This past political week reflects the sharp contrast between what it was a year ago, and political activity today. On Sunday, outgoing Chancellor Angela Merkel appeared in Jerusalem. While it is generally perceived as a society of Israel, in practice, under its leadership, a difficult anti-Israel and even anti-Jewish policy has been promoted in Germany and in Europe in general. Merkel's Germany has become the largest funder of BDS organizations.
Under its auspices, an illegal outpost called Khan al-Ahmar was established, and in front of the outpost that threatens Highway 1 and strangles Kfar Adumim, even High Court judges are unable to raise their heads. And there is also Iran. Throughout the last few years, Merkel's Germany It was the Chancellor who led the European trio (Germany, France and Britain) in refusing to join the Trump administration that withdrew from the nuclear deal, and implemented the strategy of maximum pressure on the ayatollahs.
There has been a point, over the past 16 years, in beautifying the situation and even applauding Merkel as Israel's "true friend" when she arrived in Jerusalem and bowed her head at Yad Vashem.
Germany is Israel's largest trading partner in Europe, and a crisis with it could severely hurt the economy.
Germany also controls the EU, and if it wants, it can open a brutal front against Jerusalem from Brussels.
But avoiding going into crisis does not justify Merkel's revelry this week.
What interest preceded by the Munich Festival in Jerusalem?
Especially when she's already going home.
Prime Minister Naftali Bennett did not advance Israel's interests when he called Merkel "Europe's moral compass" - on the contrary.
Bennett signaled to anyone who replaces Merkel that he will only benefit from harming Israel.
Not their celebration
Merkel hurried back to Berlin before Monday - the anniversary of Abraham's agreements - and not in vain. She was among their main opponents. Last year, Merkel and her EU colleagues reacted angrily when Trump announced the agreements publicly. Berlin and Brussels boycotted the signing ceremony of the Abrahamic Treaties at the White House. And they had a good reason.
Speaking at a ceremony in the Knesset to mark the anniversary of the signing of the Avraham agreements, opposition leader and agreement architect Benjamin Netanyahu said: "As long as they said, 'It is impossible to make peace with the Arab world without making peace with the Palestinians,' we could not make peace. Historical peace. "
And who "said" that the Palestinians have a veto on Arab-Israeli peace? Among others, Merkel and her colleagues in the union, and the progressives in the United States who also boycotted the White House ceremony. The willingness to give the Palestinians a veto over Israeli-Arab peace is not just a matter of priorities. That the Palestinians have a veto over peace, in fact means that Israel has a right to exist only on condition; or that in general Israel denies the right to exist. They justify their position by denying the historical connection between the people of Israel and their country. These are the people that Merkel and her many colleagues in the foreign policy establishment of Washington and Brussels give them the power to prevent Israeli-Arab peace.
In the Lapid-Bennett government, the story of the Avraham agreements is problematic for two reasons.
First, it is a tremendous political achievement for the rival Netanyahu.
And secondly, most members of the government want to return the Palestinian veto out of ideological and institutional interest.
For years, the political-security establishment has been addicted to Oslo's policy patterns.
But as Israelis, they cannot shake off true peace with four Arab countries.
Blindness in Washington, surrender to Jordan
Since taking office, Lapid, Bennett and their comrades have chosen to deal with the tangle of the Abrahamic agreements by denying their meaning while returning to the policy patterns they ruled before their establishment. Take for example Lapid's strange visit to Washington this week. The Biden administration marked the anniversary of the Abrahamic agreements by dismissing their importance. A State Department spokesman said they were not removing the Palestinian issue from the agenda. In terms of administration, the PLO rejects Israel's right to exist, yet keep the veto for peace with the Arab world. Lapid expressed no criticism of the statement.
Just like Bennett accuses Netanyahu responsible for the hostility of King Abdullah of Jordan to Israel (and that later) Thus, Lapid uses the former Soviet Union as a scapegoat for the hostility of Democrats in the United States, including the Democratic Jews towards Israel.
In order to blame Netanyahu for the crisis with the Democrats, Lapid had to completely ignore the growing opposition in the ranks of the dominant radical wing of the Democratic Party to the State of Israel, when this wing is led by former President Obama. Instead of looking straight at the root of the problem - anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism pervading the left - Lapid went into a state of voluntary blindness.
On Wednesday, Lapid was criticized on social media for not daring to comment in his meeting with Deputy Kamala Harris against the backing she gave to a student who accused Israel of genocide. What's worse is that Lapid not only refrained from criticizing Harris' conduct - it was implied from his words that he was adopting the progressive worldview. Lapid praised the "next generation of young Americans" who "are engaged not only in wars and conflicts, but also in the climate crisis, the global immigration crisis, in questions of identity."
We will continue with Prime Minister Bennett, who is focusing his political efforts on Jordan. When he entered the Prime Minister's Office, Israeli-Jordanian relations were in a state of disarray because King Abdullah II was hostile to Israel, and Netanyahu refused to bow down to him. In the international arena, in the last two years he has even sharpened his anti-Israel policy. And today he is getting closer to Iran. This week his foreign minister spoke on the phone with his Iranian counterpart.
Bennett "improves" relations with the kingdom not by demanding that the king cease his hostile activity against Israel, but by responding to his hostile demands. While Abdullah continues to control the lands of Tzofar and Naharayim and approaches Tehran, Bennett accuses Netanyahu of a slump in relations. Instead of demanding that Abdullah return these lands to Israel, the Lapid-Bennett government is conducting a public relations campaign for the so-called new era of Israeli-Jordanian relations; All this was achieved this week by doubling the amount of water that Israel supplies to the kingdom at cost price.
A year ago, a reality-based policy - that is, the justification for Israel's existence is not in doubt - led to four true peace agreements.
Today it is a foreign policy based on the denial of reality;
And it brings Lapid and Bennett to empower the oppressors of Israel without compensation.
