Non-Story of the Day: Israel, Iran, and "All Options on the Table"

Mitchell in Syria: Obama’s Big Push in the Middle East?

Receive our latest updates by email or RSS SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED
Buy Us A Cup of Coffee? Help Enduring America Expand Its Coverage and Analysis

UPDATE 1630 GMT: More ritual statements after the meeting between Secretary of Defense Gates and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu: "A large part of the discussion was devoted to Iran, with Gates saying that the US and Israel saw eye-to-eye on the Iranian nuclear threat, and reiterating that US engagement with Teheran would not be open-ended, said the Prime Minister's Office."

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZprJ1YDufEM[/youtube]

Unsurprisingly the media are all a-flutter today over Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak's statement, after his meeting with US counterpart Robert Gates, over an Israeli response to an Iranian nuclear programme: "We clearly believe that no option should be removed from the table. This is our policy; we mean it."

It's an entirely predictable statement, bringing an entirely predictable reaction. An insignificant statement --- despite the media's excitement --- on the military front. A more significant statement --- despite the media's inattention --- on the diplomatic front.

Let's translate:

BARAK: "This is our policy; we mean it." [I know, Mr Gates, that you and your Administration will not support an Israeli military attack on Iran. But my Government isn't planning on moving anywhere on talks to the Palestinians, and we're not that certain about discussions with Syria. And we definitely don't want the word "settlements" coming up in this conversation.

I've got a domestic audience watching this press conference, and there's nothing of substance I can give them. So I'm going to say, IRAN...IRAN...IRAN.]

GATES: "[Engagement is] not an open-ended offer....[We are aware Iran may try to] run out the clock....The timetable the president laid out still seems to be viable and does not significantly raise the risks to anybody." [No, you're not going to attack Iran, so let's deal with the diplomatic process.

My President is committed to an attempt to resolve the issues with Iran through discussion. At the same time, we need to keep you on-side, so you don't do anything crazy. And we don't want you using the Iran excuse to delay moves on other Middle Eastern issues. Last but not least, I've got an American public opinion --- as well as some people within my own Government --- who think there can never be an agreement with Tehran.

So you can get a vague statement that talks are not open-ended. The press can speculate on a deadline: End of September? December? But it's only July, and everything is up in the air given the internal situation in Iran, so no need to face the put-up-or-shut-up music yet.]

GATES: "We will continue to ensure that Israel has the most advanced weapons for its national defense." [Here's your symbolic and very real pay-off for not pushing us on this.]

BARAK: "Israel remains in its basic position that no options should be removed from the table, even though priority at this stage should be given to diplomacy." [That's cool. Thanks for the weapons. And, remember, shhh.... on the settlements.]

Gaza: Did Israelis Use Civilians as Human Shields?

This week, Breaking the Silence, the Israeli human rights organization, published a report, drawn from the statements of more than 30 soldiers, alleging mistreatment of Gazans in the effort to minimise Israeli casualties. One of the highlighted charges was the testimony of a soldier that Israeli commanders ordered the use of civilians as human shields.

Israeli officials responded immediately with criticisms. Defense Minister Ehud Barak said:

Public criticism of the IDF is inappropriate....Any criticism, information or reservations about the army's conduct should be addressed to me as the Defense Minister of the State of Israel and to the Israeli government which instructed the IDF to reinstate peace and security in southern Israel.

The Spokesman's Office for the Israeli Defense Forces said, "The IDF regrets the fact that a human rights organization would again present to the country and the world a report containing anonymous, generalized testimony without checking the details or their reliability, and without giving the IDF, as a matter of minimal fairness, the opportunity to check the matters and respond to them before publication." The Spokesman added: "A considerable portion of the testimony is based on rumors and secondhand accounts. Most of the incidents relate to anonymous testimony lacking in identifying details, and accordingly it is not possible to check the allegations on an individual basis in a way that would enable an investigation, confirmation or refutation."

Transcript:

Name: ***
Rank: ***
Unit: ***
Place of incident: ***
Description:

It was the first week of the war, fighting was intense, there were explosive charges to expose, tunnels in open spaces and armed men inside houses. Warfare was slow and basically a very small area was occupied. Every unit, every force had a rather small designated area of several dozen houses only, which they had to take over, and that took a whole week. That is warfare and that took a whole week. They really moved slowly. Close in on each house. The method used has a new name now - no longer 'neighbor procedure.' Now people are called 'Johnnie.' They're Palestinian civilians, and they're called Johnnies and there were civilians there who stayed in spite of the flyers the army distributed before it went in. Most people did leave, but some civilians stayed to watch over the houses. Perhaps they had nowhere else to go. Later we saw people there who could not walk, some simply stayed to keep watch. To every house we close in on, we send the neighbor in, 'the Johnnie,' and if there are armed men inside, we start, like working the 'pressure cooker' in the West Bank.

Every unit is familiar with a different kind of 'pressure cooker' practice. What do you mean by it?

I'm not sure either about the 'pressure cooker' procedures there, they could be different. Essentially the point was to get them out alive, go in, to catch the armed men. There weren't many encounters. Just a few. In one case, our men tried to get them to come out, then they opened fire, fired some anti-tank missiles at the house and at some point brought out a D-9, combat helicopters. There were three armed men inside. The helicopters fired anti-tank missiles and again the neighbor was sent in. At first he told them that nothing had happened to them yet, they were still in there. Again helicopters were summoned and fired, I don't know at what stage of escalation (in the use of force). The neighbor was sent in once again. He said that two were dead and one was still alive, so a D-9 was brought and started demolishing the house over him until the neighbor went in, the last armed man came out and was caught and passed on to the Shabak… The commanders tell what they saw and make sure we know how things work on the inside. They also talked about things that bothered them. They said that civilians were used to a greater extent than just sending them into houses. For example, some of them were made to smash walls with 5 kilo hammers. There was a wall around a yard where the force didn't want to use the gate, it needed an alternative opening for fear of booby-traps or any other device. So the "Johnnies" themselves were required to bang open another hole with a hammer. Talking of such things, by the way, there was a story published by Amira Hass in Haaretz daily newspaper, about Jebalya where a guy tells exactly the same thing. It's the guy who was sent. I saw him afterwards, the guy who was made to go into that house three times. He also told us about being given hammers to break walls.

So you say that, from your own experience, there's truth in these publications.

Yes. It was ludicrous to read it and then hear the response of the army spokesperson that the matter was investigated and there are no testimonies on the ground and that the Israeli army is a moral army. It raises doubts about the army spokesperson's responses in general when you know for a fact that these things actually did take place… Sometimes the force would enter while placing rifle barrels on a civilian's shoulder, advancing into a house and using him as a human shield. Commanders said these were the instructions and we had to do it… Anyway, at the concluding debriefing, he (the unit commander) said he didn't know about these things, and the guys, commanders who had been there the first week, said they saw civilians being assigned to break walls and enter with rifle barrels on their shoulders. He said he didn't know this and would look into it. I think nothing substantial had been done about it, I'm also in touch with one of the officers there at present and I don't know if an investigation was made and nothing was found or that nothing was cleared up. Several weeks later, the story came out in the paper about these exact incidents, where they were given hammers to break walls, in our area, this I can say with certainty.

Israel-Palestine: A US-Israeli Deal on the Settlements?

Haaretz states, via the Israeli newspaper Ma'ariv, that US officials are allowing the Israeli Government to continue construction of 2,500 housing units in the West Bank

Israeli Government spokesman Mark Regev would not confirm speculations but said that the US and Israel have been trying to find a common ground on the sensitive settlement issue. Washington has been silent, but "Western officials" stated that, having made some concessions, Israel could at least finish off some existing projects which are close to completion or bound to private contracts that cannot be broken.

Following Defense Minister Ehud Barak’s meetings in Washington and with US envoy George Mitchell in London, this speculation raises the question: Is the US acceptance of the 2500 units due to the specifics of private contracts and Israeli law on settlements, or have the two sides found common ground where both sides meet with some concessions?