Evelyn Gordon

Analysis from Israel

Scarcely a day has gone by recently without Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and several other ministers decrying anti-Israel incitement. Netanyahu also routinely lambastes the “international community” for refusing to take action against such incitement. But while he’s clearly right about the importance of combating incitement, he’s on much shakier ground in blaming the world. After all, his own government has done nothing against leading purveyors of anti-Israel incitement. And how can he expect foreign governments to do what Israel won’t?

Granted, Israel has little leverage over some major inciters, like the Islamic State. But even when it does have leverage, it refuses to use it.

Take, for instance, the recent outrageous behavior of our ostensibly ally, Jordan. After Palestinian terrorists slaughtered four worshippers at a Jerusalem synagogue last week, the Jordanian parliament held a moment of silence in the terrorists’ honor and read a prayer from the Koran to “glorify their pure souls.” Jordan’s prime minister then wrote the terrorists’ families a condolence letter beseeching God to grant the killers “abundant mercy and satisfaction.” Adding insult to injury, all this happened just a week after Netanyahu, at the Jordanian king’s special request, had fully reopened the Temple Mount to Muslim worshippers despite the ongoing anti-Israel riots in Jerusalem.

One can imagine Washington’s response had the German parliament held a moment of silence to honor the perpetrators of the 9/11 attack, or London’s response had the French premier sent a condolence letter to families of slain Islamic State fighters after the organization executed a British aid worker. But Israel’s government? It hasn’t done a thing.

Yet there are many things Israel could do to punish such behavior. For starters, it could tell Amman that Jordanian demands regarding arrangements at the Temple Mount, which Israel has slavishly obeyed for years, will be ignored as long as such incitement continues.

It could also curtail material aid to Jordan. Last year, for instance, Israel agreed to provide additional water, beyond the amount mandated in the peace treaty, to help its water-starved neighbor cope with an influx of Syrian refugees. Yet it hasn’t demanded even the most minimal quid pro quo in exchange – that Jordan’s executive and legislative branches cease openly lauding the murder of Jews.

Similarly, with Syria in flames, Israel has become Jordan’s key land bridge for trade with the West. Thousands of trucks that used to travel between Jordan and Turkey via Syria now go through Israel to Haifa port, then by boat to Turkey, or vice versa. Israel gains nothing from this except a minimal amount in transit fees, so its economy would suffer no great loss if it ceased. For Jordan, however, it’s a lifeline, and it also greatly benefits Turkey, another serial anti-Israel inciter. Yet again, Israel hasn’t demanded even the barest minimum in exchange – an end to governmental incitement.

Needless to say, Israel has even greater leverage over a far worse inciter, the Palestinian Authority. PA President Mahmoud Abbas, other senior PA officials, Abbas’ Fatah party and the official PA media all spew vile anti-Israel incitement on a daily basis. On Saturday, for instance, Abbas accused Israel of setting wild boars to destroy Palestinian crops. Last month, he accused Jews of “desecrating” the Temple Mount, said they must be prevented from ascending it “in any way” and praised the attempted assassin of Rabbi Yehuda Glick as a “martyr” who would “go to heaven.” And though he condemned the synagogue killings under heavy U.S. pressure, a senior aide, the Fatah parliamentary faction and Fatah’s Facebook page all praised them.

Nevertheless, Israel continues massively subsidizing the PA – for instance, by giving it free electricity. Though the PA is technically supposed to pay, it rarely does; it currently owes the Israel Electric Corporation NIS 1.7 billion.

Israeli-Palestinian agreements allow Israel to deduct this debt from the taxes it collects on the PA’s behalf and transfers to Ramallah. Instead, Israel’s government has saddled its own citizens with the bill, contributing to the past few years’ soaring electricity rates. Yet in exchange for this generosity, it hasn’t even demanded the minimal quid pro quo of an end to anti-Israel incitement.

Additionally, about a fifth of all employed Palestinians work in Israel or the settlements. Israel has no treaty obligation to permit such employment; it could close its gates to Palestinian workers tomorrow if it wanted. That would devastate the Palestinian economy, and consequently the PA’s tax base. Yet Israel has never conditioned work permits for Palestinians on an end to incitement by the PA.

Another possibility is passing legislation that would make it easier for terror victims to sue the PA for incitement and/or material support for terror, while allowing any court-ordered damages to be deducted from Israel’s tax transfers to the PA. A particularly blatant example of such material support is the PA’s payment of salaries to convicted terrorists serving sentences in Israel. Even the lowest of these salaries far exceeds the average Palestinian wage, and they increase with the heinousness of the crime: Mass murderers, for instance, receive a monthly paycheck almost 10 times higher than those convicted of minor offenses. And these payments clearly incentivize terror. Just last week, Haaretz’s Hebrew edition reported on a Palestinian convicted of shooting at civilian buses who openly admitted that his main goal was money: Having run out of funds while building his house, he decided the simplest solution was getting himself arrested for anti-Israel terror, thereby guaranteeing himself a fat PA paycheck.

Israeli tax transfers to the PA total about $115 million a month, constituting an estimated 36 to 44 percent of the PA’s annual budget. Suitable legislation targeting incitement and material support for terror could easily enable this entire sum to be devoured by damage payments, forcing the PA to choose between mending its ways and bankruptcy.

The above are just a sampling of the varied tactics Israel could use to pressure its neighbors to end incitement. But the government refuses to utilize any of them. Instead, it makes do with empty condemnations, coupled with demands that other countries take the kind of forceful action it refuses to take itself.

Originally published in The Jerusalem Post

Subscribe:

A war for the soul of Israel’s Arab community

Former National Security Advisor Yaakov Amidror offered an interesting analysis of last week’s incident in which Israeli Arabs nearly lynched an Israeli Jew in the Galilee town of Taibe. On one hand, he wrote, it’s worrisome that the assailants had no qualms about perpetrating such an attack “in broad daylight in the heart of their city.” On the other hand, the Jew’s life was saved by another Arab resident of Taibe, who “is not afraid to appear in public and take pride in his action, and none of his neighbors has condemned him.” What this means, Amidror concluded, is that “we are witnessing a struggle within Arab society,” between those who want to build a life together with the Jewish majority and those who want only to destroy what has been built.

Nor is the Taibe incident the only evidence of this struggle. Also last week, vandals firebombed an 18th-century synagogue in the northern town of Shfaram. Just a few months earlier, that same synagogue had been lovingly restored by young Arabs and Jews seeking to set “a model for coexistence between our two peoples.” Its very status as an emblem of coexistence made it a natural target for the destroyers.

In this struggle, the destroyers have some obvious advantages. First, as I’ve noted before, longstanding police neglect has ceded control of many Arab communities to the thugs. Second, most national-level Israeli Arab leaders, whether political or religious, are on the thugs’ side: Arab MKs routinely spew incitement from the Knesset, while clerics like the Islamic Movement’s Sheikh Raed Saleh do the same from the mosque. Third, the leaderships of both Hamas and Fatah in the territories are equally inflammatory (on incitement, the two are indistinguishable). Finally, as Amos Harel noted in Haaretz last week, pictures of the slaughter perpetrated by the Islamic State and other groups in Syria and Iraq have recently been flooding local social media networks, thereby encouraging copycat attacks.

But in one of the most encouraging developments of the past few months, a local-level Arab leadership has emerged that openly opposes the destroyers. This has been evident in numerous episodes.

Read more
Archives