Four newspapers discuss Richard Goldstone’s renunciation of the Goldstone Report:
Summary of Editorials from the Hebrew Press
Four newspapers discuss Richard Goldstone’s renunciation of the Goldstone Report:Yediot Aharonot says that „Not only must Goldstone apologize but so too all those who intervened and contributed to creating the modern Dreyfus trial for the State of Israel.” The author avers that „For the past decade, Israel has been waging a war against modern anti-Semitism under the cloak of human rights, the goal of which, for the Israel-haters, has been to undermine the state’s legitimacy as a home for the Jewish people,” and believes that Goldstone, a Jew, was chosen „as a fig leaf – a Jew who was prepared to collaborate with the Devil.” The paper contends that „Goldstone is not the issue,” and adds that „He merely supplied ammunition to the enemy in this war.” The author demands apologies from those Israeli organizations that provided the Goldstone Commission with „selective information,” as well as those that „trumpeted the report’s conclusions.”
Ma’ariv suggests that the problem is that „The effect of the [Goldstone] report has been stamped on a world of seven billion people, only a very small portion of which will bother to read the op-ed page in the Washington Post.” The author cautions that „The public diplomacy value of Goldstone’s article is limited in the best case and zero in the worst case,” because „The world’s attention is focused on Libya, Japan, Yemen, oil prices and the situation of the Euro. The shelf life of the article, its substance and its effects, is 36 hours at best. The value of the article from Israel’s point-of-view is not, therefore, in condemning and mocking Richard Goldstone but is in relation to the future. Goldstone’s regrets have a deterrent value of the highest order. Israel’s security and geo-political milieu create circumstances that will give rise to other commissions of inquiry in the future. Against these intentions, Israel has been armed, this week, with an important tool: Goldstone.”
Yisrael Hayom believes that „The fact that [Goldstone’s article] has yet to conquer Western public opinion is not worrying. What is worrying is that Israel has yet to prepare for a prolonged, patient policy that could bear public diplomacy fruit throughout the world only in a few months.” The author asserts that „As important as refuting the libel in the Goldstone Report may be, it will not distract the Americans and the Europeans from the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.” The paper adds that „This is well understood by Benjamin Netanyahu and several of his ministers. Thus, President Peres is being dispatched to Obama. In the distant past, all prime ministers avoided directly involving the president in diplomatic matters. But now the situation is different and Peres’ stature is significant vis-a-vis the effort to ease the pressure on Netanyahu.” The author ventures that President Peres will reiterate Israel’s opposition to any unilateral declaration of Palestinian statehood within the 1967 lines and „will check the US attitude towards various possibilities,” as well.
The Jerusalem Post declares that “Goldstone’s decision to break with the tendency of Jewish self-hatred is worthy of respect and reflects a high level of honesty and integrity, two truly Jewish traits.” The editor hopes that “Goldstone’s change of heart will serve as an example and that some of the international and domestic human rights organizations that have been so hyper-critical of the IDF will admit to their failings too, a move which might begin to restore, in some small way, Israeli mainstream confidence in them.”
===========================
Haaretz discusses the debate on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s trips abroad, which were funded in part by the Israel Bonds, and contends that the State of Israel’s position in world financial markets renders the organization superfluous. The editor points out that “due to its large apparatus and high expenses, the Bonds’ fundraising cost is more expensive than simply raising capital in the international capital markets,” and notes that “The problem is, if the Bonds closes, there will be no one to finance the ministers and Knesset members’ pleasure trips, and senior politicians will no longer be able to dish out appointments to cronies.”
BreuerPress
