Connecting the Dots on the Jericho Action?

       



   



The Real Olmert??

A friend has sent a couple of emails, the most recent being this morning regarding his take on the Jericho action and the seizure of the 6 Rachavim Ze’evi Assassins/Co-conspirators. These emails seem to strongly support the premise expressed in the Emmanuel Winston article below;

17 March, 2006;

The one thing that really seems to prove coordination between the players is the instantaneous move by the IDF once the monitors drove past. Like, so what if they drove past? Does that mean they abandoned the prison permanently? Maybe they went out to lunch? Maybe they were coming back? Maybe there were other observers left behind? Wouldn’t it have created a major diplomatic row if the IDF went in and the Brits hadn’t really left or were coming back?

There is no way the actual situation could be verified fast enough and positively enough to allow an immediate attack unless there was prior coordination between, at a minimum, the British and the Israelis.

Also, how on earth could so many soldiers converge on and surround the prison so fast? It takes time to get soldiers into their jeeps, tanks and bulldozers plus some time to drive to the location. They seem to have been conveniently located in their vehicles with their officers at just the right time. Otherwise they could not have arrived so fast.

Finally, how could it be that both the US and the British laid all the blame on the Arabs? When was the last time *that* happened? Shouldn’t they have blasted Olmert sending the IDF in, guns blazing, and for not seeking a diplomatic solution? How about the UN? The EU? The Russians? No comments on the attack?

In my original email on the subject I said it was almost too good to be true and I asked if the story was Purim shtick. I am beginning to think both are the case.

14 March, 2006

1) It’s been widely covered in the MSM as well as in blogs such as IRIS and this one that Abbas and Hamas promised to release the killers of Rechavim Ze’evi.

2) The American and British monitors were removed “for their safety”. Umm, why was their safety jeopardized? Perhaps more correctly they were not going to be able to prevent the imminent release so they and their sponsors (the US and the British) would look like idiots?

3) Israel moves in, blows the daylight out of the place and captures a ton of bad guys.

4) The Arabs respond by rioting, kidnapping and killing foreign leftists.

Sure many leftists hate us but, when their own lives are on the line, they know where their right to live will be protected.

5) Tie-in to IRIS coverage of the Rafah crossing charade (here and here): EU monitors at Rafah: “We’re outta here!”

Is this Purim shtick?

And this author adds one more question;

What was Peres’ secret meeting with Abbas all about [given that Abbas has Abbas admitted, in no uncertain terms, wanting to see Kadima elected]?

After Olmert’s 24% drop last month, he had to do something to shore up his abysmal image on security. An “October surprise” was expected. with the help of the US.

Selling Olmert as a General

Excerpts;

A slightly fishy smell emanates from the action by the Israeli troops surrounding the prison in Jericho, 20 minutes after British guards/monitors abandoned their posts. Since the Brits are sticklers for keeping certain agreements ­­ as guarding a prison ­­and do not casually get into their cars and drive away as they did from Jericho on March 14th.

As reported in The New York Times and CNN, Israeli troops and tanks arrived within 20 minutes of the Brits’ precipitous departure. Israeli spokesmen declared it wasn’t “coordinated, just coincidental”. CNN’s Tom Clancy and Zain Verze interviewed Mark Regev at the Israeli Embassy of the Foreign Ministry and asked him if this was a pre-election action. Regev denied any connection. Clancy and Verze were hostile in their questions and it was not the first time they displayed their overt hostility.

What does this theatrical performance really look like? The Americans and British are anxious to make Acting Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert appear decisive and militarily capable just before the elections which he hopes gives him the royal stamp of legitimacy as a Real Prime Minister.

For context on this story, click here.

Commentary;

There is no question that the attack on the Jericho Prison and the seizure of the Ghandi [Rechavim Ze'evi assassins] was the right thing to do to express military power, long-dormant and to act on behalf of the national welfare and security. But whether or not it goes anywhere toward re-imposing Israel’s military deterrence as a weapon depends not merely on expression of military power, but upon motivation for expression of that power as well as consistence of such expression.

Here is where Ehud Olmert is called into serious leadership and political question.

Was this action a temporary marriage of one-time political convenience; Olmert — to “insure” election victory? Abbas, because he needs Olmert at the helm continuing to give him everything for nothing? Bush and Rice needing something to gift to and to pacify the Muslim Arabs — to quote from the Winston article; “deep Israeli concessions; evacuations of Judea, Samaria, the Jordan Valley, Golan Heights, and those areas of Jerusalem controlled by the King of Jordan for 19 years”?

This author holds that these are important questions to be pondered before choosing which little slip to put into the envelope on 28 March. MB

1 Comment


  1. In order to get Israel to backi off from Mukata, the UK and the US promised Israel that they would monitor the prison to ensure the prisoners stayed there. Their duty was to Israel. They had no right to leave other then by coordinating with Israel. Whether the PA was in breach had nothing to do with their obligation to Israel. Thus, the only way they could extricate themselves was to turn the prison over to Israel. This was not a favour to Israel. This was an obligation.

Leave a reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.