* Arab States to Issue Israel an Ultimatum The Arab League is formulating an ultimatum to be issued Monday warning Israel that it must accept the League’s terms for an Arab-Israel agreement.

* Great expectations ahead of G20 summit World leaders from the Group of 20 industrial nations will gather in London to discuss ways to deal with the financial crisis.

* No halt to Gaza arms smuggling The flow of explosives and weapons smuggled into Gaza has continued since Israel’s military operation, a senior Israeli intelligence official has said.

* Obama Pressed to End Cast Lead, Wants Syrian Pact President Obama, before he took office, pressured outgoing Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to put a quick end to the Cast Lead counterterrorist operation against Hamas.

* Medvedev hopeful ahead of meeting with Obama Presidents Dmitry Medvedev and Barack Obama meet in London on Wednesday to try to “reset” thorny Russia-U.S. ties.

* Gaddafi storms out of Arab League Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi has stormed out of the Arab League summit in Qatar having denounced the Saudi king for his ties with the West.

* France, Germany remain cool on EU enlargement EU foreign ministers meeting on Saturday sought to reassure western Balkan countries on their EU future.

* Hezbollah’s Mexican-US Drug Connection The Hezbollah terrorist organization is making money by using long-standing drug smuggling routes from Mexico to the United States.

* EU Pressure on Netanyahu to Accept Arab State Inside Israel The EU has resorted to making vague threats against Israel’s Prime Minister-designate, Binyamin Netanyahu, to pressure him to support the “the two-state solution”.

* Hard-line Saudi Arabian interior minister moves closer to throne The Saudi Arabian Interior Minister Prince who last week made headlines for saying that there was no need for female members of parliament in Saudi Arabia, has been promoted to second deputy prime minister.

* Israel’s commitment to peace in doubt, Erekat says In op-ed published by Washington Post, chief Palestinian negotiator says ‘peace is not a word that sits comfortably with the Israeli right, which will dominate Israel’s new government.’

* EU warns Israel on two-state issue The European Union once again sent strong warning messages to Prime Minister-designate Binyamin Netanyahu on Friday.

* Plan would narrow goals in Afghan war President Barack Obama’s plan to widen U.S. involvement in Afghanistan came after an internal debate in which Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. warned against getting into a political and military quagmire.

* Egypt to skip key Arab summit on unity Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak will not be attending a key Arab League summit.

* Egypt, Saudis bend over backwards to extricate Syria from Iranian grip When the leaders of Saudi Arabia and Egypt last had Syria’s president alone in a room, earlier this month, it was classic good cop-bad cop.

* European NATO members at odds over strategic priorities NATO is increasingly lacking solidarity and unity of vision over future strategic options.

* Earth Hour May Prompt 1 Billion to Turn Off Lights Earth Hour, an event created in Sydney two years ago by environmentalists keen to cut energy use and reduce greenhouse gas emissions, started today.

* Facebook users wage condom campaign against Pope Critics took to the social networking site Facebook to voice their fury over Pope Benedict’s remark that condoms do not prevent HIV.

* G20 demonstrators march in London Tens of thousands of people have marched through London demanding action on poverty, climate change and jobs, ahead of next week’s G20 summit.

* Obama sets Qaeda defeat as top goal in Afghanistan President Barack Obama unveiled a new war strategy for Afghanistan on Friday with a key goal — to crush al Qaeda militants there and in Pakistan.

By: Jeremy Gaunt – Reuters.com

LUXEMBOURG (Reuters) – A U.N. panel will next week recommend that the world ditch the dollar as its reserve currency in favor of a shared basket of currencies, a member of the panel said on Wednesday, adding to pressure on the dollar.

Currency specialist Avinash Persaud, a member of the panel of experts, told a Reuters Funds Summit in Luxembourg that the proposal was to create something like the old Ecu, or European currency unit, that was a hard-traded, weighted basket.

Persaud, chairman of consultants Intelligence Capital and a former currency chief at JPMorgan, said the recommendation would be one of a number delivered to the United Nations on March 25 by the U.N. Commission of Experts on International Financial Reform.

“It is a good moment to move to a shared reserve currency,” he said.

Central banks hold their reserves in a variety of currencies and gold, but the dollar has dominated as the most convincing store of value — though its rate has wavered in recent years as the United States ran up huge twin budget and external deficits.

Some analysts said news of the U.N. panel’s recommendation extended dollar losses because it fed into concerns about the future of the greenback as the main global reserve currency, raising the chances of central bank sales of dollar holdings.

“Speculation that major central banks would begin rebalancing their FX reserves has risen since the intensification of the dollar’s slide between 2002 and mid-2008,” CMC Markets said in a note.

Russia is also planning to propose the creation of a new reserve currency, to be issued by international financial institutions, at the April G20 meeting, according to the text of its proposals published on Monday.

It has significantly reduced the dollar’s share in its own reserves in recent years.

GOOD TIME

Persaud said that the United States was concerned that holding the reserve currency made it impossible to run policy, while the rest of world was also unhappy with the generally declining dollar.

“There is a moment that can be grasped for change,” he said.

“Today the Americans complain that when the world wants to save, it means a deficit. A shared (reserve) would reduce the possibility of global imbalances.”

Persaud said the panel had been looking at using something like an expanded Special Drawing Right, originally created by the International Monetary Fund in 1969 but now used mainly as an accounting unit within similar organizations.

The SDR and the old Ecu are essentially combinations of currencies, weighted to a constituent’s economic clout, which can be valued against other currencies and indeed against those inside the basket.

Persaud said there were two main reasons why policymakers might consider such a move, one being the current desire for a change from the dollar.

The other reason, he said, was the success of the euro, which incorporated a number of currencies but roughly speaking held on to the stability of the old German deutschemark compared with, say, the Greek drachma.

Persaud has long argued that the dollar would give way to the Chinese yuan as a global reserve currency within decades.

A shared reserve currency might negate this move, he said, but he believed that China would still like to take on the role.

By: Catherine Miller – BBC News

In Cairo, the 30th anniversary of the signing of the peace treaty between Israel and Egypt is seen by many as a moment for regret, not celebration.

“It’s a celebration for Israel – not for Egypt, not for the Arabs, not for the Palestinians,” says Issam al-Aryan of the Muslim Brotherhood, the Islamist opposition movement which is officially banned in Egypt.

“I think the majority of Egyptians are against the treaty after 30 years.”

Israel is holding events to mark what it calls a “watershed” moment, the first time an Arab nation recognised the Jewish state.

But there are no commemorations in Egypt, where discussion of the treaty focuses on concerns over Israel’s new right-wing government and a campaign in the courts to stop Egypt selling its gas to Israel at below-market rates.

Pariah status

Under the deal, Israel agreed to withdraw from the Sinai Peninsula which it had occupied in whole or in part since 1967.

In return, Egypt agreed to demilitarise the area and normalise relations with Israel.

Some Egyptians accuse the government of surrendering

Promises of a comprehensive peace agreement for the whole Middle East quickly ran into the sand and Egypt went from a leader in the Arab world to a pariah.

But the treaty’s advocates say Egypt won in the long term.

“It has gained territory, it has gained a relationship with United States that is important, it has gained a reputation of being a country of peace,” says former Egyptian diplomat Ahmed Maher, who worked on the treaty.

“In the end I think the result is positive.”

But others say Israel’s recent war in Gaza demonstrates how the deal weakened Egypt.

Despite public outrage, the government refused to open its border with Gaza, leading to accusations that Cairo was putting its relationship with Israel and the US above the suffering of the Palestinians.

“In this case, the main concern of Egypt was to maintain the treaty and at same time not allow it to become an obstacle to taking stands against Israel’s actions and aggressions,” says Mr Maher.

“It’s difficult when you want to keep many balls in the air.”

Economic and political ties

Egypt argues by keeping Israel on-side it can mediate between Israel and the rest of the Arab world.

But some say Egypt could worry less about antagonising Israel.

“Since Israel violated its commitments [under the treaty] by carrying out military actions on Egyptian borders, by not going along with the intention in Camp David to reach a comprehensive settlement in the Middle East, and violated its commitments to the Palestinians, and its commitments under international law, I think Egypt has a good argument for offering more support to the Palestinians,” says Professor Mustafa Kamel al-Sayed of the American University in Cairo

As well as political ties, the peace treaty opened economic relations between Egypt and Israel and the US provided vast amounts of financial and military aid to Egypt.

“Generally I think Egyptians are quite realistic,” says Magdi Tolba, Chairman of Cairo Cotton Centre, one of Egypt’s biggest textile factories, who has joint ventures with Israel.

They do not have a problem working with Israelis when it helps economic growth, he says.

But he admits the continued regional instability of the past 30 years has made industry hesitant about forging closer ties:

“We’ve been losing opportunities… Economy-wise, industry-wise, if the area is more stable the sky can be the limit for cooperation.”

Undiplomatic presence

But the arrival of Benjamin Netanyahu’s Likud-led government in Israel, including the hardliner Avigdor Lieberman as a possible foreign minister, brings fresh concerns for stability.

The return of Sinai in effect put Egypt outside the Arab-Israeli conflict

Mr Lieberman said Egypt’s President Hosni Mubarak should “go to hell”, and has suggested bombing the Aswan Dam, drowning Egypt in the waters of the Nile.

Such language does “not make Israelis very good partners”, admits former diplomat Ahmed Maher:

“The Israelis are so arrogant… We are on a very shaky foundation, but a shaky foundation which has endured because we Egyptians have been wise.

“You can’t live by the sword alone, this is something the Israelis, in the arrogance of power, have not yet realised.”

Many Egyptians are bitter that their precedent of exchanging land for peace did not lead to a comprehensive settlement.

Instead, some believe Israel returned Sinai to consolidate its hold on other occupied territories and free its hand to pursue military action against the Palestinians and in Lebanon.

Fact of life

Although there is now talk of a possible deal between Israel and Syria, Issam al-Aryan warns the Syrians not to believe it will help in the wider conflict:

“I hope they can study and review 30 years of discomfort and struggle in Egypt against the treaty.

“They are intelligent enough to get the lesson: the problem is not in Golan or Sinai, it is in Acre, Haifa, Jaffa, Gaza, Ramallah, that is the problem.”

But even the Muslim Brotherhood shies away from calling for Egypt’s treaty to be ripped up.

“Many people are opposed to this treaty,” says Professor Mustafa Kamel al-Sayed.

“Israel did not live up to its treaty… But I think the Egyptian public considers the treaty to be a fact of life”.

In three decades, Egypt’s cold peace with Israel has never warmed.

The treaty may now be a fact of life. But it is still not a comfortable one.

By: Brenda Gazzar – The Jerusalem Post

The Foreign Ministry, as well as local academic and cultural institutions, have planned a number of events this week to commemorate three decades of peace between Egypt and Israel.

Menachem Begin, Anwar Sadat and US President Jimmy Carter at the peace treaty signing, Camp David.

In Egypt, on the other hand, not much fireworks or fanfare is planned.

There is “nothing official that I know of” going on in Cairo to commemorate the March 26 anniversary, Egyptian Foreign Ministry spokesman Hossam Zaki told The Jerusalem Post on Wednesday. He said he did not know why.

The Israeli embassy in Egypt, along with Egyptian experts, said they too were not aware of any ceremonies, receptions or events – other than television and other media coverage – to mark the signing of the historic Camp David Accords.

“We didn’t receive any invitations that I am aware of” said Shani Cooper Zubida, the spokeswoman of the Israeli embassy in Cairo. “We think that it is an Egyptian decision whether to have an event or not, but we are very happy to commemorate it, and we are very proud to have relations for the last 30 years with Egypt.”

Egyptian experts were split as to what the lack of both official and unofficial commemoration meant.

“I think it’s because of the result of the last Israeli parliamentary elections,” said Emad Gad, head of the Israel unit at the Cairo-based Al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies.

Prime Minister-designate Binyamin Netanyahu has yet to accept the establishment of a Palestinian state, while Israel Beiteinu chairman Avigdor Lieberman, who is likely to become the next foreign minister, has said Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak could “go to hell” if he didn’t want to visit Israel, he said.

Egyptian institutions or organizations seeking to host commemorative events now, at a time when Israel’s Gaza war was still fresh on their minds, would face heavy criticism both from Egyptian political parties and ordinary citizens, Gad said.

“Celebration for what?” he said people would wonder. “Killing Palestinians? For Lieberman and Netanyahu?”

But Abdel Monem Said Aly, the director of the Al-Ahram Center, said it was customary in Egypt to hold celebrations to commemorate the evacuation of foreign troops from Egyptian territory rather than the signing of agreements or treaties.

For example, April 25 is a national holiday that commemorates the Israeli withdrawal from the Sinai Peninsula as per the Camp David accords, while March 19 is celebrated as the day that Taba was liberated from Israeli control.

Similarly, June 18 is celebrated as the day British colonial troops evacuated from Egypt’s Suez military base.

And despite the lack of celebrations this week in Egypt, there had been a significant number of talk-shows and programming in Egypt on the signing of the Camp David Accords, with more slated for the actual anniversary on Thursday, Said Aly said.

In fact, the anniversary was receiving quite a bit of public attention, and in general the treaty was being portrayed as a positive thing for Egypt, he said.

On one talk-show debate about the peace treaty on a Cairo-based satellite channel on Tuesday night, Said Aly counted 18 out of 20 phone calls made by viewers that were “supportive” of the historic document.

It didn’t mean that they loved Israel or supported its policies regarding the Palestinians, but it showed that the “treaty served Egypt and gave Egypt an opportunity for development,” he said. “It saved the sons of Egypt from getting into a cycle of violence and war that can extend for years.”

At a seminar in Jerusalem on Wednesday, Egyptian Ambassador Yasser Reda praised the “courageous decision” of former Prime Minister Menachem Begin and former President Anwar Sadat to make peace on the White House lawn.

Despite the Israeli-Egyptian relationship being subject “to numerous challenges,” he said, “our gathering today is just another testament to the strength of vision of peace and stability vis-a-vis the choice of war and bloodshed.”

But Reda also said that expanding relations with Israel was part of a vision for comprehensive peace that “entails reaching a just settlement of the different dimensions of the Arab-Israeli conflict, in particular the Palestinian quandary.”

Mubarak has said that the year 2009 should be “the year of peace” in the region, Reda said at the Hebrew University seminar, organized by the university and the Foreign Ministry. “For that, he calls upon the coming Israeli government to seize this opportunity and to respond positively to the Arab peace initiative.”

The Israeli ambassador to Egypt, Shalom Cohen, praised the many areas of cooperation between the two countries, saying that relations at the governmental level were as intimate and as close as ever.

But he also warned that relations between the two nations’ ordinary citizens were far from close, and appeared to be growing farther apart.

The young Egyptian generation knew very little about Israel or the peace that Egypt has made with it, he said at the Hebrew University seminar.

“They know all about the ‘victory of October,'” he said, referring to the perceived Egyptian victory in the Yom Kippur war, “but they don’t know anything about [Sadat’s] visit in November” 1977.

In addition to the Hebrew University seminar, the Foreign Ministry also hosted a reception for dignitaries and guests on Wednesday evening during which Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and former officials who had been involved in Camp David spoke.

On Sunday, the Bible Lands Museum Jerusalem opened the “Echoes of Egypt” exhibit, which presents the works of leading artists, cartographers and photographers and their impressions from the mid-16th to the 19th centuries.

The Menachem Begin Heritage Center is also opening a historic display at the Shalom Railway Station in Tel Aviv Thursday at 12 p.m. The multi-lingual display, entitled “No More War” tells the story of the making of peace between Egypt and Israel from 1977 onward.

By: Zvi Bar’el – Haaretz.com

Did the truck convoy making its way from Port Sudan to Egypt carry weapons from Iran, China or Russia – Sudan’s three major arms suppliers? The prime suspect is Iran, which has been strengthening its ties with Sudan ever since President Omar Hassan al-Bashir took power in a military coup in 1989.

Iranian Defense Minister Mustafa Muhammad Najar visited Sudan this month and signed a series of military cooperation agreements. Among other things, Iran’s army will now train Sudanese military cadets and Iran will provide Sudan with advanced weapons. In 2006, Bashir visited Iran, declared the friendship between the two states strong and said Sudan’s army was “willing to put itself at the disposal of Iranian instructors.”

Arab sources report that Sudan allows Hezbollah to operate in its territory, including by purchasing arms both for the organization’s own use and for Hamas. Since some areas of Sudan are not under the central government’s control, international terror organizations see it as a convenient playground.

Sudan is one of the poorest countries in the world, with an average per capita income of about $200. Its legal system is based on Islamic religious law. However, it maintains relatively good ties with the American intelligence community. Sudan hosted Osama Bin Laden for years, until he left it in 1996 for Afghanistan. But after the September 11 attacks, Khartoum offered to cooperate with the United States and allowed CIA agents to operate in its territory.

In exchange, then-president George Bush lifted many of the sanctions that had been imposed on Sudan and praised the intelligence cooperation with Khartoum. Some of the sanctions were reimposed in 2004, following the outbreak of the war in Darfur. But the U.S. is maintaining its diplomatic ties with Sudan to preserve the reconciliation agreement between north and south, for which Sudan won U.S. assistance worth $360 million.

In 1995, after an assassination attempt on Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak while he was visiting Addis Ababa, Mubarak accused Sudan of responsibility for the attack and urged the Sudanese people to topple the regime. Egypt also gave asylum to former Sudanese president Jaffer Numeiri until Bashir permitted his return.

Egypt is nevertheless careful to maintain correct relations with Sudan, to ensure that it does not damage the Nile, Egypt’s life source, and that the peace agreement between northern and southern Sudan does not damage Egypt’s interests. Yet Cairo is also watching the increasingly close relationship between Iran and Sudan with alarm, seeing it as a threat.

The International Criminal Court recently issued a warrant for Bashir’s arrest on charges of planning and committing genocide. Bashir has thus far scoffed at the warrant, and this week, he visited Mubarak to seek Arab backing against it. Egyptian sources said he also consulted Mubarak about the strike on the arms convoy and sought his help to improve Sudan’s relations with Washington.

* Sudan: No proof IAF attacked convoy The Sudani Foreign Ministry said Friday there was no proof that Israel attacked a Hamas-bound arms convoy in the country two months ago.

* Russian ‘Arctic military’ plan Russia has announced plans to set up a military force to protect its interests in the Arctic.

* Japan to ‘destroy’ N Korea rocket Japan says it is deploying missile interceptors to destroy any parts of a North Korean rocket that might fall on its territory.

* Obama: Safety of world at stake in Afghanistan President Obama, saying “the terrorists who planned and supported the 9/11 attacks are in Pakistan and Afghanistan,” announced a new strategy Friday to confront the growing threat in the two countries.

* ‘Iron Dome’ Passes the Test The Defense Ministry reported Thursday that the Iron Dome rocket protection system recently passed a series of tests.

* Erdogan says Turkey ready to resume Israel-Syria mediation Turkey is ready to resume mediation between Israel and Syria, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan was quoted as saying.

* Iranian leader assures Assad of Muslim victory Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told his Syrian counterpart, Bashar Assad, on Friday that Israel and the US were “weakening with God’s help”.

* Olmert: Not much time left for peace To seal an agreement with the Palestinians, future Israeli leaders would have to offer them “more than what Ehud Barak offered at Camp David.”

* ANALYSIS / Sudan has become playground for terror groups Did the truck convoy making its way from Port Sudan to Egypt carry weapons from Iran, China or Russia – Sudan’s three major arms suppliers?

* Is it Time for the IMF to Change? As the only Arab country that is a member of the G-20 and thus invited to next week’s summit on the global economy, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has a heavy responsibility to speak for those other Arab peoples who are not represented there.

* While Israel celebrates, Egypt stays quiet The Foreign Ministry, as well as local academic and cultural institutions, have planned a number of events this week to commemorate three decades of peace between Egypt and Israel.

* 30 years at peace There was something melancholy about our story this week that Egyptian Ambassador to Israel Yasser Reda would be marking the 30th anniversary of diplomatic relations between our countries.

* China fury at US military report Beijing has reacted angrily to a Pentagon report on China’s military power, which claimed it was altering the military balance in Asia.

* Barkat: Jerusalem must stay united Jerusalem Mayor Nir Barkat told American Jewish leaders in New York on Wednesday that he believes Jerusalem must remain united for pragmatic reasons as much as for emotional ones.

* Czech government defeat raises major Lisbon concerns The presidents of both the European Commission and the European Parliament on Wednesday (25 March) urged the Czech Republic to proceed with the ratification of the EU’s Lisbon Treaty.

* ‘IAF planes bombed Gaza-bound weapons convoy’ As Israeli troops battled Palestinian gunmen during Operation Cast Lead in an attempt to end the rocket threat to southern Israel, IAF warplanes conducted a mission with similar objectives far from the front in the Gaza Strip.

* Geithner ‘open’ to China proposal Geithner, at the Council on Foreign Relations, said the U.S. is “open” to a headline-grabbing proposal by the governor of the China’s central bank.

* N Korea ‘places missile on pad’ North Korea has placed what is thought to be a long-range missile on a launch pad.

* Islam helps shape coming Indonesian elections Islamic parties in Indonesia will not get enough votes in the coming election to nominate a presidential candidate, according to polls.

* Egyptians ponder 30-year peace with Israel In Cairo, the 30th anniversary of the signing of the peace treaty between Israel and Egypt is seen by many as a moment for regret, not celebration.

By: Wolfgang G Schwanitz – The Jerusalem Post

Etgar Lefkovits asks if the US Holocaust Memorial Museum is whitewashing the grand mufti’s biography on-line (“US museum draws flak for pro-Nazi mufti bio,” March 18). Not at all. It’s not bad intention, but the wrong approach that has led to the thesis of “ideological and strategic incompatibility between Nazism and Arab nationalism.”

The main events of Hajj Amin al-Husseini’s life were kept in the dark before the millennium. Then the mufti’s memoirs and other studies appeared in Arabic. Obviously the museum’s authors – surely not Middle East historians – do not know those books or that language.

Big chunks of knowledge have been left out in the museum’s narrative. Almost nothing relates to the 29 years he lived after World War II, though there is the fairy tale of his “escape” from Paris to Cairo in 1946. But escape? Before this happened, the French said he was free to go.

Missing is his help in getting thousands of Nazis jobs in the Middle East in the military, security or propaganda (most converted to Islam). You wonder from where the deadly ideology came that pushed Israel into a spiral of struggle for survival. Here you learn nothing about the mufti’s bases in Lebanon, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Iran, Indonesia or Pakistan. Nor is anything said about his involvement in the murder of those willing to come to terms with the young Jewish state, people like Jordan’s King Abdullah I.

Missing is the mufti’s worldwide incitement of terror against Israel and Jews, the support for his protégé Yasser Arafat and his role in finding retreats for Muslim Brothers in cities like Geneva or Munich. You don’t read anything about the global Islamic organizations he built until his death in 1974.

Even the mufti’s year of birth is in quotation marks, although he stated clearly it was 1897. It goes on with misguiding sections, mistakes and omissions. Hitler certainly recognized the Arabs’ wish for independence, and the mufti as their foremost speaker. He stressed his basic position in a 1939 meeting with Ibn Saud’s envoy, and publicly at the end of 1940, giving further secret assurances to the mufti in person a year later. The text of the museum misrepresents facts and evidence.

Berlin and Rome had already done a joint broadcast declaring support for Arab aspirations. Hitler repeated it orally and in writing. The dictator was most compatible with the mufti. Until the very end, Hitler ordered full support for him – as explained by propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels in 1944. They even prepared a new financial agreement with the mufti as late as April 5, 1945.

Hitler needed the mufti as an accomplice in the Holocaust planned for the Middle East and as an adviser in Muslim affairs. For his part, the mufti found much common ground with Hitler. Just read his appeal of 1937 to all Muslims (not mentioned in the text). In a time when even Berlin still had various projects on the table about “how to solve the Jewish question,” the mufti called on Muslims for jihad to rid their lands of Jews. In a mixture of religious and racist hatred, he likened them to “microbes and scum of all countries.”

No chance that close relations arose at the end of 1937 when Adolf Eichmann traveled to Cairo, because he failed to meet the mufti in Palestine. So Husseini approached the Nazis in turn with a deal: For German help and weapons to prevent the rise of a national Jewish home, he would spread Nazi ideology and “keep up the terror in all Mandatory areas.”

Though the relations went through various phases, he soon had liaison officers in the four most powerful German offices. He enjoyed a steady relationship with the SS since 1937 (not 1943, as the museum claims). So close did the mufti feel to Hitler that he offered him a risky venture in September 1944: a mediation between Hitler and Stalin. The mufti’s protests against the release of Jews to Palestine had the desired impact. He discusses this and more in his memoirs, without mercy or regret.

It is also wrong to say Husseini conditioned his call for a general uprising on some declaration. On the contrary, he was the Nazis’ most willing executioner among the Arabs. In the Middle East he also kept a wide institutional basis for authority over Muslims in other parts of the world. He got plenty of money and aides.

Displaying a biography today and not mentioning what happened in Germany in the middle of 1943 is astounding. In his memoirs, the mufti admitted that Heinrich Himmler, one of the chief architects of the Holocaust, told him secrets of the German empire. Besides “research for a nuclear bomb,” he told him on the persecution of Jews: “Up to now we have exterminated [abadna] around three million of them.” This admission discovered in his memoirs in 1999 ended decades of heated debate on what the mufti knew about the Holocaust.

All in all, the museum displays a deeply flawed text. Carol Greenwald of Holocaust Museum Watch has alerted us rightly (for the second time) and the museum has homework to do in reaching a respectable academic standard.

By: Zvi Mazel – The Jerusalem Post

On March 26, 1979, Egypt and Israel signed a peace treaty on the White House lawn. It was an intensely emotional moment. For the Israelis, the hope was born that this first step – making peace with the greatest of Arab countries – would help build a bridge to the rest of the Middle East. They found it difficult to understand the lack of enthusiasm, if not downright opposition, demonstrated by many countries.

The Arab world as a whole denounced the Egyptian initiative, which breached its united front against Israel and was seen as weakening the Palestinian struggle in which Egypt was the strongest player due to its military might. Egypt was expelled from the Arab League and the headquarters of that organization was moved to Tunis. Even the European Community (today the European Union) refrained from supporting the treaty. It did praise Menachem Begin and Anwar Sadat for their efforts to achieve peace, but stressed that the treaty was incomplete because it did not provide for a Palestinian state.

The United Nations evinced the same lack of support. The signatories to the treaty and the United States, which had sponsored it, had expected that the world organization would set up a peacekeeping force to monitor the demilitarization of the Sinai area. It did not happen. The Soviet Union threatened to veto any such proposal at the Security Council, and it was taken off the UN agenda.

It has to be remembered that the creation of a peace force which would supervise the demilitarization of the Sinai after Israel returned it to Egypt was at the core of the treaty. Egypt was undertaking to put an end to the state of war and establish peaceful relations in all fields of life; however Israel wanted to get solid guarantees that Sinai would no longer serve as a base of attack against its heavily populated areas. Consequently a detailed military agreement had been reached as part of the peace treaty: Egypt could keep limited military forces in the peninsula, but only police forces along the border, and an international force would supervise this essential proviso.

The UN having declined to set it up, the US stepped in and led to the creation of a special unit, the Multinational Force and Observers, whose mandate was to monitor the implementation of the military agreement. Eleven countries agreed to take part in it, though it was the United States which supplied 90 percent of the personnel. The observers of the Multinational Force also monitor a narrow strip on the Israeli side where no tanks or heavy weapons are allowed.

Because of the situation in Gaza, the two countries have mutually accepted minor temporary derogations to the military treaty, such as allowing 700 Egyptian army personnel along the Philadelphi corridor, but have refrained from making changes in the treaty itself. It seems that the dispositions of the military treaty have been faithfully observed by Egypt, and this is one of the few rays of light in the overall relationship.

ITHIN EGYPT the peace agreement met with a variety of reactions, and eventually turned into what is generally seen as a “cold peace.” And yet in the beginning it was greeted enthusiastically by the masses, who cheered Sadat upon his return from his historic visit to Jerusalem in 1977. An estimated two million people waited on the route taken by his motorcade and cheered while yelling “Long live peace! Long live Sadat!”

An Egyptian sociologist, then known for his anti-Israel position, once told me that he had been suspicious of such popular fervor, and believed it had been staged by the Mukhabarat, the Egyptian security service. He decided to conduct an opinion poll – one of the first ever in Egypt – to check the situation on the ground. To his great surprise the survey showed that over 60% supported Sadat. Not convinced, he did another survey which brought the same results. This led him to change his opinion and support the peace – a position he holds to this day.

There is no doubt but that Egypt had had enough war. Thousands of Egyptian soldiers perished during the five armed confrontations with Israel with no tangible results and no end of the conflict in sight. Its economy had suffered and the Soviet Union, which was its main supplier of weapons, tended to treat it as a subservient nation. This led Sadat to change tack. He got rid of the Russians and turned to the US, knowing fully well that the path to Washington was through a peace treaty with Israel.

The Yom Kippur War had taken Israel completely by surprise and had provided the Egyptian army with a number of military successes which were seen as restoring pride to Egypt and making it possible for that country to enter negotiations. The people of Egypt rejoiced in the return of lost lands, and even more at the prospect of a rapid improvement in their standard of living. The US was granting Egypt a hefty $2 billion a year for military and civilian purposes, and the threat of war had receded.

The assassination of Sadat to a great extent ended those expectations. Opposition to the peace became more vocal. It included intellectual circles and media brought up on the pan-Arabism of Gamal Abdel Nasser but also leftist parties and the Muslim establishment, as well as the Muslim Brothers. Elected president, Hosni Mubarak was not ready to tackle those forces, though he had the means to do so. He chose to settle for a limited peace, the cold peace, while launching an all-out effort to restore Egypt to its former position at the center of the Arab world. In this he was successful: Egypt was readmitted to the Arab League in 1989, and the headquarters of that organization left Tunis to return to Cairo.

MUBARAK MADE NO EFFORT, however, to curb the growing swell of attacks against Israel and the Jews which become a staple of the Egyptian media.

In spite of the peace and the lack of any direct threat, Mubarak continued to strengthen the army. In fact, thanks to American military assistance, the Egyptian army is now the largest Arab army in the region.

ver the years, Egypt’s economy failed to progress, and a disillusioned people lost faith in the peace. And yet Israel did all that was in its power to promote normalization between the two countries, still hoping to achieve better understanding and not just a cold peace limited to contacts between governments and minimal commercial links. In 1981, Sadat asked then-agriculture minister Ariel Sharon for help in developing his country’s agriculture, which was unable to produce enough food for the growing population. Israel sent experts in a variety of fields, from drip irrigation to the supply of seeds adapted to the light desert soil. This was expected to lead to increased yields and crops in areas outside the heavily populated delta lands.

Indeed, within a few years remarkable results were achieved. Thanks to Israeli help and know-how, Egypt now meets most of its own needs in fruits and vegetables, and even exports some produce to Europe. Unfortunately, the average Egyptian is not aware of this fact, and the opposition in Egypt repeatedly accuses Israel of having “poisoned” Egyptian soil.

EFFORTS TO PROMOTE cooperation in the fields of tourism, industry and commerce remain limited because the government of Egypt does not want them to go beyond the strict minimumAll contactsin the cultural and scientific spheres are banned and the professional associations of the Egyptian elite, such as engineers, doctors and writers, boycott Israel and forbid their members to have any contact with it. The sale of oil and gas to Israel is encountering growing opposition. Visits to Israel are actively discouraged and a special permit is needed.

A case in point is that of the Qualified Industrial Zones (QIZ) agreement according to which goods produced in special zones can be exported to the US with no customs tax within the framework of the trade agreement between Israel and the US, provided a small percentage of the process is conducted in Israel. It was Egypt which asked for this agreement, since its textile industry was on the brink of ruin. It needed an injection of technology and open markets to survive. Exports from the QIZ have added a hefty $800 million to Egypt. This was instrumental in the liberation of Azzam Azzam, but did not lead to any improvement in the overall situation.

PEACE HAS ENDURED, though. Even if mostly limited to contacts
between governments, it has nevertheless facilitated significant changes in the region. It opened the door to the Madrid Conference in 1991, where the subject of a comprehensive peace with all Arab states, including the PLO, was put squarely on the table. It also led to tentative economic cooperation with a number of Arab states. The Oslo Accords and peace with Jordan probably would not have been possible without it.

What is more, over the years both countries have concluded that they do have common vital interests, making some form of cooperation a must. First and foremost is the Palestinian question. It is doubtful if both countries have the same solution in mind, since Egypt fully supports the Palestinian position. However it feels the need to stabilize the situation and contain terror and understands that there will have to be a compromise. This is why Egypt is keen to reconcile Hamas and Fatah, and why it is spending so much energy brokering the Gilad Schalit issue. But Egypt has its red lines. It is not ready to kill Palestinians to prevent smuggling and protect Israeli interests in Gaza.

NO LESS IMPORTANT for Egypt is the growing threat of international terror from jihadist groups such as al-Qaida, and the Iranian attempts at subversion through Hizbullah and Hamas. To defend itself against these threats, Egypt tends to coordinate its steps with pragmatic Arab countries such as Saudi Arabia, but needs the help and assistance of the US and the quiet understanding, with a measure of coordination, of Israel. Both Israel and the US have a vital interest in the continued stability of the Egyptian regime and cooperation with it.

Thus Egypt has steadfastly refused to be drawn back into the conflict between the Palestinians and Israel. Mubarak turned down the opposition’s calls to send the Egyptian army to fight Israel during the intifada, the war in Lebanon and the recent war in Gaza. The old leader, who is deeply committed to the stability of his country, has repeatedly said his country knows only too well the price of war and has no wish to experience it again. Let whoever wants to fight Israel do so, he says; Egypt won’t. In this he echoes Sadat’s exhortation: “No more war, no more bloodshed.”

From time to time the media in Israel turn their attention to the state of the peace with Egypt. The refusal of the Egyptian ambassador to attend the opening of the exhibition on Egypt in the Bible Lands Museum in Jerusalem last Sunday is a reminder that the policy of cold peace is still very much alive.

With the Mubarak era drawing to its close, there is a lot of apprehension concerning the future. This is only to be expected. The cold peace and escalating incitement against Israel and the Jews are not conducive to optimism. And yet peace has endured for 30 years, surviving acute crises. Does this mean it will go on? Is the will for peace going to be stronger than the vociferous opposition in Egypt? We cannot and should not be blind to the unpredictability which is one of the characteristics of the region, yet there are grounds for cautious optimism.