The situation neared boiling point on November 13 when the lead car of a 5-car convoy from the US Consulate in Jerusalem allegedly tried to run over an Israeli security guard at a checkpoint in Samaria.

According to an official description of the incident obtained by The Jerusalem Post, the convoy arrived at the Gilboa Crossing and refused to open any windows or provide identification. Israeli officials said the convoy purposely blocked the entire crossing and one of the vehicles lunged at an Israeli guard.

The incident was reportedly caught by security cameras installed at the checkpoint.

It was not the first time Israel has had trouble with US diplomatic vehicles.

Several months ago, a vehicle belonging to the US Consulate in Jerusalem was caught transporting a Palestinian without proper permits between Jerusalem and Palestinian Authority-controlled areas.

In January of 2008, the situation also became very tense when US Security Coordinator Lt.-Gen. Keith Dayton and then-consul-general Jacob Walles refused to roll down their windows or provide identification at a “West Bank” checkpoint.

In related news, major US Jewish organizations on Thursday blasted a senior member of the Obama Administration for criticizing Israeli Ambassador to the US Michael Oren for not attending an event put on by the left-wing Jewish lobby group J Street.

Oren has kept his distance from J Street since taking over the embassy due to strong differences between the lobby group and Jerusalem on issues such as Iran and peace negotiations with the Palestinians.

When Oren turned down an invitation to attend a recent gathering, former J Street board member and current State Department director of the Office to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism, Hannah Rosenthal, said it was “most unfortunate” and that Oren “would have learned a lot.”

Alan Solow, chairman of the New York-based Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, noted that it was unacceptable for an administration official to publicly criticize a foreign government for not having a stronger relationship with a US lobby group.

Among today’s many foreign policy challenges, Iran’s nuclear program may be the most daunting.

An Iran capable of producing — and delivering — nuclear weapons would have major global consequences.

Think about it.

Iran would wield enormous power in the most strategically vital and energy-rich part of the world. And its influence could extend far beyond, including in Latin America, where it has established close ties with Bolivia, Ecuador Nicaragua, and Venezuela.

Moreover, it could trigger a nuclear arms race in an already volatile region. Would Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey simply sit by while Iran achieves nuclear-weapons capability? Hardly.

Already, some neighboring states may be exploring their own nuclear options. These developments could spell the end of the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Would Iran share its nuclear and missile technology with others? Very likely. North Korea and Pakistan certainly did.

What about the claim that Iran is misunderstood, slandered by bellicose adversaries who misled us into Iraq and now threaten to repeat their mischief? Does Iran only want civilian nuclear energy to prepare for a decline in its vast oil and gas reserves?

Nonsense.

Intelligence from a variety of countries confirms that Iran’s nuclear program reflects a clear desire to achieve, at the very least, breakout capacity, allowing it to weaponize in short order.

And Iran’s missile program is on display for all to see. Iran sought to hide its enrichment facility near Qom, but it flaunts its military achievements. Why is Iran developing ballistic missiles with a range of 2000 kilometers and ever greater accuracy? And why is it seeking to extend the range to 5000 kilometers, putting all of Europe within reach?

Some say that Iran can be counted on to act rationally, even if it seeks power and prestige. It would never use weapons, they assert, that would invite a massive counter-attack. Wasn’t the Cold War proof that nuclear weapons can create stability through mutual assured destruction?

Wrong on two counts. First, we cannot be certain that the current Iranian regime will act rationally. Driven by religious messianism, it might find martyrdom an alluring prospect. Second, countries derive power from merely possessing nuclear weapons, regardless of their possible use. Other nations would always have to account for Iran’s nuclear capability in dealing with it, dramatically increasing Iran’s political, economic, and military might.

So what should we do about this challenge? There is no easy answer. But what has not worked is abundantly clear.

From Germany’s policy of “critical dialogue” to the European Union’s six years of patient diplomacy, from President Bush’s effort to isolate Iran to President Obama’s extended hand, from Russia’s soft negotiating touch to the UN Security Council’s occasional slaps on the wrist, no policy has produced the desired result. To the contrary, all have bought valuable time for Iran and emboldened Tehran to believe it can have it both ways — remaining an integral part of the international community while flouting its will.

The focus must now be on increasing the price of defiance.

Europe remains Iran’s top trading partner. That should end. China, India, and Russia should be persuaded to do the same rather than fill every void left by a departing European company. And why should Iran continue to benefit from importing refined energy products that strengthen the regime’s grip on the country?

Iran’s leaders may get the red carpet in Venezuela, but why do democracies like Brazil and Turkey offer warm embraces and business deals to Iran’s UN-defying, human-rights-abusing, Holocaust-denying, vote-rigging president?

And the military option should remain on the table. That does not necessarily mean the use of force, but it may help convince Iran’s leaders that continued defiance entails risks.

There is no guarantee of success. But the price of failure is so high that we can ill afford any further delay, disunity, or self-delusion in dealing with this pressing challenge.

By: John Rossomando

Most Americans usually do not think of Latin America in terms of Islamic terrorism, but counterterrorism expert and former FBI Special Agent James Conway tells Newsmax TV’s Kathleen Walter the region could be the nation’s “Achilles’ Heel” in its struggle against terrorism.

In recent years, these groups have established bases of operations throughout Latin America, which they have used to move people and materials.

“There is a growing presence of Islamic activism and fundraising in Latin America,” Conway told Newsmax. “There is a significant presence of human-trafficking organizations that terror cells have and could exploit for movement of people and materials into the United States, and that should be of a major concern to us from a national-security perspective.”

Indigenous Latin American terror groups such as the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) and the Zapatistas might not pose an immediate threat to the United States, but Conway told Newsmax Hizbullah and al-Qaida do.

Prior to Sept. 11, 2001, Hizbullah killed more Americans than any other terrorist group. It also holds responsibility for countless bombings, kidnapping and murders around the world dating back to its founding in 1982, most notable being the 1983 Beirut Marine barracks bombing that killed that killed 299 servicemen.

Hizbullah possesses the most sophisticated structure of any single terrorist group worldwide and receives funding to the tune of $100 million annually from its Iranian and Syrian backers. Its presence in Latin America has increased considerably in recent years.

“The specific Hizbullah targeting of the . . . Jewish community center in Buenos Ares back in the 1990s really brought to the forefront the presence of Hizbullah in Latin America and its threat to Western targets including the United States,” Conway said.

Conway says Mexico; South America’s virtually lawless Tri-border area where Parguay, Brazil and Argentina come together; and Central America have become areas of particular concern for Islamic terrorist activity.

Hizbullah has taken advantage of the presence of approximately 25,000 people of Middle Eastern ancestry in the Tri-border area to establish a base for fundraising and for the counterfeiting of everything from money to clothing and DVDs, Conway told Walter.

It has reportedly raised over $100 million due to its activities in this region.

And Iran’s growing diplomatic influence over the leftist regimes in places such as Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, Nicaragua and Honduras raise concerns Hizbullah could gain a stronger foothold.

“In my opinion, where you have Iranian diplomatic presence, you have the presence of Hizbullah,” Conway said. “And for that reason I’m concerned.”

The terror group also has a presence inside the United States, which has been evidenced by the suppression of Hizbullah cells in Charlotte, N.C., in the Midwest.

“Hizbullah is multifunctional; it doesn’t just conduct fundraising,” he said. “It also is involved in logistics, targeting, target assessment, collection of support materials ─ whether it be cloned cellular telephones, explosive and so forth and so on,” he said.

Iran’s increasing saber-rattling over its nuclear program gives Conway pause because it could lead the Iranian regime to use surrogates such as Hizbullah against the United States and its allies.

This factor, Conway says, raises concerns over border security, which he considers a major national-security issue.

“The way we accomplish this is through bilateral co-operations as FBI agents and other members of the intelligence community do,” Conway said. “We work bilateral operations with our host government partners, whether it be Brazil, Chile, Argentina, or in . . . Mexico.”

“We work right alongside, shoulder-to-shoulder with our partners in those countries; it has to be a bilateral operation. FBI agents can’t go overseas and run around unilaterally and work counterterrorism issues.”

Conway worries the growing instability in Mexico with regard to the Mexican government’s war with the drug cartels could hamper its ability to simultaneously respond to threats from Hizbullah and al-Qaida in cooperation with the United States.

“The challenges are there,” he said. “Counterterrorism operations are hard operations. It’s difficult for a variety of reasons just because of the modus operendi of terrorist groups, the fact that it’s very difficult to develop a good asset base inside terrorist organizations.

“Unlike criminal organizations, it’s a much harder to develop undercover operations and so forth.”

He says these factors complicate investigators’ work, but he says the FBI has done an outstanding job under the circumstances foiling potential terrorist attacks. And much of this has gone unnoticed by most Americans.

Israelis have hold demonstrations calling for the release of Sgt Shalit

The German mediator trying to secure the release of captured Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit has visited Gaza, the Islamic movement Hamas says.

The move comes amid speculation that efforts to agree a prisoner swap deal may be making progress.

Israel’s security cabinet met several times on the issue earlier this week, and the mediator is said to have taken Israel’s latest proposal to Hamas.

A Hamas official told Reuters the group would need a few days to study it.

“We have received the Israeli response from the German mediator and it will be studied within a few days,” a Hamas official told the news agency.

The official added that a delegation from Gaza would visit Damascus, where the Palestinian movement’s exiled leadership are based, for further discussions.

Swap debated

Sgt Shalit, 23, was captured in a raid into southern Israel by Palestinian militants from Gaza, in 2006.

Hamas want hundreds of Palestinians held by Israel, including senior militant leaders that Israel holds responsible for the deaths of dozens of Israeli citizens, to be freed in exchange for Sgt Shalit’s release.

Israel’s state prosecutor’s office said last month that the government was considering releasing 450 prisoners that Hamas had asked for, and another 530 to be selected by Israel under the deal under discussion.

Hamas’s list of demanded prisoners is said to include Marwan Bargouthi, a popular leader from Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas’s Fatah party, who is widely seen as a possible successor to Mr Abbas and a figure who might bridge the divisions between Fatah and Hamas, the main Palestinian political faction.

Israel’s seven-person security cabinet held intensive meetings on Sunday and Monday to discuss the issue.

On Tuesday, Defence Minister Ehud Barak said Israeli leaders faced the obligation to bring Sgt Shalit home, “but not at any price”.

In November members of Hamas went to Cairo to discuss the prisoner swap with mediators there.

President Shimon Peres announced last month that “real progress” had been made, but that details had to be “kept behind the scenes”.

“Now the time for Israeli gestures has ended. The Palestinians can decide whether they want to come to the negotiations table or not,” Lieberman told students at Ariel University Center. “The ball is in the Palestinian court.”

Lieberman reminded those listening that the temporary settlement freeze is not the first gesture implemented since Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu took office in March. Netanyahu also complied with Palestinian demands that he accept the creation of a sovereign Palestinian state as the outcome of peace talks, and has removed numerous military checkpoints in the so-called “West Bank.”

But instead of responding in kind, or at least returning to the negotiating table, the Palestinians have rejected each Israeli gesture and “moderate” Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas has repeatedly threatened to step down over what he calls phony Israeli offers.

“We cannot tolerate a situation in which (Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas) keeps threatening to resign and shouting ‘support me,’” said Lieberman.

If the Palestinians do not take the current gesture seriously, Lieberman said it will be Israel’s last and it will be fully reversed. “Let be clear – in 10 months construction in the Judea and Samaria will resume in an open and transparent manner.”

Gilad Schalit

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad welcomes Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal, for a meeting in his office in Teheran, Sunday.
Photo: AP

Speaking in Teheran, Mashaal said that Israel has no choice but to free the Palestinian prisoners Hamas wants in exchange for the captured soldier.

Regarding Iran, Mashaal warned that his group would back Iran, if it was attacked by Israel.

“All of the Islamic groups will take a united front with Iran against Israel,” he told reporters. “We’re all parts of the same body, we need to fight against the common enemy.”

On Sunday, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad reiterated his support for Hamas during a meeting with Mashaal. Iran’s official news agency quoted him as saying, “The government and the people of Iran will always stand by the Palestinian resistance and the Palestinian people.”

“Today Palestine is symbol of the global front of freedom-seekers and militants,” Ahmadinejad added.

Gov’t investigates Operation Cast Lead

“We will not agree to a situation in which [former prime minister] Ehud Olmert, [Defense Minister] Ehud Barak and Tzipi Livni are sitting on the defendants’ bench,” the premier said.

“We will not allow IDF soldiers and commanders, who heroically and morally defended our citizens from a cruel and criminal enemy, to be condemned as war criminals,” Netanyahu added. “We outright reject this absurdity.”

Netanyahu instructed National Security Council head Uzi Arad to relay a clear message on the issue to the British ambassador in Israel.Arad spoke with the ambassador, and told him that “the Israeli government expects the British government to act against this immoral phenomenon, which is trying to undermine Israel’s right for self-defense.”

The Foreign Ministry’s deputy director-general for Western Europe, Naor Gilon summoned British ambassador in Israel Tom Phillips for a meeting, to reprimand him over the arrest warrant.Gilon told Phillips that “you must find a solution to the problematic harassment of Israeli leaders visiting in Europe.”

How Britain would respond if arrest warrants were to be issued against former British ministers visiting abroad? Gilon asked Phillips.

Earlier Tuesday, the Foreign Ministry issued a harsh statement condemning the arrest warrant against Livni, saying these types of actions damage British-Israeli relations and if not dealt with will harm Britain’s ability to play a role in Mideast diplomacy.

The statement said that Israel rejected the “cynical” move taken in the UK courts at the behest of extremist elements in Britain and called on theBritish government “for once and for all” to keep its promises and work to prevent the manipulation by anti-Israeli elements of the British legal system against Israel.

“The lack of determined and immediate action to correct this distortion harms the relations between the two countries,” the statement read. “If Israeli leaders cannot visit Britain in a dignified manner, it will naturally be a real obstacle to Britain’s desire to have an active role in the peace process in the Middle East.”

The Foreign Ministry statement pointed out that both Israel and Britain are currently engaged in a common struggle against international terrorism, and that British soldiers are actively engaged in trying to root out terrorism on a number of different fronts around the world.

Also on Tuesday, Livni came out in defense of Operation Cast Lead, calling it a “necessary operation” that any normal country would have launched to defend its civilians.

“The operation in Gaza was necessary and was meant to restore Israel’s deterrence and did restore Israel’s deterrence,” Livni, who was foreign minister during the 2008 operation, said at the Institute for National Security Studies in Tel Aviv.

“The fact that Israel embarked on such an operation after withdrawing from the Gaza Strip and restraining itself for years in face of rocket fire shows that it was necessary…this is what any normal country that wants to defend its civilians from terror would do,” she said.

Livni also rejected comparisons that have been made between IDF soldiers and Hamas terrorists.

“I have no problem if the world wants to judge us, but I do have a problem with them failing to apply this judgment to the entire region,” she said. “There is no place in the world except here that a comparison is made between someone who kills deliberately and someone who kills by accident.”

Israel has been trying for years to get the British government to plug a hole in its legislation that enables legal procedures to be taken against high ranking government and IDF officials visiting Britain. As the arrest warrant against Livni attests, these efforts have been largely unsuccessful.

(Communicated by Bureau of the Deputy Foreign Minister

Today, 15th December, Asharq Alawsat, one of the largest pan-Arab daily newspapers printed an op-ed in Arabic by the Deputy Foreign Minister of the State of Israel, Danny Ayalon. The op-ed was titled “An Open Letter to the Arab World”.

In an historic and unprecedented article, Ayalon calls on the Arab world to accept Israel’s extended hand in peace and fraternity. The Deputy Foreign Minister calls on the Arab world to step forward and join with Israel to defeat the forces of extremism and destruction in the Middle East. Iran and its terrorist followers on the one hand and climate change on the other are issues which threaten Arabs and Israelis alike. It is surely time to look to the future and break with former intransigencies to create a better future for all the people of the region.

For us to be able to face these and many other challenges, Ayalon states that we need to break with the paradigms of the past. “The Jewish people are here because of our historical, legal, moral and national rights,” Ayalon states. “Israel has gone very far and is prepared to do its part, but we must be met by a willing partner. Without this, the region is doomed to more conflict and will negate the unity of purpose in the Middle East that is necessary to face the mounting challenges from without and within.”
English translation:

An Open Letter to the Arab World

By Danny Ayalon

Since the reestablishment of our state, Israeli leaders have sought peace with their Arab neighbors. Our Declaration of Independence, Israel’s founding document that expressed our hopes and dreams reads, “We extend our hand to all neighboring states and their peoples in an offer of peace and good neighborliness, and appeal to them to establish bonds of cooperation and mutual help.” These words are as true today as when they were first written in 1948. Sadly, 61 years later, only two nations, Jordan and Egypt, have accepted these principles and made peace with the Jewish State.

Recently the Israeli government has made significant steps to restart negotiations with the Palestinians and reach out to the Arab world. In his Bar-Ilan speech in June, Prime Minister Netanyahu clearly stated his acceptance of a Palestinians state living side by side in peace and security with the State of Israel. My government has removed hundreds of roadblocks to improve access and movement for Palestinians and has assisted the facilitation of economic developments in the West Bank, through close cooperation with international parties to expedite projects and remove bottlenecks.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, a right-wing government has, in an unprecedented move, declared it would refrain from building new settlements in the West Bank. All of these moves taken together amply demonstrate Israel’s willingness for peace.

This Israeli government is also committed to extend a hand to all of our Arab neighbors, its leaders and its citizens, to join together to face some of the major challenges facing us all in the coming years.

For the first time in many years, we find ourselves on the same side in seeking to quell and defeat the forces of extremism and destruction in our region. While many see the threat from Iran directed solely at Israel, we in the region know differently. Together, we understand the menace that emanates from the extremist regime in Tehran. A regime that seeks to export its extremist ideology across the region and beyond, while arming terrorist groups that seek to destabilize moderate Sunni regimes and aiming for hegemonic control of the Middle East and far beyond.

The Iranian regime has many tentacles spread out across the region sowing destruction and despair amongst the people. The enemy of the people of Lebanon is not Israel, but Hizbullah. The enemy of the Palestinian people is not Israel, but Hamas. The enemy of the Egyptian people is not Israel, but militant Islamist opposition groups. All of these groups, and many others, receive their commands from Iran, who wish to control and suppress any aspirations the region has towards freedom and advancement.

Iran seeks to hold an entire region, including its own people, to ransom and keep it engaged in conflicts orchestrated and directed from Tehran. Whether it is in Morocco, Iraq or Yemen, Iran is constantly interfering with Arab sovereignty for their own nefarious gain. Israel and its Sunni neighbors alike are in the sights of Khameini, Ahmadinejad and their minions.

If Iran is able to attain nuclear weapons, the situation becomes inexplicably and inexorably worse. The Iranian regime has demonstrated that if feels unrestricted in its ability to dominate our region, a nuclear umbrella will only embolden its acolytes to act unrestrained to the detriment of us all. Only together can we face this threat and remove it.

Another issue that entails mutual political will to overcome is the threat of climate change to our region. Many reports and organizations are pinpointing the Middle East as an area that will suffer gravely as rain falls even more infrequently and temperatures rise.

Recently, the leading international scholars on climate change met in Copenhagen and released an important report on this issue. They claimed that climate change will exacerbate conflicts and increase strains and violence among competing groups. We are already witnessing water rights and growing desertification as underlying reasons for the intensification of conflicts in our region.

“Making the desert bloom” has been a core component of the Zionist ethos and successes throughout the decades. Israel has been able to turn desert into arable land and barren landscapes into forests. We constantly share our agricultural miracles with our friends in Africa and Asia and it is for this reason that many countries of the developing world have sought partnership with Israel in addressing their own agricultural challenges.

However, as Israel’s founding fathers wrote in 1948, Israel is prepared to do its share in a common effort for the advancement of the entire Middle East. Our partners in peace, Jordan and Egypt, and especially the Palestinian Authority, bear witness to our endeavors in this direction. Israel has actively cooperated with Egypt on the “Mubarak Project” for the establishment of an irrigation demonstration system in Nubariya and annually trains hundreds of Jordanians in Israel in fields such as sustainable eco-friendly agricultural methods.

For us to be able to face these and many other challenges, we need to break with the paradigms of the past. The Jewish people are here because of our historical, legal, moral and national rights.

Those naysayers who can not countenance a Jewish political presence in the region will doom all of us to many more decades of conflict and instability. It is time for courageous leaders to emanate from the Arab world as did Egyptian President Anwar Sadat in 1979 and Jordan’s King Hussein in 1994 and recognize that peaceful coexistence is far better for all of our people than enduring conflict and enmity.

We recognize that the Arab Peace Initiative is an important document, and is welcomed in Israel as a crack in the denial of an Arab recognition of Israel. However, like the Palestinian Authority’s dictates to Israel on the peace process, it remains frozen in 1993.

Since the historic handshake between Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat on the White House lawn, Israel has taken major strides both politically and strategically towards the Palestinian position.

Both in 2000 at Camp David and in 2008 during the Annapolis process, Israeli prime ministers offered the Palestinians everything possible for peace and on both occasions the Palestinian leadership rejected these offers.  The Palestinian Authority, like the Arab Peace Initiative, is still holding to its maximalist positions and has not moved an inch towards Israel since 1993. These positions are obviously untenable for peace and reflect a worldview that ignores Israel’s significant gestures and seeks to enforce a solution that will mean the end of the Jewish State. Recent Palestinian and Arab League declarations only enforce this view.

It is surely time to look to the future and break with former intransigencies to create a better future for all the people of the region. Israel has gone very far and is prepared to do its part, but we must be met by a willing partner. Without this, the region is doomed to more conflict and will negate the unity of purpose in the Middle East that is necessary to face the mounting challenges from without and within.

Danny Ayalon is the Israel Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs