Authentic [even a tad radical] Zionism that leans Right claims Israel extends beyond the Jordan. The Left counters with its views as a perfect negative [and opposite extreme]. And nowadays people speak as moderates, while claims of selling out Israel are often heard in the background.
But did anyone notice Arab Spring - and happen to take in the last 100+ years of Zionism to form a long view perspective? We may be looking at the closing of one long tekufa in the making that will bring us to Zionism 1.0 as a conclusion, and into 2.0: the Messiah version [and vision of Eretz Yisrael].
When Zionism first became the vehicle of choice to govern in the Land [and to the Land] while lending itself as a viable method of vision, its extreme blend had a purpose, one that has lasted all the way until today and led to the very threshold that we find ourselves sitting upon today. In 2013 you will hear Zionism speaking of becoming moderate, yet make no mistake, this is not a change of winds; this is the echo of a mission nearly complete.
In 1948, the Jews return to their Land, disheveled from 2000 years of Trauma, and suddenly take to Israel with 6,000,000 questions as to where to go from here. An immediate redemption although poetic to the ear, would be a cause of sure destruction, so a plan would be needed to bring this thing up to speed. Let the War of Independence begin!
Israel will eventually [seem] to win this war, and the struggle will continue over 60+ years of the same themes and characters, over and over again. The same questions will remain - are we being sold out and when will Israel finally fall victim to her neighbors?
However after much deliberation and commitment to extreme Zionism, something changed [in the time of the Zohar's predicted times even!]: Arab Spring - in its season.
With perfect deception in perspective, people look to see where it began, however it is the end game that matters in any round of chess - on any level.
The end game here is Jordan.
Jordan possesses the three prophesied gifts to Eretz Yisrael: Edom, Moav, and Ammon, al to be given once The Land - Proper is secured, something that even King David did not do, before his Syrian conquest.
Speaking of Syria: they are about to fall, causing black hole eruption that will indeed pull in the kingdom of Yishamel - Iran. When that happens, the Middle East is in total collapse [except Israel no less] with refugees seeking to pour into an already [mysteriously] weakened Jordan. If Jordan is the last player in this, Israel is last man standing - but in face of international isolation as the price to pay for victory.
This paves the way for Gog Magog onto Israel. But now there is a catch: Even if America lands on Holy soil to negotiate the final [solution] two state submission, Israel now speaks as moderates?
With Jordan down and last - now Israel can create a Palestinian State from the former Jordan which happens to be the original Palestinian State [if even that existed].
At this point Authentic Zionism served her purpose, paved the path to a redemption scenario, and allows the prophesied lands to be delivered as if giftwrapped and served on a platter.
So if indeed Zionism caused Arab Spring, and Jordan is the main course [while the Right with Left opposition worked like a charm] we may be looking the frail beginning of redemption, a vision shining through after over 100 years in the making. No longer is the modern moderate seen as a sellout, but rather as a captain steering the ship into port.
If Bibi signs the draft of a future treifa state, it is my belief that this is no less than divine engineering of a promise delivered thousands of years ago.
Much like the Para Adumah - from the impure comes forth the pure, and as we saw in Parashas Beshalach - from the bitter comes the sweet. Nothing is more bitter than this Palestinian State - and for this we are told, with Hope to Hashem, we will witness those waters become something sweet for the whole World to drink.
May we soon taste the sweet waters of the World through the sweet channel of the Beis Hamikdash, that will be built on The Holy Land, and through its expansion of Promised Territory TransJordan. For Your Salvation [Hashem] - We Hope To You [God]!
Jpost.com:
While not ready to sign a comprehensive peace deal, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu is willing to establish an interim Palestinian state without a final agreement, former deputy foreign minister Yossi Beilin said on Monday.
Speaking during a debate with outgoing settlement council head Danny Dayan, Beilin stated that he had heard from Netanyahu that he would be ready for establishing a “provisional border with the Palestinians.”
“This is something that I heard from him that he would be ready to do it,” he stated.
The debate, held at the David Citadel Hotel in Jerusalem, was organized by the American Jewish Committee.
“Both sides prefer a permanent agreement but are not ready for it under either’s current leadership,” Beilin continued.
Beilin, who was one of the primary architects of both the Oslo Accords and the Geneva Initiative, a framework for peace negotiated outside of official government channels, noted that “what can be done is an interim agreement which establishes a Palestinian state in provisional borders so that Netanyahu will not have to negotiate now about Jerusalem.”
“Netanyahu, far from being a warmonger, is a very cautious person and therefore not the one [to sign] a permanent agreement. This is not because he doesn’t want it but because he is not ready to pay the price.”
Beilin negated the possibility of an accord such as his Geneva Initiative being workable in the current political climate or with the “current government.”
He also asserted that instead of the prime minister being forced to deal with the issue of forcibly evacuating settlements, any settlers who would wish to remain in their homes under Palestinian sovereignty would be allowed to do so. Those not wishing to live within a Palestinian state would be resettled, Beilin said, possibly even in other areas over the green line that Israel would retain.
“Knowing Bibi,” he said, using Netanyahu’s nickname, “I believe an interim solution could be realistic.”
However, the Prime Minister’s Office denied Beilin’s statements. Speaking to The Jerusalem Post in response to Beilin’s comments, PMO officials noted that Netanyahu “believes in direct negotiations with the Palestinians with no preconditions that would lead to, as described in the Bar-Ilan speech, a two-state solution based on a demilitarized Palestinian state that recognizes Israel.”
Settlement council head Dayan also had an alternative peace plan on hand.
Currently, he said, Israel and the Palestinians “are devising a modus vivendi that is moderately satisfying for everyone. It’s not idyllic or what we or Palestinians want, but it’s moderately satisfying, and in this region it’s a hell of an achievement.”
There is currently no long-term solution, he said, but should Jordan experience regime change, it may be possible to push the idea of Jordan as a Palestinian state.
“There is a significant chance for two states, Israel west of the Jordan River and Palestine to the east, with joint functional control over Judea and Samaria, although not shared sovereignty,” he speculated. “That will be the beginning of serious negotiations, in which Israel [eventually] rules the Jewish population there and Palestine rules the territory in which their people live there.”
The debate was held during a dinner for the Board of Governors Institute of the AJC, which is currently in Israel as part of a regional tour.
AJC director David Harris, whose staff organized the debate, noted that members of the board were granted an audience with King Abdullah of Jordan in Amman on Sunday and had met with both President Shimon Peres and Prime Minister Netanyahu on Monday.
“This evening is sort of quintessential AJC,” Harris noted. “We always have a major debate as part of our programming. We invite people who are thoughtful and reasoned but have certain perspectives on key issues. We listen to them respectfully and we process the information. Tonight’s debate was very much in that spirit.”
"Jordan has not avoided Arab awakening or Arab Spring completely but there were actually some protests. And a number of protests that took place in the country over the last two years is actually incomparable with the number of protests that used to take place earlier," Ibrahim Saif, resident scholar at the Carnegie Middle East Center, in Beirut, told the Voice of Russia.
Jordan has not avoided Arab awakening or Arab Spring completely but there were actually some protests. And a number of protests that took place in the country over the last two years is actually incomparable with the number of protests that used to take place earlier. Also the ceiling of the demands by protesters was increasing over time since the Arab awakening. Over the last two years they were demanding the reform of the regime and then they wanted to introduce new issues like constitutional monarchy and to limit the king’s power.
So, there was a kind of movement at the streets level and within the elites level and the need to introduce new changes. So, Jordan is one of the countries that are actually going through I would say a transitional moment now. But we can also argue that it is a smooth and managed transition in a way, that so far the opposition parties, including the Islamist and other parties, are not having the critical mass as yet to have something like a popular uprising similar to other countries, like Tunisia or Yemen, or like Egypt in that regard.
And for that there are several reasons that we can consider in understanding why the protests have been minimal, why that so far has not been going up to a way out revolution. There are reasons behind this regarding the nature of the regime, regarding the nature of the social contacts between the state and the society, and the due politics that has been unfolding in the region for that matter.
Sir, but you said that Islamists have not reached the critical mass in power structures and you said – as yet. Does that imply that you do not rule out the scenario of more turbulent development?
Actually if we think about scenarios for Jordan and what would happen, I wouldn’t rule out any of the scenarios. The most likely scenario is that we will continue in this managed transition. But if there is a sort of severe economic deterioration and there is a severely high rate of unemployment, as we witnessed around the end of the last year, and increasing number of poor people, and also the rising sentiment against corruption and lack of action in that regard – that would drive increasing numbers to the streets and could witness a serious trouble in the country. This is one of the scenarios.
But the second scenario which as I argue is the most likely is that the Government is trying to respond to demands at both levels by fighting corruption and having a more participatory policy making. The latest parliamentarian election which by far at least can be characterized as fair election in the sense that there was no forgery, there was no intervention as happened before in the previous elections, though it was boycotted by the Islamists and some opposition groups. But at least the outcome was uncontroversial compared with other previous elections.
So, now we at least have a legitimate legislative body that can take some more fierce measures regarding the political reform in Jordan and introducing a new election law or a new set of rules for governing the new affairs in Jordan.
Several times I’ve run into an assumption that Arab Spring poses a certain challenge for monarchy regimes. So, does that mean that Jordan might be one of the models to argument that position? Or is Jordan's case absolutely special?
Actually I think there are some certain challenges and there are some certain threats. It depends on how you response to this new political landscape in the region and the new political landscape in Jordan. And this challenge could be turned into a threat if you do not act, if you do not react, also if you are sometimes too active and take serious steps towards changing the way that the state-society relations are shaped and how you gain the public support.
But so far actually, since the revolution or the Arab Spring has started, Jordan has amended its constitution, which is for the first time in 50 years when they introduced some constitutional amendments which reduce the absolute power granted to the king and gave it to the Parliament, also reduce the executive body’s power and empower more the elected legislative body in that regard. So, actually there is a new dynamics that is taking place.
Sometimes you would argue that maybe they are slower than they should be and they are quite hesitant but I think this is quite natural in a country where there is an entrenched interested groups that have benefiting from the existing arrangement for a long time and you would expect them to resist the shift to a new dynamics whereby new elites and new interests would emerge and take positions in the new political and economic landscape.
Of course, if you wait, if you don’t react, if you think that all policies would apply today and would reach a conclusive agreement with your own society – then you are definitely mistaken. And a challenge is how really to predict and draft a new social contract and a new political arrangement whereby you increase the level of participation and you don’t take responsibility as a monarchy on your own part or as an individual institution, or a singular institution in the country.
But Sir, definitely there are other factors which are out of control of the Government, like the situation around the country. So, in what ways does the situation in the neighbouring countries affect Jordan? And can the Government efficiently counter those dangerous effects?
There are actually two aspects to what is happening in the region, and particularly in Syria. One thing is that this refugee crisis, which is a kind of humanitarian crisis which puts more pressure on the Government and its own resources and how they are responding to this. And this event unfolding in Syria, so far we don’t know how this would end and what kind of new political regime would prevail in Syria. That fight and that geopolitical threat is out of the Government’s hands, and I agree that that is something we have to include when we talk about the regional aspect of this Arab Spring in that regard.
The second aspect is actually people at the street when they are watching what is happening in Syria, that devastation, that destruction of their infrastructure, the divide in the society, the casualties, the way that the Government and the Army is dealing with its own people has actually put a kind of break to the protest in the street and the public support in the sense that although we are demanding for reforming the polity and reforming the regime in Jordan but nobody wants Jordan to get into the chaotic state that we are witnessing in Syria in that regard. And therefore they are really backing off from supporting any uncalculated movement.
So, I would say that what is happening in Syria to great extent has weakened the more drastic political demand in Jordan and you would find a lot of people actually leaning towards a managed transition. And probably the outcome of this election is actually the reflection of that, I mean the level of participation and the quality of the parliamentarians who reached the Parliament would reflect that flavor of the opposition but also the flavor of how can we improve the status quo and how can we move forward with the light at the end of the tunnel instead of jumping into the unknown. I think this is where the support and Syria has played a significant role in really creating a group of hesitant people because they are unsure about how this would unfold in Syria and what role could the international community play in the crisis similar to the ones in Syria.
