Netanyahu fires defense minister Galant

Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu fired Yoav Galant as his defense minister, because the latter decided to cause trouble for judicial reform, and even before that, he was underminining the army:

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu fired Defense Minister Yoav Gallant following his opposition to the judicial reform, it was announced on Sunday evening.

Gallant made a dramatic declaration on Saturday evening calling on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to halt the judicial overhaul long enough to more deeply engage in negotiations with others to reach a compromise.

The prime minister told Gallant he lost his trust in the defense minister after he "went behind the government's back" on Saturday evening, while Netanyahu was visiting the United Kingdom. Netanyahu now has 48 hours to appoint a defense minister, as per Maariv.

It's for the best Galant goes out. It'll remain to be seen who the next defense minister will be. But Galant's decidedly no loss, and won't be missed in the role. If he tries to hurt the government further even outside the cabinet proper, that'll be wrong, so let's hope Galant will respect and come to terms with his dismissal.

Update: Ruthie Blum explains how Galant hurt military order by allowing air force reservists to take political stances at the expense of the country's security.

Those Jewish groups who push the US government to pressure Israel should be avoided

Irit Tratt's raised an issue that may be overlooked, of doubtlessly leftist Jewish movements who've pushed for the US government to pressure Israel for all the wrong reasons:

On Feb. 27, Israeli-American Elan Ganeles was fatally shot by Palestinian terrorists while driving by the town of Jericho on the way to a friend’s wedding. The horrific murder followed a tragic month in Israel during which 14 lives were lost to Palestinian terrorism.

After the attacks, American officials, including U.S. President Joe Biden and U.S. Ambassador to Israel Thomas Nides phoned Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu or issued expressions of “deep condolences” to the victims’ families.

While expressions of sympathy are a reassuring indicator of a stable alliance, there has also been a torrent of American criticism on a host of issues ranging from Israel’s strategy on Ukraine to internal Israeli debates over judicial reform.

The Biden administration’s pivot away from Israel became clear last month when the U.S. backed a U.N. Security Council statement condemning Israel’s legalization of nine “settlements” in Judea and Samaria.

Little attention has been paid to the Jewish leaders who are abetting this change in U.S. policy. It remains expedient to blame politicians for this shift but, in fact, American Jewish institutions have fostered an atmosphere favorable to cooling U.S.-Israel relations for decades.

In his 1998 article “Netanyahu and American Jews,” Jonathan Broder described a White House state dinner that took place the previous year honoring Israel’s then-President Ezer Weizman. Among those invited were ten senior representatives from U.S. Jewish organizations.

The article stated that President Bill Clinton went around the room and asked each Jewish dignitary if they agreed with the conclusions of a poll conducted by the Israel Policy Forum (IPF) that showed 84% of American Jews surveyed “favored U.S. pressure on both Israel and the Palestinians to save the faltering Middle East peace process.”

To Clinton’s surprise, the Jewish organizational leaders expressed unanimous agreement with the IPF study and rejected any attempt to dispute its findings.

Moreover, not one Jewish attendee spoke favorably of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. This left the task to Clinton, who suggested that Israel’s cabinet, rather than Netanyahu, was causing an impasse in the peace process.

While the organizations' attitude towards Israel is obviously bad, Clinton was still reprehensible in his own approach, considering he pushed through some very bad demands of his own, had a lenient view of Islam, and of course, let's not forget his record of sexual abuse allegations. Based on that, one must wonder if he really did find it surprising the Jewish organizations in question were hostile to Israel.

But that told, of course these organizations are a most repulsive lot, and no decent person should have anything to do with them. That's the vital lesson to consider in this whole affair, a tragedy that's been caused by people who've been taught to otherwise reject their heritage and history. Worst, they're sympathetic to Islamofascism, and that's one more reason why they should be avoided.

37th Israeli government, and Netanyahu's 6th term as premier, is sworn in

Israel's 37th government has been sworn in at the Knesset, and this also marks the beginning of Benjamin Netanyahu's 6th term as prime minister:

Israel's 37th Government was sworn in on Thursday, with Benjamin Netanyahu beginning his sixth term as prime minister.

The swearing-in ceremony began at 11:00 a.m., during which Netanyahu presented his agenda to the Knesset plenum. These include stopping the Iran nuclear program, developing state infrastructure and restoring internal security and governance.

During his address, which was interrupted by members of the opposition, Netanyahu said "Losing elections isn't the end of democracy – it's the essence of democracy. In a democracy, we don't climb the fences of the Capitol, and we don't climb the fences of the Knesset."

Unfortunately, this is something the current leftist opposition in the Knesset no longer seems willing to respect, and likely never did. I guess that's why the sad part is how Yair Lapid, upon leaving office, refused to shake Netanyahu's hand:

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was the first to take the oath of office. Most of the heads of the opposition parties were present out of respect for the ceremony, but opposition leader Yair Lapid left the plenary hall even before Netanyahu was sworn-in without shaking his hand as is customary.

What really makes this sad is that it hints at where things are headed with the left, which is bad for democratic relations. It could take years to mend the damage Lapid's causing with his ostracizing approach. But, this does demonstrate why it's good he's now out of office. He was causing all the harm he's going to cause, even in the opposition.

So let's hope Netanyahu can handle all the trouble the left's already causing. What if they intent to do everything they can to sabotage his efforts to make peace with Saudi Arabia, for example? Regrettably, that's something they're more than willing to do, if reality says anything about their conduct.

New Israeli government formed

At nighttime, Benjamin Netanyahu announced his new coalition to president Isaac Herzog:

Israel has a right-wing government: Prime Minister-designate Benjamin Netanyahu phoned President Isaac Herzog on Wednesday evening and proclaimed, “I have succeeded in forming a government”.

The phone call took place 18 minutes before the extension granted to Netanyahu from Herzog was set to expire at midnight.

Netanyahu told Herzog, "Dear President, thanks to the enormous public support we received in the last elections, I am informing you that I have been able to establish a government that will act in the interest of all the citizens of Israel."

And since we're on the subject, it was shameful how the New York Times predictably assailed Netanhahu and disrespected the electorate, even if it wasn't shocking. The Jerusalem Post editorial said in response that Israel's democracy is vibrant:

It is now bon ton to forecast the demise of Israel’s democracy.

Everyone is doing it: from august forums such as the New York Times editorial board, to blogs run by North American ex-pats now living in Israel, to Facebook groups set up by disgruntled Israelis encouraging emigration.

For instance, the web headline to a Times editorial on Saturday warning of the dangers of presumptive Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s new government read: “The Ideal of Democracy in a Jewish State Is in Jeopardy.” And the headline adequately reflected the spirit of the editorial.

The editorial said that Netanyahu’s government “is a significant threat to the future of Israel – its direction, its security and even the idea of a Jewish homeland.”

The credibility of the editorial was cast in doubt further down in the piece when the renowned paper inexplicably left out Palestinian terrorism as a reason why “hopes for a Palestinian state have dimmed,” writing instead that the reasons are “the combined pressure of Israeli resistance and Palestinian corruption, ineptitude and internal divisions.”

On this, why doesn't anybody call for a boycott of the NYT, and save a lot of money by not subscribing or buying them? They've been such an insufferable paper for decades on end, and are one of the worst of the USA's most dishonest media sources. What's the use? They insult the Israeli electorate along with the USA public, and it's time to stop buying them in any way.

Not improving matters is that fraud-in-chief Joe Biden's pseudo=administration wants to hold Netanyahu accountable for any directions they oppose:

Netanyahu’s successful welding together of Zionist and orthodox parties into a solid Right-Wing coalition was completed two days after Washington wired a warning, via Politico among other media outlets, that it would hold the Israeli leader personally answerable for any decisions or actions his new government might take that the US doesn’t like.

President Joe Biden and his secretary of state, Anthony Blinken, have not hidden their alarm over the political platforms of the most significant coalition partners – the Jewish Strength Party of Itamar Ben-Gvir, who will come in as Minister of National Security, and the Religious Zionist Party of Bezalel Smotrich, slated to receive ministerial authority over Judea and Samaria.

The two men’s combined goals are to strengthen Israel’s character as the Jewish state by taking steps, among others, to increase security against terrorism, as well as criminal violence, open the Temple Mount to Jewish worship and increase and consolidate the presence of Jewish residents in the towns and cities of Israel’s biblical heartland – Samaria and Judea.

All these aims fly in the face of America’s political intent which, along with that of the rest of the world, is to see the Jews removed from the “West Bank” and the Israel-hating Arab populace enabled to establish in their place a new state called Palestine: the “Two State Solution”.

Not just removed from Judea/Samaria/Gaza, but also from Israel entire. To remove Jews from the main biblical areas is just the beginning of the anti-Israelists' twisted goals. And it's shameful as it's repulsive. This is exactly why the Likud was elected.

WHAT ABOUT THE BUILDING?

The Jerusalem Post writes about Netanyahu's scheduled meeting with US/European officials:

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu will make it clear in his discussions with US and European officials abroad that Israel will not accept any limitations on its sovereignty in Jerusalem, sources at the Prime Minister's Office said, immediately before his plane took off from Tel Aviv on Monday afternoon.

The PMO sources said Netanyahu also stressed that normal life in the settlements will need to be assured.

Netanyahu was leaving Israel for a visit in London and Berlin, where he is scheduled to meet with British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and US special Mideast envoy George Mitchell.

In his meetings with Brown and Merkel, Netanyahu will raise the need to apply maximum pressure on Iran "in order to stop their nuclear march," the sources said, adding that the prime minister discussed the matter with French President Nicolas Sarkozy on Sunday night.

In addition to the Iranian nuclear threat, Netanyahu will discuss bilateral security issues with his European counterparts.

Regarding Netanyahu's meeting with Mitchell, which will be held in London early on Wednesday morning, the sources said that while there has been a certain degree of progress in the discussions leading up to the meeting, a "breakthrough" is not expected.

The sources reiterated remarks made by Netanyahu on Sunday, noting that the Israeli-Palestinian peace process was expected to resume in the end of September.

I'm not going to turn a blind eye to the hard questions here now, but what about allowing construction in Jerusalem and the "settlements"? As Caroline Glick said in the article in the prior topic, if he's going to bar building, then he's not conducting a strong policy or doing well on his assurances. Don't take his statements here at face value. I realize that wouldn't be a good idea.

SHAS COLLABORATING IN CAPITUALATION?

Caroline Glick tells on the Jewish World Review that Netanyahu is now signaling his betrayal, something that I'm sure many expected would be possible:

This week we discovered that we have been deceived. Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's principled rejection of US President Barack Obama's bigoted demand that Israel bar Jews from building new homes and expanding existing ones in Judea and Samaria does not reflect his actual policy.

Housing and Construction Minister Ariel Attias let the cat out of the bag. Attias said that the government has been barring Jews from building in the areas since it took office four months ago in the hopes that by preemptively capitulating to US demands, the US will treat Israel better.

And that's not all. Today Netanyahu is reportedly working in earnest to reach a deal with the Obama administration that would formalize the government's effective construction ban through 2010. Netanyahu is set to finalize such a deal at his meeting with Obama's Middle East envoy George Mitchell in London next Wednesday.

[...]

Furthermore, even if Netanyahu is right to seek an agreement with Mitchell next week, he showed poor negotiating skill by preemptively freezing Jewish construction. Domestically, Netanyahu has lost credibility now that the public knows that he misled it. And by preemptively capitulating, Netanyahu showed Obama that he is not a serious opponent. Why should Obama take Netanyahu's positions seriously if Netanyahu abandons before them before Obama even begins to seriously challenge him?

[...]

Netanyahu had hoped that his conditional support for Palestinian statehood, and his current willingness to bar Jews from building homes in Judea and Samaria would neutralize US pressure on Israel and facilitate his efforts to convince Obama to recognize and deal rationally with the issue of Iran's nuclear weapons program. But as Ambassador Michael Oren made clear on Sunday, the opposite has occurred.

In an interview with CNN, Oren said that Israel is "far from even contemplating" a military strike against Iran's nuclear installations." He also said, "The government of Israel has supported President Obama in his approach to Iran, initially the engagement, the outreach to Iran."

From this it appears that Israel has not only made no headway in convincing the administration to take Iran seriously. It appears that Jerusalem has joined the administration in accepting a nuclear armed Iran.

It's fortunate that as of now, there's a mobilizing opposition within the coalition itself. However: is Shas making itself partner to any suppression of Israeli building? I realize that even today, they cannot be trusted 100 percent, and that's why they too will have to be taken to task. There's supposed to be a meeting convened by coalition members in another 2 weeks about this case, and I hope it signals that pro-Israeli activists are going to take proper action in making sure that this time, Netanyahu does not betray his voters. Come to think of it, the same goes for Shas.

One more thing Glick argues:

Some critics of Netanyahu from the Right like Ariel Mayor Ron Nachman claim that it may well be time to begin bringing down Netanyahu's government. They are wrong. We have been down this road before. In 1992 the Right brought down Yitzhak Shamir's government and brought the Rabin-Peres government to power and Yassir Arafat to the gates of Jerusalem. In 1999 the Right brought down the first Netanyahu government and gave Israel Camp David and the Palestinian terror war.

There is another way. It is being forged by the likes of Vice Premier Moshe Ya'alon on the one hand and former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee on the other.

Ya'alon argues that not capitulating to American pressure is a viable policy option forIsrael. There is no reason to reach an agreement with Mitchell on the administration's bigoted demand that Jews not build in Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem. If the US wants to have a fight with Israel, a fight against American anti-Jewish discrimination is not a bad one for Israel to have.

Ya'alon's argument was borne out by Huckabee's visit this week to Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria. Huckabee's trip showed that the administration is not operating in a policy vacuum. There is plenty of strong American support for an Israeli government that would stand up to the administration on the Palestinian issue and Iran alike.

Netanyahu's policies have taken a wrong turn. But Netanyahu is not Tzipi Livni or Ehud Olmert. He is neither an ideologue nor an opportunist. He understands why what he is doing is wrong. He just needs to be convinced that he has another option.

I agree with her there. There are ways to get him to cut out any negative approach he's using without having to topple the government. Netanyahu once spoke of a national referendum. That may be an ideal option to make him agree to.

Update: then again, if Huckabee is going to downplay the dangers of Muslim honor murders, as the videos here suggest, I think we'll have to give pause to the notion that he'll be really helpful.

US DEMAND TO FREEZE NATURAL GROWTH IS UNREASONABLE

Benjamin Netanyahu has described the Obama administration's demand to halt Jewish "natural growth" in Judea/Samaria as unreasonable:

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu characterized on Monday as "unreasonable" US demands to freeze all building east of the Green Line, adding that he was "still unclear" as to what exactly the United States was demanding of Israel regarding construction in the settlements.

The prime minister, briefing the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee on his recent trip to Washington, said, "it is likely that we are not going to reach an agreement with the Americans" regarding settlement building, but did his best to portray his meeting with US President Barack Obama in a positive light.

Netanyahu said that "new important understandings were reached" in the course of the meeting, but added that in some fields there was no agreement, and did not elaborate on the "new understandings."

Netanyahu broadly hinted that it was the US which was now changing understandings with Israel regarding settlement construction.

"If they would come to us and say 'there were understandings, live up to them,' then that we could understand," he said. But, he added, if the US instead said, "'there were understandings, but we are abrogating them,' then that would be difficult."

Israeli officials maintain that over the past five years there were tacit agreements with the US over where construction could continue in the settlements, and that the new administration was now essentially rolling back those understandings.

Quite right about the Obama administration's demands, but they're missing an important detail about the Dubya administration: they wanted a "settlement freeze" too, as Condi Rice's stance could suggest. The point that needs to be made is how the history of modern Israel is replete with unhonored agreements.

Update: Hot Air reports that Obama may now be seeking revenge.

ABANDON THE FAILED 2-STATE NOTION

Moshe Ya'alon continues with some wise observations about why the 2-state propaganda must be left behind:

(IsraelNN.com) Minister of Strategic Affairs Moshe (Boogie) Yaalon believes that the time has come for Israel to “free itself from the failed paradigm” of the “two-state solution.” Yaalon spoke Tuesday at a meeting of MKs dedicated to finding an alternative to the creation of a Palestinian Authority-led Arab state.

While the creation of a PA-led state in Judea, Samaria and Gaza is perceived as a necessity both in Israel and worldwide, such a state would not solve the Israel-PA conflict, said Yaalon. In fact, he said, it is doubtful that the possibility of creating such a state exists, due to Arab and Muslim reluctance to take any step that would imply recognition of Israel or compromise on Arab claims to the entire Land of Israel.

On some related notes, aside from that, the government is going to have to a]take convincing steps to prove that it will allow for new homes to be built, and b]will not keep on dismantling "outposts". So far, I assume that Ehud Barak, who wants to do the latter, has been convinced by those concerned in the coalition not to, as he has backed off of destroying several homes in Ofra. But there's still much more that needs to be done about the problem, and let us note that even Netanyahu cannot be ignored here.

RELIAPUNDIT ADDS:

I BELIEVE IN THE TWO STATE SOLUTION: ISRAEL AND JORDAN.

• BRITISH "PALESTINE" CONSISTED OF WHAT IS NOW ISRAEL AND WHAT IS NOW JORDAN.
• ISRAEL WAS SUPPOSED TO INCLUDE MOST OF WHAT IS NOW JORDAN.
• I SAY, WE LET THE ARABS KEEP JORDAN, WE ANNEX THE SO-CALLED "OCCUPIED TERRITORY"/'WEST BANK", OFFER ARABS IN THE "WEST BANK" AN ISRAELI PASSPORT OR A JORDANIAN ONE; AND GIVE ARABS WHO TAKE AN ISRAELI PASSPORT A LOT OF LOCAL POLITICAL POWER.
• AND WE TREAT GAZA EXACTLY THEY DESERVE TO BE TREATED: AS A HOSTILE STATE WE ARE AT WAR WITH.

STANDING UP TO OBAMA

Benjamin Netanyahu has shown some courage and rebuffed Barack Obama's call to freeze "settlement" activity (Hat tip: Hot Air):

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Sunday rebuffed U.S. calls for a full settlement freeze in the occupied West Bank and vowed not to accept limits on building of Jewish enclaves within Jerusalem.

The note of defiance set the stage for a possible showdown with U.S. President Barack Obama’s administration, which, in talks with Netanyahu in Washington last week, pressed for a halt to all settlement activity, including natural growth, as called for under a long-stalled peace “road map.”

“The demand for a total stop to building is not something that can be justified and I don’t think that anyone here at this table accepts it,” Netanyahu told his cabinet, referring to Jewish settlements in the West Bank, according to an official.

Netanyahu said Israel had no plans to set up any new West Bank settlements. But he told Obama, according to the official, that his government “does not accept limitations on building” within what Israel defines as its capital, the Jerusalem municipality, an area that includes Arab East Jerusalem and parts of the West Bank captured in a 1967 Middle East war.

Of course, he's going to have to prove that he can provide any necessary permits for building if needed, and that he won't let Ehud Barak try to stall any projects.

In a related report in the Jerusalem Post (via Power Line), Moshe Yaalon said something very important too:

"We will not follow American dictates. We will not halt construction in the settlements," Strategic Affairs Minister Moshe Ya'alon told Channel 2's Meet the Press on Saturday.

Ya'alon was referring to the American demand that Israel halt all settlement activity, voiced by US President Barack Obama to Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu during their meeting last week.

"Settlements are not the reason that the diplomatic process failed," Ya'alon said. "The settlements were not an obstacle to peace at any point [in the talks]. Even when Israel evacuated swathes of land, terrorism continued. Even when we uprooted communities, all we got in return was 'Hamastan'. This is why I suggest we think it over - but not with slogans or dictates."

The former IDF chief of staff emphasized that the government will not allow the establishment of new outposts, but clarified: "We will not halt the expansion of settlements which is a result of natural growth. There are people living here, raising their children here. We need to build homes for families' residence - it's not this which has prevented peace."

"What the US demands," he said, is "not a dictate. We'll see how they translate the statements into policy. Their envoy [to the Middle East, George] Mitchell will come, and we will talk to him. I suggest that neither the US, nor us, decide on a timetable in advance."

"From the banks of the Potomac, you don't always fully understand the situation, and here Israel's job is to help its ally," Ya'alon said, also criticizing dissent from within: "The dialogue in Israel presents us as peace objectors - the problem is within us."

I highly admire Yaalon for his courage as well. He is correct in pointing out how concessions to date have only led to war, and that's why such an approach cannot continue.

NETANYAHU'S KNESSET PM SPEECH

Key excepts from Benyamin Netanhayu's inaugural Knesset speech:

The State of Israel was established during its most difficult hour, an hour during which the words of the Declaration of Independence echoed in our ears: “The Land of Israel was the birthplace of the Jewish people. Here their spiritual, religious and political identity was shaped. Here they first attained statehood, created cultural values of national and universal significance and gave to the world the eternal Book of Books. After being forcibly exiled from their land, the people kept faith with it throughout their Dispersion and never ceased to pray and hope for their return to its land and for the restoration in it of their political freedom.”

I am pleased that the Labor Party, a movement with deep roots and of great contributions to the history of Zionism and settlement, eventually made the responsible decision for the good of the country to join hands with the Likud Movement and our other partners.

I wish to express appreciation to the members of this house who understood the enormous responsibility we are facing, and took the decision, not without hesitation, to extend a hand and provide support for the unity government.

The security crisis we are facing originates from the rise and spread of radical Islam in our region and in other parts of the world. The greatest threat to humanity, and to the State of Israel, stems from the possibility that a radical regime will be armed with nuclear weapons or that nuclear weapons will find a home in a radical regime. I wish to distinguish fundamentalist Islam from the overall Muslim and Arab world, which is also threatened by the extremists.

My Government will act vis-à-vis the Palestinian Authority to achieve peace on three parallel tracks: economic, security and political. We strive to assist with the accelerated development of the Palestinian economy and in developing its economic ties with Israel. We will support a Palestinian security mechanism that will fight terror, and we will conduct ongoing peace negotiations with the PA, with the aim of reaching a final status arrangement.

We are on the eve of the Passover holiday and the Seder. At our national table, there is an empty chair: that of Gilad Shalit. I will do everything in my power to quickly return him healthy to the bosom of his family, and will act to return all our missing soldiers. (Read full speech here)

Commentary from The Weekly Standard here.

AND SO, THE NEW GOVERNMENT BEGINS

Let me begin by saying how happy I am to see that Ehud Olmert is finally out. Benjamin Netanyahu is now the prime minister of Israel once again after a decade.

I'm not happy that the cabinet has to consist of as many as 30 ministers, but this apparently had what to do with the greed of these smaller parties, who may be the ones to blame.

And if there's anyone else to blame, I think the National Union is going to have to take some, because their abysmal talents in negotiating coalition agreements has cost them the chance to have a possible ministry. What their leader, Ya'akov Katz, did was to issue an ultimatum to Netanyahu, that either he give them the construction ministry or they wouldn't join. I can see now why Caroline Glick was mad at them - that's no way to maintain coalition negotiations by implying that they won't be reliable coalition partners and making things too hard for the head.

But now, if this info is correct, it looks like the NU hasn't made things any better:

Also voting against the government was the Ichud Leumi (National Union) party, which stood by its demand that Prime Minister Netanyahu declare a position against the establishment of a new Arab state within Israel’s current borders.

As much as I'd like to credit them for demanding the aforementioned position, I get the strange feeling that their vote against approval of the government was less than altruistic. And I don't think they should have done that. What if it resulted in the government falling before it begun? And why do I have my doubts they really want to get rid of a bad government?

I'd like to think that if they're going to be in the opposition, that they'll learn a lesson for their incompetent strategy in negotiating a coalition deal. But I get the feeling they won't. Nice going there, NU. All you've done is make it sound like you've got nothing more than sour grapes, and for now, you've cost yourselves what could've been a promising role in the government.

Another problem with them, I suppose, is that the NU does not have a clear stance on industry and finance, which, if they were to show some serious talent and a willingness to reach out to people on the issues, might get them more respect. But they haven't ever shown any real talent in that capacity, and that's one more reason why it's hard to credit them.

LIKUD KADIMA ALLIANCE?

Isreali National News is reporting that Likud has offered Kadima a number of cabinet positions, in order to form of a government together:

Senior aides in the Likud party said late Wednesday that chairman Binyamin Netanyahu has offered Kadima two senior Cabinet positions in exchange for its joining a nation unity government.

The two parties comprise 55 Knesset seats, leaving the Likud the option of completing the government with religious and strongly nationalist parties or Israel Is Our Home (Yisrael Beiteinu).

Kadima reportedly was offered to choose among the defense, finance and foreign affairs ministries. (Read full article here)

The Jerusalem Post denotes that both Likud and Kadima insiders are privately conveying the accepted political reality that both parties, for historical reasons, will probably have to unite.

The DEBKA File asserts that Netanyahu proffered 10 portfolios to Livni, no rotating leadership and desires to incorporate Labor head Ehud Barak into his coalition.

On the Kadima front, however, Livni is pushing Avigdor Lieberman very hard to, at a modicum, sway him to recommend to Pres. Shimon Peres that she get a first shot to form a new administration.

Access Benyamin Netanyahu-Likud's official home page here, Facebook profile here, You Tube site here and FlickR photostream here and Twitter him here.