Israel’s ambassador to the UK has apologized after a senior member of his staff was secretly filmed saying he wanted to “take down” Foreign Office Minister Sir Alan Duncan.
Israeli Embassy senior political officer Shai Masot made the comment in footage filmed in a London restaurant and obtained by the Mail on Sunday.
He told a reporter that Sir Alan was creating “a lot of problems”.
Ambassador Mark Regev said this was not the embassy or government’s view BBC reported.
Secret recording
The conversation involved Mr Masot and Maria Strizzolo, an aide to education minister Robert Halfon, the former political director of Conservative Friends of Israel, as well as an undercover reporter.
It was recorded in October 2016 as part of an investigation by Al Jazeera.
The BBC understands that Ms Strizzolo has resigned from the civil service.
Mr Masot asked her: “Can I give you some names of MPs that I would suggest you take down?”
Ms Strizzolo replied that all MPs have “something they’re trying to hide” and Mr Masot responded by saying “I have some MPs”, adding “she knows which MPs I want to take down” before specifying “the deputy foreign minister”.
Sir Alan, who has described expanding Israeli settlements as a “stain on the face of the globe”, was seen as more of a problem than Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson – who was “basically good”, according to Mr Masot in a transcript of the conversation.
“He just doesn’t care. He is an idiot but has become minister of foreign affairs without any responsibilities. If something real happened it won’t be his fault… it will be Alan Duncan.”
Sir Alan launched a scathing attack on Israel in 2014, when MPs backed Palestinian statehood, deeming Israeli settlements as an “act of theft”.
“Occupation, annexation, illegality, negligence, complicity – this is a wicked cocktail which brings shame on Israel,” he told BBC Radio 4’s World At One programme.
Sir Alan, who was special envoy to Yemen and Oman at the time, said “international law must be upheld” to prevent further settlements.
Labour has demanded an immediate inquiry into the extent of Israeli “interference” in British politics.
Shadow foreign secretary Emily Thornberry said improper interference was “unacceptable whichever country was involved” adding Mr Masot’s comments were “extremely disturbing”.
She said it was a national security issue and that the Foreign Office’s response was “not good enough”.
‘Completely unacceptable’
Crispin Blunt, Foreign Affairs Select Committee chairman, said Mr Masot’s “apparent activity” was “formally outrageous and deserving of investigation”.
But Sir Craig Oliver, David Cameron’s former communications director, said the undercover video was a “classic piece of mischief-making” by the Mail on Sunday.
He told the BBC’s Andrew Marr Show that Mr Masot’s comments should be viewed as “extremely comic” rather than “extremely chilling”.
“The Israeli government just wants to shut [the story] down,” he added. “It’s embarrassing”.
Lord Stuart Polak, director of Conservative Friends of Israel, said: “We utterly condemn any attempt to undermine Sir Alan, or any minister, or any member of Parliament.”
Ms Strizzolo told the newspaper that her conversation with Mr Masot was “tongue-in-cheek and gossipy”.
In a statement, the Israeli Embassy said it “rejects the remarks concerning minister Duncan, which are completely unacceptable”.
“The comments were made by a junior embassy employee who is not an Israeli diplomat, and who will be ending his term of employment with the embassy shortly,” it said.
“Ambassador Regev on Friday spoke with minister Duncan, apologised for the comments and made clear that the embassy considered the remarks to be completely unacceptable.”
A Foreign Office spokesman said: “The Israeli Ambassador has apologised and is clear these comments do not reflect the views of the embassy or government of Israel.
“The UK has a strong relationship with Israel and we consider the matter closed.”
Israeli Prime Minister already being investigated for accepting gifts of champagne and cigars but denies any wrongdoing
According to the Independent Benjamin Netanyahu has been caught on tape offering commercial favours to an Israeli newspaper owner in return for more positive coverage, reports suggest, in a development commentators are describing as an “earthquake” in the police investigation.
The Israeli Prime Minister, who is being investigated for alleged corruption offenses, is said to have been recorded proposing a commercially beneficial deal to Arnon Mozes, the owner of one of Israel’s biggest newspapers, Yedioth Ahronoth.
He has denied any wrongdoing.
Israel’s Channel Two television station claimed Mr. Netanyahu had offered to reduce the circulation of Israel Hayom, a pro-Netanyahu newspaper that is owned by U.S. billionaire and Republican Party donor Sheldon Adelson, if Mozes instructed Yedioth Ahronoth to be more favourable towards the Prime Minister.
Cutting the circulation of Israel Hayom, which is distributed free of charge, would be of clear benefit to Mr Mozes because it is the main competitor of his newspaper in the battle for advertising revenues.
The conversation is reported to have taken place several months ago, although the precise date is unknown. Reports suggest the recording was made by Mr Mozes.
Mr Netanyahu is already under investigation for alleged corruption relating to receiving illegal gifts and donations. He has disputed the allegations and his lawyer said receiving gifts from friends is not illegal.
The Prime Minister is accused of accepting thousands of pounds worth of gifts, including cigars and champagne, from Israeli billionaire Hollywood producer Arnon Milchan. Reports suggest Mr Netanyahu lobbied US Secretary of State John Kerry on Mr Milchan’s behalf while the producer was attempting to acquire a new US visa.
Mr Netanyahu has denied the allegations. Sources said he told his ministers: “This is wrong, incessant pressure from the media on law enforcement. They release balloons and the hot air comes out of them time after time. That will be the case here too.”
Israeli news outlets quoted Mr Netanyahu’s lawyer, Yaakov Weinroth, as saying: “Any reasonable person knows that there is nothing remotely criminal involved when a close friend gives his friend a gift of cigars.”
The Israeli Prime Minister has been interviewed twice by police in the last week and is reported to have been surprised by the evidence against him.
“He didn’t expect it”, a source who knows the Prime Minister well told Haa’retz.
The evidence of the conversation between Mr Netanyahu and Mr Mozes is said to have been passed to the Israeli Attorney General, Avichai Mandelblit, by investigators early last year. It is unclear what caused the delay in interviewing Mr Netanyahu, although there are suggestions state prosecutors were not clear whether a deal of the nature allegedly proposed by the Prime Minister was actually illegal.
The conversation between the pair was reported by Israeli media to have been initiated by Mr Netanyahu in an attempt to convince the newspaper publisher not to print a story about his son, Yair. The nature of the story is unclear.
Mr Netanyahu is also accused of having accepted a accepted €1 million (£850,000) from Arnaud Mimran, a French businessman currently serving eight years in prison for committing a huge carbon-tax fraud. Mimran claimed during his trial that he had given the money to Mr Netanyahu during the 2009 Israeli election campaign – something the politician has consistently denied.
Last year a spokesperson for the Israeli Prime Minister said: “Mr. Netanyahu received no prohibited contribution from Mimran. Any other claim is a lie.”
The Prime Minister did, however, admit accepting $40,000 (£33,000) from Mimran in 2001.
Following reports last month that investigators had been given permission by Mr Mandelblit to open a formal investigation into Mr Netanyahu, a spokesperson for the Prime Minister told Haaretz the allegations were “all nonsense”.
He said: “Since Netanyahu’s victory in the last elections and even before, hostile elements have used heroic efforts to attempt to bring about his downfall, with false accusations against him and his family.
“[The allegation] is absolutely false. There was nothing and there will be nothing.”
Mr Netanyahu is not the first Israeli prime minister to be accused of corruption and his allies have pointed out that such accusations have often come to nothing. Other charges have been proven, however: Ehud Olmert, for example, is currently serving an 18-month prison sentence after being convicted of breach of trust and bribery. Mr Olmert held office from 2006 to 2009 before giving way to Mr Netanyahu.
A former Westminster official has resigned after footage emerged appearing to show her discuss “taking down” pro-Palestinian MPs.
According to Independent Maria Strizzolo, who is a former chief of staff to Conservative MP Robert Halfon, was recorded talking to Israeli embassy official Shai Masot.
The footage, obtained by Al Jazeera, shows Mr. Masot say: “Can I give you some MPs that I would suggest you would take down?” In response, Ms Strizzolo appears to laugh, before responding: “Well you know, if you look hard enough, I’m sure there is something that they’re trying to hide.”
Ms. Strizzolo has reportedly now resigned from her post at the Skills Funding Agency.
Israel’s ambassador to the UK Mark Regev has apologized for Mr. Masot’s comments, describing them as “unacceptable”.
Labour has demanded an investigation to probe alleged Israeli “interference” in British politics.
During the conversation between the pair, which took place at the Aubaine restaurant near the Israeli embassy in Kensington, Mr. Masot also described Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson as “an idiot”.
Ms. Strizzolo told the Mail on Sunday that her conversation with Mr. Masot was “tongue-in-cheek and gossipy”, adding: “Any suggestion that I … could exert the type of influence you are suggesting is risible.”
She said she knew Mr. Masot “purely socially and as a friend. He is not someone with whom I have ever worked or had any political dealings beyond chatting about politics, as millions of people do, in a social context.”
by Lawrence A. Franklin
December 25, 2014 at 5:00 am
It is a society that rejects religious zealotry. Most Kurds are Sunni Muslim and one can hear the five-times-a-day Muslim call to prayer, but it is muted and ignored by most.
Like Israel, Kurdistan is more democratic than any of its neighbors. Like Israel, Kurdistan is surrounded by enemies that wish it did not exist. Like Israel, Kurdistan looks West. And like Israel, Kurdistan has maintained an internal equilibrium though all the world betrays it.
Iraqi Kurdistan is full of surprises. Probably, the most unexpected discovery is how normal life is in its capital city, Erbil. Despite a late summer scare by Islamic State [IS] military gains north of Mosul and the threat of suicide bomber attacks, the social discipline of Kurdistan’s citizens is admirable. There is a relaxed state of tension. It is “business as usual.”
There is also a sense of optimism, pervasive and infectious. Entrepreneurial spirit is alive and well. While there was an exodus of foreign businessmen after the initial territorial gains by the IS, foreign investors are filtering back. The Kurdistan Regional Government [KRG] has already drawn up plans for large-scale projects to improve the infrastructure. Heavy-duty construction vehicles are everywhere. The most visible project is the beltway being built around the city.
An aerial view of Erbil, in Iraqi Kurdistan, featuring the ancient Erbil Citadel in the center. (Image source: Wikimedia Commons/Jan Kurdistani)
Political pluralism has come to the Kurdish north as well. While the Kurdistan Democratic Party [KDP] and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan [PUK] respectively remain the one-two political powerhouses, they now have plenty of company. No one party dominates the parliament. There is plenty of horse-trading on issues, fleeting coalitions, and new political personalities are being heard. Nevertheless, the most influential and respected leaders still come from the Barzani extended family, which run the KDP. The late Mustafa Barzani (1903-1979) is revered as the warrior-godfather of modern Kurdistan.
Kurds, for the most part, are a welcoming lot. The methodical and rapid settlement of tens of thousands of refugees from IS-controlled Iraq required bold leadership by the Barzani-led government and especially from the Catholic hierarchy of Kurdistan. This success also reflects the compassion of a self-confident people. The population of the Dohok region, for example has doubled due to the influx of refugees. There is no observable tension between the newcomers and the population of the host country. Despite the inveterate resentment of the excesses of past Arab regimes, Kurdistan is a multi-ethnic and multi-religious society. It has become even more so with the emigration from other parts of Iraq of Turkmen, Yezidis, and Christian Assyrians and Arabs. It is also a society that rejects religious zealotry. Most Kurds are Sunni Muslim and one can hear the five-times-a-day Muslim call to prayer, but it is muted and ignored by most.
Men, mostly, walk on the streets of Erbil, Dohok, and Zako, especially at night. Kurdistan is not, however, a society that represses women. There are many in parliament, and they are outspoken on the issue of violence to females in Kurdish society. At one conference in mid-November, at least half of the speakers were women prominent in Kurdistan. Women military volunteers are widely admired. The Kurdish media celebrates the Kurdish Peshmerga‘s female fighters. One woman — a veteran of the fierce battle to save the Syrian Kurdish town of Kobane (near Turkey’s border) from an IS takeover — who recently visited Erbil, was received as a national hero. Female Yezidis who have escaped after torture by IS operatives are deeply admired too.
Zako, once the center of Kurdistan’s Jewish population, still invites back descendants of those who long ago left for Zion. Zako’s isolated villages are the wild west of Kurdistan. Its stark beauty against a ring of mountain chains may become a tourist magnet both for its ancient historical attractions and recreational possibilities.
For all of the above reasons, Kurdistan reminds one of Israel. Like Israel, Kurdistan is not dominated by the Arab, nor by Islam. Like Israel, Kurdistan is more democratic than any of its neighbors. Like Israel, Kurdistan is surrounded by enemies that wish it did not exist. Like Israel, Kurdistan looks West. And like Israel, Kurdistan has maintained an internal equilibrium though all the world betrays it.
Dr. Lawrence A. Franklin served on active duty with the U.S. Army and as a Colonel in the Air Force Reserve, where he served as a Military Attaché to Israel.
The nation of Israel is galloping blindly toward Bar Kochba’s war on the Roman Empire. The result of that conflict was 2,000 years of exile.
By Shabtai Shavit
Menachem Begin before an image of David Ben-Gurion
From the beginning of Zionism in the late 19th century, the Jewish nation in the Land of Israel has been growing stronger in terms of demography and territory, despite the ongoing conflict with the Palestinians. We have succeeded in doing so because we have acted with wisdom and stratagem rather than engaging in a foolish attempt to convince our foes that we were in the right.
Today, for the first time since I began forming my own opinions, I am truly concerned about the future of the Zionist project. I am concerned about the critical mass of the threats against us on the one hand, and the government’s blindness and political and strategic paralysis on the other. Although the State of Israel is dependent upon the United States, the relationship between the two countries has reached an unprecedented low point. Europe, our biggest market, has grown tired of us and is heading toward imposing sanctions on us. For China, Israel is an attractive high-tech project, and we are selling them our national assets for the sake of profit. Russia is gradually turning against us and supporting and assisting our enemies.
Anti-Semitism and hatred of Israel have reached dimensions unknown since before World War II. Our public diplomacy and public relations have failed dismally, while those of the Palestinians have garnered many important accomplishments in the world. University campuses in the West, particularly in the U.S., are hothouses for the future leadership of their countries. We are losing the fight for support for Israel in the academic world. An increasing number of Jewish students are turning away from Israel. The global BDS movement (boycott, divestment, sanctions) against Israel, which works for Israel’s delegitimization, has grown, and quite a few Jews are members.
In this age of asymmetrical warfare we are not using all our force, and this has a detrimental effect on our deterrent power. The debate over the price of Milky pudding snacks and its centrality in public discourse demonstrate an erosion of the solidarity that is a necessary condition for our continued existence here. Israelis’ rush to acquire a foreign passport, based as it is on the yearning for foreign citizenship, indicates that people’s feeling of security has begun to crack.
I am concerned that for the first time, I am seeing haughtiness and arrogance, together with more than a bit of the messianic thinking that rushes to turn the conflict into a holy war. If this has been, so far, a local political conflict that two small nations have been waging over a small and defined piece of territory, major forces in the religious Zionist movement are foolishly doing everything they can to turn it into the most horrific of wars, in which the entire Muslim world will stand against us.
I also see, to the same extent, detachment and lack of understanding of international processes and their significance for us. This right wing, in its blindness and stupidity, is pushing the nation of Israel into the dishonorable position of “the nation shall dwell alone and not be reckoned among the nations” (Numbers 23:9).
I am concerned because I see history repeating itself. The nation of Israel is galloping blindly in a time tunnel to the age of Bar Kochba and his war on the Roman Empire. The result of that conflict was several centuries of national existence in the Land of Israel followed by 2,000 years of exile.
I am concerned because as I understand matters, exile is truly frightening only to the state’s secular sector, whose world view is located on the political center and left. That is the sane and liberal sector that knows that for it, exile symbolizes the destruction of the Jewish people. The Haredi sector lives in Israel only for reasons of convenience. In terms of territory, Israel and Brooklyn are the same to them; they will continue living as Jews in exile, and wait patiently for the arrival of the Messiah.
The religious Zionist movement, by comparison, believes the Jews are “God’s chosen.” This movement, which sanctifies territory beyond any other value, is prepared to sacrifice everything, even at the price of failure and danger to the Third Commonwealth. If destruction should take place, they will explain it in terms of faith, saying that we failed because “We sinned against God.” Therefore, they will say, it is not the end of the world. We will go into exile, preserve our Judaism and wait patiently for the next opportunity.
I recall Menachem Begin, one of the fathers of the vision of Greater Israel. He fought all his life for the fulfillment of that dream. And then, when the gate opened for peace with Egypt, the greatest of our enemies, he gave up Sinai – Egyptian territory three times larger than Israel’s territory inside the Green Line – for the sake of peace. In other words, some values are more sacred than land. Peace, which is the life and soul of true democracy, is more important than land.
I am concerned that large segments of the nation of Israel have forgotten, or put aside, the original vision of Zionism: to establish a Jewish and democratic state for the Jewish people in the Land of Israel. No borders were defined in that vision, and the current defiant policy is working against it.
What can and ought to be done? We need to create an Archimedean lever that will stop the current deterioration and reverse today’s reality at once. I propose creating that lever by using the Arab League’s proposal from 2002, which was partly created by Saudi Arabia. The government must make a decision that the proposal will be the basis of talks with the moderate Arab states, led by Saudi Arabia and Egypt.
The government should do three things as preparation for this announcement:
1) It should define a future negotiating strategy for itself, together with its position on each of the topics included in the Arab League’s proposal.
2) It should open a secret channel of dialogue with the United States to examine the idea, and agree in advance concerning our red lines and about the input that the U.S. will be willing to invest in such a process.
3) It should open a secret American-Israeli channel of dialogue with Saudi Arabia in order to reach agreements with it in advance on the boundaries of the topics that will be raised in the talks and coordinate expectations. Once the secret processes are completed, Israel will announce publicly that it is willing to begin talks on the basis of the Arab League’s document.
I have no doubt that the United States and Saudi Arabia, each for its own reasons, will respond positively to the Israeli initiative, and the initiative will be the lever that leads to a dramatic change in the situation. With all the criticism I have for the Oslo process, it cannot be denied that for the first time in the conflict’s history, immediately after the Oslo Accords were signed, almost every Arab country started talking with us, opened its gates to us and began engaging in unprecedented cooperative ventures in economic and other fields.
Although I am not so naïve as to think that such a process will bring the longed-for peace, I am certain that this kind of process, long and fatiguing as it will be, could yield confidence-building measures at first and, later on, security agreements that both sides in the conflict will be willing to live with. The progress of the talks will, of course, be conditional upon calm in the security sphere, which both sides will be committed to maintaining. It may happen that as things progress, both sides will agree to look into mutual compromises that will promote the idea of coexisting alongside one another. If mutual trust should develop – and the chances of that happening under American and Saudi Arabian auspices are fairly high – it will be possible to begin talks for the conflict’s full resolution as well.
An initiative of this kind requires true and courageous leadership, which is hard to identify at the moment. But if the prime minister should internalize the severity of the mass of threats against us at this time, the folly of the current policy, the fact that this policy’s creators are significant elements in the religious Zionist movement and on the far right, and its devastating results – up to the destruction of the Zionist vision – then perhaps he will find the courage and determination to carry out the proposed action.
I wrote the above statements because I feel that I owe them to my parents, who devoted their lives to the fulfillment of Zionism; to my children, my grandchildren and to the nation of Israel, which I served for decades.
I was planning to write a follow up to the latest article I wrote about Turkish-Greek cultural cooperation, which I learned had been translated and published on a number of Greek websites. However, the recent cool winds blowing in the Mediterranean changed the focus of this article.
The discovery of gas in the Mediterranean had raised hopes that diplomatic work to find a solution to the Cyprus problem could be sped up. Unfortunately, it has become an additional obstruction for settlement efforts.
Following attempts to start drilling in 2011 and 2013, both of which triggered a reaction from Turkey, Greek Cyprus once more decided to try its luck in late October, by starting exploration activities just as talks were continuing between the two communities.
It is hard to imagine that the Greek Cypriot leadership was not expecting a reaction from Ankara. Indeed, Turkey sent the Barbaros Hayrettin Paşa scientific ship to carry out seismic surveys around the same area, which was declared an exclusive economic zone (EEZ) by Greek Cyprus, disputed by Turkey and Turkish Cyprus.
Antonis Samaras of Greece and Nicos Anastasiades of South Cyprus
Greek Cypriot President Nicos Anastasiades then announced that he would not attend the peace talks.
I would not be surprised if many Turkish decision-makers are convinced that the exploration activities were authorized by Anastasiades, specifically at this time, in order to trigger a reaction from Ankara that would give him an alibi to quit the negotiations, which Turks believe he was not incredibly enthusiastic about anyway.
Meanwhile, just as third party players, like the U.N. Secretary General’s representative, were trying to find a way out from the impasse, the leaders of Greece, Greek Cyprus and Egypt recently met in Cairo to pledge greater energy cooperation in the Middle East.
Ankara refrained from making an official statement about the summit, but let their naval forces commander made an announcement that there were more assertive rules of engagement in the Mediterranean.
Now we learn that the trilateral meeting in Cairo will be followed by a new trilateral meeting between Greek Cyprus, Greece and Israel. The time of that meeting is not yet set, but Anastasiades is due to visit Israel on Dec. 2. This visit was preceded by a visit to Nicosia last week of Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, who lambasted Turkey for intruding on Greek Cyprus’ EEZ.
So the picture that comes around is like this: On the one side is Turkey, whose international standing is not exactly brilliant, and on the other an alliance of Israel, Egypt and Greek Cyprus, each of which have, for the time being at least, very hostile relations with Turkey.
As someone who has been highly critical of Turkey’s foreign policy course in the past, you might think I will talk about how the government’s erroneous policies have landed Turkey in such a situation in the East Mediterranean.
Nicos Anastasiade, Antonis Samaras and Abdel Fatah el-Sisi
Indeed, Turkey is partly responsible for the picture in which you can see Egypt’s former military leader, now President Abdel Fatah el-Sisi standing between Greek Prime Minister Antonis Samaras and Anastasiades.
I can understand Greek Cyprus’ futile effort to forge an alliance with Egypt and Israel up to a certain point, but Greece? Tension in the Aegean has never served Athens. The last decade is a testament to how Greece has benefited from engaging with Turkey.
Let’s suppose Turkey’s policy on the issue is totally wrong. Even so, is it the right course for Greece to go and pose together with a coup leader just to support Greek Cypriots? Does the Greek government seriously think an alliance with Israel and Egypt will frighten and deter Turkey? Couldn’t Greece surprise us and work as a silent mediator to defuse the tension?
Greece has more to benefit from cooperating with a semi-democracy like Turkey than a dictatorship like Egypt, or Israel, which is increasingly being isolated by the European Union.
In addition, Turkey may have temporary strains in its relations with Israel and Egypt, but the moment is there for normalization; both Tel Aviv and Cario have ties with Ankara that will always outweigh those with Greece and Greek Cyprus, as was rightly underlined in a comment published yesterday in the Cyprus Mail titled “Realism needed on the power of regional agreement.”
I am still optimistic that the Turkish-Greek reconciliation will stand strong against this new wave of tension.
It’s good to know that just as the foreign ministers of Greece, Greek Cyprus and Egypt were meeting in Nicosia to prepare for the Cairo summit, the Greeks were attending a Turkish film week in Athens. Meanwhile, just as the two countries’ naval officers issued statements over the weekend about new rules of engagement in the Mediterranean, Turks were attending the Athens marathon on Nov. 9. In addition, the Turkish economy minister and the Greek development minister will be attending a business forum this week in İzmir; while as Israel prepares to welcome Anastasiades on Dec. 2, Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu is set to visit Athens on Dec. 4.
An aerial view of Erbil, in Iraqi Kurdistan, featuring the ancient Erbil Citadel in the center. (Image source: Wikimedia Commons/Jan Kurdistani)
