This is Costa Black’s 38th week demonstrating on Kaplan Street in Tel Aviv. Like many other activists he left everything to dedicate himself to the fight against the right-wing coup d’état. But Costa’s story is a little different. He came over to Israel at age 11 from Ukraine with his mother and sister experiencing no little social and economic hurdles. Costa unfurls huge posters in English that photograph well from a bird’s eye view. They feature an American flag next to the Israeli flag, that call President Biden not to meet with Bibi, and to support the protest. When Biden was previously asked if he would invite Bibi to the White House and answered with a categorical “no,” he gave hope and encouragement to Costa and his friends. Yet two weeks ago Biden met with Bibi and presented him with a gift – the prospect of a peace agreement with Saudi Arabia’s MBS. Could it be that Biden has thrown up his hands and thus, in one fell swoop, the judicial coup is off the agenda, and peace with Saudi Arabia brings Bibi back to life?

With sadness, Costa tweets an innocent question, which he says no one has yet answered: “What does Israel gain de facto from this agreement?” The political reporter Barak Ravid replied to this: “This tweet shows how politics sometimes clouds judgment and causes people in the liberal camp to lose all ability to examine life in a complex and straightforward manner.” Costa did not have time to recover from Ravid’s patronizing scolding before another tribal elder, Ben Caspit, joined him and added: “We are sorry that we were unable to explain to you, Costa. But it is simple: peace with the most important and wealthiest Muslim country in the world, which controls the holy cities and symbolizes Islam’s Holy of Holies is a historical event on a biblical scale that completes the circle of peace around Israel (as opposed to peace with the Palestinians, which is within Israel) and brings the rest of the Arab world into it. It is unlike anything and is more important than all of us together. Yes, even if it has something to do with Bibi.”

So, this is it Costa, you have been turned into a “power broker” whose understanding is vague, so you do not see that peace with Saudi Arabia is an event on a “biblical scale”. You demonstrated for 38 weeks, Costa, getting beaten, arrested, and managed to stop the coup d’état with your friends, but it turns out you must now return to your natural dimensions. How dare you compare the coup d’état with the “biblical” peace, even if it is “somehow” related to Bibi! The problem is that those elders of the tribe such as Ravid, Caspit and even the anti-Zionist elder, Gideon Levi, have already proven in the past that their great wisdom has left your generation, to eat their rotten fruit. This does not prevent them from teaching you a lesson in political wisdom – as people who support you, of course, some of whom even go out to demonstrate with you from time to time.

It’s no coincidence, Costa, that you find it difficult to believe them and accept their learned opinion, since you could have asked them the same question about the Abraham Accords as well. After all, you know very well that what we got out of the Abraham Accords is a fascist government that threatens the very existence of the state. The elders of the tribe try to convince you that “somehow” it has to do with Bibi, but the truth is it has to do not only with Bibi, but also with those who surround him: Trump, Putin and other lower-level dictators. Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) himself is a friend of Putin, of Xi Jinping, and like Bibi, he also wishes for Trump’s return to the White House. They are made from the same dough and have no bounds. They are ready to do anything, literally anything, to hold onto power.

MBS is not looking for “biblical” peace. Like Bibi, Putin, and Trump, he is looking to transform his leper status following the murder and dismemberment of the body of critical Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi inside the Saudi embassy in Turkey. The Americans also did not forget the Saudis’ 2001 attack on the Twin Towers in New York, which was planned by Osama bin Laden and carried out with the participation of 15 Saudi citizens and with the Saudi regime turning a blind eye. It is no secret that Mohammed bin Salman worked with Bibi against President Obama and on behalf of Trump, who cancelled the nuclear agreement with Iran in accordance with the Israeli-Saudi demand. Before being elected president, Biden promised to turn MBS into a pariah and refused to meet with him. Yet the coronavirus pandemic and the Russian invasion of Ukraine threw everything up in the air.

This is how MBS became the kingmaker. Not only does he coordinate oil production with Putin to maintain its high price and shows utter contempt at Western sanctions that set a low ceiling price for Russian oil, but he also helps Putin finance his criminal war in Ukraine. On the other hand, bin Salman pokes Biden in the eye by creating a strategic partnership with China, and renews diplomatic relations with Iran through Chinese mediation, steps that flashed a warning signal in the White House. While MBS is another bloodthirsty dictator, like most leaders of the Arab world, China is a world power that aspires to achieve global hegemony and has the means to fulfil its ambitions. Today China leads the Autocracy camp and is trying to push America out of Africa, Latin America, and the Middle East. This situation left Biden no choice, he must tie MBS’s hands, and Bibi can provide him with the rope to do so.

Here we will return to Costa’s question – “What does Israel gain de facto?” To answer, you should ask – what do the people of Saudi Arabia gain from the agreement? In Saudi Arabia, as in Israel, there is a difference between the regime and the people, and not everything that benefits the regime also benefits the people. The Saudi people live under a dictatorial regime based on Sharia law. Oppression of women, the LGBTQ community, and freedom of expression are offenses punishable by death. In Israel, too, we are fighting against oppression of women, the LGBTQ community and attempts to impose Jewish religious law on us. The difference between us and them is that here there is a will to hold on to these vested rights, while in Saudi Arabia the people have never had even one day of freedom and democracy. And those who demanded freedom in Saudi Arabia ended their lives like Jamal Khashoggi.

The Saudi regime is not only oppressing its own people, but also spreading its Wahhabi and Messianic Islamic ideology throughout the Middle East. It was the Saudis who helped Abdel Fattah al-Sisi eliminate the Arab Spring. They also brought the jihadist militias into Syria to drown the civil resistance in blood, thereby aiding the Syrian regime’s massacre of the Syrian people with the aid of the Iranians and the Russians. Not many Israelis bothered to learn the details. The Saudi regime is no better than the Iranian regime. Like it, Saudi Arabia wants to arm itself with nuclear weapons to secure its rule, and like in Iran, its own people demanding freedom are its main enemy.

That’s why, together with you, Costa, we go out every week and shout “de-mo-cra-cy” and repeatedly state that we will not become Poland, Hungary or Iran. Does it make sense that we would be unwilling to compromise with illiberal “democratic” regimes, but are ready to make “biblical peace” with the bloodthirsty Saudi regime? Look what happened to Israel, which always prided itself on being the “only democracy in the Middle East.” Instead of us spreading democracy, dictatorship threatens to devour us.

The lesson is clear – it is impossible to maintain a long-term democracy in an environment infested with dictatorships. Our interest as democrats is to spread democracy to our neighbours so that our democracy will be sustainable. As for your question, Costa, what will come out of peace with Saudi Arabia in reality, I’ll leave it to you to answer. One thing I ask of you, don’t stop protesting for democracy, and don’t give in to all those sages and their advice.

The post Costa’s Question first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

The carnage in the Pittsburgh synagogue overshadowed the international scandal aroused by the murder of the well-known journalist and Saudi government critic, Jamal Khashoggi. Although there appears to be no connection between an anti-Semitic slaughter and the murder, President Trump is linked to both events. The Jewish community in Pittsburgh protested Trump’s visit. They view his rhetoric as racist. The fact that he defines himself as a “nationalist” foments division and hatred, encouraging murder.

Trump continues to be a welcome guest in Saudi Arabia’s capital, Riyadh. He is doing everything in his power to help his friend, the de facto Saudi leader and crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman (a.k.a. MBS), to obscure the latter’s direct involvement in Khashoggi’s death. Trump hastened to announce, “I believe him.” He also trusts Putin, Kim Jong Un, the Philippine strongman Rodrigo Duterte, and now the newly elected extreme right-wing president of Brazil, Jair Bolsonaro.

Many were surprised by the crude and amateurish way in which Khashoggi’s execution was carried out inside the Saudi consulate in Istanbul. As Trump’s protégé, the crown prince must have felt he had complete immunity. When the US president legitimizes lies as a weapon to attack his rivals, there is no reason why MBS’s fabrications should not be accepted too. MBS did in Istanbul what Trump does every day in Washington: eliminating political rivals through deception. This encourages attacks like the sending of bombs to Democrats and the massacre of Jews during prayer.

Khashoggi’s murder is a seminal event with the potential to shake up the Saudi royal family and threaten the throne of the supposedly enlightened crown prince. The mafia-style political hit has revealed his violent and murderous character. Is this the sort of man we can expect to lead Saudi Arabia into the 21st century by making far-reaching changes in the economy, social reforms, and the status of women?

The brutal war in Yemen (a humanitarian disaster), MBS’s detention of Lebanese President Saad Hariri, the arrest and extortion of MBS’s opponents within the royal family, barely raised the global eyebrow. Saudi Arabia’s enormous weapon procurements worldwide, especially from the United States, blinded many to his tyrannical behavior. However, Khashoggi’s murder has changed the equation.

Jamal Khashoggi was not some innocent journalist. An important political figure who once worked close to the royal court, he was an unofficial Saudi spokesperson while Prince Turki Al-Faisal headed the Saudi security services. Although Khashoggi used to talk about democracy, he stressed that the religious regime was the most suitable sort for conservative Saudi society. Khashoggi’s professional journalistic roots lie deep in Afghanistan, where he was close to Osama bin Laden when the latter was a favorite of President Ronald Reagan. However, following MBS’s palace coup, Khashoggi found himself, along with many in the royal court, cut off from power and a foe of the new ruler.

Following the rise of MBS, Khashoggi went into exile to conduct his struggle against the new regime. He chose the Washington Post as a platform from which to blast the new Saudi ruler. Jeff Bezos, the CEO of Amazon and one of Donald Trump’s most vocal opponents, owns the Washington Post. Jamal Khashoggi served as a tool of the American liberal wing to attack American policy in the Middle East, especially Trump’s support of MBS.

Khashoggi acted as a journalist steeped in Saudi affairs, exposing the shady sides of the new ruler. This undoubtedly offended MBS, who from his first days has employed an aggressive public relations campaign and invested money in Silicon Valley’s high-tech giants. His goal has been to create a technological revolution for his ambitious plan, “Vision 2030,” which will end Saudi dependence on oil as a major source of income. The vision is to attract large foreign investments to the Saudi economy in renewable energy, education, health, culture, recreation, and tourism.

However, the kingdom’s illnesses obstruct these goals. First, Saudis have grown accustomed to a life of idleness. Ten million foreigners, mainly Pakistanis and Indians, do the hard work. Saudis live on oil revenues. Their daily needs are subsidized and they pay no taxes. This is how the regime maintains internal quiet. Second, Saudi Arabia’s judicial system is based on Islamic Sharia law.It has no modern legal apparatus that can protect the interests of foreign companies. Third, in a country where half its citizens, the women, are unemployed and oppressed, there is little chance of economic growth. MBS’s steps for women are still far from what is needed to enable their integration into society and the economy. Fourth, every word of criticism is prohibited. This stymies cultural and scientific innovation and is contrary to Islamic religious law. Therefore, the transition to innovation is almost impossible. Saudi Arabia will need a lot more than a charismatic leader to propel itself into the modern world.

The Saudis fully understand that the era of oil has passed. Renewable energy occupies a central place in the world’s leading economies, and large amounts of capital are being invested in the development of autonomous electric cars. This threatens the very essence of the conservative Saudi regime. That is why Khashoggi’s murder is not only the beginning of MBS’s end, but it also puts a finishing touch on attempts to combine a royal religious dictatorship with modern economics.

The murder also sends a clear message to Benjamin Netanyahu and all those in Israel who see the Sunni axis as a bulwark against Iran, thinking it relieves them of any need to reach peace with the Palestinians. Officially, Israel has refrained from condemning Khashoggi’s slaying. Supreme security interests motivate cooperation with Israel buffs like Viktor Orban, Rodrigo Duterte, Jair Bolsonaro, and Donald Trump. However, the Saudi regime is built on sand, and its approach to Israel stems from weakness, not power. A self-confident regime does not urgently dispatch fifteen security men on a private plane to liquidate a rogue journalist who has come to its consulate in Istanbul to get papers that will allow him to marry.

Saudi Arabia serves as Trump’s ticket to the Arab world. MBS initially agreed to broker the “deal of the century,” which will give Israel control over the West Bank in exchange for limited Palestinian autonomy. Saudi Arabia, heading the coalition of Sunni Arab states, remained silent when Trump transferred the American embassy to Jerusalem. In exchange, Israel kept as quiet as a tomb when Khashoggi disappeared. Saudi Arabia backed the military coup in Egypt and supported the dictatorship of General el-Sisi, who is also a close friend of Israel.The Saudis also appointed jihad militias in Syria that liquidated the democratic youth who led the revolution against the Assad regime. Saudi money has also helped spread fundamentalist Islamic Wahhabism by funding mosques in Israel and around the world.

Therefore, the decline of the Saudi regime represents, above all, an eclipse of fundamentalist Islam as we have known it since the 1980s. This decline paves the way for the democratic forces that led the Arab Spring to return to the stage and establish a democratic regime. Only such a revolutionary movement, rising from the rank and file, can usher the Arab world into the Fourth Industrial Revolution that is currently spreading throughout the globe.

* Translated from the Hebrew by Robert Goldman

The post Khashoggi’s murder will bury the Crown Prince first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

What is happening today in Iran proves that the Spring is alive and well. In fact, we may trace its beginning to Iran in 2009, where it was triggered by election-rigging in Ahmadinejad’s camp. Two years later it spread like wildfire throughout the Arab world. Two regional oil powers, Saudi Arabia and Shiite fundamentalist Iran, did everything possible to drown the Spring in blood. Saudi Arabia financed the coup of General Sisi in Egypt, and Iran backed Assad’s efforts to wipe out the Syrian revolution. Hostility toward the Spring was shared equally by the Saudi and Iranian regimes, but Iran seemed to have the upper hand in Yemen, Iraq, and Syria – the Shia Crescent that keeps Israel awake at night.

Everything seemed finished: Saudi Arabia up to its neck in Yemen; Syria carved up among the victors (Putin, Erdogan and Khamenei); and Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri, Saudi Arabia’s long-time ally, aligning himself with Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah. Suddenly, however, Iranian workers, students and young people took to the streets and spoiled the party. The paradox is that Iranian “triumphs” hastened the outbreak of the current demonstrations. Unlike the Green Movement that broke out in Tehran in 2009, the current protests are not calling just for reform of the Islamic regime, rather they are demanding its overthrow.

On the diplomatic front, Iran’s moderate reformist president, Hassan Rouhani, could pat himself on the back after the signing of the nuclear agreement with the Obama administration. The Iranian people put their faith in Rouhani. He managed to get rid of most economic sanctions on Iran, but on the other hand, he allowed Major General Qasem Soleimani, commander of the Quds Force, to conduct his adventures in Iraq, Syria, and Yemen. The sanctions were lifted, Iran returned to being an oil economy, which initially grew by 12%, and the war against ISIS in Iraq and Syria was over.

The problem lies in the fact that economic growth did not trickle down. Daily life remains tough, and the annual budget submitted by Rouhani slashed subsidies on food and fuel. The public realized that oil revenues were being used to finance Soleimani’s adventures. Thousands of Iranians have poured into the streets protesting against Hezbollah, Hamas and Shiite militias in Iraq and Yemen. They are attacking the Iranian leadership because they feel that the military ventures have taken priority over the people’s welfare.

Today, many clever people are celebrating at the expense of the Iranian regime. They are led by the Saudis, Trump, and Netanyahu. The joy may be premature, however. Not because the demonstrations have still not swelled into a general revolt, but because the fall of the Iranian regime will benefit not the Saudis, nor Trump, nor Netanyahu. Iran’s fiscal difficulties stem from the same structural problems that Saudi Arabia suffers (even though the Saudis are dealing with them in a different way.) Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman staged a palace coup and called for the modernization of his economy. The plan, Vision 2030, is intended to deal with the plunge in oil prices, which has spawned a budget deficit. Nevertheless, many pundits doubt his ability to make the necessary changes without an overhaul of the kingdom.

Despite their differences, Saudi Arabia and Iran are running a similar economic system of centralization in favor of the ruling class. In the case of the Saudis, it’s all about the royal court and those close to it. In the Iranian case, it’s about the Revolutionary Guards and those close to them. In both countries, the religious establishment is the final arbiter of law and lifestyle. Modesty patrols invade the private lives of citizens, and freedom of speech is limited to statements that do not harm the regime and “public sentiment.” Needless to say, interpreting “public sentiment” is in the hands of religious scholars alone. The two countries, Saudi Arabia and Iran, are hungry for foreign investment to diversify their economies, but corruption and severe restrictions on freedom drive potential investors away. Saudi Arabia and Iran both rely on oil exports to finance an Islamic welfare state, blocking the technological revolution which drives the economic engine of the 21st century.

The third industrial revolution, built on renewable energy and the Internet, makes oil economies irrelevant. At a time when traditional industries are losing ground to advanced manufacturing based on technology and renewable energy, Arab regimes and the Iranians are becoming an obstacle to economic development. They are sentencing most of their citizens to a life of backwardness and poverty. The origins of the Iranian and Arab Spring have roots in the failure of neoliberal economic regimes to ensure the welfare of the citizens, not only in the Middle East but also in Western economies and, first and foremost, the US itself. The fact that the Saudis succeeded in thwarting the Egyptian revolution, and the Iranians in thwarting the Syrian revolution, is temporary. The Spring will not skip over them.

The collapse of the Iranian regime, if it occurs, is liable to remove the “strategic threat” that has made Netanyahu’s entire career. In any case, the Iranian threat is more an Israeli fantasy than reality. Israel has been Iran’s excuse to expand its influence in the Arab world. The Iranian revolution has challenged the Saudi kingdom for hegemony in the Islamic world. Iran and Hezbollah inscribed “Jerusalem” on their banner in order to conquer Aleppo, Mosul, Sana’a, and Beirut.

The fall of the Iranian regime would catalyze the collapse of other dictators in the Middle East, such as Egypt’s Sisi, Syria’s Assad, and eventually the Saudi regime. The last seeks to sidestep this destiny by trying to build a modern economy layered on an archaic regime, but it cannot work. The Iranian threat will be removed from Israel, and in its place there will be a much greater threat: without nuclear weapons, without fundamentalist ideology, but equipped with weapons of knowledge and freedom of information. Let’s call it the threat of the new Arab Democracy.

The State of Israel is very invested in threats, and it has a strong army that identifies and deals with them. However, IDF intelligence failed to predict the revolution in Egypt, just as it did not foresee the first intifada 30 years ago. The concept of Arab civil society, modern economics, democratic government, the entry of the Arab world into the 21st century through renewable energy, and the internet revolution are not considered a possibility. The statement by Egyptian intelligence chief Omar Suleiman that” democracy does not suit the Arabs” is a guiding light for Israel.

The fact is that Israel, the start-up nation and the “only democracy in the Middle East,” views benighted regimes such as the military dictatorship in Egypt and the Saudi royal family as strategic allies, and their possible fall as an immediate and tangible danger. In the Arab region, a reality will be created in which the “only democracy in the Middle East” will be judged according to what it is: a colonialist and fundamentalist state, a remnant of the last century. And who knows, perhaps the Spring will also knock on its door.

*Translated from the Hebrew by Robert Goldman

The post The Iranian threat is in danger first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

The entire world was astonished when Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman embarked on a sweeping crackdown and purged some of the kingdom’s most important princes and businessmen. Within a day, he announced the creation of an “Anti-Corruption Committee.” Saudi Arabia’s billionaire Prince Alwaleed bin Talal was arrested along with at least ten other princes, several government ministers and former ministers, as well as two of the late King Abdullah’s sons. They have been corralled into a luxurious hotel once frequented by Saudi sheikhs. This is indeed a coup. Politicians and commentators are crossing fingers for the young prince in the hope that this gambit pays off, and that Mohammad bin Salman will succeed in taking control of all branches of power that are now held by the 15,000 members of the House of Saud.

The crown prince aims to change the world order in a kingdom where time has stood still since 1932, the year of its founding, thanks to oil resources that once seemed inexhaustible. The Saudi kingdom was created on oil wells, and it is because of this that its distorted economy has survived. It’s a kind of welfare state that allows the people of the kingdom to live without working as long as they adhere to Sharia law. Saudi women are at the mercy of men in all respects, and work is done by foreign workers without rights.

But like every good thing, the petrodollar celebration is coming to an end. The fall in oil prices has pushed the Saudi economy towards an abyss. Economic growth is near zero, and the kingdom will not survive unless it changes radically. When historians mark the beginning of the end of the kingdom, they will have no trouble noting the date – September 11, 2001. After all, Saudi Arabia exports not only oil, which lubricates the wheels of the global economy (and has made countless petrodollars which were invested in American banks and enterprises), it also exports a version of Islamic jihad. The Shiite Islamic revolution in Iran in the late 1970s frightened the Saudis, and in response, they established a wide global network for the spread of Wahhabism. This is an Islamic doctrine that insists on a literal interpretation of the Koran. Saudi Arabia was founded on Wahhabism, and it is its dominant faith today.

September 11 changed the world. The same oil that moved the world economy also spread destruction by funding Sunni fundamentalist groups such as al-Qaeda. The West realized that dependence on Saudi oil must be reduced – the sooner the better. While the Americans discovered a way of extracting oil from shale, the world learned that oil not only spreads radical Islam, but also pollutes the air and brings about global warming. That’s why the Saudi kingdom switched from being a strategic asset to a huge problem. Obama did not hide his opinion about the Saudis when he abandoned them in favor of the nuclear agreement with Iran. And although Trump chose to make his first visit outside the US borders to Saudi Arabia and to withdraw from the Paris agreement, which restricts greenhouse gas emissions, this will not change the historical trend – the abandonment of oil and fossil energy in favor of renewable energy.

The kingdom has set a date. Mohammed bin Salman announced the year 2030 as the goal, and “Vision 2030” is the name of an economic plan that is supposed to launch the medieval monarchy into the 21st century. However, this dramatic program in the social and economic spheres ignores the need to change the regime, which will remain an absolute monarchy. Even though Saudi Arabia is hungry for overseas capital to diversify its economy and reduce its dependence on oil sales, anyone who looks at the initial data, which are amazing and frightening, finds it hard to understand how the young and energetic prince can succeed in squaring the circle: In Saudi Arabia there is no civil legal system except for Sharia courts, there is no restriction on the age of marriage, and there are no rights for women. It is not clear that Western investors will invest in a country where the law is in the hands of Sheikhs who rule according to such an extreme and rigid tradition. Equally amazing is that one-third of the kingdom’s 30 million residents are foreign nationals who serve as the labor force in industry and services, while 20 million Saudis work in the public sector and/or live on subsidies.

There is no question that the Crown Prince must make drastic changes if he wants his country to move toward modernity. Having decided to stop dependence on oil sales, he must also wean the economy of foreign workers and train Saudis to work for private employers according to the rules of a modern economy. Although it will be possible for women to get a driver’s license (taking effect only in June 2018), in order to work they will have to have a valid identity card and passport, plus a male guardian’s consent. In order to overcome the deficit in the state budget, instead of subsidizing citizens, taxes will have to be placed on them, and a profound reform of the education system will need to be undertaken. This will mean a shift from religious to scientific studies in order to integrate workers into a high-tech economy. No less crucial, the prince must eliminate the corruption that has crept into every corner of the kingdom. Saudi citizens will not forever cooperate with a regime in which taxes and oil revenues finance the bloated royal family.

It can be said that Saudi Arabia is at the same point that the Arab regimes reached in 2011, when they fell like dominoes in the Arab Spring. The purges conducted by Mohammad bin Salman are evidence that the Saudi regime suffers from wide-scale corruption, oppression, and lack of democracy, just like those regimes that have already disappeared. The only difference is that Saudi Arabia has held out longer because it breathes petrol fumes.

The Saudi regime is currently trying to do exactly what its predecessors did two decades before they collided with the Arab Spring. Assad and Mubarak dismantled the welfare state and enforced a neo-liberal market economy that only widened the gap between the ruling elite and the general public. Corruption and oppression caused people to rise up, and the regimes collapsed. Mohammed bin Salman’s attempts to gain global recognition, his commitment to stop promoting radical Islam, his war on corruption, and his promise to invest billions in a modern, green economy, will not convince those who understand that such an economy cannot tolerate dictatorship. Modernization must be based on intellectual pluralism, sharing instead of centralization, and a total democratization of the regime.

Here we should remember another important detail. One of the reasons why the Arab Spring failed was the resolute opposition of the Saudis to the revolutionary wave. Saudi money financed el-Sisi’s military coup, which was grounded in political terrorism and corruption; it also backed jihadist militias that put down democratic forces in Syria (thus indirectly serving the Syrian regime and providing an excuse for Russian and Iranian intervention). In spite of all the bloodshed and prophecies about the demise of the Arab Spring, the Saudi Kingdom now faces the very same challenge: either to embrace modernity, democracy, alternative energy, and the freedom of information that flows through the internet – or to disappear.

The Arab Spring was a wake-up call. The young people in the Arab world set a clear path for the future. The Saudis did everything to obstruct the course of history in Egypt, Yemen, Libya and Syria. However, history knows no mercy. It is now knocking at the gates of the kingdom itself. Saudi Arabia must decide whether to stand on the side of progress or to oppose it and disappear. Mohammad bin Salman’s purge campaign is no more than a desperate attempt to ward off the inevitable: regime change in Saudi Arabia as a prelude to regime change in the entire Arab world. A democratic transformation in Saudi Arabia, when it happens, will determine not only the fate of that country but of the entire Arab world. The writing is on the wall. It was written in the winter of 2011, and it cannot be erased.

* Translated from the Hebrew by Robert Goldman

The post The Saudis and the Arab spring first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

About 15,000 people gathered in Rabin Square on May 27th to mark 50 years of Occupation and call for a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. One by one, leaders of the peace camp took to the stage, from “Buji” Herzog to Ayman Odeh, as President Abu Mazen’s message echoed in their ears: “There is no stronger voice than the voice of a just and comprehensive peace, just as there is no stronger voice than the right of nations to self-determination and freedom from the burden of Occupation. The time has come to live — both you and us — in peace, harmony, security and stability. The only way to end the conflict and the fight against terror in the region and the world is a two-state solution based on the June 1967 borders, Palestine by Israel’s side.” Strong words intended to breathe life into a camp that has lost faith in itself and continues to believe in the slogan of “two states,” which has become obsolete and has no way of being realized.

On the face of it, Abu Mazen is the “ultimate” partner of the peace camp. But in reality, he is its gravedigger. He enjoys the praises of those seeking peace, but he is skeptical of the possibility of a political upheaval that will put an end to Israel’s right-wing government. And since political upheaval is not in sight, the two-state slogan has become a rationalization for the continued existence of the Palestinian Authority (PA), which, over time, has become a temporary solution to a permanent condition. Most of Abu Mazen’s energy is not aimed at ending the Occupation, but rather at trying to eliminate Hamas. While security coordination has become a cornerstone of the relationship between the PA and Israel, the struggle against Hamas has become a major obsession, and the PA hasn’t hesitated to prevent fuel, medicines and salaries from reaching Gaza, at the same time employing other pressure to bring Hamas to its knees and return Gaza to the hands of the Fatah movement.

The two-state slogan also serves Netanyahu. He isn’t under pressure to decide between the annexation of the West Bank and withdrawal from the occupied territories. Of course, the peace camp tries to convince the Jewish public of the need for a Palestinian state by cultivating fears of an Arab majority. Billboards are displayed showing an enraged Palestinian crowd with the caption “Tomorrow we will be the majority.” Abu Mazen is burning the candle at both ends: he continues his imaginary struggle against Netanyahu, and, simultaneously, he allows the Zionist Left to nurture the false hope that they can separate from the Palestinians, preserving the Jewish and democratic character of the state in the spirit of the Declaration of Independence.

Netanyahu knows full well that Abu Mazen’s situation is not brilliant. The more Netanyahu refuses to negotiate with him, the more Palestinians’ trust in their president is eroded. It seems that Rabin Square is the only square where Abu Mazen can speak freely. He was disgracefully “thrown out” of Gaza Square, and, in the squares of the West Bank he only hears curses and insults. Just recently, he was cursed by the mothers of hunger-striking prisoners in Israeli jails, who claimed he was thwarting their struggle. The Labor Party, “Yesh Atid” and ” Kulanu”—the bloc that is supposed to stop Netanyahu in the next elections—does not believe in an attainable solution. Like Netanyahu, they use the two-state slogan in order to seek a new interim arrangement that will last for the next 50 years. And there is still a small matter that few have considered: how do we persuade the Palestinians to agree to another interim arrangement while the three core issues – the status of Jerusalem, the settlements and the refugees – still hang in the air? However, such trivialities are ignored.

The peace camp discerns a singular “historical opportunity” and has discovered the magic of the Sunni states, which overnight changed from an enemy to a lover. No more cultivating the Maronites, Shiites, Kurds, Copts, Druze, and all those who had suffer from the heavy hand of the Sunni majority. Until now, the Sunni-Israeli alliance against Iran has failed for one reason: President Obama liked the Iranians and feared the Sunnis, especially the Sunni Wahhabism of the Gulf States.

With Trump’s election, a historic opportunity became a reality as the erratic US president began his first overseas tour in Saudi Arabia. In return for a sizeable check of $400 billion, and at the request of King Salman, he put together an anti-Iran coalition. In order to cushion the new Sunni alliance and to improve its problematic image in his country, Trump has taken on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. What an irony, the unbelievable has happened! Hillary Clinton was defeated and replaced by a mercurial thug, a close friend of Netanyahu, the one who cannot be refused. It is precisely Trump—a rival of Angela Merkel and the enemy of women, blacks and Muslims, a supporter of torture, a despiser of refugees, a climate change denier—who has become the messiah of Israeli peacemakers.

Trump’s supporters claim that even if all the above is true, it does not contradict the fact that Trump, in order to please the Saudis and thus bring America back to its grandeur, is urging Netanyahu to make concessions to pave the way for an agreement with Abu Mazen. Therefore, the peace camp must support such a move, which is expected to lead to separation from the Palestinians. Life is full of contradictions, and history has already proved that not everything bad for the Gentiles is necessarily bad for the Jews. The fact is that Trump’s emissary, Jason Greenblatt, is trying to persuade Netanyahu to transfer some of Area C to Area B, an ingenious idea that will make it appear that Israel is making concessions. The problem is that this idea was raised 20 years ago when, at the end of his first term, Netanyahu promised to move thirteen percent of Area C to the Palestinians in exchange for cancelling the Palestinian National Covenant. The Palestinians did indeed amend the charter at an impressive ceremony in Gaza in the presence of President Clinton. But Netanyahu suddenly repented and coined the phrase “If they give, they will receive. If they don’t give, they won’t receive,” which he still maintains to this day in various versions.

What may seem a historic opportunity to the peace camp is an anti-historical opportunity. In fact, Trump is trying to breathe life into a dying Saudi kingdom, which has seen its resources dwindle as oil prices have plummeted. The Saudi people are lazy and idle. The Arab Spring has removed most Arab dictators, and the Saudi economy is being drained by a costly and seemingly unwinnable war in Yemen. The Saudis also support radical Islamic militias in Syria. The irony is that Saudi Arabia is fighting Iran by spreading Islamic Salafi Wahhabism, al-Qaeda’s incubator. It is in this arena that Trump chooses to combat terror. The alliance between the Sunni states and Trump has no chance of succeeding, not only owing to the rotten nature of the Sunni regimes, but also because Iran is essential to Trump as an ally in Iraq, in the struggle against ISIS, and in the taking of Mosul.

In light of the reality that has emerged during the 50 years of Occupation, it is time to change the diskette. Reliance on Trump, Saudi Arabia and Abu Mazen, allies of the Israeli Right, will not save the peace camp. A truly historic opportunity to find genuine peace with the Palestinians was lost when, after the Oslo Accords, the PA was invented as a substitute for an independent state. Today, we pay a heavy political price for this. After the Right has entrenched itself in power, it cannot be defeated by fear that Israel will someday have a Palestinian majority.

The way to defeat the Right is to find a true partner for building an egalitarian society in a democratic state that honors its citizens without discrimination based on nationality, religion or skin-color. The Middle East is changing, new societies will emerge from beneath the ruins of civil wars, and the benighted Arab regimes are condemned to disappear. These deep and revolutionary changes will sooner or later bring about a democratic change in Palestinian society, which will force Israeli society to change likewise.

• Translated from the Hebrew by Robert Goldman

The post Abu Mazen: The peace camp’s partner or gravedigger? first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

As Israel’s media began marathon broadcasts on the three abducted Jewish youths, the world was busy with just one event: the fall of Mosul into the hands of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) and the disintegration of the Iraqi army. There is no apparent connection between the two, but one man dreamt up a connection and made full use of it for his own political ends. That man was Israel’s imaginative prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu.

The abduction and ISIS’s encroachment on Baghdad were an opportunity for Netanyahu to win back the world’s support for his political views. When he sent the mothers of the three youths to the United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva on a weird propaganda mission entitled “Bring back our boys,” he already knew that they were no longer alive and that Hamas was taking no responsibility for the abduction. But for Netanyahu, everything is permitted in the struggle to regain the favor of the international community.

When the abduction was first known, Netanyahu convened the security cabinet to get government support for the military operation dubbed “Brother’s Keeper”, whose aim was to eliminate Hamas’ presence in the West Bank. The prime minister was granted a free hand. He used the abduction to demonstrate that “there is no partner” (for peace) and that Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen), merely by agreeing to a joint Palestinian government with Hamas, supports terrorism. He used the advance of ISIS to shore up his outlook on security, according to which the Jordan River is Israel’s eastern border, and thus to negate the possibility of a sovereign Palestinian state.

Moreover, during the assembly of Tel Aviv University’s Institute for National Security Studies, Netanyahu declared that Israel supports the creation of an independent Kurdish state in the Kurdish autonomous region in Iraq (Iraqi Kurdistan). Thus Netanyahu breaks up the Palestinian Authority by military operation and the state of Iraq by declaring a sovereign Kurdish state.

Everyone loves ISIS

Netanyahu is the first leader to call for the establishment of an independent Kurdistan in the face of US wrath. America called on the Kurdish leader, Masoud Barzani, to avoid such a step, because this would strengthen ISIS’s hold on Sunni regions and lead to Iraq’s disintegration. For Netanyahu, however, the main threat is not ISIS but Iran. In his opinion, with the creation of a Kurdish state, Israel would gain a friend on Iran’s border. This would serve as a counterweight to Lebanon, which Iran has shaped as its own outpost on Israel’s northern border.

These are tense moves in a fascinating game of chess in which Netanyahu takes advantage of Iraq’s and Syria’s disintegration to promote what he believes are Israel’s strategic interests. ISIS is doing the work not only for Netanyahu, but also for Saudi Arabia, which was very happy to hear that ISIS was hammering on the gates of Baghdad. Saudi Arabia would love to see the fall of Iraq’s Shiite prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki, the Saudi kingdom’s sworn enemy and the ally of Iran’s ayatollah regime.

Thus ISIS became the darling of both Netanyahu and Saudi Arabia, for ISIS hates the Shiites much more than it hates the Jews. At the same time, it is the darling of Syria’s Bashar Assad and Iraq’s Maliki: these two exploit the fears of the Americans and Europeans, who worry that Jihadists holding Western passports will bring the battle back to Europe and America. In a bid for the West’s support, Assad and Malaki portray Isis as the greater evil, while behind this scrim of fear they continue murdering or oppressing their own people. ISIS benefits in any case, but particularly from the anarchy caused by the decay of dictatorships from Egypt through the Persian Gulf to Syria and Iraq.

ISIS’s success cannot be disconnected from the Sunni uprisings in Iraq and Syria. After years of discrimination, suppression, economic exclusion, and hostility, Sunnis view Iran and its satellites in Syria, Iraq, and Lebanon as their bitter enemies.

The fear of the Arab Spring

The “pragmatists” in the Zionist left, mainly Meretz and Labor Party supporters, stand in open-mouthed surprise as ISIS strengthens Netanyahu and the right wing. The latter are already talking about beefing up the security fence in the occupied Jordan Valley to defend Israel’s permanent presence there, an act that would put an end to any chance of agreement with the Palestinians. The Israeli left’s alternative is of course to strengthen Abu Mazen and link up with the Egypt-Saudi Arabia-Persian Gulf axis. This is a conservative, narrow Zionist perspective, which does not understand that the rise of ISIS is due to the Arab Spring’s failure to bring democracy to the Arab world.

The Arab Spring shook up all the regimes, but Saudi Arabia and Iran succeeded in suppressing the democratic uprising in two central states: Egypt and Syria. Saudi Arabia and Iran are indeed enemies, but they are united in their fear of any democratic change which threatens their regimes. Saudi Arabia took steps against the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, because the Brotherhood was an expression of political Islam that gained power by adapting to the democratic game, as in Turkey and Tunisia. Iran, for its part, supports Assad, because his downfall is liable to spark renewed rebellion against the ayatollah regime, which has been under constant threat since the Green Revolution of 2009.

It is shortsighted to call for establishing a “moderate axis” with Abu Mazen as well as the Jordanian and Saudi kings, because each is perceived by his own people as a dictator, a traitor to the people’s interests. These regimes are so unstable that a few thousand ISIS fighters can shake up the entire region. Opposition to them is increasing all the time. It is a mistake to think that the Arab Spring is over. Demonstrations and strikes in Egypt continue, and those who follow the Egyptian media see heated debates and severe criticism of Abdel Fattah el-Sisi’s regime.

The revolutionary youth are hounded, but their popularity remains high. They are the alternative to ISIS and fundamentalist Islam, and they are struggling for democracy and economic development based on equality for the entire region. To count on the “moderate” Arab regimes is to count on the past and ignore the educated middle-class youth and the working class who constitute the Arab world’s future.

Netanyahu will one day yearn for Hamas

By his constant refusal to reach an agreement with the Palestinians, Netanyahu is building ISIS not only in Iraq and Syria but in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip too. ISIS broke away from Al Qaeda, which it saw as too moderate. The greater the suppression, poverty and exclusion, and the more the dictatorships suppress democratic change, the more extreme will the alternative be – in keeping with the people’s despair.

Hamas grew on the despair following the failure of the Oslo Accords and the corruption of the Palestinian Authority. Now, as Hamas takes a more moderate stand due to the Egyptian embargo and is willing to compromise with Abu Mazen, Netanyahu – like his Egyptian counterpart Sisi – is acting to eliminate it. If he succeeds – who will fill the vacuum? An even more extreme organization. Every call of “Death to the Arabs” shores up the call “Death to the Jews,” and every door closing on an agreement opens a door to fundamentalist Islam. There is no need for a vast number of extremists – it is enough to have a handful with public support.

The suppression of the democratic uprisings known as the Arab Spring did not lead to a “moderate axis” but to the rise of ISIS on the one hand, and, on the other, to the deepening of the Israeli right’s refusal to accept a just peace. This is the ground on which a local version of ISIS will flourish. ISIS is not far away; it is hammering on the doors of the Jordanian kingdom, growing roots in the Sinai Peninsula, and gaining support in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. No fence in the world will stop it from spreading.

ISIS is an emotional condition, an extreme expression of an extreme situation, and the more anarchy reigns, the more likely it is that Israel will find itself confronting ISIS. It is possible that Netanyahu, like Assad, Sisi and Maliki, will enjoy the world’s support as a “fighter against terrorism.” However, this will not help the people of Israel, who will have to cope with a very different situation than the one they have grown used to. It is not just “Judea and Samaria” that are “inside Israel,” as the settlers like to say, but ISIS too.

– Translated by Yonatan Preminger

The post ISIS in Israel first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

On July 19, 2013, US Secretary of State John Kerry announced the resumption of talks between the Israelis and the Palestinians. The announcement did not come from Jerusalem or Ramallah, but from the Jordanian capital Amman, which has become the US State Department’s front line in the region. In the present tour, Kerry did not meet with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, because it was clear to all that Netanyahu was not the one who must make the decision. The ball was in the court of Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen); he’s the one being asked to accept Israel’s familiar terms – talks with no preconditions, or in other words, talks for the sake of talks, as has been the norm since the Oslo Accords were signed.

For the last three years, Abbas has been against resuming negotiations with Israel as long as Netanyahu does not commit to halting the settlement project and to recognizing the pre-1967 borders as a basis for talks. Netanyahu, as we all know, rejected the Palestinian terms. This raises the question: has something changed in Israel’s position which opened its way to negotiations? For the answer, we must look to the changes in the region, especially the revolution in Egypt.

Saudi Arabia, Abu Mazen and the Egyptian revolution

Before Abu Mazen made his decision, Kerry met with 11 Arab foreign ministers, mostly from the Gulf states, in order to receive their blessing for the move. If we look at the details of that meeting, which received scant media coverage, we see that the agenda included the situation in Egypt. If we want evidence of this, note that immediately after Kerry’s announcement Jordan’s King Abdullah visited Cairo – the first leader to do so since the coup that brought down President Morsi. What’s the link between the situation in Egypt and the resumption of talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority?

There is certainly a link, and it is very well known, but now the events in Egypt must be added to the equation, especially the defeat of the Muslim Brotherhood. Consider the following:

In recent weeks, Saudi Arabia has managed to overcome the Muslim Brotherhood in Syria by forcing its own man, Ahmad Assi Jarba, onto the Syrian National Coalition. It was Saudi Arabia, likewise, that planned and funded the overthrow of Egypt’s elected leader, Morsi, helped by its bosom friend the Salafist al-Nour Party, which ditched its alliance with the Muslim Brotherhood.

Just as the fall of Mubarak was a blow to Abu Mazen, so the fall of the Muslim Brotherhood is a blow to Hamas. Just as Abu Mazen lost his most important regional ally in Mubarak, now Hamas has lost its major card. Hamas was banished from Syria after expressing reservations about the massacres ordered by Assad, and it is now besieged on all sides: in the south by Egypt, in the north by Israel, and now by the Palestinian Authority, which has waited long to settle accounts with it.

Hamas faces an unusual wave of incitement from the leaders of the Egyptian National Salvation Front, which supported the military coup. This group is using Hamas to undermine Morsi’s legitimacy; the Front accuses him of being too tolerant towards terror in the Sinai Peninsula, harming Egypt’s national security. The Tamaroud movement has also opened a front against the Brotherhood entitled “the war on terror,” thus endorsing the Egyptian security forces’ suppression of Brotherhood activists and leaders. At the same time, the Egyptian army is annihilating the “smuggling tunnels” between the Gaza Strip and Sinai, which constitute an important economic lifeline for the Strip.

Saudi Arabia sacrifices Palestine

When the Brotherhood leadership in Egypt sits behind bars, and when the Hamas leadership is besieged in the Gaza Strip, the time is ripe for Abu Mazen to tighten the noose on Hamas by cooperating with Israel. It will be remembered that Morsi took advantage of the last war in Gaza to get US support by brokering a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas; immediately afterwards he made the famous declaration that put himself above the constitution (this declaration, by the way, marked the beginning of the end for his regime). In the same way, Saudi Arabia today is taking advantage of the Israeli-Palestinian negotiations to gain US support for the shady military coup in Egypt. Just as Morsi sacrificed Hamas to win US support for his totalitarian declaration, so Saudi Arabia is sacrificing the Palestinian cause to gain US support for its status in the region and the new regime in Egypt.

This strategy is doomed. With all due respect to the US, governments are dependent on popular support. If Morsi failed the aspirations of the Egyptian people,

The post Abu Mazen’s failed gamble first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.