Israel’s policy of perpetual occupation is already causing an increase in animosity toward the Jewish people and their state. Perpetuating this policy fosters the beginning of an anti-Israel movement – from within and without the state – that will be difficult to reverse.

Casino tycoon and right-wing political patron Sheldon Adelson has finally spoken to the existential issue of Israeli democracy absent a Palestinian state. Many observers were shocked by the multi billionaire, hard-liner's recent statement proclaiming, "Israel isn’t going to be a democratic state – so what?”

While I passionately oppose Adelson's views, his remarks provided clarity by openly acknowledging that a binational Jewish state would not be a democracy, an obvious consequence largely ignored by the Israeli right wing.

Continue Reading

APN today called on the Obama Administration not to block the Jordanian-backed resolution in the United Nations Security Council regarding Israeli-Palestinian peace.  APN president and CEO Debra DeLee commented:

"We urge the Obama Administration, as a true friend of Israel, not to block the Jordanian-introduced resolution in the United Nations Security Council setting out parameters and a timeline for Israeli-Palestinian negotiations.  Notwithstanding the misleading reports and cynical criticisms of this UN effort, the bottom line is this:  the substance of this resolution is firmly in line with longstanding U.S. policy regarding a resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and passage of this resolution is consistent with the national interests of both the U.S. and Israel.  For these reasons, the Obama Administration, if it is not prepared to support the resolution, should not intervene to block its passage.

This week, Alpher discusses the primary strategic developments in the Middle East in 2014 from Israel’s standpoint; strategic lessons do you draw from Secretary Kerry’s peace process failure and the Gaza war; the US-IS conflict that emerged in 2014; the revolutionary situation in general in the Arab Middle East and US-Iran negotiations; the worsening of Israel’s growing isolation; and the bottom line for the Middle East in 2015.

Don’t miss APN’s "What Would Leibel Do? (WWLD?)" awards dinner! Renowned author and commentator Peter Beinart will be joining us - the list of speakers and guests continues to grow - RSVP now to be part of this special event!

Hyatt Regency, 1 Avenue de Lafayette, Boston
Sunday, January 11, 2015

Reception at 5:45 P.M. Dinner & Program at 7:00 P.M.

Please RSVP by clicking here
OR
You may RSVP by calling or emailing 202-408-9898 • apnboston@peacenow.org • www.peacenow.org

Americans for Peace Now (APN) today reiterated its call on the Obama administration to support French-led efforts to gain consensus around a United Nations Security Council laying out terms of reference and a timeline for Israeli-Palestinian, two-state negotiations. APN urged the Obama administration to reject efforts to delay such a resolution until after Israeli elections (March 2015).  APN President and CEO Debra DeLee commented: 

"As a true friend of Israel, the Obama administration should be working closely with the French and other parties to achieve consensus around a new Israeli-Palestinian peace resolution in the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), and to help pass such a resolution expeditiously.  Passage of a two-state resolution by the UNSC offers an historic opportunity for friends of Israel in the international community, including the Obama administration, to breathe new life into the two-state solution.  It can go a long way to strengthening those Israelis and Palestinians – among both the general population and among the current and potential leaders – who stand firmly with such a solution.  It can also send a much-needed message to rejectionists on both sides, making clear that the world is out of patience with ideologies and actions that prioritize land over peace, and prefer perpetual war in pursuit of zero-sum outcomes to a negotiated compromise.

The prospect of a U.N. Security Council vote on parameters and a timeline for Israel-Palestinian negotiations, coming as it does in the lead-up to Israeli elections, is eliciting this tricky argument: “We can’t pressure Israel when Israelis are going to the polls, because it will only help the Right.”

That argument fits neatly into the list of memes that time and time again have been used to justify U.S. inaction in the Israeli-Palestinian arena. Memes like: “We can’t press for peace with the region in upheaval.” “We can’t ask any Israeli prime minister to take action that could destabilize his government.” “This is a losing issue that will cost any president and his party dearly.”

This week, Alpher discusses Jordan's draft resolution to the UN Security Council regarding Palestinian statehood; last week's request from Tzipi Livni to Secretary Kerry to delay the UNSC vote and thereby keep the Palestinian statehood issue off Israel's election agenda lest this generate more votes for the Israeli political right and whether this makes sense; whether there is still an Israeli consensus against UN intervention in the conflict; and why last week's firing of a rocket from the Gaza Strip at an Israeli community on the Gaza periphery was cited by a number of Israeli security commentators and authorities as a step toward renewed escalation of fighting between Israel and Hamas.

Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu condemned the UN Security Council Resolution introduced late Wednesday by Jordan as a unilateral move that would result in “a Hamas takeover of Judea and Samaria.”  Foreign Minister Leiberman blasted the resolution as an act of aggression against Israel.  Strategic Affairs and Intelligence Minister Steinitz branded it an “act of war.”

What can one conclude except that this resolution is manifestly anti-Israel?  It must, for example, reject Israel’s right to exist and endorse a full Palestinian “right of return.”  It must deny any Israeli or Jewish claims to Jerusalem and require Israel to leave its security in the hands of its erstwhile enemies.  And no doubt it includes text justifying violence and terror against Israel.  More broadly, this resolution must seek to impose on Israel a “solution” to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, along lines defined unilaterally by the Palestinians.  How could Israel respond to such a text with anything less than outrage?   

Netanyahu, Leiberman, Steinitz, and others critics of the effort must be hoping that people won’t bother to actually read the text of the resolution, because, in fact, it is nothing of the sort.