Opinion | Jeff Jacoby: Israel's Golan sovereignty should have been recognized years ago - The Boston Globe

By Jeff Jacoby Globe Columnist  March 26, 2019

During a White House meeting with Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday, President Trump signed a formal proclamation that the United States recognizes Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights. In so doing, the president acknowledged a longstanding fact of life, bolstered a vital American ally, promoted stability in a deeply unstable neighborhood, and upheld the oft-ignored but crucial distinction between acquiring territory through aggression and acquiring it through lawful self-defense. Good outcomes all, extending the Trump administration’s already exemplary record when it comes to the Middle East.

Trump’s policy shift didn’t sit well with everyone, of course. Those angrily denouncing it included the dictators and terror-sponsors who rule Iran, Turkey, Russia, Syria, and the Palestinian Authority. Tellingly, though, there was barely any protest from most Arab governments, which in recent years have come to value Israel as an ally against Iran and its proxies. As a CNN headline put it, “Trump’s Golan Heights announcement met with a shrug in the Arab world.”

The president’s signature changes nothing on the ground. Israel has held the western two-thirds of the Golan Heights — a plateau that towers over the Sea of Galilee and much of northern Israel — since the 1967 Six Day War. That war, recall, was one of blatant aggression against Israel: Syria joined Egypt and Jordan in an assault that Syria’s Defense Minister Hafez Assad had labeled “a battle of annihilation” to “explode the Zionist presence” in the Mideast.

Advertisement

But Israel declined to be annihilated or exploded. It repelled its invaders and seized the Golan Heights, from which Syria had been shelling Jewish farms and towns for more than 20 years. In the aftermath of the war, Israel offered to return the territory in exchange for peace. Damascus refused to negotiate. It tried to recapture the Golan Heights in a massive armored invasion in 1973. Israel repelled that threat too.

Get Today in Opinion in your inbox:

Globe Opinion's must-reads, delivered to you every Sunday-Friday.

Thus, Israel has ruled the Golan Heights for 52 years (1967-2019) — more than twice as long as the 21 years of Syrian rule that began in 1946. The contrast between the two eras could not be more open-and-shut, as Michael Doran, a former senior director at the National Security Council, testified before Congress last year:

“The last 70 years constitute the laboratory of real life, and its results are incontrovertible,” Doran told the House Oversight Committee during a hearing on US-Israel relations. “When in the hands of Syria, the Golan Heights promoted conflict. When in the hands of Israel, they have promoted stability.”

Nonetheless, Israeli and US leaders well into the 1990s kept trying to entice Damascus to make peace with its Jewish neighbor in exchange for a return of the Golan. In his first term as prime minister, Netanyahu used a secret back channel to communicate with Syrian President Bashar Assad about a land-for-peace deal.

Fortunately, nothing came of those efforts. Syria’s implosion in 2011 plunged the country into a hellish civil war that eventually included Iran, Russia, the Islamic State, and Hezbollah. If Israel hadn’t retained the Golan Heights, the plateau would likely have been captured by Iran or ISIS, and Israel might well have faced an unspeakable existential nightmare. Instead, the Golan Heights remained an oasis of stability and decency amid the savagery of the Syrian war. Israel even made use of the territory to provide free medical care to thousands of Syrian civilians.

If Israel had seized the Golan Heights as an act of aggression, it would arguably have no right to keep the land even after all these years. But in 1967, Israel was the target. It seized the Golan in a defensive war against an enemy explicitly bent on “annihilation.” Syria forfeited its sovereign right to the territory when it was defeated by its intended victim. To claim otherwise is to claim that a belligerent aggressor should lose nothing for waging an unlawful war. That would be folly. By endorsing Israeli sovereignty over the Golan, the Trump administration is sending a message of deterrence to would-be warmongers. It’s a message that should have been sent years ago. Better late than never.

Jeff Jacoby can be reached at jacoby@globe.com. Follow him on Twitter @jeff_jacoby. To subscribe to his free weekly newsletter, Arguable, click here.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2019/03/26/israel-golan-sovereignty-should-have-been-recognized-years-ago/bwPwcu1VxipmaxN6HKfLnI/story.html

2019-03-26 18:58:00Z
52780247951696

Brexit: UK Parliament tries to end Brexit impasse with indicative votes - Vox.com

The British Parliament has taken control of the Brexit process.

Members of Parliament (MPs) approved a historic amendment Monday that would allow them to hold so-called “indicative votes” this week, which will give Parliament a chance to decide on what type of Brexit could get the most support.

The measure passed 329 to 302, in what was yet another blow to British Prime Minister Theresa May’s authority. May opposed the measure, but more than two dozen members of her Conservative Party bucked her stance. At least three of May’s ministers resigned in protest and voted for the amendment.

Parliament will now take over on Wednesday, and hold these “indicative votes” to try to overcome the Brexit impasse. The move comes less than a week after the European Union postponed the EU-UK divorce date from March 29 until at least April 12.

Indicative votes are nonbinding and are intended to give Parliament the opportunity to figure out which Brexit outcome might win a majority in the House of Commons.

MPs have defeated May’s Brexit deal twice, and though the prime minister is likely to try to bring it one more time, she apparently doesn’t yet have enough support to succeed on a third try.

Parliament has said it doesn’t want to leave the European Union without a deal — but unless it can come up with an entirely new plan, the UK will crash out of the EU on April 12 without any agreement, or exit amicably on May 22, if May’s plan manages to get through Parliament in the next week or so.

The EU also said it would consider a longer Brexit extension, provided the UK offers up a totally different Brexit strategy and agrees to participate in the European parliamentary elections in May.

That’s where these indicative votes come in; they’re intended to unlock the paralysis and maybe help Parliament and May’s government find a new approach.

Maybe.

Here’s how these indicative votes are expected to work: MPs will put up a menu of Brexit options — a softer-style Brexit, such as membership in the EU customs union or single market; a second referendum; May’s deal; no deal; and so on. (The full slate hasn’t been agreed on yet.)

Indicative votes can play out a few ways, according to the UK’s Institute for Government. MPs can vote on Brexit options individually, supporting as many options as they might want, or they could be asked to rank their choices. The hope is that at the end, Parliament will rally around one option, which might offer a breakthrough on Brexit.

There are no guarantees, though. Parliament is divided, and has been throughout the Brexit process. Hardline Brexiteers desperately want to leave, and now. Remainers are seeking for a way to either reverse Brexit — through a second referendum, for example — or mitigate Brexit by seeking very close ties with the EU post-breakup. The rest of the MPs all exist somewhere in between.

But Monday marked a real turning point. Members of May’s party rebelled against the prime minister to support this measure, and joined with Labour members to seize the agenda. Parliament failed to approve a similar indicative votes measure by just two votes during that marathon vote week in March. Its win on Monday shows just how much May is losing her hold on her party, and her power.

A spokesperson for the government’s Brexit department expressed their displeasure in a statement after the vote, saying the amendment “upends the balance between our democratic institutions and sets a dangerous, unpredictable precedent for the future.”

“While it is now up to Parliament to set out next steps in respect of this amendment, the government will continue to call for realism — any options considered must be deliverable in negotiations with the EU,” the statement continued. “Parliament should take account of how long these negotiations would take, and if they’d require a longer extension, which would mean holding European parliamentary elections.”

May has lost some of her authority — but only up to a point. That’s because these indicative votes are nonbinding, so even if Parliament can rally around a brand new Brexit approach, the prime minister is not bound to honor the result.

May indicated as much ahead of the vote on Monday, saying that she was skeptical of the process and wouldn’t make any promises to act on the results of the indicative vote except to “engage constructively” with the outcome. Health secretary Matt Hancock echoed this on Tuesday, saying May’s government “can’t pre-commit to following whatever the Commons votes for because they might vote for something completely impractical.”

May also warned that just because Parliament agrees to something doesn’t mean the EU will go for it — although she left out the part where she tried multiple times to renegotiate her Brexit deal after the EU told her it was nonnegotiable.

She’s right that the EU would have to agree to such a change, though the EU is much more likely to accept a softer Brexit as long as the UK doesn’t request aggressive carve-outs.

But it’s not clear if May herself will get behind such a strategy, as it violates her Brexit “red lines” — essentially the UK’s starting point for negotiations — which included an end to its membership in the permanent customs union and the single market. And if she hasn’t budged yet, it’s doubtful she ever will.

Then again, she may not have a choice. The prime minister admitted Monday that she doesn’t have enough support to get her deal through Parliament right now — though she’s likely to try for a third vote this week, after the indicative votes.

May could be betting that the outcome of the indicative votes will scare the hardline Brexiteers and her allies in Northern Ireland enough to finally get behind her deal, or risk much closer ties with the EU — and possibly a much, much longer Brexit delay.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.vox.com/2019/3/26/18280946/brexit-news-parliament-indicative-votes-theresa-may

2019-03-26 16:20:00Z
52780249686109

Theresa May could offer resignation in last ditch attempt to get third Brexit vote passed - Fox News

Theresa May could quit as soon as Wednesday as the Brexit chaos deepens - in a last-ditch bid to win a third and final vote on her deal.

The Prime Minister has summoned all Tory MPs to a closed-doors Commons meeting Wednesday night.

Westminster insiders believe she could use the "1922 Committee" meeting to lay out a timetable for her resignation in a last-ditch bid to get her Brexit deal over the line.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FROM THE SUN

Britain's Prime Minister Theresa May makes a statement on Brexit to lawmakers in the House of Commons, London, Monday March 25, 2019. May is under intense pressure Monday to win support for her Brexit deal to split from Europe. (House of Commons via AP)

Furious Brexiteers may come round to the withdrawal agreement if Mrs May guarantees she won't be in place during talks over a future trade deal.

Today MP Tim Loughton said: "If she gets her deal through, we need somebody else controlling the process."

BREXIT OR NO BREXIT, THE US-BRITISH ALLIANCE REMAINS VITAL

In a boost for Mrs May, top Brexiteer Jacob Rees-Mogg finally admitted he will be forced to support her deal when it returns to the Commons.

He previously said he'd only back the withdrawal agreement if the DUP, who are essential for the Prime Minister's Commons majority, also supported it.

HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS PROTEST IN LONDON DEMANDING SECOND BREXIT VOTE

Mrs May's desperate gambit comes after Remainer MPs grabbed control of the Government and won the right to decide what they want to happen next.

Ministers are now openly discussing the possibility of dissolving Parliament and heading for an early election.

CLICK HERE FOR THE FOX NEWS APP

This article originally appeared in The Sun. For more from The Sun, click here.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.foxnews.com/world/theresa-may-could-offer-resignation-in-last-ditch-attempt-to-get-third-brexit-vote-passed

2019-03-26 15:17:01Z
52780249686109

Time for a change: EU lawmakers vote to scrap clock shifts in 2021 - Reuters

STRASBOURG (Reuters) - European Union lawmakers voted on Tuesday to scrap from 2021 the practice of moving clocks forward by an hour in spring then back again in the autumn, two years later than the EU executive initially proposed.

FILE PHOTO: A giant clock is seen over the entrance of Cergy-Saint-Christophe railway station in Cergy, near Paris, France, September 19, 2018. REUTERS/Christian Hartmann/File Photo

The European Parliament voted by 410 to 192 in favor of ending the practice of seasonal time shifts. The vote is not the last word on the issue but will form the basis of discussions with EU member countries to produce a final law. The countries have yet to take a stance.

Since 2001, EU law has required all countries in the bloc to observe daylight saving time, moving clocks forward by an hour on the last Sunday of March and back by an hour on the final Sunday in October.

The practice of switching clocks was first introduced in World War One and brought back during the 1970s oil crisis, aiming to save energy by prolonging evening daylight in summer.

The European Commission proposed in September ending the practice after an EU-wide opinion survey showed a large majority in favor of doing so.

A parliament report in favor of operating on a single time throughout the year said scientific studies link time changes to diseases because they interrupt biological cycles, and that there were no longer any energy savings.

“New technology and different ways of living mean that we no longer earn anything, in fact we don’t save,” Marita Ulvskog, the lawmaker in charge of the time change file, told the EU parliament during a debate on the issue on Monday.

Under the Commission’s proposal, initially planned for this year, EU countries would not be able to change their clocks forward and backward during the year in future, but would be free to decide which time zone they wanted to be in.

EU transport commissioner Violeta Bulc said during Monday’s debate that EU countries saw the need for coordination.

“No one wants to see a patchwork of time zones within EU,” she said.

The European Union will have 27 members once Britain leaves the bloc. The UK government has indicated it will stick to the current system of seasonal changes after Brexit, according to Britain’s ruling Conservatives.

The seasonal time shift has also been the subject of debate in the United States, where legislators have tried unsuccessfully to abolish it. For now, Hawaii and most of Arizona do not follow the practice.

Russia switched to permanent summer time in 2011 in an attempt to improve citizens’ well-being, then shifted to permanent winter time in 2014 after public complaints.

The majority of countries outside Europe and North America do not adjust their clocks.

Reporting by Clare Roth and Philip Blenkinsop; Editing by Frances Kerry

Our Standards:The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-eu-time/time-for-a-change-eu-lawmakers-vote-to-scrap-clock-shifts-in-2021-idUSKCN1R71FS

2019-03-26 12:49:00Z
52780251259969

Airbus secures multi-billion dollar jet order from China - BBC News

Airbus has secured an order from China for 300 jets, in a deal estimated to be worth tens of billions of dollars.

An agreement to purchase A320 and A350 XWB aircraft was signed during a visit by Chinese President Xi Jinping to Paris.

The order is part of a package of deals signed during Mr Xi's visit to Europe.

It comes as rival Boeing has grounded all of its 737 Max jets after two fatal crashes.

Airbus said in a statement it signed an agreement with China Aviation Supplies Holding Company covering the purchase by Chinese airlines of Airbus aircraft including 290 A320 planes, and ten A350 XWB jets.

The deal is worth an estimated 30bn euros ($34bn; £26bn), according to reports.

"We are honoured to support the growth of China's civil aviation with our leading aircraft families - single-aisle and wide-bodies," Airbus Commercial Aircraft President Guillaume Faury said in a statement.

Mr Faury is due to become Airbus's new chief executive in April.

"Our expanding footprint in China demonstrate our lasting confidence in the Chinese market and our long-term commitment to China and our partners."

The deal will likely be a blow for Boeing, under pressure after two fatal crashes involving its 737 Max 8 jets in five months.

Many countries banned the aircraft from their airspace after an Ethiopian Airlines crash earlier this month. Boeing later grounded its 737 Max fleet as investigations into the cause of the disaster continue.

• What's next for Boeing?

Mr Xi kicked off his European tour last week in Italy, where it became the first developed economy to sign up to China's global Belt and Road Initiative.

But other European countries and the United States have expressed concern at China's growing influence.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-47702044

2019-03-26 10:44:13Z
52780249073332

Behind the Niceties of Chinese Leader’s Visit, France Is Wary - The New York Times

Advertisement

Supported by

Behind the Niceties of Chinese Leader’s Visit, France Is Wary

Image

President Emmanuel Macron of France with President Xi Jinping of China at a news conference in Paris on Monday.CreditCreditPool photo by Yoan Valat

By Adam Nossiter

• March 25, 2019

阅读简体中文版閱讀繁體中文版

PARIS — France rolled out red carpets and honor guards for President Xi Jinping of China on Monday, but beneath the pomp, there were wary statements about China’s influence by his host, President Emmanuel Macron.

With Italy last week breaking from Europe in signing on to China’s global infrastructure project for moving Chinese goods, Mr. Macron has made it clear that a unified European response, in his view, is critical in dealing with the Chinese hegemon.

He reiterated that sentiment Monday as Mr. Xi listened in a deal-signing ceremony at the presidential Élysée Palace, where more than a dozen commercial and governmental treaties were signed worth billions of euros.

Earlier Mr. Macron welcomed Mr. Xi at a symbol of French imperial history and power, the Arc de Triomphe.

Beneath the tight smiles and brisk handshakes, Mr. Macron’s sharpened words resonated as the template for France’s attitude toward China, a country that floods France with luxury-shopping tourists but competes directly with it in a principal arena of mutual geopolitical interest, Africa.

Mr. Macron, keenly aware of France’s small position in the Chinese market — between 1 and 2 percent of imports — talks about Europe when he talks about China. Germany’s position is nearly five times as large.

After saying last week that the era of European “naïveté was over,” and that China had “played on our divisions,” he emphasized to the Chinese leader Monday that in talking to France, he was talking to Europe.

It was not immediately clear how France had avoided the “naïveté” Mr. Macron criticized, nor how it had reinforced the multilateral unified European approach he promulgated, in signing the French deals with the Chinese on Monday.

Still, unlike Italy, France has not signed on to China’s global goods-moving project, which it calls “One Belt One Road.”

Making reference to Gen. Charles de Gaulle’s famous declaration in 1964 that recognizing China was a matter of “reason” and “evidence,” Mr. Macron said Monday at the Élysée that those same words applied to the “choice” of the 21st century: the “relationship between Europeans and Chinese.”

De Gaulle was bucking the United States when he uttered those words, and Mr. Macron, 55 years later, was doing something of the same.

Image

The two leaders at a ceremony at the Arc de Triomphe on Monday.CreditPool photo by Francois Mori

Appealing to China as a partner, he made a pointed reference to the United States under President Trump, who has repudiated multinational agreements like the Paris Climate accord and Iran nuclear deal.

“The order of things has been shaken,” the French president said, and “faced with the risk of the destruction of the multilateral order, France and China have a responsibility,” as permanent members of the United Nations Security Council.

“No country can redefine the rules of the international game,” Mr. Macron asserted, saying that France, like China, would stick to an agreement with Iran, and saying the two countries had made progress on the subject of climate change, and on the lifting of import restrictions for French beef and poultry.

Earlier French and Chinese officials and executives signed agreements on aeronautics — the Chinese are buying 300 airplanes from Airbus — and on space, banking and investment, shipbuilding and cultural exchanges.

On human rights violations in China, a subject that preoccupies French media but not official discourse or French business, Mr. Macron made only a hurried reference. Mr. Xi is visiting at a time when Galeries Lafayette, the emblematic French department store, is projecting a rapid expansion in China, which represents a third of the world market for luxury goods.

Jet-lagged Chinese tourists are bussed directly from the airport to the Galeries Lafayette store in central Paris, and the Rue Saint Honoré, a thoroughfare studded with luxury shops, routinely decks itself out for Chinese New Year.

The Chinese have invested in a wide scattering of French sectors, including wine, hotels, and industrial food production, including milk. France was the recipient of 9 percent of Chinese investments in the European Union in 2018; the Chinese have bought more than 150 wineries in Bordeaux, and China is the top export market for Bordeaux wine. The Chinese push into that culturally symbolic sector has created some backlash, but not enough to stop French owners from selling their properties.

With Mr. Xi silently listening Monday Mr. Macron said that Europe had never considered individual rights as “culturally specific,” and that its preoccupation remained for “the respect of fundamental and individual rights.” He said that the two had “had frank exchanges” on the subject.

But French analysts of relations with China said Monday that commercial relations were the real subject of preoccupation. “It’s the question of reciprocity,” said Jean-Philippe Béja of Sciences-Po, the research university. “We’ve been open towards trade and investment, and the Chinese have never let us enter their state procurements process.”

Europeans, he suggested, had also become more aware, and wary, of technology transfers and investments that “help the Chinese government develop its potential, and in the case of artificial intelligence it’s about control, and exporting control,” said Mr. Béja, referring to advances in Chinese government surveillance of its own citizenry.

“We’re more fearful than the other” members of the European Union about Chinese power and hegemony, said François Godement, an expert at the Institut Montaigne research center in Paris. “China is pushing its own pawns,” he said, particularly in parts of Africa where for decades French dominance has been undisputed.

Mr. Macron insisted Monday that France and China were “not strategic rivals” in Africa, though he said the two nations could be “much more important partners,” appearing to reflect a worry about Chinese investment on the continent.

Aurelien Breeden contributed reporting.

A version of this article appears in print on , on Page A9 of the New York edition with the headline: Welcome for China’s Xi, But Paris Remains Wary. Order Reprints | Today’s Paper | Subscribe

Related Coverage

Italy Gives Xi, and China’s Vast Infrastructure Project, a Royal Welcome

March 22, 2019

Image

Defying Allies, Italy Signs On to New Silk Road With China

March 23, 2019

Image

Advertisement

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/25/world/europe/macron-xi-france-china.html

2019-03-25 23:38:59Z
52780249073332

Why Israel is so good at targeting Hamas - Washington Examiner

Responding to a Hamas rocket strike that wounded seven Israelis, the Israeli Defense Forces successfully targeted high-value Hamas facilities across the Gaza strip. Once again, the IDF showed their great knowledge of where Hamas posts are hidden.

But how do they know those locations? It's an important question because the IDF hasn't been picking off low-hanging fruit. On the contrary, its targets included Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh's office, Hamas' military intelligence headquarters, and its internal security headquarters.

The answer: Israel is better at spying than Hamas is at catching spies. That's down to Israel's ability to saturate the Gaza strip with a wide range of highly capable intelligence platforms. Consider how these efforts come together.

First up, there are the IDF's drones that provide near-constant real-time intelligence flow from the skies above Gaza. Monitoring the movement of Hamas officers, these drones allow the Israelis to know where targets are traveling to and from. That allows for other intelligence assets to be directed at locations that have a nexus to Hamas. Once identified as such, these facilities or officials can then be targeted by Israeli strikes.

Then there's the work of the IDF's Unit 8200 signal intelligence service. Monitoring Hamas communications, Unit 8200 provides insight into the group's planning and enables IDF targeting.

But while the IDF controls the sky above Gaza and listens to the sounds inside the territory, Israeli intelligence forces also play a crucial role on the ground. This mission centers on the IDF covert infiltration units Samson, and Unit 217, and the border police's Yamas unit. Operating in small teams throughout the Gaza strip, these units dress and act like normal Palestinian residents of Gaza. But they take extraordinary risks in monitoring Hamas leaders and identifying new Hamas facilities. This constant human intelligence effort is crucial because Hamas constantly relocates its operation centers so as to reduce the probability of Israeli detection. Of course, Israeli spies also recruit Hamas officials who can then provide intelligence on the group from a position of access.

The basic point is that when this effort comes together, it allows Israeli commanders to know where their enemies are located, and what they are doing in those locations. In turn, the IDF is able to launch short notice, but highly effective, strikes that drive Hamas to reconsider whether escalation with Israel is really such a good idea.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/why-israel-is-so-good-at-targeting-hamas

2019-03-25 21:08:00Z
52780247968444