Tag Archives: Israel

Uncategorized

Looking back on an incredible journey

The world, or at least about a fourth of it — the Christians among the world’s people — is getting ready to celebrate the birth of a baby who would come to symbolize salvation, grace and victory over death.

My own thoughts at Christmas every year since, oh, 2009, have turned to an amazing journey I was honored to take through the Holy Land. I was given the honor in May-June 2009 of accompanying four young people on a Rotary International Group Study Exchange trip through virtually all of Israel. Fernando, Aida, Shirley and Katt have become four of my closest friends and I cherish them more than they know.

We spent four weeks there traveling from Nahariya to Eilat, to Tel Aviv, Sderot and Ashkelon, to Nazareth and Caesarea, the Dead Sea and Masada. It was an amazing time. Then, after the exchange had concluded, I spent another week with my wife who had flown over to join me as a tourist. We spent the bulk of our time in Jerusalem, visiting holy sites.

But I think of that journey now every year at Christmas time and remember the things we saw along the way.

* Nazareth and the Church of the Annunciation, where the angel told Mary she would give birth to the Son of God.

* Bethlehem, where my wife and I visited the Church of the Nativity and the Shepherds Field.

* The Temple Mount, where Jesus preached.

* The Mount of Olives overlooking Jerusalem and Via do lo Rosa where Jesus walked.

Easter, of course, marks the end of Jesus’s life on Earth and the resurrection we celebrate.

This day, though, is to remember his birth.

I’ve believed my entire life in all that is holy about this holiday. However, being able to see those places up close and to walk the paths trod by Jesus himself makes it special beyond all measure.

Uncategorized

Cornyn offers insulting tweet on Iran deal

I’ve long thought that U.S. Sen. John Cornyn was a serious man.

Then came this response to the deal brokered over the weekend involving Iran’s nuclear development program.

“Amazing what WH will do to distract attention from O-care”

http://blogs.star-telegram.com/politex/2013/11/sen-cornyns-iran-tweet-sparks-reaction-in-twitter-sphere.html

Huh? That was the response from the senior U.S. Republican senator from the great state of Texas?

So, in Cornyn’s mind an agreement that seeks to guide Iran toward a dismantling of its nuclear program, protect Israel — our nation’s most stalwart Middle East ally — and restore some semblance of stability in one of the world’s most explosive regions is a mere “distraction”?

Cornyn’s tweet drew some harsh response, some of which was equally unfair.

My larger point, though, is that Sen. Cornyn should know better than to suggest an intense negotiation involving the United States, Iran and several other great world powers is some kind of political feint to take interest away from an unrelated domestic policy dispute.

Ridiculous.

Uncategorized

Iran must pay huge price for non-compliance

Congress is going to step into the Iranian nuclear program dismantling discussion if the need arises.

Go for it, lawmakers.

http://thehill.com/blogs/global-affairs/middle-eastnorth-africa/191416-congress-prepares-to-punish-tehran

The deal hammered out over the weekend between several of the great powers and Iran calls for the mullahs to take down its nuclear program over time. They must not develop a nuclear weapon. In return Iran will see a partial lifting of economic sanctions that have punished that country’s economy — and which, in my view, have helped bring the Iranians to the negotiating table after years of refusing to discuss their nuclear development program.

Iran has six months to make good on its promises. If it doesn’t, or if it reneges on any element of the agreement, then Congress is going to take action to clamp down even tighter on the Islamic Republic.

The decision to take action if Iran doesn’t comply forestalls any effort to derail the agreement brokered by Secretary of State John Kerry and the Iranian foreign minister. Yes, the agreement has drawn heavy fire from congressional Republicans and Democrats, not to mention from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who calls the agreement a “historic mistake.”

Israel remains prepared to take unilateral military action against Iran if it feels threatened. Who can blame the Israelis, given the constant battles they fight with many of their neighbors who are intent on destroying Israel?

The agreement might not be perfect, but Iran has paid a heavy price already for its refusal to talk — until now — with the rest of the world about its nuclear intentions. As for Israel’s security, Kerry says our nation’s key Middle East ally will remain secure and that the United States will continue to stand foursquare behind it.

Meanwhile, Congress is right to prepare a punishment option to have ready in the event Iran doesn’t comply with the agreement.

The task now is to persuade the Iranians that additional suffering makes it necessary for them to follow through.

Uncategorized

Iran nuke deal: mistake or triumph?

Here is what I understand about the deal brokered in the wee hours today to persuade Iran to stop its nuclear development program.

* For the next six months, United States and other nations will be allowed daily access to Iran’s agreement to dismantle some of its nuclear enrichment program.

* There will be a lifting of a tiny fraction of the sanctions that have crippled the Iranian economy.

* The six-month interim agreement will enable the great powers and Iran to continue negotiating toward a comprehensive long-term agreement aimed at eliminating the threat that Iran would develop a nuclear weapon.

* If the Iranians do not comply with all the elements of this agreement, the sanctions will be restored and Iran will continue to pay a huge price as a rogue nation.

And this, according to Republicans in Congress and our friends in Israel is a “historic mistake”?

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/11/24/21591860-historic-mistake-israelis-republicans-condemn-iran-nuclear-deal?lite

I happen to have great sympathy for the Israeli point of view here. I got to spend five weeks in Israel in 2009 and saw first hand the damage that has been inflicted on that country by forces dedicated to Israel’s elimination. Iran is one of Israel’s sworn enemies.

However, let’s look at a bigger picture here.

Iran has returned to the negotiating table with much of the rest of the civilized world. That, by itself, must be considered a positive development. Iranians say their nuke program is intended for peaceful purposes. No one believes that contention. I surely don’t.

However, the Iranians understand the price they are paying — through the sanctions imposed by the world — is too great a burden for their people. It is surely plausible for them to want to restore some semblance of normalcy in their dealings with the rest of the world, and agreeing to work toward the end of its nuclear development program is one avenue toward that restoration.

The newly elected Iranian president has declared his intention to change Iran’s relationship with the rest of the world. Is he to be believed? Well, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu calls Iranian President Hassan Rouhani a “wolf in wolf’s clothing.”

Netanyahu’s view of this agreement is stained by the blood that has been shed already in his country. I get that. However, from my perch many thousands of miles away, I am interested to see how stern the United States and our allies will be in holding Iran accountable for following through on this huge agreement.

Secretary of State John Kerry says there is “no daylight” between the U.S. and Israeli positions regarding the end of Iran’s nuclear program. Kerry says the United States stands foursquare with Israel.

Let us now move forward on this agreement — and make damn sure Iran complies.

Uncategorized

Can you say ‘gig ’em’ in Hebrew?

I was thrilled to see the Texas Tribune story about Texas A&M University System Chancellor John Sharp’s planned announcement that A&M was going to the Middle East to open a “peace campus.”

http://www.texastribune.org/2013/10/22/texas-m-announce-plans-branch-campus-israel/

The Aggies are going to set up a branch campus in Nazareth, Israel, of all places. It’s the result of some communication between Sharp and Manuel Trajtenberg, an Israeli economist who’s had this idea of bridging the distance between his country and ours.

I’m fascinated for a personal reason. I got to spend some time in Nazareth in 2009 as part of a Rotary International Group Study Exchange team. I learned that Nazareth over the years has become a primarily Arab community. Much of the Jewish population has moved into the suburbs around Nazareth, leaving the city proper to the Arabs.

It’s also a city with some magnificent Christian antiquities, such as the Church of the Annunciation, where Scripture tells us Mary learned she would give birth to the Son of God.

Now the Aggies are going to set up a campus in this holy city, bringing modernity to a community that is steeped in ancient tradition.

The Tribune reported that Sharp visited Israel earlier and had lunch with Trajtenberg, whom the Tribune described as “an economist who has chaired the Planning and Budgeting Committee of the Council for Higher Education in Israel for about four years. In that role, Trajtenberg has worked to increase access to higher education for, among other groups, the ultra-Orthodox and Arab communities.

“’There is no major academic institution in any Arab city or town within Israel,’ he observed in an interview with the Tribune.”

The announcement hasn’t been made official just yet. Sharp, along with fellow Aggie, Gov. Rick Perry, and former Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres, will make it official on Wednesday.

This is a big deal for all parties concerned. Texas A&M University is establishing a tremendous foothold in a place where deep faith and bitter conflict exist in close proximity to each other.

Is there a better place than Nazareth to establish a university campus dedicated to peace?

Uncategorized

Israeli PM takes dimmer view of Iran

I totally understand Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s mistrust of Iran.

He is bringing that message this week to the United Nations General Assembly and warns the United States not to trust Iran’s new president, who says he wants to make peace with the rest of the world.

http://news.msn.com/world/israels-netanyahu-warns-white-house-about-iran

President Obama placed a historic phone call last week to Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, the first president-to-president contact between the nations in 34 years. Obama said a comprehensive agreement to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons is possible. I hope he’s right, quite obviously.

Netanyahu isn’t so sure. And why should he trust a thing that comes out of the Iranian president’s mouth?

Rouhani succeeded a man who vowed to wipe Israel off the face of the planet. Indeed, that’s been the stated goal of the Islamic Republic of Iran since its founding in 1979.

I’ve had the pleasure of touring Israel. I spent five weeks there in the spring of 2009 and witnessed up close the proximity between Israel and nations with which it has gone to war several times since Israel’s founding in 1948. The Israelis live in a constant state of heightened vigilance.

Iran doesn’t border Israel, but it is close enough to launch missiles westward and into Israeli cities. That is the concern Israel maintains to this very moment and it is the concern that Netanyahu intends to relay to the world community when he speaks to the U.N. General Assembly.

No, he doesn’t trust Iran’s newfound conciliatory posture. The task at hand is for the world to extract from Iran’s president ironclad assurances that he means what he says.

Uncategorized

U.S.-Iran breakthrough, or breakdown?

President Obama made a historic phone call today.

He telephoned Hasan Rouhani, president of the Islamic Republic of Iran. The two men chatted for about 15 minutes, after which President Obama informed the world that he believes a deal to derail any Iranian effort to build a nuclear weapon could be struck.

http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/09/27/20722870-obama-and-rouhani-make-history-with-phone-call-thawing-three-decade-freeze-between-us-and-iran?lite

Some folks are hailing the phone call as a thawing of a 34-year-old freeze between the two nations. The last phone call between U.S. and Iranian heads of state occurred in 1979 when Jimmy Carter was president of the United States. It all went to hell later that year when Iranian “students” stormed our embassy in Tehran and held Americans hostage for 444 days.

Rouhani is sounding as though he wants to normalize relations with the United States and rejoin the world community. He’s launched something of a charm offensive of late, talking to a U.S. news network and speaking calmly at the United Nations. I am not totally comfortable plunging ahead with such an effort. I hope Barack Obama retains a degree of skepticism and moves very carefully.

We need to remember that for decades Iran has declared virtual war against the “Great Satan,” meaning the United States. It has declared its intention to wipe Israel off the face of the planet. It has supplied arms and other know-how to international terrorist groups, such as al-Qaida. It arms the Syrian dictator in his war against rebels. It has cozied up to Hezbollah and Hamas, two sworn enemies of Israel. The incendiary statements of Rouhani’s immediate predecessor as president also should not be dismissed and tossed aside.

A single phone call shouldn’t signal a “thaw.” It well might mean that it’s time to turn the temperature up just a bit to begin the thawing of relations.

But just as the late President Ronald Reagan said of Soviet strongman Mikhail Gorbachev, “Trust, but verify,” it is good to seek multiple verifications of any statement that comes from an Iranian president that might signal a new era in relations between two longtime enemies.

Here’s hoping today’s phone call has opened the door to that new era.

Uncategorized

Obama is winning the Syria debate

With all due respect to the Republican chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, President Obama is emerging as a victor in the struggle to rid Syria of the chemical weapons it now says it possesses.

Mike McCaul, R-Texas, said on Fox News Sunday that Russian President Vladimir Putin is the big winner here and that President Obama has been reduced to a bit player in this ongoing drama.

Well, that’s about what we’ve come to expect from a leading House Republican.

http://thehill.com/blogs/global-affairs/middle-east-north-africa/322295-rep-mccaul-obama-no-victor-in-syria-deal

Living as I do in the heart of Anti-Obama Country, I am acutely aware of the negative views of the president’s handling of the Syria crisis. I am not happy with the way he’s handled some developments in this crisis. I wished initially he hadn’t backed off his threat to strike Syria in retaliation for that government’s gassing of civilians.

But consider what’s happened.

* Barack Obama issued the threat to hit Syrian military targets to dissuade Syria from using chemical weapons in the future.

* Russia, one of Syria’s main allies, steps in with a plan to get Syria to turn its chemical weapons over to international inspectors.

* The Syrians, who at first denied having the weapons, agreed.

* Secretary of State John Kerry and his Russian counterpart agree to the deal and have given Syria a timetable to comply.

I agree the deal is fraught with danger. Syria might not comply, forcing the United States to follow through with its strike threat.

What was the catalyst for all this? The president’s initial threat to hit Syria.

Does that make Barack Obama look stronger or weaker? I believe it strengthens the president. Of course, those in the opposing party say he is weakened by all this. I would suggest that a strategy that results in Syria giving up its chemical weapons without having to bomb them into doing it takes us closer to an end to a serious crisis.

That view, of course, will be a non-starter for those who think the worst of the 44th president of the United States.

Uncategorized

Al Jazeera coming to America

Al Jazeera has come to TV screens all across America next Tuesday.

Get ready for the backlash, which I don’t think will be warranted.

http://www.connectamarillo.com/entertainment/story.aspx?id=936149#.UhO4nEoo6t8

Al Jazeera, based in Qatar, is thought by many to be some kind of mouthpiece of Middle East terror groups. Al Jazeera America, which will be shown by many cable providers, has enlisted several prominent American broadcast journalists to take part. Are they part of some terrorist cabal? I think not.

I’ve seen a little bit of Al Jazeera at work. While traveling through Israel in May and June 2009, I stayed for a few nights in the Haifa home of a wonderful couple. Haifa is a gorgeous city on the Mediterranean coast and the couple that hosted me couldn’t have been more gracious.

I awoke each morning to Al Jazeera news and talk on the television. I had heard all the criticism of the network from those who dislike its Arabic origins, apparently believing — as some in the United States do — that all Middle East residents are closet terrorists and murderers.

Having been imbued with that negative feeling, I was stunned to see that Al Jazeera presents the news calmly, without bias that I could detect and it is — to borrow a phrase — fair and balanced in its reporting.

What will Al Jazeera America bring to U.S. airwaves ought to mirror what I witnessed not far from where the network originates.

I’m hopeful it will lend another important perspective in the United States on the news of the day.

Uncategorized

Kerry to get Nobel Peace Prize?

Israel and the Palestinian Authority have commenced peace talks in secret.

If the talks prove successful and the ancient enemies — the Israelis and the Palestinians — actually forge a working peace agreement, I have a candidate for next year’s Nobel Peace Prize: Secretary of State John Kerry.

http://news.yahoo.com/israelis-palestinians-kick-off-peace-talks-182226376.html

Kerry managed to persuade the two sides to restart talks that would seek a so-called “two-state solution” to the longstanding conflict. The Palestinians want an independent state next to Israel. The Israelis are now talking about that outcome being acceptable — under certain conditions. One of them would be that the Palestinians would stop shelling Israeli homes. The two sides have until October to seal the deal.

Meanwhile, Kerry and the Israelis will need to hammer out some solution to the continuing construction of settlements in territory that Israel captured during the Six-Day War in 1967. The Palestinians say the settlements are a barrier to a peace agreement; the Israelis say they are necessary to keep the Palestinians at bay.

I’m not an expert on Israeli-Palestinian relations, but I have seen up close just how precarious the situation is within Israel. I’ve visited cities — such as Sderot and Ashkelon — that have been shelled by Palestinians living in Gaza I understand the Israelis’ fear of continuing attacks on civilians. I’ve been able to peer into Gaza from just outside the region’s border with Israel.

Gaza is governed by Hamas, the infamous terrorist organization dedicated to Israel’s destruction. Whatever comes out of these peace talks, there must be some accounting for how to handle Hamas and to reel in the terrorists who continue to rein violence down on Israel.

Secretary Kerry has many decades of international experience under his belt. He knows the players on both sides personally. The civilized world, therefore, should be pulling for a successful resolution to these talks. Peace must come to the Holy Land.

If it does, John Kerry should start working on his Peace Prize acceptance speech.