Thoughts for Israel’s Independence Day

By: Hillel Fendel – Arutz Sheva

A compendium of inspiration for Israel’s upcoming 63rd Independence Day – Part One

Rabbi Marc D. Angel, New York:

…Yes, Israel. This tiny country–surrounded by enemies, threatened constantly by terrorism and war, subject to an Arab economic boycott, frequently maligned by the media, torn within by ethnic and religious strife–is [tied for 8th place] among the world’s happiest countries [according to a Gallup World Poll]!

Given its many problems, why is Israel so happy?  Why is it among the happiest, most thriving, most creative countries of the world?             

I believe the answer is: the grand human spirit of the people of Israel. Israelis–in spite of many differences among themselves–recognize that they are part of an incredible, dynamic adventure. Israel is the only example in the history of humanity of an ancient nation exiled from its land, forced to live (often under horrific conditions) as a minority group scattered throughout the world–who after nearly 2000 years returned to its ancestral land, revived its ancient language, and re-established its historic culture.  Israelis–and all members of the Jewish people–understand that we are living in a unique period of history.  Israelis are happy not only because they are thriving intellectually, culturally, scientifically, militarily; but because they understand that their lives mean something, that they are pioneers in restoring the honor and strength of the Jewish people after centuries of powerlessness and disgrace…

Rabbi Avraham Yisrael Sylvetsky, Yeshivat Merkaz HaRav Kook:

…But we are still in the midst of the process. He “Who gathers Israel from the four corners of the world” has not yet restored our “judges as of yore”, and the [resulting] “sadness and sorrow” have not yet been removed [quotes based on the 11th and 12th blessings of the Amidah prayer – ed.]. The legal establishment, our shame, is still a patchwork of British law and Turkish law, while the true justice of Torah law is abandoned by the wayside… Corruption, too, has spread in various parts of the government, where there is no Torah and the heart is not directed heavenward.

It appears that precisely this low point that we have reached is leading the Nation of Israel to recognize the need to build a new foundation of government and justice according to Torah, ‘whose ways are pleasant and whose paths are wholly peace.’ …

The State has already been established – the Jewish body is recovering from its sickness, the wounds of the Exile are healing, the limbs are getting stronger – and it is well on its way, with G-d’s help, to reaching complete health.

Rabbi Shmuel Yaniv, Givat Shmuel:

The State of Israel was established in the year 5708 to the Creation of the World – and the 5,708th verse in the Torah reads, “And G-d will bring you to the Land inherited by your forefathers, and you will take possession of it, and He will do good to you…” (Deut. 30,5)

Rabbi Beryl Wein, Jerusalem:

The Prophet Ezekiel warned the Jewish people 2,500 years ago not to think that they are like other nations. Independence Day of the State of Israel is not like Bastille Day in France, Canada Day, or the 4th of July. If our Independence Day takes on the same status as other Independence Days around the world, it loses its spiritual and emotional significance.

Please note: These stories are located outside of Prophecy Today’s website. Prophecy Today is not responsible for their content and does not necessarily agree with the views expressed therein. These articles are provided for your information.

Osama Bin Laden’s Takedown Must Force U.S. to Rethink Relations With Pakistan

By: Robert Maginnis – Human Events

The takedown of al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden in a Pakistani military town near that nation’s capital illustrates just how far U.S.-Pakistani relations have deteriorated.  It is time for America to recalibrate its relationship with Pakistan, which has significant implications for our success in Afghanistan.

Sunday, a U.S. Navy SEAL team acted on confirmed intelligence to covertly move on a fortress-like mansion in Abbottabad, Pakistan, to end an almost 10-year effort to capture or kill the mastermind of the September 11, 2001, attacks on America.  It took so long to bring bin Laden to justice because our so-called ally Pakistan hasn’t been sufficiently cooperative due to divergent interests in the strategically important Afghanistan War.

Pakistan wants to be the dominant player in a future Afghanistan to avoid having to defend both its eastern and western borders if India and Afghanistan become too close.  That explains Islamabad’s efforts to shape the Afghanistan endgame by pushing back—not cooperating—with Obama’s war strategy, such as by helping bring bin Laden to justice.

Last year Obama announced a strategy that surged 30,000 fresh troops into population centers to force out insurgents, establish governance, and train Afghan security forces.  The President promised to begin withdrawing troops this summer and turn over all security to a fully ready Kabul by 2014.

On top of his self-imposed time line, the President is also under pre-election pressure to show strategic success in the war—which has flagging support.  A recent Washington Post-ABC News survey found for the first time more Americans disapprove (49%) of Obama’s management of the war than approve (44%).

Obama admits, “Pakistan is central to our efforts to defeat al-Qaeda,” but that relationship has soured, undermining his strategy—the lack of cooperation regarding bin Laden illustrates the point.

That is why in part Obama recruited Army Gen. David Petraeus, commander in Afghanistan , to become director of the Central Intelligence Agency ( CIA ), the government’s primary agent engaging Pakistan.  Obama expects Petraeus, who rescued the war in Iraq and is reversing the trends in Afghanistan, to perform the same magic with the Pakistanis.  But Petraeus must first solve four daunting problems to win Pakistan’s cooperation if Obama’s strategy is to be salvaged.

First, Pakistan must stop supporting our enemy.  It is unbelievable Pakistani intelligence officials didn’t know about the location of bin Laden.  Likely, they played us for fools all these years to milk us for aid money.  Interestingly, that lack of cooperation was coming to a head even before the bin Laden operation.

Last week, Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, said while in Islamabad that Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence directorate (ISI) shelters fighters from the Haqqani network, a Taliban ally that has served as a Pakistani proxy.

Mullen said the ISI-Haqqani relationship was “at the core” of difficulties between the governments.  “It is the Haqqani network which is killing Americans across the border,” Mullen said.

The ISI’s substantial ties to the Taliban, al-Qaeda, and other right-wing Islamic extremists are common knowledge.  Last week, U.S. military documents obtained by WikiLeaks and reported by the New York Times identified the ISI along with numerous militant groups as allies of al-Qaeda and the Taliban.

Second, Pakistan must aggressively pursue al-Qaeda and the Taliban within its borders and deny them sanctuary.  Bin Laden left Afghanistan from his Tora Bora mountain hideout in late 2001 and has been hiding in that country.  It is hard to believe the ISI, which has enjoyed a long-term relationship with al-Qaeda, didn’t know his whereabouts.  But then again, Pakistan’s lack of aggressiveness against these enemies is an ongoing problem.

Last month the Obama administration reported to Congress that Pakistan lacks a “clear path toward defeating” the Islamic insurgency inside the country’s tribal region.  It noted Pakistani security forces repeatedly failed to keep militants from returning to areas cleared of the al-Qaeda-linked fighters.

Pakistan’s army has conducted several campaigns to suppress Taliban groups since 2001.  However, according to the administration’s quarterly report to Congress, the Pakistani army launched a major operation this January but “was failing for the third time in two years” to clear militants from Mohmand, one of the seven autonomous agencies comprising Pakistan’s tribal region, which borders Afghanistan.  The report states this is “a clear indicator of the inability of the Pakistani military and government to render cleared areas resistant to insurgent return.”

Third, Pakistan must support a full range of American covert actions.  U.S. counterterrorism strategy in Afghanistan relies on covert operations in Pakistan:  Agents monitor extremist groups planning actions in Afghanistan and American drones attack Taliban safe havens in northwest Pakistan.

Details regarding the bin Laden takedown will demonstrate whether Pakistan cooperated.  But the ongoing bitter dispute over covert CIA activities and drone attacks inside Pakistan is not in doubt and may explain why it took almost 10 years to get bin Laden.

Tensions over CIA activities peaked earlier this year when Pakistan arrested a CIA contractor after a shooting incident involving ISI agents.  That affair followed the withdrawal last December of the CIA station chief in Pakistan after his name was published by local media.

London’s Guardian reported in April that Pakistan has moved to expel hundreds of U.S. personnel, many believed to work for the CIA , by not renewing their visas.

Pakistani officials are also incensed by CIA drone attacks.  They complain the U.S. has stopped sharing intelligence on how it selects targets, according to the New York Times.  Islamabad claims it needs the information to eliminate collateral damage, but U.S. officials suspect the ISI is warning would-be targets.

Gen. Petraeus will have a difficult task repairing the ISI-CIA relationship.  “In its current form, the relationship is almost unworkable,” Dennis Blair, a former American director of national intelligence, told the New York Times.  “There has to be a major restructuring.  The ISI jams the CIA all it wants and pays no penalties.”

Finally, Pakistani officials must stop undermining America by pressuring Afghan officials.  The Wall Street Journal reported that Pakistani Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gillani urged Afghan President Hamid Karzai to look to Pakistan and China for help instead of partnering with the U.S.

The Journal reported that Gillani made the statement during an April 16 meeting in Kabul with Karzai.  Gillani allegedly told Karzai the U.S. had failed Afghanistan and Pakistan, and that Karzai should not allow a long-term U.S. military presence in the country.  An Afghan official told the Journal, “There was a mention of China in the meeting, China as a country, as an emerging economic power, and that maybe we should reach out to a new global economic power.”

Dr. Abdullah Abdullah, a onetime Afghan presidential candidate and former foreign minister, told the Journal he had some knowledge of what was discussed at the Gillani-Karzai meeting.  “They said that the goals of the United States are confusing and uncertain, the American force is not reliable, and their power is not a reliable power,” Abdullah said.

Abdullah said Pakistan’s perspective on the U.S. is increasingly negative.  He opined, “One of the schools of thought in the Pakistani establishment is that the U.S. presence in Afghanistan is not for the stabilization of Afghanistan, but is for seizing Pakistan’s nuclear assets in due time.”

Solving these problems will be complicated for Gen. Petraeus, especially because Pakistani military leaders—the real power brokers in Islamabad—do not regard Petraeus as a friend.  Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, Pakistan’s army chief of staff, called Petraeus a political general, and has made little secret of his distaste for the man, according to the New York Times.

Petraeus’ chances of solving these problems are limited given Obama’s time line for withdrawal, America’s growing impatience with the war, and Islamabad’s compelling strategic interests to dominate Afghanistan’s end state.  Even a surge in aid on top of $18 billion already shoveled at Islamabad is unlikely to “force” Pakistan to reverse course.

America’s long-delayed operation to kill bin Laden illustrates the consequences of an uncooperative Pakistan.  Islamabad ’s same lack of cooperation is glaringly evident in the Afghanistan war.  Clearly, it is time America recalibrated its relationship with Pakistan and rethinks its Afghan strategy.

Please note: These stories are located outside of Prophecy Today’s website. Prophecy Today is not responsible for their content and does not necessarily agree with the views expressed therein. These articles are provided for your information.

The symbol is dead, but the global network lives on

By: Yaakov Lappin – The Jerusalem Post

A decade after Osama bin Laden escaped US forces who had surrounded his maze of caves in Tora Bora, Afghanistan, US Navy SEALs, backed by helicopters, finally caught up with the world’s most infamous terrorist in Pakistan.

The successful raid, made possible by a painstaking American intelligence-gathering operation, represents a vital psychological milestone in the global war on al-Qaida, for every day that bin Laden evaded justice and was free to continue to issue calls and instructions for mass murder was an affront to the American people and to US prestige.

To be sure, US-led efforts have greatly weakened the jihadi network around the world. Relying on a mix of ground forces, covert operations, assassinations, drone strikes and effective intelligence, as well as an ever-growing Internet-based counterterrorism effort, the US and other states have been able to prevent al-Qaida from carrying out “spectacular” attacks on high-profile Western targets for a number of years. But the battle is far from over.

Bin Laden’s death will have little real operational impact on al-Qaida, since it has become a decentralized global network of radicalized followers, linked to one another by the Internet.

Al-Qaida has become a “worldview” to which anyone can subscribe and in whose name anyone can act. It stopped relying on its centralized leadership in Afghanistan and Pakistan years ago.

By the late 1990s, bin Laden packed his Afghani cave hideouts with computers and began using the Internet to promote his dark vision of a medieval pan-Islamic state, ruled according to a fanatical interpretation of Islam, a vision he and his followers call “the caliphate.”

Long before the horrendous attacks on New York and Washington on 9/11, bin Laden set in motion a process that would lead to the creation of a virtual maze of caves for his followers – an online network where they could seek refuge, plan further attacks, spread their ideology and gain new recruits.

By moving its base of operations to the Internet, al-Qaida and its various affiliates have been able to survive the loss of safe havens like Afghanistan and wait for new opportunities to rebuild their forces in other locations.

They have exploited power vacuums in failed states like Yemen and Somalia, and in lawless regions of Afghanistan and Pakistan, to rebuild their presence, and are eagerly watching the wave of unrest washing over the Middle East for signs of more failed states.

Al-Qaida’s global strategy is based on the idea of moving back to the physical realm from the virtual sphere.

Its followers have also continued to try and reach Muslims living in the West via the Internet. Countless videos and messages continue to appear on jihadi forums singing the praises of “martyrdom operations,” showing soon-to-be suicide bombers in a state of near ecstasy, and attempting to drive a wedge between would-be recruits and the societies around them.

Al-Qaida is a stateless organization seeking to found a state, the caliphate. It does not rely on one particular geographical location for survival and cannot be eliminated with the brush of a stroke.

The war to eliminate al-Qaida will therefore take years, if not decades, to win. The killing of bin Laden is a practical and a symbolic achievement, therefore, but should not be overestimated.

The fact that bin Laden was able to live in a wealthy Pakistani suburb of Islamabad, in a fortified compound, raises disturbing questions.

For years, Indian and Western sources have suspected Pakistan’s ISI intelligence service of cooperating with radical terrorist groups and elements of the Taliban.

In recent years, the nuclear-armed state of Pakistan has moved closer toward the abyss of Islamic radicalism.

In March, the country’s sole Christian minister, Shahbaz Bhatti, who was responsible for religious minorities, was shot dead by a Salafi militant for questioning draconian blasphemy laws.

The shooting came soon after the governor of Punjab, Salman Taseer, who also questioned the blasphemy laws, was gunned down by his own bodyguard. The assassin was celebrated as a hero by many ordinary Pakistanis.

Please note: These stories are located outside of Prophecy Today’s website. Prophecy Today is not responsible for their content and does not necessarily agree with the views expressed therein. These articles are provided for your information.

US: 61% Support Defending Israel

By: Hillel Fendel – Arutz Sheva

A poll shows that 61percent of Americans support defending Israel if it is attacked – more than those who support defending all but three other countries.

Polls on this topic are carried out by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC, on behalf of Rasmussen Reports. The most recent of these surveys, taken last week, dealt only with nine countries – not including Israel, which was asked about in an earlier survey.

The most recent findings show that Canada, Great Britain and Australia enjoy the greatest support among Americans in terms of willingness to come to their defense. Eighty percent said they would support coming to Canada’s defense, 74% would for Great Britain, and 65% for Australia. Next on the list was Israel, with 61%, as opposed to 26% who said they would oppose supporting Israel if it was attacked.

The Bahamas and Panama each enjoy a 58% support rate among Americans in this regard.

In general, Americans are not eager to send their sons to defend other countries. The US has a military defense treaty with Brazil, for instance, but only 33% of Americans say they would support going to its defense if it were attacked; 53% would oppose. Only 46% support coming to the aid of France or Spain, 38% would for Belgium, and 28% for Portugal.

Please note: These stories are located outside of Prophecy Today’s website. Prophecy Today is not responsible for their content and does not necessarily agree with the views expressed therein. These articles are provided for your information.

Jerusalem’s time tunnels

By: Nir Hasson – Haaretz

Under the streets of the Old City of Jerusalem and the neighboring village of Silwan is a parallel universe. It is cool year round, and lacks the din of vehicular traffic and merchants. In lower Jerusalem, you cannot hear stones being thrown or smell the tear gas from the Friday clashes between Silwan youths and the police.

On the final day of the Great Revolt against the Romans, in 70 C.E., as the Temple was going up in flames, the last of the Jewish rebels escaped into the city’s underground sewer system in a desperate attempt to flee the Roman legionnaires. “Those in the sewers were ferreted out, the ground was torn up, and all who were trapped were killed,” reported contemporary historian Flavius Josephus.

The most significant sewage tunnel, which ran underneath Jerusalem’s main street, has been excavated by the Antiquities Authority and the nonprofit Elad Foundation. This main street led from the Siloam Pool – the city’s main water source – to the Temple Mount and the Temple. Hundreds of thousands of pilgrims marched up this road three times a year. Jerusalem’s main thoroughfare during the Second Temple period is today directly under the main road of Silwan, known in Arabic as Wadi Hilweh Street.

The Siloam Pool, at the bottom of Silwan, is a small remnant of the major waterworks that sustained ancient Jerusalem. Near the edge of the pool is an opening into the hillside, leading to a long, magnificently carved tunnel. Welcome to the Herodian period.

After a few dozen meters, the tunnel suddenly drops from street level into the sewer below, which Josephus described. Once work is complete, visitors touring the City of David tunnels will be able to descend beneath the Old City walls and emerge from the ground at the Davidson Center, the archaeological park between just within the Dung Gate, to the immediate southwest of the Temple Mount. In the future, visitors may even be able to enter the Western Wall tunnels and continue all the way to the Via Dolorosa, in the heart of the Muslim Quarter. From there, it is a quick walk to the immense Zedekiah’s Cave under the Muslim Quarter buildings. All told, this means that visitors could potentially spend hours on end exploring subterranean Jerusalem from end to end of the ancient city (though not including the Temple Mount), barely seeing the light of day.

The excavation of the extensive network of caves and tunnels below the Western Wall, Silwan and the Muslim Quarter is now nearing completion. The intensive activity has been under way for decades, generally without collaboration between the various agencies involved. Yet despite the lack of a unified policy, critics of the tunnels charge that the excavations have changed the geography and geopolitics of Jerusalem’s Holy Basin. The tunnels have created a new Jerusalem, one illuminated by fluorescent bulbs – a Jewish-Israeli expanse devoid of Palestinians and conflicts. Whatever the case may be, it seems that from this point on, anyone who wants to talk about dividing Jerusalem will need two maps, one for above the surface and another for the subterranean.

The Western Wall link

The excavation enterprise includes five different projects: the well-known and heavily trafficked Western Wall tunnels, which lead northward from the Western Wall plaza along the length of the wall obscured by the Muslim Quarter buildings; the City of David national park; the tunnel along the Herodian-era road, which connects the City of David to the Old City; a tunnel from the Muslim Quarter eastward toward the Western Wall; and Zedekiah’s Cave, a gigantic quarry excavated over several thousand years, that extends under much of the Muslim Quarter. The partners in this immense excavation enterprise are the Western Wall Heritage Foundation (a nonprofit association that administers the Western Wall plaza and is controlled by the Prime Minister’s Office ), the Antiquities Authority, the East Jerusalem Development Corporation (another government agency ), and the right-wing, nonprofit associations Elad and Ateret Cohanim.

Some of the tunnels were excavated for religious and tourism objectives: Work on the Western Wall tunnels, for example, took place over the past 40 years at the initiative of current and former Western Wall rabbis and the Religious Services Ministry. However, most of the subterranean enterprise is archaeological. The excavations have yielded significant findings and insights, and even critics admit there is much of interest in at least some of the tunnels.

There is also an important financial aspect. The two main tunnel networks – the City of David and the Western Wall tunnels – are among Jerusalem’s premier tourist attractions, drawing hundreds of thousands of visitors annually. An underground link between the Western Wall and the City of David would undoubtedly boost the importance of the latter, which the Elad Foundation controls. All it would take is a fraction of the millions who visit the Western Wall every year to descend into such a channel.

The project’s critics, mainly members of left-wing groups and independent archaeologists, view the excavations as a right-wing tool. The left argues that the tunnels are physically undermining Palestinian homes in Silwan and the Old City, while politically reinforcing Jewish settlement in the Muslim Quarter and Silwan. Others are concerned that the tunnels could be used by extremists to attack the Muslim shrines on the Temple Mount.

“The settlement enterprise in Jerusalem takes place on three dimensions,” says Meretz city council member Meir Margalit. “The ground, the rooftops and the underground. The tunnels are yet another way of gaining control over East Jerusalem. I have no problem with excavating per se; I myself am an archaeology buff, and I always get a thrill from these tunnels. The problem is the excavators’ messianic political agenda. A provocation beneath the mosques could end the peace process for generations.”

Nevertheless, despite the occasional complaints by officials from the Waqf (the Muslim trust that administers the Temple Mount ) and the Islamic Movement in Israel, none of the tunnels actually go under the Temple Mount or threaten its structures, and there are no plans to excavate underneath it. In most places, the huge stones of the Western Wall actually block the excavators’ access to Temple Mount.

Lost temple treasures

The most important tunnel excavator in the city’s history was the noted British archaeologist Charles Warren. In the 1860s, tunneling was partly necessitated by the need to conceal from the Ottoman authorities some of the work adjacent to – or beneath – the Temple Mount. At the same time, the tunneling was also motivated by a mystical romantic hunt for the treasures of the ancient Israelites’ Temple.

The tunneling halted during the British Mandate and Jordanian rule, and was renewed following the Six-Day War. Then, as well, it was the pursuit of Temple treasures that underlay the excavations. The most significant figure in this pursuit was then-Western Wall Rabbi Yehuda Meir Getz. Getz, who had a spiritual, mystical approach to life in general and to the Temple Mount in particular, believed he could find the greatest treasure of them all – the Ark of the Covenant.

Journalist Nadav Shragai, who investigated the tunnels for his 1995 Hebrew-language book “The Temple Mount Conflict,” explains that, according to Maimonides, when King Solomon was building the First Temple he knew it would eventually be destroyed, so he “built a structure in which to hide the Ark, down below in deep and twisting concealed places.” Getz believed the Ark of the Covenant, which had not been seen since Solomon’s days, was still hidden beneath the Temple Mount. The Ark, Getz believed, would hasten the redemption. Except that his excavations nearly led to bloodshed.

Getz spearheaded the excavation of the Western Wall tunnels, which were meant to expose the western wall of the Temple Mount in its entirety. The tunnels stretch northward from the Western Wall plaza deep into the Muslim Quarter. One visual highlight of the tunnel tour is a colossal carved stone weighing hundreds of tons. Given the limits of Second Temple-era engineering capabilities, it is still unclear how the stone got there. The tunnels also afford visitors the opportunity to pray at the closest point to the Temple’s Holy of Holies.

But Getz wanted much more. In 1981, his excavators broke eastward onto the Temple Mount, into an ancient tunnel first excavated by Warren. Getz was looking for signs of the Ark. His excavation was conducted under a heavy cloak of secrecy, with knowledge of it kept even from Prime Minister Menachem Begin.

When Waqf officials discovered the tunnel, a massive altercation broke out between the excavators and Palestinian youths who entered the tunnel from the Temple Mount side. In the wake of the riot, then-Minister of Religious Affairs Yosef Burg, ordered the opening sealed.

In his book, Shragai quotes from the diary of a frustrated Getz, who wrote on September 3, 1981: “A sound of beating, a sound of Arabs in the tunnel. Apparently, they are sealing the inside of the wall with thick concrete. Every shout is like a dagger in my wounded heart. I yelled out: ‘O God, the heathen are come into thine inheritance; thy holy Temple have they defiled.’ But I must be stronger, and not be broken, for I must continue in my capacity, even if I am alone in the war.”

The violent dispute that was barely avoided in 1981 erupted in full force 15 years later in the form of the Western Wall tunnel riots, which came to be considered a harbinger of the Second Intifada. Violent clashes that spread from Jerusalem to West Bank cities claimed the lives of 15 members of Israel’s security forces and about 60 Palestinians. The riots broke out after then-Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu authorized the opening of the Western Wall tunnels, calling them the “bedrock of our existence.” In actuality, the tumult erupted over the opening of a short passage that enabled the thousands of visitors to the Western Wall tunnels to exit into the Muslim Quarter instead of having to retrace their steps back to the start of the tunnel. Then, unlike as in 1981, the tunnel did not pass below the Temple Mount. But it was enough for the Waqf and the Palestinian leadership to incite thousands of people to take part in violent demonstrations. The tunnel was reopened shortly after the riots ended, and still serves the hundreds of thousands of visitors to the Western Wall tunnels.

As opposed to his predecessor Rabbi Getz, the current Western Wall rabbi, Shmuel Rabinovich, vehemently objects to easing the prohibition keeping Jews off the Temple Mount, either above or below ground. “As far as I am concerned, it is not a political issue; it is an issue of halakha [Jewish law]. Just like I cannot eat on Yom Kippur, I will not go up to the Temple Mount. So long as I am the rabbi of the Western Wall, no one will get even within touching distance of the Temple Mount,” Rabinovich told Haaretz. Nevertheless, he is continuing the excavation of the Western Wall tunnels, and has turned them into one of Jerusalem’s most famous and popular tourism attractions, with 750,000 visitors each year.

Briefing the parties

The main excavation project in the Western Wall area is in a tunnel underneath the Ohel Yitzhak synagogue, in the Muslim Quarter, 80 meters east of the Western Wall tunnels. The excavation was initially funded by Ateret Cohanim, a nonprofit association that works to move Jews into the Muslim Quarter with the financial backing of settlement movement patron Irwin Moskowitz.

Currently, states Rabinovich, Ateret Cohanim has nothing to do with the excavation, which has exposed an impressive Crusader structure, a Byzantine street and the remains of a large Second Temple-era structure. Rabinovich adds that he briefs all the relevant parties on the excavation progress, including American diplomats and Muslim Waqf officials.

“Human life is more important than uncovering the past. No excavation will be conducted if I think there is any risk to human life,” he adds. The Ohel Yitzhak excavation has already linked up with the Western Wall tunnels, and when it is opened to the public, it will significantly expand visitors’ below-ground options.

Uzi Dahari, deputy director of the Antiquities Authority, explains that in the case of Ohel Yitzhak, the excavation is not taking place in a tunnel; it is an ordinary excavation in a large underground chamber. The space was created by the construction methods employed in the Old City in the past few centuries: Many Muslim Quarter buildings are not built at ground level, but rather on top of outsized arches. Over the years, the spaces under the arches fill with debris and sewage; once the debris is removed, excavations can be conducted underneath.

These arches enabled excavation of the Western Wall tunnels and the Ohel Yitzhak synagogue. “We received a legal opinion stating that residents did not possess rights to these underground areas. Nevertheless, these are their homes and we must make sure nothing collapses. So we are working at all times with a safety engineer,” Dahari explains.

Rabinovich says that aside from the archaeological and tourism-related benefits, not only do the excavations not undermine the buildings, they sometimes save them.

“The problem in the Old City is that there is no sewage infrastructure, meaning that when you excavate, you discover that the arches are warped, because the sewage is undermining the foundations,” he says.

Disconnecting the Palestinians

As in the Muslim Quarter, Silwan is being excavated via tunnels; standard methods cannot be used because of the extant Palestinian homes. Since the mid-1990s, and to an even greater degree in the past decade, Antiquities Authority investigators have been working on a large-scale excavation in the City of David, funded by the Elad Foundation.

Elad was established by David Be’eri with the declared objective of “Judaizing” Silwan, and in 1996, the organization took over management of the City of David national park from the Israel Nature and Parks Authority.

Elad’s fund-raising has enabled the excavations to expand immensely. A significant part of a typical visit to the City of David is now below ground. In some of the passageways, visitors march in the footsteps of ancient Jerusalem’s waterworks employees; other tunnels were excavated by Charles Warren; yet more were cleared out only in the past 20 years.

Being below ground helps detach the site from Silwan and reinforces Jewish control, say Elad’s opponents on the left. “The story about the tunnels is a means of justifying Israeli settlement in Silwan and the Muslim Quarter. The tunnels form a Jewish-Israeli underground city and transform those who control it – the settlers – into residents, and those who are disconnected from it – the Palestinians – into temporary outsiders,” writes archaeologist Yoni Mizrachi in a report on below-ground Jerusalem. Mizrachi, one of the founders of the nonprofit group Emek Shaveh, compiled a critical report, whose details are being published here for the first time, about the underground spaces in the Old City and Silwan.

The Palestinian residents feel that they don’t know what is going on under their homes. A few cases of craters appearing in the floor or cracks forming in walls were attributed to the excavations, sparking rage. In the past six months, Silwan has been on the verge of a “third intifada,” complete with nearly daily violence between youths and security forces. The tunnels are surely not helping keep the quiet.

The excavation of the sewage canal that links the City of David with the Western Wall began in 2003. In many respects, this tunnel became Elad’s flagship project. If, as Elad officials hope, the public can walk the length of the tunnel, it would give the national park a major boost, connecting it directly to the Western Wall plaza. The excavators say this is not an excavation in the ordinary sense, but rather a matter of “clearing” sewage from a Herodian tunnel that was largely exposed by Warren and his successors.

This explanation did not ease the misgivings of Silwan residents, who petitioned the High Court of Justice against the excavation, which delayed it by two years. But in September 2009, High Court justices authorized work to continue.

In her opinion, Justice Edna Arbel stated, “The importance of investigating the past does not negate the interests of the present. It cannot tread upon the right of residents of the excavation area to live in tranquility.” Nonetheless, she ruled that the excavation was legal and archaeologically important, and was not causing damage to the buildings above it. This decision enabled the Antiquities Authority to announce by late January 2011 that the tunnel had been cleared all the way up to the Western Wall.

While excavating the tunnel, archaeologists found coins and pottery from the period of the Great Revolt, thus confirming the report from Josephus about the rebels’ escape into the sewers as the city was being destroyed. Human bones were also found, although they had apparently been swept there over the years. In any event, there is no way to determine how old they were or whether they were connected to the late Second Temple era, due to the law forbidding examining human remains found in archaeological excavations.

distorting archaeology?

Since the excavation of the tunnel to the Western Wall plaza, the Antiquities Authority’s home page (in Hebrew ) has featured a prominent link to a short promotional film about it.

“I am now walking up the first step, prior to ascending to the Temple,” says archaeologist Eli Shukron in the film. Shukron and Dr. Ronny Reich were in charge of the excavation. “From here, people started to ascend to the Temple. A gradual ascent; you don’t run to the Temple, you walk up slowly. I’m very excited; this is the first time that I am touching the destruction here.”

“An archaeologist should not work based on emotions,” says Prof. Yoram Tsafrir, one of Israel’s most prominent archaeologists and a critic of the excavations. “He must uphold professional standards. He has to be like a surgeon, and behave professionally. They are saying they’re ‘only’ clearing debris, but debris is important, too, and should be removed from top to bottom, not chipped away from the side, since it mirrors what happened there,” says Tsafrir.

He also objects to the massive use of steel necessary to stabilize the tunnels. “It looks like defensive fortifications, like the Bar-Lev Line. In such a case, you’re best not excavating. Someday there may be peace here, and the Palestinian residents will agree to a proper excavation. It is unacceptable that the political needs of Elad dictate the pace.”

The scholarly objection to digging laterally through the tunnels is that this is a faulty, unscientific way of excavating, one that typified archaeology a century or more ago; it makes it impossible to find, date and document all the archaeological findings. Another objection concerns the fact that most of the excavations are cautiously retracing the steps of Warren and his successors, meaning they are providing only marginal added value. Critics also say the tunnels conceal the excavation from the public.

The tunnels distort archaeology in favor of the Jewish narrative, say critics, who argue that the excavators are skipping over the archaeological strata of other cultures, primarily Muslim and Christian, to get straight to the glory days of the Jewish reign in Jerusalem. This serves the political interests of the sponsors, of course.

“The Antiquities Authority and those whose bidding it is doing, the Elad Foundation settlers, the Western Wall Heritage Foundation and others, are conspiring to superficialize both Jewish history and the history of Jerusalem,” states Mizrachi in the report. “All of Judaism is compressed into the brief periods of Jewish-Israeli sovereignty in Jerusalem, while ignoring any layer of history that does not involve political sovereignty and ritual sacrifice. The history of Jerusalem is losing its infrastructure, including the period prior to the kingdom of Israel and everything that happened afterward, when Jerusalem became a Christian holy city and the Muslim al-Quds.”

Archaeologist Dr. Ronny Reich is considered the father of the new tunnels. He and Shukron conducted most of the excavations. Reich was recently appointed chairman of the archaeological advisory council, the supreme professional body of the Antiquities Authority, after which he announced he was retiring from Jerusalem excavations after 40 years.

Reich himself wrote in an introductory archaeology textbook that the tunnel excavation method is outdated. Nevertheless, he rejects the criticism of his work in the City of David. One must differentiate between genuine archaeological excavations and clearing out debris from an ancient sewer, he says. This is not a vertical excavation, but rather the uncovering of an ancient structure. As for vertical excavations, such as the stepped street – the street that was built above the sewer system, now cleared and part of the City of David national park – Reich explains that given the choice between what he gave up by adopting this type of excavation style, and what he discovered by virtue of employing the method, he has no doubt that the excavation was highly valuable.

“Despite the allegations, we didn’t excavate haphazardly,” he says. “We decided to do without what we would have found by excavating garbage and mudslides in favor of discoveries whose added value to Jerusalem’s history is immeasurably larger. We found that the entire slope is covered with 8 to 10 meters of garbage. The archaeologists who worked here in the past excavated with a bulldozer. We carried out a meticulous excavation; we sampled the dirt. No one has ever done such a scrupulous charting, even those who are criticizing us.”

Reich admits that it is not ideal to have a private foundation with a pointed political ideology underwriting the excavation. It would be better if the state itself were to fund it, he says. Yet Elad has never interfered with the scientific work, says Reich.

“I’m not motivated by politics; I myself am on the left. I’m motivated by the archaeological understanding of Jerusalem. The excavation is sponsored by the State of Israel. What can I do if it is easy to raise funds for excavations in Jerusalem?”

Reich is also proud of his part in encouraging tourism in the area. “When we started, 15 years ago, there may have been a thousand tourists a year . Now there are 450,000 and that is solely because of the archaeology. There is nothing else. So what am I being accused of, heping develop tourism in Jerusalem?”

Reich also rejects the criticism regarding secret excavations. “What can I say? The excavation isn’t always visible. There are safety issues. Elsewhere in the world you sometimes have to wait 20 years to see the sites,” he explains.

Dahari also defends the Elad-financed vertical excavations. “If you want me to say that I love the fact that Elad is financing the project, I can’t. But Elad is like every other developer; it is the landlord, but the excavation is conducted scientifically. We have to be judged on the basis of whether we are doing good scientific work. We don’t engage in politics. Of course, I would be happy if people weren’t living in the City of David, as in Tel Hatzor or Tel Megiddo, and it were possible to excavate the ordinary way. Excavating in tunnels is not the best way, but there is no arguing that this is a significant site for the history of Jerusalem, and we have no alternative,” he says.

It was the Antiquities Authority, Reich says, that stopped his work on the ancient street, after he came across a Byzantine structure and concerns arose that the excavation might destroy it.

Therefore, the excavators dropped down below the street level into the sewer, which enabled them to break through toward the Western Wall, says Dahari.

“I don’t see the excavations as a political act,” he says, “but because this is Jerusalem, it is hard to differentiate between scientific significance and politics. Just consider how people would respond to the discovery of such a sewer system in any other historic city.”

Discoveries of import ‘for all human civilization’

Haaretz received the following statement from Elad in response to questions about its excavations in Jerusalem. “The excavations in the City of David have been conducted for over 150 years by dozens of delegations from Israel and the world over. The excavations funded by Elad are being carried out by leading archaeologists on behalf of the Israel Antiquities Authority. They are the ones who decide on the work methods at the site, and at each and every spot the digging is done according to their scientific and professional instructions.

“Everyone is aware that those who are opposing the excavations in Jerusalem today are doing so for clear political reasons. The courts, headed by the High Court of Justice, repeatedly reject various and sundry attempts to stop the development in the City of David. Apparently the courts have also realized that the serial complainers are motivated by non-practical considerations.

“Over the years many of the residents of Silwan worked at the digs, and were an inseparable part of the tremendous project in the national park in which they live. During the past two years elements from the extreme left – from Israel and all over the world – have linked up with ultranationalist and extreme-Islamic players. Arab workers began to receive threats, and Arab and Jewish residents began to suffer from harassment and violence. Unfortunately most of the Arab workers left in fear for their lives, and because one of them was beaten and his car set on fire. As a result some of the residents now feel unconnected to what is being done on the site. Evildoers are exploiting that in order to feed them biased and misleading information.

“Recently a drainage canal from the Second Temple period was exposed. This is one of the most important and exciting archaeological discoveries of recent years, not only for the Jewish people but for all of human civilization. It is clear to every thinking person that the route of the canal was determined 2,000 years ago, and there is no connection between its discovery and attempts to connect it, indecently, to political viewpoints.”

Please note: These stories are located outside of Prophecy Today’s website. Prophecy Today is not responsible for their content and does not necessarily agree with the views expressed therein. These articles are provided for your information.

Jewish, Not Arab, Roots in Judea and Samaria

By: Hillel Fendel – Arutz Sheva

U.S. Pres. Barack Obama’s demand that Israel not settle Jews in the Biblical areas of Judea and Samaria ignores thoroughly-documented Jewish roots in the Land of Israel, and in Judea/Samaria in particular.

Yoram Ettinger, a former liaison for Congressional affairs in Israel’s Washington embassy, lists in the latest of his periodic position papers some of the evidence showing that Judea and Samaria has Jewish, not Arab, roots.

Area Always Known as “Judea and Samaria”
Ettinger negates Obama’s claim – enunciated during his June 4, 2009 speech at Cairo University – that “the aspiration for a Jewish homeland is rooted in” the Holocaust. For one thing, Ettinger notes, many world-renowned travelers, historians and archeologists of earlier centuries refer to “Judea and Samaria,” while the term “West Bank” was coined only 60 years ago.

Jordan gave the region this name when it occupied it after Israel’s War of Independence. No nation on earth other than Britain and Pakistan recognized Jordan’s claim to Judea and Samaria.

Among the travelers, historians and archeologists who referred to Judea and Samaria are H. B. Tristram (The Land of Israel, 1865); Mark Twain (Innocents Abroad, 1867); R.A. MacAlister and Masterman (“Palestine Exploration Fund Quarterly”); A.P. Stanley (Sinai and Palestine, 1887); E. Robinson and E. Smith (Biblical Researches in Palestine, 1841); C.W. Van de Velde (Peise durch Syrien und Paletsinea, 1861); and Felix Bovet (Voyage en Taire Sainte, 1864). Even the Encyclopedia Britannica, as well as official British and Ottoman records until 1950, used the term Judea and Samaria, and not the West Bank.

Land Was Named “Palestine” in Order to Erase Jewish Presence
Ettinger goes even further back, and says that the name “Palestine”, which had nothing to do with a people as non by that name existed,  was given to the Holy Land for the sole purpose of erasing the previous name of the country – Judea – from human memory. The Romans, whose plan this was, similarly sought to extinguish Jewish presence in Jerusalem by renaming it Aelia Capitolina.

Arabs Came in the Last 150 Years
When speaking of “Palestinian national rights,” it must be similarly kept in mind, Ettinger notes, that most Arabs residing today in Israel – anywhere between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean – have their origin in a massive 19th-20th century migration from Egypt, Syria, Lebanon and other Moslem countries. They adopted the title “Palestinian”, which gives the impression of ancient ties to the land.

Town Names Betray Their True History
Finally, Ettinger says that almost all Arab localities in Judea and Samaria have retained Biblical Jewish names, thus reaffirming their Jewish roots. Examples include the following:

    Anata is Biblical (and contemporary) Anatot, the dwelling of the Prophet Jeremiah.
    Batir is Biblical (and contemporary) Beitar, the headquarters of Bar Kochba, the leader of the Great Rebellion against the Roman Empire, which was suppressed in 135CE.
    Beit-Hur is the biblical (and contemporary) Beit Horon, site of Judah the Maccabee’s victory over the Assyrians.
    Beitin is biblical (and contemporary) Beit El, a site of the Holy Ark and Prophet Samuel’s court.
    Bethlehem is mentioned 44 times in the Bible and is the birth place of King David.
    Beit Jalla is biblical (and contemporary) Gilo, in southern Jerusalem, where Sennacherib set his camp, while besieging Jerusalem.
    El-Jib is biblical (and contemporary) Gibeon, Joshua’s battleground known for his command to stop the sun and moon (Joshua 10:12).
    Jaba’ is the biblical (and contemporary) Geva, site of King Saul’s son Jonathan’s victory over the Philistines.
    Jenin is the biblical (and contemporary) Ein Ganim, a Levite town within the tribe of Issachar.
    Mukhmas is biblical (and contemporary) Mikhmash, residence of Jonathan the Maccabee and site of King Saul’s fortress.
    Seilun is biblical (and contemporary) Shilo, a site of Joshua’s tabernacle and the Holy Ark and Samuel’s youth.
    Tequa is biblical (and contemporary) Tekoa, hometown of the Prophet Amos.

Arabs Never Wanted Palestinian State
In another of his posts, Ettinger has negated the US government position that a Palestinian state is the crux of the Arab-Israeli conflict and that its formation would resolve the situation. He cites proofs from recent history showing that Arab antipathy to Israel not only predates Palestinian concerns, but often sidesteps such interests.

Israel’s war for its independence in 1948-9, for instance, was conducted by the Arab countries at the expense of local aspirations. Though Egypt conquered Gaza, and Jordan took Judea and Samaria, and Syria claimed the Golan, in none of these areas was a  government of local Arabs allowed.

When Egypt conquered the Gaza Strip, it proceeded to prohibit “Palestinian” national activities and expel its leadership. Not only did Jordan not grant locals independence to Judea and Samaria, it actually annexed these areas to its own country. When Syria occupied and annexed the Hama area in the Golan Heights, the Arab League outlawed a provisional “Palestinian” government there.

In short, it can be concluded that Arab “rights” to a state in Judea and Samaria are historically weak and were long ignored by other Arab countries.

Please note: These stories are located outside of Prophecy Today’s website. Prophecy Today is not responsible for their content and does not necessarily agree with the views expressed therein. These articles are provided for your information.

The New Cold War

By: Bill Spindle and Margaret Coker – The Wall Street Journal

For three months, the Arab world has been awash in protests and demonstrations. It’s being called an Arab Spring, harking back to the Prague Spring of 1968.

But comparison to the short-lived flowering of protests 40 years ago in Czechoslovakia is turning out to be apt in another way. For all the attention the Mideast protests have received, their most notable impact on the region thus far hasn’t been an upswell of democracy. It has been a dramatic spike in tensions between two geopolitical titans, Iran and Saudi Arabia.

This new Middle East cold war comes complete with its own spy-versus-spy intrigues, disinformation campaigns, shadowy proxy forces, supercharged state rhetoric—and very high stakes.

“The cold war is a reality,” says one senior Saudi official. “Iran is looking to expand its influence. This instability over the last few months means that we don’t have the luxury of sitting back and watching events unfold.”

On March 14, the Saudis rolled tanks and troops across a causeway into the island kingdom of Bahrain. The ruling family there, long a close Saudi ally, appealed for assistance in dealing with increasingly large protests.

Iran soon rattled its own sabers. Iranian parliamentarian Ruhollah Hosseinian urged the Islamic Republic to put its military forces on high alert, reported the website for Press TV, the state-run English-language news agency. “I believe that the Iranian government should not be reluctant to prepare the country’s military forces at a time that Saudi Arabia has dispatched its troops to Bahrain,” he was quoted as saying.

The intensified wrangling across the Persian—or, as the Saudis insist, the Arabian—Gulf has strained relations between the U.S. and important Arab allies, helped to push oil prices into triple digits and tempered U.S. support for some of the popular democracy movements in the Arab world. Indeed, the first casualty of the Gulf showdown has been two of the liveliest democracy movements in countries right on the fault line, Bahrain and the turbulent frontier state of Yemen.

But many worry that the toll could wind up much worse if tensions continue to ratchet upward. They see a heightened possibility of actual military conflict in the Gulf, where one-fifth of the world’s oil supplies traverse the shipping lanes between Saudi Arabia and Iran. Growing hostility between the two countries could make it more difficult for the U.S. to exit smoothly from Iraq this year, as planned. And, perhaps most dire, it could exacerbate what many fear is a looming nuclear arms race in the region.

Iran has long pursued a nuclear program that it insists is solely for the peaceful purpose of generating power, but which the U.S. and Saudi Arabia believe is really aimed at producing a nuclear weapon. At a recent security conference, Prince Turki al Faisal, a former head of the Saudi intelligence service and ambassador to the U.K. and the U.S., pointedly suggested that if Iran were to develop a weapon, Saudi Arabia might well feel pressure to develop one of its own.

The Saudis currently rely on the U.S. nuclear umbrella and on antimissile defense systems deployed throughout the Persian Gulf region. The defense systems are intended to intercept Iranian ballistic missiles that could be used to deliver nuclear warheads. Yet even Saudis who virulently hate Iran have a hard time believing that the Islamic Republic would launch a nuclear attack against the birthplace of their prophet and their religion. The Iranian leadership says it has renounced the use of nuclear weapons.

How a string of hopeful popular protests has brought about a showdown of regional superpowers is a tale as convoluted as the alliances and history of the region. It shows how easily the old Middle East, marked by sectarian divides and ingrained rivalries, can re-emerge and stop change in its tracks.

There has long been bad blood between the Saudis and Iran. Saudi Arabia is a Sunni Muslim kingdom of ethnic Arabs, Iran a Shiite Islamic republic populated by ethnic Persians. Shiites first broke with Sunnis over the line of succession after the death of the Prophet Mohammed in the year 632; Sunnis have regarded them as a heretical sect ever since. Arabs and Persians, along with many others, have vied for the land and resources of the Middle East for almost as long.

These days, geopolitics also plays a role. The two sides have assembled loosely allied camps. Iran holds in its sway Syria and the militant Arab groups Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in the Palestinian territories; in the Saudi sphere are the Sunni Muslim-led Gulf monarchies, Egypt, Morocco and the other main Palestinian faction, Fatah. The Saudi camp is pro-Western and leans toward tolerating the state of Israel. The Iranian grouping thrives on its reputation in the region as a scrappy “resistance” camp, defiantly opposed to the West and Israel.

For decades, the two sides have carried out a complicated game of moves and countermoves. With few exceptions, both prefer to work through proxy politicians and covertly funded militias, as they famously did during the long Lebanese civil war in the late 1970s and 1980s, when Iran helped to hatch Hezbollah among the Shiites while the Saudis backed Sunni militias.

But the maneuvering extends far beyond the well-worn battleground of Lebanon. Two years ago, the Saudis discovered Iranian efforts to spread Shiite doctrine in Morocco and to use some mosques in the country as a base for similar efforts in sub-Saharan Africa. After Saudi emissaries delivered this information to King Mohammed VI, Morocco angrily severed diplomatic relations with Iran, according to Saudi officials and cables obtained by the organization WikiLeaks.

As far away as Indonesia, the world’s most populous Muslim country, the Saudis have watched warily as Iranian clerics have expanded their activities—and they have responded with large-scale religious programs of their own there.

The 1979 Iranian revolution was a major eruption that still looms large in the psyches of both nations. It explicitly married Shiite religious zeal with historic Persian ambitions and also played on sharply anti-Western sentiments in the region.

Iran’s clerical regime worked to spread the revolution across the Middle East; Saudi Arabia and its allies worried that it would succeed. For a time it looked like it might. There were large demonstrations and purported antigovernment plots in Saudi Arabia’s Eastern Province, which has a large population of Shiite Muslim Arabs, and in Bahrain, where Shiites are a distinct majority and Iran had claimed sovereignty as recently as 1970.

The protests that began this past January in Tunisia had nothing to do with any of this. They started when a struggling street vendor in that country’s desolate heartland publicly set himself on fire after a local officer cited his cart for a municipal violation. His frustration, multiplied hundreds of thousands times, boiled over in a month of demonstrations against Tunisian President Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali. To the amazement of the Arab world, Mr. Ben Ali fled the country when the military declined to back him by brutally putting down the demonstrations.

Spurred on by televised images and YouTube videos from Tunisia, protests broke out across much of the rest of the Arab world. Within weeks, millions were on the streets in Egypt and Hosni Mubarak was gone, shown the door in part by his longtime backer, the U.S. government. The Obama administration was captivated by this spontaneous outbreak of democratic demands and at first welcomed it with few reservations.

In Riyadh, Saudi officials watched with alarm. They became furious when the Obama administration betrayed, to Saudi thinking, a longtime ally in Mr. Mubarak and urged him to step down in the face of the street demonstrations.

The Egyptian leader represented a key bulwark in what Riyadh perceives as a great Sunni wall standing against an expansionist Iran. One part of that barrier had already crumbled in 2003 when the U.S. invasion of Iraq toppled Saddam Hussein. Losing Mr. Mubarak means that the Saudis now see themselves as the last Sunni giant left in the region.

The Saudis were further agitated when the protests crept closer to their own borders. In Yemen, on their southern flank, young protesters were suddenly rallying thousands, and then tens of thousands, of their fellow citizens to demand the ouster of the regime, led by President Ali Abdullah Saleh and his family for 43 years.

Meanwhile, across a narrow expanse of water on Saudi Arabia’s northeast border, protesters in Bahrain rallied in the hundreds of thousands around a central roundabout in Manama. Most Bahraini demonstrators were Shiites with a long list of grievances over widespread economic and political discrimination. But some Sunnis also participated, demanding more say in a government dominated by the Al-Khalifa family since the 18th century.

Protesters deny that their goals had anything to do with gaining sectarian advantage. Independent observers, including the U.S. government, saw no sign that the protests were anything but homegrown movements arising from local problems. During a visit to Bahrain, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates urged the government to adopt genuine political and social reform.

But to the Saudis, the rising disorder on their borders fit a pattern of Iranian meddling. A year earlier, they were convinced that Iran was stoking a rebellion in Yemen’s north among a Shiite-dominated rebel group known as the Houthis. Few outside observers saw extensive ties between Iran and the Houthis. But the Saudis nonetheless viewed the nationwide Yemeni protests in that context.

In Bahrain, where many Shiites openly nurture cultural and religious ties to Iran, the Saudis saw the case as even more open-and-shut. To their ears, these suspicions were confirmed when many Bahraini protesters moved beyond demands for greater political and economic participation and began demanding a constitutional monarchy or even the outright ouster of the Al-Khalifa family. Many protesters saw these as reasonable responses to years of empty promises to give the majority Shiites a real share of power—and to the vicious government crackdown that had killed seven demonstrators to that point.

But to the Saudis, not to mention Bahrain’s ruling family, even the occasional appearance of posters of Lebanese Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah amid crowds of Shiite protesters pumping their fists and chanting demands for regime change was too much. They saw how Iran’s influence has grown in Shiite-majority Iraq, along their northern border, and they were not prepared to let that happen again.

As for the U.S., the Saudis saw calls for reform as another in a string of disappointments and outright betrayals. Back in 2002, the U.S. had declined to get behind an offer from King Abdullah (then Crown Prince) to rally widespread Arab recognition for Israel in exchange for Israel’s acceptance of borders that existed before the 1967 Six Day War—a potentially historic deal, as far as the Saudis were concerned. And earlier this year, President Obama declined a personal appeal from the king to withhold the U.S. veto at the United Nations from a resolution condemning continued Israeli settlement building in Jerusalem and the West Bank.

The Saudis believe that solving the issue of Palestinian statehood will deny Iran a key pillar in its regional expansionist strategy—and thus bring a win for the forces of Sunni moderation that Riyadh wants to lead.

Iran, too, was starting to see a compelling case for action as one Western-backed regime after another appeared to be on the ropes. It ramped up its rhetoric and began using state media and the regional Arab-language satellite channels it supports to depict the pro-democracy uprisings as latter-day manifestations of its own revolution in 1979. “Today the events in the North of Africa, Egypt, Tunisia and certain other countries have another sense for the Iranian nation.… This is the same as ‘Islamic Awakening,’ which is the result of the victory of the big revolution of the Iranian nation,” said Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Iran also broadcast speeches by Hezbollah’s leader into Bahrain, cheering the protesters on. Bahraini officials say that Iran went further, providing money and even some weapons to some of the more extreme opposition members. Protest leaders vehemently deny any operational or political links to Iran, and foreign diplomats in Bahrain say that they have seen little evidence of it.

March 14 was the critical turning point. At the invitation of Bahrain, Saudi armed vehicles and tanks poured across the causeway that separates the two countries. They came representing a special contingent under the aegis of the Gulf Cooperation Council, a league of Sunni-led Gulf states, but the Saudis were the major driver. The Saudis publicly announced that 1,000 troops had entered Bahrain, but privately they concede that the actual number is considerably higher.

If both Iran and Saudi Arabia see themselves responding to external threats and opportunities, some analysts, diplomats and democracy advocates see a more complicated picture. They say that the ramping up of regional tensions has another source: fear of democracy itself.

Long before protests ousted rulers in the Arab world, Iran battled massive street protests of its own for more than two years. It managed to control them, and their calls for more representative government or outright regime change, with massive, often deadly, force. Yet even as the government spun the Arab protests as Iranian inspired, Iran’s Green Revolution opposition movement managed to use them to boost their own fortunes, staging several of their best-attended rallies in more than a year.

Saudi Arabia has kept a wary eye on its own population of Shiites, who live in the oil-rich Eastern Province directly across the water from Bahrain. Despite a small but energetic activist community, Saudi Arabia has largely avoided protests during the Arab Spring, something that the leadership credits to the popularity and conciliatory efforts of King Abdullah. But there were a smattering of small protests and a few clashes with security services in the Eastern Province.

The regional troubles have come at a tricky moment domestically for Saudi Arabia. King Abdullah, thought to be 86 years old, was hospitalized in New York, receiving treatment for a back injury, when the Arab protests began. The Crown Prince, Sultan bin Abdul Aziz, is only slightly younger and is already thought to be too infirm to become king. Third in line, Prince Nayaf bin Abdul Aziz, is around 76 years old.

Viewing any move toward more democracy at home—at least on anyone’s terms but their own—as a threat to their regimes, the regional superpowers have changed the discussion, observers say. The same goes, they say, for the Bahraini government. “The problem is a political one, but sectarianism is a winning card for them,” says Jasim Husain, a senior member of the Wefaq Shiite opposition party in Bahrain.

Since March 14, the regional cold war has escalated. Kuwait expelled several Iranian diplomats after it discovered and dismantled, it says, an Iranian spy cell that was casing critical infrastructure and U.S. military installations. Iran and Saudi Arabia are, uncharacteristically and to some observers alarmingly, tossing direct threats at each other across the Gulf. The Saudis, who recently negotiated a $60 billion arms deal with the U.S. (the largest in American history), say that later this year they will increase the size of their armed forces and National Guard.

And recently the U.S. has joined in warning Iran after a trip to the region by Defense Secretary Gates to patch up strained relations with Arab monarchies, especially Saudi Arabia. Minutes after meeting with King Abdullah, Mr. Gates told reporters that he had seen “evidence” of Iranian interference in Bahrain. That was followed by reports from U.S. officials that Iranian leaders were exploring ways to support Bahraini and Yemeni opposition parties, based on communications intercepted by U.S. spy agencies.

Saudi officials say that despite the current friction in the U.S.-Saudi relationship, they won’t break out of the traditional security arrangement with Washington, which is based on the understanding that the kingdom works to stabilize global oil prices while the White House protects the ruling family’s dynasty. Washington has pulled back from blanket support for democracy efforts in the region. That has bruised America’s credibility on democracy and reform, but it has helped to shore up the relationship with Riyadh.

The deployment into Bahrain was also the beginning of what Saudi officials describe as their efforts to directly parry Iran. While Saudi troops guard critical oil and security facilities in their neighbor’s land, the Bahraini government has launched a sweeping and often brutal crackdown on demonstrators.

It forced out the editor of the country’s only independent newspaper. More than 400 demonstrators have been arrested without charges, many in violent night raids on Shiite villages. Four have died in custody, according to human-rights groups. Three members of the national soccer team, all Shiites, have also been arrested. As many as 1,000 demonstrators who missed work during the protests have been fired from state companies.

In Shiite villages such as Saar, where a 14-year-old boy was killed by police and a 56-year-old man disappeared overnight and showed up dead the next morning, protests have continued sporadically. But in the financial district and areas where Sunni Muslims predominate, the demonstrations have ended.

In Yemen, the Saudis, also working under a Gulf Cooperation Council umbrella, have taken control of the political negotiations to transfer power out of the hands of President Ali Abdullah Saleh, according to two Saudi officials.

“We stayed out of the process for a while, but now we have to intervene,” said one official. “It’s that, or watch our southern flank disintegrate into chaos.”

Corrections & Amplifications

King Mohammed VI is the ruler of Morocco. An earlier version of this article incorrectly stated that the ruler was Hassan II.

Please note: These stories are located outside of Prophecy Today’s website. Prophecy Today is not responsible for their content and does not necessarily agree with the views expressed therein. These articles are provided for your information.

FBI Counter-Terror Official: Al Qaeda ‘Thrives’ After Dictators Fall

By: Lee Farran – ABC News Internet Ventures

On the same day reports emerged of a new al Qaeda video that praised the revolutions sweeping the Arab world, one the U.S.’s top counter-terror officials warned the terror organization “thrives” in the political unrest that follows.

“The governments of Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and Yemen have drastically changed in the last six months,” FBI Assistant Director of Counter-Terrorism Mark Giuliano said Thursday. “They are now led by transitional or interim governments, military regimes, or democratic alliances with no established track record on counterterrorism efforts. Al Qaeda thrives in such conditions and countries of weak governance and political instability — countries in which governments may be sympathetic to their campaign of violence.”

Giuliano made the comments at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy just hours before the first reports emerged of the new al Qaeda video, which features separate appearances by al Qaeda’s number two commander, Ayman al-Zawahiri, and American-born key commander in al Qaeda in the Arabian Penninsula (AQAP), Anwar al-Awlaki, each praising the recent uprisings. In the hour-plus long video, al-Zawahiri orders Muslims in Egypt to create an Islamic state there and calls for the Arab armies of the Middle East to intervene in Libya to oust dictator Moammar Gadhafi before “Western aid… turns into invasions.”

If Guiliano is wary of Islamic militant influence in the uprisings, especially in Libya, he’s is not alone. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton expressed her fears the revolt in Libya would be exploited by terror groups at a Senate Foreign Relations Committee meeting in early March.

When President Obama authorized the U.S. government to provide covert support for the Libyan rebels later that month, the deal did not include arms provisions.

“We don’t know as much as we would like to know and as much as we expect we will know,” Clinton said at the time of the rebels the U.S. was supporting.

Eastern Libyan towns now associated with the rebel cause were just a few years before considered by the U.S. as havens for al Qaeda fighters, according to government documents.

Read: In Libya, Rebel Strongholds Now, al Qaeda Wellspring Then

Still, one U.S. official saw the new al Qaeda video as just another attempt in al Qaeda’s recent, belated efforts to spin the spreading Arab-world protests in their favor.

“Al Qaeda must be pretty damn frustrated these days,” the official told ABC News Thursday in response to the video. “Calls for democracy in the Middle East and North Africa don’t exactly square with their extremist views. They’ve been on the wrong side of history — and humanity — for years.”

Whether their spin on the Arab revolutions is working or not, Guiliano said al Qaeda’s ability to reach millions around the globe through such video propaganda and al-Qaeda’s English-language online magazine “Inspire” — which dedicated its whole last issue to supporting the revolutions — is a serious threat to U.S. security.

In fact, Guiliano said that al-Awlaki’s AQAP, which produces “Inspire” in addition to online videos, has become “the most serious threat to the homeland today” — even more so than Osama Bin Laden’s “core” al Qaeda group. That’s in part due to their media savvy, he said.

“AQAP… understands and expertly exploits social media to share their knowledge with others of similar mindsets,” he said. “They realize the importance and value of reaching English speaking audiences and are using the group’s marketing skills to inspire individuals to attack within the homeland.”

One U.S. official told ABC News that by having al-Awlaki’s message appear with that of senior al Qaeda leadership in the new video — which is unprecedented — the “core” al Qaeda group may be using al-Awlaki to reach a “more Western audience.”

Please note: These stories are located outside of Prophecy Today’s website. Prophecy Today is not responsible for their content and does not necessarily agree with the views expressed therein. These articles are provided for your information.

Time for the U.S. to Quit NATO

By: Robert Maginnis – Human Events

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s (NATO) performance in Libya provides yet another reason why America should quit the 61-year-old collective defense alliance.

Two weeks ago, America relinquished the lead role in Operation Odyssey Dawn to NATO.  The U.S., which led the operation’s initial decapitation phase to protect the Libyan people against systematic attacks, has more pressing priorities in East Asia and the Middle East.  Besides, Libya is a European concern, not an American problem.

NATO’s performance hasn’t been impressive.  The alliance’s mission conduct is marked by incompatible goals and political and operational infighting, and most members are too stingy with their militaries.  The unintended consequence is to encourage Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi, who is playing NATO’s fecklessness for a stalemate.

U.S. Adm. James Stavridis, the senior NATO military commander, said the alliance needs to increase its arsenal of sophisticated aircraft capable of launching precise attacks.  Only 14 of the alliance’s 28 members are actively participating in the operation, and just six of those are striking targets on the ground in Libya.  Meanwhile, the U.S. supports the operation with 46 aircraft for command-and-control, electronic warfare, and refueling missions, which accounts for half of the operation’s overall costs.

NATO’s lackluster performance in Libya demonstrates that the alliance has outlived its usefulness.  Consider five more reasons America should quit the alliance.

First, America pays disproportionately for Europe’s security, while the Europeans are on a defense-spending holiday.  The U.S. contributes 25% of NATO’s operating budget and spends more than twice the percentage of its gross domestic product on defense [4.7%], compared with all but one of its NATO partners [Greece at 4%].  Economic powers France and Germany do not reach NATO’s 2% threshold for security spending.

The majority of NATO-related expenses are incurred by members from the deployment of their armed forces.  Not surprisingly, the U.S. leads NATO deployment expenditures because it has the largest and only expeditionary force.

NATO also relies on America’s strategic umbrella—its nuclear arsenal with help from Great Britain and France.  But NATO partners such as Germany pay nothing for this strategic umbrella.  In fact, Berlin doesn’t even intend to invest in new aircraft that have the capability to deliver atomic weapons, a change from the Cold War era.

Second, the lack of defense investment results in ill-prepared NATO militaries.  Most NATO forces lack sufficient helicopters and unmanned aerial vehicles for operations in Afghanistan, and few European troops are equipped and trained for modern warfare.  Only a couple European partners have an expeditionary capability to deploy even 30% of their forces, and only Great Britain approaches true combat interoperability with U.S. forces.   Interoperability is critical to coalition operations.

Third, NATO is irrelevant when dealing with modern security threats.  The alliance lacks fundamental technologies for fighting terrorism, rebuilding failed states, and fighting counterinsurgencies.  These deficiencies are significant given that Europe’s backyard is becoming a less predictable and a more perilous place conducive to asymmetric threats, rogue states with weapons of mass destruction such as Iran, threats to global supply lines, and cyber attacks on critical infrastructure.

Fourth, NATO is not a promising global partner.  NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen doesn’t intend for the alliance to become a tool of America’s global role, which raises the question of its relevance for America’s long-term security interests.

Afghanistan has become a crucible for the alliance’s global partnering, and this isn’t working out.  America had to drag NATO into the Afghanistan war, which exposed the alliance’s “two-tiered” nature, according to U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates.  The secretary said, “You have some allies willing to fight and die to protect people’s security, and others who are not.  It puts a cloud over the future of the alliance if this is to endure and perhaps get even worse.”

Specifically, Gates is frustrated with NATO’s reluctance to put forces in harm’s way in Afghanistan.  Most of the NATO nations contributing troops impose caveats that dictate strict rules of engagement, which severely limits their usefulness.  That puts a heavy burden on the few nations such as the U.S. willing to fight.

Finally, Europe is no longer key to American security because the Soviet Union, our Cold War nemesis, is gone, and in its place is the Russian Federation, which poses far less of a strategic threat.  That is why the U.S. is shifting its resources from Europe to the Middle East and Asia.  Therefore a European-based alliance with no interest in other regions has a diminishing interest for Washington .

Last week, Gates warned that the U.S. military would have to scale back its overseas commitments and shrink to meet President Barack Obama’s proposed defense cuts.  That is why America’s remaining European-based forces and investments in NATO’s budget and operations should be high on Gates’ list of potential defense cuts.

These issues justify Washington’s reconsideration of our NATO membership.  If NATO does not transform into a multilateral security alliance that addresses 21st century challenges with a global expeditionary capability, the U.S. should quit.

Elizabeth Sherwood Randall, director for European affairs at the U.S. National Security Council, suggests NATO needs to reform to be remain relevant.  She said, “While allied leaders haggle over commitments to the fight in Afghanistan [and elsewhere], NATO needs to keep its eyes on the strategic prize: an alliance that can thrive in an increasingly messy world.”

The best way for NATO to thrive in this “messy world” is to become a multilateral alliance with a portfolio that includes missile defense against Iran, cyber security, nation-building in failed states, and much more.  Alternatively, the U.S. should invest in partners willing to play a global role, and develop these partnerships with countries such as India, Brazil, and Australia, and the few Europeans with credible military capabilities and global willingness.

NATO either develops a credible 21st century global capability and the willingness to fight for mutual security interests, or the U.S. should prioritize Europe below other regions by quitting NATO and investing our dwindling defense dollars in willing partners.

Please note: These stories are located outside of Prophecy Today’s website. Prophecy Today is not responsible for their content and does not necessarily agree with the views expressed therein. These articles are provided for your information.

Palestinians hail international ‘birth certificate’ of statehood

By: –

Donor countries meeting in Brussels recognized on Wednesday that the “Palestinian Authority (PA) is above the threshold of a functioning state” – an assessment immediately hailed as a “birth certificate” for a Palestinian state by PA premier Salam Fayyad.

In recent months, the World Bank, the United Nations and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) have certified that Fayyad’s state-building plans are on track for completion in mid-2011.

“We can today conclude that the Palestinian Authority is above the threshold of a functioning state,” Norwegian Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Store said after chairing a meeting of the Ad Hoc Liason Committee, a panel of donor countries to the Palestinians.

“It amounts to a birth certificate for the reality of Palestinian statehood,” Fayyad told reporters after the talks in Brussels.

The development took place against the backdrop of deadlocked peace negotiations between Palestinians and Israelis and running tensions in North Africa and the Middle East which have heightened Israeli security concerns.

A meeting of the Quartet – the panel of international mediators comprising the European Union, the United States, the United Nations and Russia – scheduled for Thursday in Berlin on the margins of NATO talks was called off, diplomats said.

Speculation has been mounting that the Palestinians would ask the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) to recognize their statehood in September, if no progress in peace talks had been achieved by then.

But when asked, Fayyad refused to confirm that intention.

“We are not looking for another declaration of statehood, nor are we looking for a virtual state, what we are looking for, again, is a genuine, fully sovereign State of Palestine,” including East Jerusalem which Israel captured in 1967, Fayyad said.

The Quartet’s envoy, former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, reiterated the need for a “negotiated solution,” warning that a unilateral Palestinian move for recognition at the UNGA would split the international community.

“Probably if we are hoping for complete unity in the international community on anything to do with this issue, it would be a rather misplaced hope,” he quipped.

On the sidelines of the meeting, the EU signed an agreement granting duty-free access to Palestinian agricultural produce – provided that fruit and vegetables are sold above a set price.

EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton also said the bloc had earmarked 300 million euros ($433 million) in 2011 to further support Palestinian state-building.

The trade deal is expected to give a much-needed boost to the Palestinian economy and to its trade ties with the EU, which amounted only to 57 million euros in 2009, to which exports from Palestine contributed only 6 million euros.

Fayyad called it “a very important agreement,” but stressed its application depended on Israel allowing goods out of the Palestinian territories, including the Gaza Strip over which it maintains a tight grip because it is ruled by the Islamist Hamas group.

But Irit Ben-Abba, an Israeli foreign ministry official who also was in Brussels, said “there are no restrictions … for exports from Gaza to the international markets” since the Israeli government relaxed its embargo on the enclave in December.

Please note: These stories are located outside of Prophecy Today’s website. Prophecy Today is not responsible for their content and does not necessarily agree with the views expressed therein. These articles are provided for your information.