fbpx

June 1, 2012

Potential Republican VP candidate meets Israel’s top leaders

Sen. Rob Portman, reportedly on the short list for the Republican vice presidential nomination, met in Israel with its top leaders.

The Ohio Republican, traveling during the Memorial Day recess, met with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak on Thursday.

Portman has been touted as a likely contender to be Mitt Romney’s choice as running mate in the fall election.

The U.S. Trade Representative under President George W. Bush and a former member of the U.S. House of Representatives, Portman has had a long and close relationship with Ohio’s Jewish community.

The meetings with Barak and Netanyahu focused on the threat posed by a nuclear Iran and the potential challenges facing the region, particularly with humanitarian crisis in Syria.

Following his meeting with Barak, Portman highlighted the significance of the security cooperation between Israel and the United States

“U.S.-Israeli security cooperation is one of our most valued and important arrangements, and given the volatility in the region, one of our most significant,” Portman said.

During his trip this week, Portman, a member of the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee, visited a battery of the Iron Dome missile shield and noted the importance of the system in protecting Israel from terrorist rocket and mortars.

“The Iron Dome system is a proven way for Israel to defend its people from hostile threats,” Portman said in a press statement.  “This cooperative effort between our two governments will also help enhance U.S. missile defense capabilities.”

The Obama administration has asked Congress for $70 million to seed additional Iron Dome batteries. Legislation currently under consideration would ultimately budget $680 million for additional batteries.

Potential Republican VP candidate meets Israel’s top leaders Read More »

Israeli soldier, Gaza gunmen killed in clash

A Palestinian gunman broke into Israel on Friday and killed a soldier before being shot dead himself in a rare cross-border attack that Israel blamed on the Islamist group Hamas.

Israel hit back, with a missile-strike killing one militant and wounding two others in the southern Gaza Strip. Militants also fired rockets out of the Palestinian enclave, but they did not cause any damage, the Israeli army said.

Sources in Gaza said the gunman killed in the cross-border attack was affiliated with the Islamic Jihad. However, the faction, which operates independently of Hamas, denied responsibility, suggesting the infiltrator might have been acting alone.

Hamas, which governs Gaza, had no immediate comment.

The Israeli army said the gunman crossed through the border fence with the intention of killing civilians and had ambushed soldiers sent to intercept him.

Palestinian witnesses heard an explosion and shooting near Abassan, a border village that is also close to the Egyptian frontier shared by Israel. They said Israeli forces set off smoke bombs to obscure the view as helicopters circled.

Though hostile to Israel, Hamas has largely sat out recent cross-border fighting and has appeared unwilling to rock the boat. Rather, it is focused on power-sharing talks with its Palestinian rivals and is monitoring developments in Egypt.

Reporting by Dan Williams and Nidal al-Mughrabi; Editing by Crispian Balmer

Israeli soldier, Gaza gunmen killed in clash Read More »

Are You Afraid to Talk to Me?

A couple of generations ago medical culture was aloof and authoritarian. Doctors did not give advice to patients, they gave orders. Patients were expected to follow those orders. Questions might have been tolerated, but patient requests for explanations or suggestions for a different approach were considered very unusual.

I thought this paternalistic model of doctoring ended long before I was trained. I was trained to think of the patient’s autonomy as the core of the patient-doctor relationship. I was taught that I should explain various alternatives, answer questions, and allow the patient to make the final decision directing her care. Doctors were expected to make recommendations, but also to encourage questions, second opinions, and exploration of alternatives.

I guess old habits die hard. A ” target=”_blank”>Afraid to Speak Up at the Doctor’s Office (Well, the NY Times health blog)
” target=”_blank”> Authoritarian Physicians And Patients’ Fear Of Being Labeled ‘Difficult’ Among Key Obstacles To Shared Decision Making (Health Affairs, abstract available without subscription)

Important legal mumbo jumbo:
Anything you read on the web should be used to supplement, not replace, your doctor’s advice.  Anything that I write is no exception.  I’m a doctor, but I’m not your doctor.

Are You Afraid to Talk to Me? Read More »

House Jewish Projection: Candidate Elimination Week

Our J-Meter House Jewish Projection – in which we track races of ‎Jewish candidates for the House of Representatives, and give you an ‎up-to-date assessment of the general picture of Jewish presence in the ‎House and the Senate – will be updated again next week. That is ‎because the outcome of primary votes might have impact on the ‎numbers, and might reduce even more the number of projected Jewish ‎Representatives following the 2012 November election.‎

Steve Rothman of New Jersey’s 9th district seems to be in a tough situation. Polls show ‎that the Democratic race – to be decided June 6 – is tight.  “A new poll ‎commissioned by U.S. Rep. Bill Pascrell shows the 9th Congressional ‎District primary a virtual dead heat. An outline of the poll, obtained ‎by PolitickerNJ, gives U.S. Rep. Steve Rothman 43.8 percent of the vote ‎to Pascrell’s 43.3 percent.  An additional 12.9 percent of those polled ‎are undecided.” Rothman’s rival, Bill Pascrell, was endorsed by former ‎President Clinton (Pascrell was a Hillary Clinton supporter in 2008, ‎Rothman was an Obama supporter). ‎Obama stepped in on Friday to support – but not endorse – Rothman with an invitation to the White House.

If Rothman loses, the district might still have a Jewish Congressman, if ‎Republican Rabbi Shmuley Boteach wins in November. Boteach has a ‎long way to go, but is gaining attention and seems like a viable ‎contender. ‎

Franke Wilmer will also face the voters next week (June 5). In a seven-‎candidate field she’s one of the two leaders in fund raising. It should be ‎noted, though, that even if Wilmer clinches the nomination, polls give ‎the Republican nominee in Montana the ultimate advantage.  ‎

There are also a lot of Jewish contenders in California districts slated for primary vote ‎next week. Berman vs. Sherman is naturally the ‎notable battle, but that’s one of the races in which – no matter who wins – a ‎Jewish candidate will emerge from the race. That is not the case in California’s ‎‎47th district, where Alan Lowenthal is trying to win the nomination, or in the state’s 28th district, ‎where Rep. Adam Schiff is vying to keep a seat in the House post-‎redistricting. ‎

In Illinois’ 10th district, there are signs that the chances of the Jewish contender challenging Rep. Bob Dold are pretty good. Brad Schneider is running ‎neck to neck with Dold in the polls, and the district is listed almost ‎everywhere as one of the districts likely to switch parties. ‎

Our hesitation and then ultimate decision to include Randy Altschuler (NY-01) ‎in our table of House contenders, even though he is not yet on the radar ‎of political experts, hasn’t yet paid off. But it is starting to show some ‎promising signs: Altschuler is now officially the Republican candidate, ‎as his primary rival withdrew from the race. But more importantly, ‎observers of this race believe it will be a very tight one:‎

Most important could be that Altschuler pulled off the ‎endorsement of the Independence Party, a ballot line that Bishop ‎had in 2010. Bishop received 7,370 votes on that line—way more ‎than he won by. This alone could make Altschuler the favorite this ‎year. But it isn’t the only factor that will affect the outcome. Two ‎years ago, the winner was in doubt until the official recount was ‎over and all the absentee ballots were counted. Surprising to ‎many veteran campaign observers, Bishop actually picked up ‎votes among the absentees. With a large number of wealthy ‎travelers, second-home owners and military ballots, a Republican ‎should always win the absentee voters in this area. Without being ‎privy to either campaign’s playbook, I think the best explanation ‎is that Bishop’s campaign had one bang-up absentee ballot ‎program, or at least a far better one than Altschuler’s campaign. ‎That oversight is not likely to be repeated this year.‎

House Jewish Projection: Candidate Elimination Week Read More »

Timeline: Violence in Syria

Following is a timeline of events in Syria since protests began.

2011

March 15 – About 40 people join a protest in Old Damascus, chanting political slogans in a brief first challenge to the ruling Baath Party before dispersing into side streets.

March 18 – Security forces kill three protesters in southern Deraa, residents say. The demonstrators were demanding political freedoms and an end to corruption.

March 22 – Hundreds of people march in Deraa and Nawa demanding freedom in the fifth straight day of demonstrations challenging the government.

March 24 – President Bashar al-Assad orders the formation of a committee to raise living standards and study scrapping the emergency law in place in Syria for the last 48 years.

March 25 – At least 200 people march in Damascus and there are reports of at least 23 dead around the country including, for the first time, in Damascus.

March 29 – Government resigns. Assad appoints Naji al-Otari, head of the government that stepped down, as caretaker prime minister. Thousands of Syrians hold pro-government rallies.

April 19 – Government passes bill lifting emergency rule.

July 31 – Syrian tanks storm Hama, residents say, after a month-long siege. At least 80 people are killed.

Demonstrators protest against Syria’s President Bashar Assad on Nov. 18, 2011. Photo by REUTERS

Sept. 15 – Syrian opposition activists announce a Syrian National Council to provide an alternative to government.

Nov. 12 – Arab League suspends Syria.

Dec. 7 – Assad denies ordering troops to kill peaceful demonstrators, telling U.S. television channel ABC only a “crazy” leader kills his own people.

Dec. 19 – Syria signs Arab League peace plan and agrees to let observers into the country to monitor the deal.

Dec. 23 – Twin suicide bombs target two security buildings in Damascus, killing 44 people. Syria blames al Qaeda while the opposition blames the government.

2012

Feb. 4 – Russia and China veto a resolution in U.N. Security Council, backed by Arab League, calling for Assad to step down. The General Assembly approves a resolution on Feb. 16 endorsing the Arab League plan calling for Assad to step aside.

Feb. 22 – More than 80 people are killed in Homs including two foreign journalists. Hundreds of people have now been killed in daily bombardments of the city by Assad’s besieging forces.

Feb. 23 – Former U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan is appointed U.N.-Arab League envoy to Syria.

Feb. 24 – Foreign ministers from more than 50 countries meet in Tunis for the inaugural “Friends of Syria” meeting. Russia and China, allies of Syria, do not attend.

Feb. 28 – Assad decrees that a new constitution is in force after officials say nearly 90 percent of voters endorsed it in a Feb. 26 referendum. Opponents and the West dismiss it as a sham.

Syrian and Lebanese protesters in Wadi Khaled village, north Lebanon on April 1. Photo by REUTERS/Roula Naeimeh

March 1 – Syrian rebels pull out of the besieged Baba Amr district of Homs after more than three weeks of bombardment.

March 11 – Annan ends talks with Assad and leaves Syria with little sign of progress.

March 27 – Syria accepts the U.N.-sponsored peace plan.

April 1 – At second “Friends of Syria” meeting, Western and Arab nations warn Assad not to delay adopting the peace plan.

April 12 – U.N.-backed ceasefire comes into effect. Four days later monitors start their mission in Syria to oversee the ceasefire which is undermined by persistent violence.

May 7 – Syria says voters turned out in large numbers for a parliamentary election it sees as central to a reform program. Opposition supporters denounce the exercise as a sham.

May 10 – Annan condemns attacks in Damascus in which two bomb explosions kill 55 people and wound 372, damaging an intelligence complex involved in Assad’s crackdown. A week later U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon says he believes al Qaeda was responsible. He also says 10,000 people have now been killed.

May 25 – At least 108 people are killed, including many children, in attacks in the region of Houla in one of the bloodiest days of the conflict.

People gather at a mass burial for the victims purportedly killed during an artillery barrage from Syrian forces in Houla on May 26. Photo by REUTERS/Shaam News Network

May 27 – Security Council unanimously condemns the killings in Houla, confirmed by U.N. observers. Syria denies carrying out the massacre.

May 28 – Activists say Assad’s forces killed 41 people, including eight children, in an assault on Hama. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov says Moscow is alarmed by the deaths but it is clear both Assad’s government and rebels are to blame.

May 29 – Annan says Syria is at a “tipping point” and appeals to Assad to act immediately to halt the violence.

May 30 – Rebels give Assad a 48-hour deadline to abide by the international peace plan or face consequences.

May 31 – Twelve workers are killed near the western town of al-Qusair when gunmen loyal to Assad ordered them off a bus and killed them, activists say. Syrian media blames “terrorists”.

June 1 – Annan says he is “frustrated and impatient” over the continuing killings and wants faster progress in resolving the crisis. On the same day, the U.N. Committee against Torture condemns the widespread use of torture and cruel treatment of detainees in Syria.

For an Interactive look at Syria click here.

Reporting by David Cutler, London Editorial Reference Unit; Editing by Andrew Heavens

Timeline: Violence in Syria Read More »

U.N.’s Ban Ki-moon says bold steps needed to stop Syrian violence

The escalating violence in Syria shows the urgent need for the international community to take bolder steps, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon told a news conference in Istanbul on Friday.

Ban voiced fears a day earlier that any repeat of the massacre of civilians a week ago in Houla could tip Syria into a civil war, and drag neighboring countries into a bloody sectarian conflict.

“If the escalating violence shows anything, it is that we urgently need bolder steps,” Ban told a news conference at the end of an international meeting on aid for Somalia.

Created by Simon Cameron-Moore; Editing by Kevin Liffey

U.N.’s Ban Ki-moon says bold steps needed to stop Syrian violence Read More »

United Nations: Syrian forces face prosecution for Houla

Syrian forces and pro-government militia accused of committing a massacre in Houla could face prosecution for crimes against humanity, the United Nations said on Friday and rights experts said Syrian authorities had directly ordered torture.

U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay called again for the Security Council to refer Syria to the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) and for world powers to help implement Kofi Annan’s peace plan to end the violence.

In a speech read out on her behalf to an emergency session of the U.N. Human Rights Council, she cited allegations that the Syrian military unleashed a barrage of heavy weapons on the town of Houla a week ago and that shabbiha groups killed dozens of the 106 victims, including women and children.

“These acts may amount to crimes against humanity and other international crimes and may be indicative of a pattern of widespread or systematic attacks against civilian populations that have been perpetrated with impunity,” she said.

Pillay, a former war crimes judge, added: “I reiterate that those who order, assist or fail to stop attacks on civilians are individually criminally liable for their actions.”

The Human Rights Council was set to call on Friday for a full U.N. inquiry into the massacre after putting initial blame on government bombardment and gunmen loyal to President Bashar al-Assad, diplomats said.

It is the 47-member forum’s fourth special session on Syria in a year, raising pressure on his increasingly isolated government.

But Syria’s ambassador, Faysal Khabbaz Hamoui, accused 600-800 “terrorists” using Israel-made weapons of carrying out the slaughter in Houla so as to “ignite sectarian strife”.

A Syrian investigation was underway to identify the perpetrators and instigators of the killings, he said, adding: “We will submit their confessions to the whole world.”

Qatar, Turkey and the United States have submitted a draft resolution for adoption at the session. But the European Union has yet to endorse the text as it wants stronger wording, including a call to refer the case to the ICC, diplomats said.

The text condemns “the wanton killings of civilians by shooting at close range and by severe physical abuse by pro-regime elements and a series of government artillery and tank shellings of a residential neighborhood”.

The Council, which has repeatedly condemned Syria for its crackdown, is likely to adopt the resolution by a wide margin, even if countries including China, Cuba and Russia may vote against it, as in the past, Arab and Western diplomats said.

“We hold the Syrian government fully responsible for the slaughter of innocent civilians in Houla,” U.S. ambassador Eileen Donahoe told the talks. “Those who committed these atrocities must be identified and held accountable.”

Separately, the U.N. Committee against Torture, in findings issued on Friday, said that Syrian forces and allied militias had tortured and mutilated civilians including children under “direct order” from Syrian authorities.

Reporting by Stephanie Nebehay; Editing by Jon Boyle

United Nations: Syrian forces face prosecution for Houla Read More »

Israeli Independence vs Naqba – Finding the Truth in Two Different Narratives – Part I

In March 2011, the Israeli Knesset passed a law called the “Naqba Law” that would punish public institutions for any reference to the Israeli occupation of Palestine in 1948 as “Naqba” (meaning “Catastrophe”). The Knesset law enables Israel to deny state funding to institutions that question the country’s existence as a Jewish state. The debate that led to the vote was heated and angry.

Right-wing Israeli lawmakers who introduced the law insisted that it was meant to defend Israel against delegitimization efforts within Israel and internationally by Israel’s enemies. Israeli liberals argued that the measure is inherently undemocratic because it restricts free speech, even though this particular speech challenges the existence of the Jewish State of Israel itself.

How should we Jews in the Diaspora regard this law? What does it mean for Israel’s democracy and Jewish character?

Though the law has been on the books already for more than a year, the issue came up on Israeli Independence Day when Palestinian Arabs took to the streets to demonstrate what they believe is a basic injustice to their rights and national identity. The law will likely be recalled, as well, on the anniversary of the 1967 Six-Day War (this coming Tuesday, June 5) when Israel took the West Bank and Golan Heights (and the Sinai Peninsula which it returned to Egypt in the Camp David Accords) in a war of self-defense imposed upon it by its Arab neighbors.

In the interests of a future peace agreement (should it ever come about) an accurate understanding of the true history of what happened in 1948 is important for Israelis and the Palestinians to understand beyond the myths perpetuated in each of their narratives.

In this blog and the next blog I will offer, as best as I can, a reconstruction of some of that history. Much has been written about it by Israeli historians on both the left and the right, as well as by scholars internationally. I have sought to glean only a few essential truths of that history.

The establishment of the State of Israel in 1948 was the most important and positive event in 2000 years of Jewish history because it meant the return of the Jewish people to our ancient national homeland and a return to history itself. There the flowering of the Jewish national spirit could occur, and indeed it has over the course of these past 64 years.

However, as extraordinarily inspirational as the establishment of Israel has been for the Jewish people it has been just as extraordinarily negative for the Palestinians, who call that event the “Catastrophe” (Naqba).

Despite the Palestinians within the Green Line (the armistice line established in 1949) living as full citizens in the only democracy in the Middle East, and despite their having greater freedom and more rights and opportunities in education, law, government, politics, medicine, religion, and the arts than in any other Arab or Islamic nation, Israel’s Independence represents for Palestinians what they regard as a great loss to their national identity and heritage, the loss of control over their ancestral homeland, their being prevented from returning to their homes from which they fled and were driven out, and the ability to establish their own state.

The Israeli narrative is, of course, much different. Theodor Herzl promised that the Jews would settle a barren wasteland devoid of people and build a new society and a state of their own. Indeed, the Zionist pioneers came and made the desert bloom. In doing so they confronted many obstacles, the most cruel of which has been ongoing terrorism and multiple wars.

Despite the violence against it Israel’s successive governments reached out to Israel’s Arab neighbors to make peace and asked that all the nations of the Middle East join to create a new prosperous, creative and cooperative region.

Two different worlds and two different perspectives! Each narrative is built upon fact and myth. However, peace will depend on mutual clarity about the objective truths of history, what happened, where injustice really lies, and the measure of accountability each side must take for its role in the perpetuation of the conflict. Confronting the truth of our mutual history, however, is so very difficult because that history carries much pain and loss, resentment, distrust, fear, and hatred.

We and the Palestinians are enmeshed in a very bad “marriage.” As in any bad marriage the only reasonable result is first separation and then divorce. With a successful divorce must come compromise, a division of property, and a sharing of the “children” (i.e. those things that both sides cherish). Divorce is always difficult and far too often there is very bad blood between the former partners, but if each partner wishes to live out a better life for itself and its progeny, it is necessary.

Following Shabbat I will offer a short list of “Claims/Myths” and the facts that abide within those claims and myths.

Shabbat Shalom.

To be continued…

 

Israeli Independence vs Naqba – Finding the Truth in Two Different Narratives – Part I Read More »