On April 25, the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced that an Israeli delegation will take part in next year’s World Expo, hosted by the United Arab Emirates (UAE) in Dubai. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, fresh off his victory in the April 9 elections, tweeted his approval of Israel’s participation, which he called “another expression of Israel’s rising status in the world and the region.” The idea of Israeli innovators showcasing their achievements in the Gulf would have been hard to imagine not long ago. Today, it turns few heads.

This latest public sign of détente builds on years of diplomatic progress between Arab Gulf states and Israel. Under Netanyahu’s second premiership—beginning in 2009—Jerusalem has sought closer ties with the Gulf’s conservative monarchies. Netanyahu secured an audience with Sultan Qaboos of Oman during an official visit last fall and met the Omani foreign minister in Washington early this year. Bahrain, too, has long had covert talks with Israel and could be close to normalizing relations. Regional giant Saudi Arabia has also cooperated with Israel on different levels. Riyadh reportedly supported Israel’s offensive against Hamas during the 2014 Gaza war, while Jerusalem in turn greenlighted the sale of German tanks to the Saudis.

Once an open secret, these relationships are now all but overt and serve to enhance Israel’s regional standing. Yet proclamations of a supposed “new era” in Israeli-Gulf relations exaggerate the extent to which ties have improved. Although Israel and the Gulf states are getting closer, it is unclear where these relationships are heading.

Government-to-government contact with Israel by Gulf states is a sharp break with longstanding policy in the Arab world. Following Israel’s decisive victory in the Six-Day War of 1967, the Arab League pledged to oppose recognition of, as well as negotiation with, Israel. Though Gulf states did not follow the lead of Egypt and Jordan in signing peace treaties with Israel, relations were semi-normalized with and Oman and Bahrain after the Oslo Accords in 1994. Israel likely would have secured diplomatic breakthroughs with other Gulf states had the peace process succeeded. Yet all this came to a halt with the outbreak of the Second Intifada in 2000, when budding relations were severed.

Shared stakes in curbing Iranian aggression will drive these relationships for the foreseeable future. Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif referred to Israel in conjunction with Saudi Arabia and the UAE as Iran’s adversaries during a Fox News interview that aired on April 28. Jerusalem sees an existential threat in the “death to Israel” chanting Iranian regime, while the Gulf states view Tehran’s influence as destabilizing to the region and beyond. Opposing a common foe has brought Israel and the Gulf states into a tenuous strategic alliance. At least for now.

Strategic interest can take Israeli-Gulf ties only so far. The biggest obstacle to full normalization of relations remains the Palestinian issue. Consider Israeli-Egyptian relations. Although Jerusalem and Cairo maintain extensive security cooperation, in other areas, such as person-to-person contacts, relations are poor. A 2015 poll found that Egyptians considered Israel the most hostile country, just ahead of the United States and Iran. A similar “cold peace” is likely to take shape between Israel and the Gulf states whereby Jerusalem has extensive ties to the governments but Israelis are viewed overwhelmingly in a negative light by the local population.

Unless the stagnant peace process gets a new lease on life, security will be far and away the most robust area of cooperation between Israel and the Gulf. Therein lies a wasted opportunity. These countries could expand ties in a wide array of areas, chief among them economic relations. Lagging behind on measures of innovation, oil-rich Gulf states could invest in research and development opportunities with Israel while taking advantage of its renowned high-tech sector. Sustainability would be a particularly important area of cooperation, as Israeli environmental innovation could help address challenges like water shortages. The Gulf could conversely serve as an attractive destination for Israeli firms seeking foreign markets.

In addition to economic ties, person-to-person relations also have enormous potential. Israel offers several world-class universities, which have all tried to expand international enrollment—there’s no reason to believe students from the Gulf couldn’t fill some of those spots. Tourism could further bridge the gap between these countries. Hundreds of thousands of Israelis visit Turkey every year, and similar numbers of Israelis heading to the Gulf would not be unimaginable given grand plans for tourism there. Citizens from the Gulf could also visit Israel, whose tourism industry raked in $6.3 billion last year. Expanding—and diversifying—relations would be in the interests of both Israel and the Gulf states.

No matter how much willpower there is on both sides, the status quo in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will likely preclude stronger ties. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has said that there will be no Palestinian recognition of Israel as a “Jewish state.” From the Israeli perspective, any deal must be contingent on the Palestinians’ recognition of Israel as just that: As German Chancellor Angela Merkel said last October, this sine qua non is non-negotiable.

Also rendering a peace settlement more and more unworkable are the 42 percent of Israelis who now favor annexing the West Bank and the proliferation of Israeli settlements in that territory. The result is the lowest levels of support for a two-state solution in two decades. It’s difficult to imagine Gulf states embracing Israel openly if prospects for a two-state solution disintegrate.

Next year’s expo in Dubai may or may not mark an inflection point in Israeli-Gulf relations. Both sides have shown a willingness to engage more with the other. However, much can change in a year, and this is but one signal of potential change. It remains to be seen what shape this engagement will take going forward and if any significant policy changes follow. The United States should step in by leveraging its close relationships with both sides to push for stronger cooperation across many areas, not just security.

Daniel J. Samet is a program assistant with the Rafik Hariri Center for the Middle East 

Source: https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/menasource/israeli-gulf-relations-will-the-detente-deepen-or-dry-up

The post Israeli-Gulf Relations: Will the Détente Deepen or Dry Up? first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

“Today, I announce that the Australian Government has discontinued funding to the World Bank’s Multi-Donor Trust Fund for the Palestinian Recovery and Development Program,” Foreign Minister Julie Bishop wrote in a statement.

Bishop explained that she had contacted the PA in late May seeking assurances that Australian funding was not being misused.

“I am confident that previous Australian funding to the PA through the World Bank has been used as intended,” she affirmed, having had previously stated that the funds were subject to a close audit and had been spent on health, education and governance – aligning with Australia’s policies.

“However, I am concerned that in providing funds for this aspect of the PA’s operations there is an opportunity for it to use its own budget to activities that Australia would never support,” she added, referring to what she previously called the “so-called Martyrs fund.”

“Any assistance provided by the Palestine Liberation Organization to those convicted of politically motivated violence is an affront to Australian values, and undermines the prospect of meaningful peace between Israel and the Palestinians,” Bishop’s statement continued.

The payments to families of Palestinian attackers are an highly controversial issue often used to criticize the Palestinian Authority internationally, including by actors in the United States and the European Union. PA President Mahmoud Abbas has defended these payments as “social responsibility”.

Palestinian president Mahmud Abbas gestures as he chairs a Palestinian National Council meeting in Ramallah on April 30, 2018  – ABBAS MOMANI (AFP)

In 2017, the total budget for “prisoners’ payments” stood at $345 million, equivalent to half of the international contributions to the PA’s budget. The stipend is pegged to the length of the convicted terrorists’ prison sentences, meaning it is indirectly pegged to the severity of the crime.

The 10 million Australian dollars ($7.4 million) aid will now be redirected from to the UN Humanitarian Fund for the Palestinian Territories which supports 1.9 million “vulnerable Palestinians” with a focus on assisting access to basic services. According to the statement, this includes health care, food, water, improved sanitation and shelter.

According to the Guardian, Australia allocated $43 million for humanitarian assistance in the region which began on July 1.

On March 23 of this year, the Taylor Force Act was passed by the US Senate as part of an omnibus $1.3 trillion spending bill, stating that it would withhold a large chunk of Washington’s financial aid to the PA unless they ceased the “pay-for-slay” policies. At the same time, it protected aid funding for wastewater projects.

On Sunday, i24NEWS learned that the US had quietly frozen its aid to the Palestinian Authority pending review. The funding freeze was said to have caused a suspension of certain programs run by international agencies, the HALO Trust, which performs landmine clearance in the West Bank said it had suspended operations due to the fund freeze. The US Agency for International Development (USAID) said that funds that should have been received had not arrived.

Last year, former Australian prime minister Tony Abbott called on the government to slash the payment of “pensions to terrorists and their families” and also urged his country to follow in the footsteps of Trump’s embassy decision.

Abbott’s support for Israel which has lauded in the past as “the region’s only liberal, pluralist democracy” reflects a prevalent feeling amongst many Liberal Party members.

Australia generally, has been supportive of Israel in the international arena amid a slew of condemnation following the recent string of “Great March of Return” protests along the Gaza border that have turned violent.

Source: https://www.i24news.tv/en/news/international/178508-180702-australia-ends-direct-aid-to-pa-amid-concerns-of-funds-funneled-to-terrorists

The post Australia ends direct aid to PA amid concerns over funds funneled to terrorists first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas takes the oath of office after the new government was appointed after German Chancellor Angela Merkel was elected for a fourth term as chancellor in the German parliament Bundestag in Berlin, Germany, Wednesday, March 14, 2018. (AP Photo/Michael Sohn)

Solidarity with the Jewish state is a cornerstone of German foreign policy, Berlin’s new top diplomat said Sunday as he boarded a plane to Israel for his first visit.

“Responsibility for and solidarity with the Jewish and democratic State of Israel, standing up for its security and against anti-Semitism — that’s at the center of our foreign policy,” he said. “And it’s the compass that I followed on my way to politics.”

During his two-day trip to the region, Maas is scheduled to meet with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and President Reuven Rivlin. He will also visit the Yad Vashem Holocaust museum and meet with survivors. In Ramallah, he is set to meet with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas.

“Every trip to Israel is special, especially a few weeks before celebrating the 70th anniversary of the founding of the state,” Maas said. That momentous occasion is an important date in Germany, he added, “because the friendship that we enjoy today with Israel is thanks to the great men and women that made it grow. For us, it is a great gift.”

Maas, who became foreign minister earlier this month, affirmed German “continuity” regarding Middle East policy. “We want to strengthen our special connection to Israel in the future,” he said.

His talks with Netanyahu, however, may focus on some contentious issues, as Germany, along with other European states, is currently advocating for the maintenance of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, while Israel has been seeking to have the pact, in which Germany was a key partner, either significantly modified or abrogated altogether.

“Germany remains committed to the nuclear agreement with Iran in order to avoid an increasing arms race in the Middle East,” the German Foreign Ministry posted on its website on Sunday morning.

Another potential point of friction between Jerusalem and Berlin is the upcoming vote for a non-permanent seat in the United Nations Security Council for 2019-2020.

The two countries are competing for the same slot, which dramatically decreases Israel’s chances to enter the prestigious council for the first time.

During his March 14 inauguration at the German Foreign Office headquarters in Berlin, Maas reiterated his personal commitment to Israelbut also made plain that Germany will not withdraw its candidacy for the Security Council.

“For me, German-Israeli history does not only entail a historic responsibility. For me personally, it is a deep motivation of my political activity,” he said.

---

Source: https://www.timesofisrael.com/solidarity-with-israel-central-to-german-foreign-policy-new-fm-says/

[Disclaimer]

The post Solidarity with Israel central to German foreign policy, new FM says first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

ARTICLE SUMMARY

The one-sided decision by the United States to relocate its embassy to Jerusalem in May opens the way for a European Mideast peace initiative.

European High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Federica Mogherini shakes hands with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas in Brussels, Belgium, Jan. 22, 2018.

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas underwent some medical checks in Baltimore Feb. 22, and therefore he had to cancel his visit to Venezuela. But while the test results were satisfactory, Abbas’ political health is less brilliant, to say the least.

According to a senior PLO official who is close to Abbas, the president was shocked by the US decision to move its embassy — or at least parts of it, including the ambassador’s office — from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem in May 2018. Still, Abbas’ public reaction could be considered mild, compared with the rage expressed in Ramallah. The Palestinian leadership already understood that US President Donald Trump’s policies were 100% on Israel’s side, but to implement such a policy on Israel’s 70th anniversary (which in the Palestinian narrative marks 70 years since their national catastrophe — the Nakba) is viewed as a public attack against Abbas. More so, the Palestinian leadership considers this move as deliberately weakening Abbas’ position in public opinion.

The official argued that this American move is a gift to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, HaBayit HaYehudi leader Naftali Bennett, Hamas and Hezbollah. Abbas has stood by diplomacy since 1988. Now there is not a single Palestinian left who believes that diplomacy will lead anywhere.

Intense deliberations at the highest Palestinian level took place in the aftermath of the US decision, leading to several policy decisions.

The first was to convene an emergency meeting of the Arab League to denounce the US move, reiterate that East Jerusalem is the Palestinian capital and call on world countries to establish their embassies to Palestine in East Jerusalem. Ramallah also decided to ask Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Egypt to intervene vigorously with the US administration. In parallel, the Palestinian Authority (PA) will approach the European Union and Russia to engage in a new peace initiative based on Abbas’ Feb. 20 address to the UN Security Council.

Abbas is suggesting an international conference on a two-state solution, under the auspice of the P5+1 (China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States plus Germany). His closest advisers Nabil Shaath and Saeb Erekat have been in touch on this policy initiative with EU headquarters in Brussels and with the Emmanuel Macron administration in Paris. Abbas himself raised it in his last meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Feb. 12.

A senior EU official close to High Commissioner for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Federica Mogherini told Al-Monitor that Brussels was very much taken aback by Trump’s decision to move the US Embassy to Jerusalem in May. The European source qualified this decision as a kiss of death for any realistic US peace initiative.

According to this European diplomat, the EU will wait for another few weeks to ensure that there is no real US initiative, and then it will launch deliberation about an EU-led peace process initiative, led by France.

Such an initiative would entail a long list of elements. On the Iranian file, it will be comprised of a common policy on keeping the Iran nuclear deal intact while reaching out to Tehran to guarantee the implementation of the agreement. The EU will launch a dialogue with Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif on curbing Tehran’s regional ambitions, especially concerning the Tehran-Damascus-Beirut axis against Israel. Preventing the export of sophisticated missiles to Hezbollah will also be on the table.

On the Israel-Palestinian issue, the initiative would guarantee Israel that its security interest will be enhanced, not under threat, by a peace process. An element in that direction would be anti-terror cooperation with Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia. The initiative will call for an international peace conference on a two-state solution along the lines of the two Paris peace conferences, to take place possibly in Brussels. The terms of reference would be the conclusion of the last Paris Conference on Jan. 15, 2017, and the 2002 Arab Peace initiative. The United States, EU, Russia and China would be invited to co-chair the conference. Israel will be requested to cease settlement construction during the eventual peace process (the official added that Brussels could not predict which Israeli government will govern in Jerusalem at the end of 2018).

In parallel, the PA will be asked to halt all incitement for violence and enhance security cooperation with Israel.

The European diplomat said that a major point in these eventual negotiations would be the boundaries between West and East Jerusalem. He also said that all permanent status issues would be simultaneously on the table.

More so, the fate of the Gaza Strip would also be part of these negotiations, provided there would be one Palestinian rule and security force in the West Bank and Gaza. The Europeans are planning to offer significant assistance to the Palestinian economy, both West Bank and Gaza, and a possible upgraded (non-EU member) status for Israel and the Palestinians after permanent status.

Last, the initiative would offer Israel normalization of ties with the Arab states based on the Arab peace initiative.

A senior Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs official reacted to these propositions in a condescending way. He stated that “only Trump” is Netanyahu’s motto. Yet given the one-sided US policy and the political crisis in Israel, an EU policy initiative should not be ruled out in 2018-19. Otherwise a policy vacuum could leave the door open to violence.

Uri Savir has spent his professional life working on the strategies of peacemaking in Israel. In 1996, he established the Peres Center for Peace and is currently the center’s honorary president. In 2011, Savir founded the YaLa Young Leaders online peace movement. On Twitter: @Uri_Savir

---

Source:   https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2018/03/israel-palestinians-us-european-union-federica-mogherini.html

[Disclaimer]

The post Europe starts preparing Mideast peace initiative first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.