Why is this flotilla different from the one that came before it- Then, Turkey stood front and center on the Mavi Marmara's deck. This time it is not in the game. Then, the Israel Defense Forces refused to examine the different options proposed in advance by generals Yoav Galant and Avraham Botzer. This time all the options were on the table and were discussed seriously. Then, the decision-making process was flawed, even though that wasn't the reason for the big failure that ensued. This time, everything is being done according to the findings of the Turkel Commission, which was set up to investigate the circumstances of the first flotilla. Then, there was no hidden hand sabotaging the vessels before they set sail. This time, a hidden hand has acted, and has been successful. Then, Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi did not take his position in the Bunker, the IDF's command-and-control headquarters, to monitor the unfolding event. This time, Lt.-Gen. Benny Gantz will spend the night there. Then, mistakes made were not corrected. This time, there have been mistakes but they are being corrected quickly. Like the foolish threat to deport and ban foreign journalists who cover the flotilla from on board one of the ships. Then, the Israeli organizer of the flotilla, Dror Feier, got away unharmed. This time, the watchdog group the Movement for Quality Government has recommended that an investigation be opened against Feier. And back then, Israel was out of luck. This time, Israel will be luckier. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ On Thursday, Tovah Tzimuki published a scoop in the Yediot Aharonot newspaper, a scoop which until then had been hush-hush among a select few people in the know: that Boaz Harpaz, the former IDF intelligence officer accused of fabricating the Galant Document in an attempt to besmirch the name of Yoav Galant and thwart his appointment as chief of staff after Gabi Ashkenazi, has broken the barrier of silence and has started to talk. Harpaz has twice appeared before State Comptroller Micha Lindenstrauss and has told him all. Gabi Ashkenazi and his wife Ronit won't like what Harpaz had to say, to say the least. The associates of the lead investigator in this case, Yaakov (Mendi) Orr, had intended to call Ronit Ashkenazi in for questioning, but they realized that she was with her husband in Washington D.C. It is possible that a team of investigators from the state comptroller's office will travel to meet them there. First to question Ronit, then Gabi. Meanwhile, there's been another development: somebody in the State Prosecutors Office wanted to release Harpaz from his travel ban and allow him to leave the country. This has come up before, and led to a power struggle between Defense Minister Ehud Barak and Ashkenazi. Harpaz wanted to travel to South America, but was forced to stay in Israel. Now, his lawyer has asked that Harpaz be allowed to travel to Italy for a few days. Military Advocate-General Brig.-Gen. Avichai Mendelblit would have none of it. The IDF fears that the State Prosecutors Office is trying to weaken the travel ban. The argument between the two organizations has been very heated. Finally, Attorney General Yehuda Weinstein stepped in and put the brakes on the state prosecution's move. Behind the scenes a huge drama was playing out between the heads of the IDF and the state prosecution, which was resolved only through Weinstein's intervention. Harpaz's hearing at the State Prosecutor's Office has been put off until some time in July in the hope that Lindenstrauss's investigation bears some fruit. There are signs that the prosecution is trying to whittle down the charges and get a plea bargain -- and the truth will not come out, yet again. One thing is clear, this investigation cannot end in a plea bargain. It needs to run its course. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Rabbi Dov Lior claims there was no need to investigate him for his endorsement of the Torat Hamelekh (the King's Torah), which contains tracts discussing when it is permissible, according to Jewish law, to kill non-Jewish children during wartime. He asked why this was even an issue. Could be. But maybe the police should have simultaneously brought in the lecturer from Ben Gurion University who recently suggested breaking the bones of people who were celebrating Jerusalem Liberation Day. True, the police should have, and they messed up here. But still, Lior should have shown up at the police station when told to do so, as is the law, where he could have given his version of the story, or made use of his right to remain silent. But he didn't come. For four months he rejected the country's sovereign law and thumbed his nose at police, behaving like Pope Gregory VII, who, some 934 years ago, humiliated King Henry IV by affirming the primacy of the papal authority in what became known as the Investiture Controversy, the most significant conflict between church and state in medieval Europe. Gregory forced Henry to come to Canossa, Italy, and apologize in person. This is what Lior wanted to do to the symbols of our sovereign kingdom, Police Commissioner Yochanan Danino and Yoav Segalovich, head of the Police Investigations and Intelligence Office. It is just that there are enough Jews who will not agree that Kiryat Arba will become Israel's Canossa. They will not agree to this, nor will they agree to the riots by the rabbi's followers at the High Court. What's more, it is unacceptable that former IDF chief rabbi Avi Ronsky did not state in a clear voice that Lior should have presented himself at the police station, using the excuse that he had still not spoken with him. There is nothing to speak about and nothing to discuss, besides telling Lior that he erred by not presenting himself at the police station. With the knowledge of the great part that Jewish law has played and is playing in forming the ethos of the Jewish state and the education of its young generations and their enlightened hold on the land of our forefathers and its language -- I am forced to admit that it is not just the ultra-Orthodox who are undermining the shared foundation of the Jewish nation, but also some of those known as the Orange Brothers, the religious ultra-nationalists. By leading people into a needless quarrel the result of which will be a dangerous fracture within the nation, they have developed an obscene struggle which aims to replace Israel as a nation of secular law with the law of the Torah. This is unacceptable, especially before the Messiah comes. Their methods are dangerous. Instead of bringing their grievances about the IDF's actions in Judea and Samaria to the Knesset, they pour their anger on government officials. Shai Nitzan is a just and loyal government employee. If he is sacked, heaven forbid, we will not be able to find other honest people willing to take upon themselves the job of keeping the Supreme Court balanced. Nitzan Alon is a brigade commander who executes the IDF's legal orders. If the settlers have qualms with that, they should complain in the Knesset, but leave the loyal commander's family alone. The same goes for Maj.-Gen.Yoav Segalovich. Rabbis such as Dov Lior and Ovadia Yosef's son, who is wanted for interrogation, are attempting to discredit him and the law by avoiding interrogations. This is corrupt behavior. It pits the state against religion in three instances, each of which is an attempt to shut mouths. It is not easy for women and children who are forced to watch a campaign against a husband and father who is also an advocate, brigade commander, and police officer. It is also not easy for Nitzan and Segalovich. They may end up postponing their duties till tomorrow or the next day, or till after their son's graduation party, and then do what they are supposed to do, only with less zeal and determination because of the pressures they and their families have to face each day. Segalovich, Nitzan and Alon are facing the most difficult tests of their lives. Only they know if they have the strength to withstand the unjust attacks against them. The American European document There is a buzz in the system. The next wave of WikiLeaks documents will reveal that there is a lot of activity above the Atlantic Ocean. The Americans and the Europeans are developing a position paper that will be presented to the Palestinians and Israelis. The purpose of the paper is to counter Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas request to the U.N. General Assembly to recognize a Palestinian state, even if the Americans veto the proposal in the Security Council. By doing so, they will prevent Palestine from becoming a member of the U.N. If that happens, nothing will happen. But only seemingly. They will inevitably use such a decision to torture Israel in international forums, especially in the International Court of Justice in Hague. This will happen until the moment comes when they believe they can push through a proposal in the Security Council without the Americans vetoing it. What they see as the diplomatic noose around Israel's neck. Perhaps Abbas prefers this scenario. He is not interested in negotiations, but to maintain Europe's support, he pretends to be interested in talks. The American-European activity is the litmus test of his intentions. The Europeans are cooperating with the Americans under the assumption that U.S. President Barack Obama has lost interest. He is busy with his November 2012 re-election campaign and will not face off against Israel till then. If he succeeds in delaying a pro-Palestinian decision, all the better. If he fails to do that, that will also be fine. He is not responsible for that, but rather Israel the rejectionist is. The American-European position paper, which is under the scrutiny of representatives of both sides, Yitzhak Molcho for Israel, Saeb Erekat for the Palestinians, has not yet been finalized. It is based on two speeches made by Obama. The side that rejects the paper will lose support in the General Assembly in September. But the decision to accept it or reject it will have to be made soon. In July, the foreign ministers of the Quartet nations (four nations involved in mediating the peace process in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict) will meet, and August is when the annual Muslim Ramadan month of fasting occurs. An agreement can only be made before the fasting commences. The Palestinian leadership is divided not only between Fatah and Hamas, but also between Abbas and Salam Fayyad (the Palestinian Prime Minister). And what is Israel's position? It is clear that the American-European paper will have the support of two senior ministers, Ehud Barak and Dan Meridor. They are always quick to point out that Israel always arrives at the correct conclusion, but always too late. How far are Benjamin Netanyahu's ideas from those presented in the draft of an agreement designed by Dr. Yossi Beilin together with Abbas- Part of that outlook was expressed by Ron Lauder, who runs an influential Jewish organization. Lauder challenged Netanyahu to accept negotiations with the Palestinians, without the pre-conditions he is asking for. The Americans are on board. It is reasonable to assume that the prime minister wants to do just that, in accordance with his speeches and flexible stance, which were at odds with the right wing he represents. Will he be able to carry out his intentions? Will he prefer that his acceptance of unconditional talks be forced upon him? European diplomats are traversing the country, asking anyone they feel is or was in the know if that is what the Prime Minister is looking for. But they will not return to their offices with a clear answer.
