Blogmocracy in Action!
Guest post by: Enchantress!

There is one thing to be grateful for in the new year: Ehud Olmert is not the Prime Minister of Israel.

Check out this OpEd where he seeks to undermine Bibi in a number of ways:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/22/opinion/Olmert-peace-now-or-never.html?_r=2&hp

The most damaging paragraphs are towards the end, though the whole thing is awful. Pure, unadulterated garbage. And I am being nice when I call it garbage. Much of it reads like it was written by a Palestinian official. It certainly does not read any differently than the standard biased-against-Israel NY Times OpEd. Only it was written by the former prime minister of Israel. (!) When people wonder why Israel has such bad PR, look no further than Ehud Olmert.

———————————-

Here goes my analysis of Olmert’s exact words:

Moreover, the Arab Spring has changed the Middle East, and unpredictable developments in the region, such as the recent attack on Israel’s embassy in Cairo, could easily explode into widespread chaos. It is therefore in Israel’s strategic interest to cement existing peace agreements with its neighbors, Egypt and Jordan.

By this logic, it makes ‘peace’ with an authoritarian state all the more difficult, because the so-called “Arab Spring” brings into question the credibility of authoritarians to deliver. Olmert does not in any way explain how the “Arab Spring” makes it more important for Israel to “cement peace agreements,” and he also does not explain how Israel even would have the power to “cement” these agreements.

In addition, Israel must make every effort to defuse tensions with Turkey as soon as possible. Turkey is not an enemy of Israel. [emphasis mine] I have worked closely with the Turkish prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan. In spite of his recent statements and actions, I believe that he understands the importance of relations with Israel. Mr. Erdogan and Mr. Netanyahu must work to end this crisis immediately for the benefit of both countries and the stability of the region.

In Israel, we are sorry for the loss of life of Turkish citizens in May 2010, when Israel confronted a provocative flotilla of ships bound for Gaza. I am sure that the proper way to express these sentiments to the Turkish government and the Turkish people can be found.

I bolded the important statements. Olmert flatly said that Israel must work to diffuse tensions with Turkey. He placed the onus on Israel. And he implied that Israel should apologize to Turkey for…defending the lives of its citizenry when attacked. (!) And then he pretended as if Erdogan is interested in peace or a relationship with Israel – despite all evidence to the contrary.

The time for true leadership has come. Leadership is tested not by one’s capacity to survive politically but by the ability to make tough decisions in trying times.

When I addressed international forums as prime minister, the Israeli people expected me to present bold political initiatives that would bring peace — not arguments outlining why achieving peace now is not possible. Today, such an initiative is more necessary than ever to prove to the world that Israel is a peace-seeking country.

This is obviously saying that all Bibi is doing is making excuses. Last I checked, it was Abbas – not Bibi – who has refused to negotiate. Already Bibi has done more for “peace” than Olmert ever did. This hypocritical blowhard (Olmert) presided over an administration that built far more ‘settlements’ than Bibi ever did. Bibi, not Olmert, agreed to a ‘settlement freeze.’ Bibi also has done a great deal to improve the economy of the West Bank. And yet, according to him, Bibi has simply been making excuses. And then he claims that Israel has to prove to the world that it is a “peace seeking country.” (!) What shocking gall! Again, it is Israel – not the Palestinians – who has repeatedly sought peace agreements. The Palestinians are the ones who perfected modern day suicide bombing and terrorism. They are led by a leader, Abbas, whose PhD dissertation denies the Holocaust, and who was a funder of the Munich massacre. Abbas also has flatly said that he has not given up violence, and that he won’t agree to an end of conflict. He also wants a Judenrein ‘Palestine.’ But according to Olmert, it is Israel, not the ‘Palestinians,’ who must prove they are “peace seeking.”

The window of opportunity is limited. Israel will not always find itself sitting across the table from Palestinian leaders like Mr. Abbas and the prime minister, Salam Fayyad, who object to terrorism and want peace. Indeed, future Palestinian leaders might abandon the idea of two states and seek a one-state solution, making reconciliation impossible.

Now is the time. There will be no better one. I hope that Mr. Netanyahu and Mr. Abbas will meet the challenge.

This almost defines “truthiness.” As noted, Olmert earlier said that Israel has to “prove” it is a peace seeking country. Meanwhile, the kleptocratic/terror led Palestinian Authority “want peace” and “object to terrorism.” Just last year there was a conference in Bethlehem where Fatah (including Abbas) affirmed their use of violent resistance. There is daily hate incitement in Fatah’s schools, mosques, and media, hardly bespeaking of a leadership that “wants peace.” And of course his statement ignores the fact that, even if Abbas and Fayyad were truly “moderate,” they do not control Gaza, and they are at war with Hamas. In short – how do they even have the power – today, or at Annapolis – to deliver peace? This little inconvenient fact is missing in Olmert’s ‘analysis.’

In conclusion, despite everything, I think we should be celebrating today. In his OpEd, Olmert lays out what his ‘peace plan’ was at Annapolis. This ‘plan’ included giving up vast swaths of Israel – and would have included dislodging tens of thousands or more Jews from their homes – in exchange for a piece of paper. His ‘plan’ would have included internationalizing the holiest site for Jews, the Temple Mount. Jews would be at the mercy of ‘international forces’ if they desired to worship at the Temple Mount, or even live in the Jewish sections of ‘East Jerusalem.’ Given how unfriendly (to put it mildly) the ‘international community’ is to the Jewish people, this would have been horrific. And it appears unlikely that Jews would even have had access to their second holiest site, the cave of the Patriarchs, in Hebron. More than that – Israel would have been greatly reduced in size, and the existing land buffers Israel enjoys would be gone…and yet peace would not be at hand. The so-called “Arab Spring” has shown that such pieces of paper are not necessarily worth much. We should celebrate that Abbas (and the Palestinians) never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity (because their goal is not statehood), and thus we should celebrate that Olmert’s plan never passed. It would not have brought peace. It only would have weakened Israel and demoralized Jews.

So while this OpEd caused me great consternation, I am also joyful that this craven and corrupt politician (Olmert) no longer is prime minister.

-Enchantress