said. And while Putin "expressed genuine interest in understanding our security concerns," the aide said Moscow remains opposed "at this time" to sanctions.

Earlier last week, following meetings with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Putin rebuffed U.S., European and Israeli calls for sanctions and insisted he had seen no convincing evidence to counter Tehran's claims that ongoing nuclear efforts are for peaceful, energy-related purposes. In an Oct. 16 news conference in Tehran, he upbraided Bush, French Prime Minister Nicholas Sarkozy and other world leaders for even hinting at use of a military option to solve the dispute.

Israeli officials are taking comfort in Washington's commitment to deny Iran nuclear weapons.

They are also intensifying efforts in China, where they are appealing for support - or, at least non-active objection - to sanctions. Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni is scheduled to visit Beijing later this week in attempts to persuade Chinese leaders not to veto resolutions planned for introduction in the U.N. Security Council.

Continued (Permanent Link)

France urges EU to widen Iran sanctions

France is beginning to get serious about Iran...

France urges EU to widen Iran sanctions
(Reuters)

3 October 2007

BRUSSELS - French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner has urged European Union counterparts to study widening existing sanctions on Iran's banking sector over its nuclear programme before any new UN resolution against Teheran.

'These new measures, coming from its most important commercial partner, should have the aim of increasing the pressure on Iran, in particular in the financial and economic area,' Kouchner wrote in a letter to fellow EU ministers, a copy of which was obtained by Reuters on Wednesday.

'Initially, we could add new entities, in particular in the banking sector, and new individuals to the existing European lists of asset freezes and visa bans,' he added, urging a debate on such measures at an Oct. 15 meeting of EU foreign ministers. 

Cross posted: Israel News  Middle East Analysis

 

Continued (Permanent Link)

Making the world safe for Iranian Nuclear Weapons

Yet another review of The Israel Lobby - Dual Loyalties by yet another Jew.

The purpose of the Israel Lobby Book can be found in this sentence:

Now, Mearsheimer and Walt fear that Israel and the lobby will shove the United States into a new war with Iran: "They are the central forces today behind all the talk ... about using military force to destroy Iran's nuclear facilities. Unfortunately, such rhetoric makes it harder, not easier, to stop Iran from going nuclear."

OK, so why aren't Mearsheimer and Walt the central forces urging the US to take effective action against Iran? If they spoke out for effective action against Iran, it might help to stop Iran from going nuclear? The book is a not too subtle attempt to label the Iran issue a child of the imagination of the Jewish lobby.


Jews protesting that we don't have an Elders of Zion and don't use the blood of Christian Children to make Matzoth are NOT going to stop this sort of propaganda. We need an Emile Zola to take up our case - a non-Jew who sees the injustice and is willing to speak out.

Ami Isseroff

Continued (Permanent Link)

Divesting from Iran and Sudan

A lot more work will be needed to get US  pension funds, and even Jewish organizations, to divest from Iran and Suda, according to a report in the Forward:  

 

Three states have passed legislation that should move their pension funds out of companies that do business with Iran, but legislation in most states has either failed or was not yet introduced. On the federal level, Congress is still far from making a decision on bills supporting divestment. Among the most notable slow movers, though, have been the Jewish communal organizations, which are struggling with the financial and technical difficulties of rearranging investment portfolios.

"Your money or your life," said the bandit.

"Take my life. I need my money for my old age," said Moe.

Ami Isseroff

Cross posted: Israel News  Middle East Analysis

Continued (Permanent Link)

Haleh Esfandiari- "True Confessions" from Iran

If your mother was jailed by the Mullah's of Iran, you would be upset too. in My Mother's Interrogators Haleh Bakhash complains about the regime of the Mullahs. Don't wait until it is your mother, or you, in an Iranian jail. Bakhash writes:

 

It was obvious from the words she used that much of what my mother said was scripted. Some of the phrases that she and two other prisoners -- Tajbakhsh and a man arrested last year who has since been released -- are shown saying echo statements that Iran's Intelligence Ministry has issued to describe their cases. Her statements, to me, sounded wooden -- unnatural and coerced. But did she say anything incriminating? Certainly not.

 

What Iran's security authorities, in their infinite wisdom, are presenting to the world and to their domestic audience is a doctored "interview" in which dishonest cutting and splicing unconvincingly attempt to make the most ordinary statement appear to be part of a great "conspiracy," a harbinger of massive subversion.

 

What did you expect? Didn't we sit through the same movies in the 1930s with the Soviet trials of "left deviationists" and "right deviationists" and their "confessions"? In reality, everyone know what such regimes, with their forced confessions and staged trials are like. But most of the time we ignore it, because it is expedient not to think about it, not to contemplate the fate of victims of such regimes, and not to think about what we are not doing to stop them. Mexico thinks Iran is just fine, and concluded some nice economic deals with them. So does Mr. Chavez. Are you making money from Iran? Isn't everyone? Isn't it time to do something about it??

 

Ami Isseroff

 

Cross posted: Israel News  Middle East Analysis

 

 

 

Continued (Permanent Link)

Persian Jews about Immigration to Israel: Hell no, we won't go

What is behind the strange reluctance of Jews to leave places where they are in obvious danger? Iran is ruled by a Holocaust -denying bigot. It is not a got place for ethnic Persians to live. It can't really be a good place for Jews, yet Iran's Jews are apparently obstinate. Why do Jews always wait until it is too late?

 

Text of report by web version of Israeli newspaper Ma'ariv on 8 July

[Report by Eli Bradenstein: "Israel to Iranian Jews: Immigration At Any Price"]

Israel is trying to find new ways of encouraging immigration from Iran in the wake of a lack of desire on the part of thousands of Iranian Jews to leave. In order to do this, an expatriate group of Iranian Jewish donors, which is behind a special fund to encourage aliyah from the land of the ayatollahs, is now offering approximately $60,000 to every Jewish family that comes to Israel, whi