Some pundits have suggested that Kerry, who chairs the Senate's Foreign Relations Committee, is 'running cover' for President Barack Obama in case the President decides not to meet General Stanley McChrystal's demand to send more troops to Afghanistan.  

Warner:         Senator Kerry, thanks for joining us. You said in your speech today that General McChrystal’s plan goes too far too fast. Are you talking about the troop levels or his basic overall strategy of counter insurgence.

Kerry:            The breadth of the reach of the counter insurgency that he wants to start with that the numbers of troops can do it immediately. That doesn’t mean you might not get there ultimately, Margaret, but I think you’ve got to show people like me and others that we have the civilian capacity to come in underneath those troops and the governance that’s going to allow us to hold on and the Afghan army members who will be in there with you so it’s not an American face, it’s an Afghan movement immediately. I think those three ingredients are critical and we just don’t have that sufficiently there to say, oh boy, let’s just go deploy this number of troops now.

Warner:         So are you suggesting to the President’s recently deferred decision on additional troops?

Kerry:            No, I think the President could uh conceivably make the decision, uh with and in many ways he could put in some troops, he could put in a lot of troops. He could do you know any number of options. What I’m trying to suggest that the standard that you use before you put them out into combat and clear an area and start to hold an area, and, and actually implement the counter insurgency component itself, I think you need those ingredients or you’re going to fail.

Warner:         But the ingredients you lay out, I mean some kind, some kind of effective local and national governance, Afghan security forces, a much better coordinated U.S. civilian effort. I mean those are big projects, aren’t they?

Kerry:            Well, then if you don’t, they don’t have to be that enormous, no. I don’t, I don’t agree with that. For instance, the local governance, you’ve got to identify a district governor or a province governor who knows who the players are, have authority in the tribe, or authority in a particular community, and that they’re wiling to be with you so that if indeed you send your troops in there to clear the bad guys out, those guys will have local authority to begin to help to distribute the services and do the things you need to do rather than an American face, and American soldier trying to translate to people through a translator, this is why we’re here and this is what we’re doing. You want an Afghan face on that. They’ve got to invest in this. On the, on the, on the civilian piece of what you need to come in with underneath there, to some degree the military can take care of part of that. They can use certain funding that we have available, pay people simply to give up their guns and come over, but you’ve got to pretty quickly have something for them to do, you’ve got to pretty quickly begin to engage them in uh, you know open up some kind of commerce and the other kinds of things you need to have sustainability. Uh, otherwise you get into trouble. So I, I want to speed that. I doesn’t mean you don’t deploy some troops. But before you tell them go in and clean out this province, you want to have identified what’s coming in underneath, who’s going in with us on the Afghan army, how many, in what role and who’s going to manage this from an Afghan point of view after it’s done. So those are the important things.

Warner:         Let me see if I can understand that what you’re suggesting that President Obama should do right now, in other words he’s got a pending troop request for, if reports are to believed anywhere from 10 to 40 or way more thousands of troops. In the next three to four weeks and you’ve got an Afghan election coming up, how are you suggesting the President calibrate his response to that request?

Kerry:            Well by, I very respectfully would suggest to him that they make the kinds of judgments that I laid out in the speech I gave today, uh about how much they feel they can commit at this moment in the relative weight of what we need to do in Pakistan versus what we need to do in Afghanistan, versus what we need to do potentially with Iran, with North Korea with you know other, you know other challenges in the world, balance all of that and then specifically define what, that what, what is it that would have the most impact on advancing our efforts in Afghanistan, that we can accomplish in the, in the least costly, most effective way to start with? See what works. Prove that you can make that difference and as you prove it, you can establish confidence not just in Afghanistan but here at home about further commitments. If you rush in with too many people too quickly, without having the support structure there that they need to make it sustainable, we’re asking for uh, the undermining of our own effort and that’s what I want to avoid.

Warner:         So are you saying that if the benchmarks were met then you wouldn’t have any problem with 40,000 additional troops?

Kerry:            Aw, it depends again as I said, I think the strategy is reaching a little too far too fast. I want to see these done, the benchmarks met and the process put in place in a way that we can measure so that we have confidence about where we’re going in the future. I would rather not start with 40. I clearly believe we can do with less to begin with and that we can be effective because we have so many troops who just went in there. We’ve tripled the numbers of troops already, and we need to demand more from some of our allies. I do not want this to become such a significantly American effort and we have a right to expect more from those NATO countries that just signed up for this.

Warner:         And how you do think the upcoming Afghan election should play into that in terms of for the President, both for the way it’s conducted and the outcome?

Kerry:            Well obviously uh we’ve got to have a government with legitimacy. I mean that’s been very critical. That’s one of the things that I thought was so important in the work we did uh, you know a week or so ago, uh which was to try to make sure we had the opportunity to have that government, cause if you didn’t, you’re really in trouble to begin with. I think we’ll come out of there with a government of legitimacy. And then the issue is, how do we get the reforms in place rapidly enough to begin to give people an assurance that business is going to be different in Afghanistan?

Warner:         Do you think that the President should use the troop request in a way as leverage with, whether it’s Karzai or Abdullah Abdullah to extract certain commitments?

Kerry:            Should use the request?

Warner:         Well no, . . .

Kerry:            I think the President should absolutely uh leverage the, the significance of America’s participation in what it means to the President and to Afghanistan to achieve a level of sustainability to the effort, of course. Yes, I think he has every right in the world to anticipate that our commitment to do something is going to get their commitment to do something. If you can’t do that, that’s the basics of diplomacy and of friendship, we’re in trouble.

Q:        You said that you believe based on your many, many hours with President Karzai just 10 days ago, a week ago, that he is ready to make some changes if reelected. I mean can you tell us well what did he actually say that led you to believe that he understands he’s got a corruption problem, a governance problem and he’s ready to take some tough . . .

Kerry:            Well he, he understands absolutely that there are individuals who engage in uh, you know different kinds of behavior that is uh contrary to his interests and to the interests of the country. I think he understands that and, and the question now is identifying them and identifying you know good people who can take their place that he has confidence in and is willing to make that change. Part of the test here what the President, President Obama ought to do will be President Karzai’s response to those needs. If President Karzai tries to stiff the President and the United States on those kinds of changes, I would be very reluctant to say hey, let’s put more troops in here so we can get diddled around by these guys. I, I think that we’ve got to be very smart.

Warner:         There were two, this has been a bloody weekend both in Iraq and Afghanistan. I want to ask you whether you think that there’s anything that could happen in Iraq that would slow down our withdrawal there to the point that it would affect the ability to ramp up in Afghanistan as the President may or may not decide to do?

Kerry: Uh, could something happen, the answer is yes. Do I expect it to happen? I think probably not. Uh, because I believe the vast majority of Iraqis would like to see us go. And that is because I think the unsettled differences of Iraq have parties on all sides that kind of feel they’d like to get to the next step which is fighting about it among themselves without us. So I think that you’re going to see some bombs go off. You will see some violence. Now there’s not a lot that one can do to prevent one individual or two who want to blow themselves up, from hurting people.

Warner:         And then of course in Afghanistan today, 14 Americans that we know of have already lost their lives today. American public opinion is already barely 50-50 on the question of our engagement there. How long do you think the President with whatever strategy he decides can actually hold on to even that level of support as these casualties mount?

Kerry:            Only so long as we are actually demonstrating that we’re having a positive impact and that we’re making progress. Which is one of the reasons why I define the kinds of measurements that I thought today ought to be laid out there. If you can’t maximize, I mean if you’re going to ask some kid to put his life on the line, and you’re going to do it and, and talk to those parents and look them in the eye if something terrible happens, I think we all have an obligation to make certain we have maximized the ability to be successful. That means you’ve got to do things I’ve talked about. Can you try to stumble ahead without some of those things? Yes, but does that empower you to be able to say we did everything possible to prevent this? No. And I think we have an obligation to maximize success. When you send young people into harm’s way, you owe them a strategy that’s equal to their sacrifice. And the only strategy I can see that is, is one that is comprehensive and tries to get the job done to the best of our ability.

Warner:         And you don’t think we have that now.

Kerry:            I don’t believe we have that. I think we have the capacity for it, but I don’t think we actually have it in place and functioning today, no.

Warner:         Senator Kerry, thank you.

Kerry:            Thank you.

Photo: A U.S. soldier from the Stryker Brigade patrols in Kandahar city October 26, 2009. REUTERS/Omar Sobhani. 

We mentioned how, despite it being one of the Palestinians' most hated symbols of Israeli occupation, some people had worked the barrier into their daily lives, using it as a backdrop for movie screenings, restaurant menus and all manner of protest - artistic and otherwise.

Now Cellcom, an Israeli mobile phone company has used a portion of the separation barrier as the backdrop for one of its TV commercials - causing something of a stir in the blogosphere and on social networks like Facebook (login required) and YouTube.

Its not an original idea. As you will have seen in the video in last week's post - the wall has already been used as a tennis net by activists protesting its existence and, in the video below, to promote an extraordinary idea that an Israeli-Palestinian joint bid for a World Cup soccer tournament might be a catalyst for peace.

Interesting to note that in neither video do you see what's happening on the other side of the wall as the ball sails over - which is what's got the bloggers up in arms.

The Promised Land blog notes: "The voice over at the end (of the Cellcom commerical) goes 'What do we all want? Some fun, that's all' And what's more fun than not seeing the Palestinians around anymore, thanks to the 10 meters high wall?"

More from Half and Half, where the question asked is: "But who is it on the other side? Are they from another planet? Do they mean us no harm? Let us communicate with them via foot and ball and see if their intentions are sincere."

Many of those posting comments on the Haaretz website reject the idea that the ad is somehow racist, as suggested by some angry bloggers, with some comments even offering that the ad sends an uplifting message of peace.

The East Jerusalem resident speaking in our video story below echoes that sentiment - although he is in no doubt who is responsible for the lack of peace.

For the full story on this, including comments from Cellcom on their ad, click here.

Is the ad just a harmless kick-about? Or is there something troubling about it?

Aziz Dweik was the speaker of the Hamas-led Palestinian parliament until his arrest and imprisonment by Israel 3 years ago. He was one of dozens of Hamas lawmakers rounded up across the occupied West Bank in the summer of 2006 after gunmen from Hamas and other militants from Gaza abducted an Israeli soldier, Gilad Shalit, in a cross-border raid. 

Dweik was released earlier this week after serving nearly the full term of his prison sentence.

Our journalists interviewed Dweik, 60, earlier this week in his hometown of Hebron. Here's the interview as it appeared on our news wire. And below, a video of excerpts from the interview in English where Dweik holds out hope for a deal that would see Shalit released in exchange for Palestinian prisoners held by Israel and for a unity deal to overcome the deep schism in Palestinian politics between Hamas and the Fatah faction led by President Mahmoud Abbas.

Israeli TV star Dudu Topaz , once known as the "TV Ratings King", has been arrested on suspicion that he hired a couple of heavies to put the hurt on TV execs and an agent who turned down his pitch to make a comeback - 5 years after his show was yanked from Israel's airwaves.

The assaults left two men and a woman battered and bruised (and presumably somewhat vindicated in their decision not to extend Topaz's career)

Our report on the story of a fallen star is here. See the stories from Ynet here and from Haaretz here.

And here's some video of Dudu in happier times courtesy of Channel 2.

Niche holidays are all the rage these days and a cursory browse of the web quickly throws up an eclectic mix of possibilities from this Elvis Presley-themed trip to the United States,  to a pleasant vacation in Germany looking at tractors and other farm machinery, right through to this combination "boat trip on the Seine/making a quilt" holiday. (And those are all from just one web site).

But even these high-adrenalin holidays pale by comparison to the week-long tour of Israel we spotted on the web being offered by Shurat HaDin Israel Law Centre whose motto is "Bankrupting Terrorism - One Lawsuit at a Time".

Their "Ultimate Mission to Israel" offers a range of unusual activities sure to put the smile on any vacationers face, to whit:

- Briefings by Mossad officials and commanders of the Shin Bet.

- Inside tour of the Israeli Air Force unit who (sic) carries out targeted killings. 

- Live exhibition of penetration raids in Arab territory.

And that holiday must-have that will be sure to provide fond vacation memories for years to come:

- Observe a trial of Hamas terrorists in an IDF military court.

Its not all terrorists and targeted killings though -- there's also a chance for a jeep tour in the Golan Heights, water activities on Lake Kinneret (Sea of Galilee) and a cook-out barbecue.

The tour is due to run from June 8 - June 15 this year so we suggest you hurry while spaces are still available. As we reported three years ago, the tour is a popular event that fully lives up to its cloak-and-dagger billing.

(PHOTOS COURTESY OF SHURAT HADIN WEBSITE)

To give an idea of just how difficult it will be take a look at this extraordinary map designed by French cartographer Julien Boussac. It might look like Indonesia or the Caribbean at first glance, but the map is a fanciful reworking of what is actually happening in the West Bank with the blue/water areas representing areas under full Israeli control with the dark and light green 'islands' representing areas where the Palestinian Authority exerts some control.

This puts me in mind of high school geography and studying the amazing engineering feat of land reclamation in the Netherlands - where polders and dykes enabled the Dutch to push back the North Sea and expand their living space.

For the Palestinians politics and diplomacy, not polders and dykes, are going to be needed to reclaim the land they want for a future state in a feat even more spectacular than anything those Dutch engineers could pull off.

And for the settlers - as we explain here - they think there's no point even thinking about it. In this video, settlers in Efrat, between Jerusalem and Hebron, comment on the issue, preceded by the reaction from Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat.

For a larger view of the map click over here to Strange Maps where its well worth browsing around for some other interesting takes on the world around us.

The two men met for two hours - during which time Obama pressed the 'two state solution' to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict on a reluctant Netanyahu, while Netanyahu underlined his belief that Iran was a more pressing concern than Palestinian statehood.

White House watchers pointed out that 2 hours is a long meeting by Preisdential standards and also that the body language of the two men as they sat together suggested none of the fireworks that some had predicted went off in the private encounter.

Here's a video report on the public comments made by the two leaders as they finished up their marathon chinwag.

Israel's Haaretz newspaper has a full transcript of the Q&A here.

Pope Benedict has left the Holy Land bequeathing a message of peace, tolerance and love between all religions and peoples.

We hope that message also filters through to the eternally fractious relationship between journalists and security men - which gets even more strained when a high-profile visitor like the Pope is in town.

Months of elaborate preparation went in to ensuring the Pope's visit was safe and successful and also to ensure journalists got controlled access to major events to tell the stories their readers and viewers want to see.

This planning process is hostage, however, to a simple dichotomy which pits journalists against bureaucrats and security officials.

In the eyes of the security men, journalists are bothersome, quarrelsome and disobedient and need to be coralled (even though that process is often like 'herding cats'). Notions of a free press and unlimited access take a back seat to security concerns.

In the eyes of the journalists, security men are unthinking automatons with no common sense or an appreciation of the (self-)importance of journalists - and they need to be challenged and confronted whenever possible. The elaborate coverage restrictions, security sweeps, shuttle buses and byzantine pool regulations are, of course, both ridiculous and the main obstacle between the journalist and his/her exclusive, prize-winning story.

Perhaps its not unusual then that tempers occasionally overheat.

In the video below you will see what happens when very clear 'pool' rules are breached by a local photographer - who runs from a pre-ordained position towards the Pope and enters the inner core of accredited Vatican journalists who travel with Benedict wherever he goes.

The photographer in question had a different accreditation - only allowing limited access to the Pope's itinerary.

To give you an idea of how seriously these breaches of protocol are taken - the gentleman 'herding the cats' in this case is the Director of the Government Press Office which oversees many aspects of the work of foreign journalists in Israel.

In this next video you will see what happens when people spend too much time waiting around in the sun wearing suit jackets and ties and getting...well, a little cranky.

The cameraman here was doing exactly what he was supposed to do on behalf of the Host Broadcaster pool which has been providing the bulk of the live pictures of the Pope's visit to Israel. A TV Pool like this is set up to film on behalf of everyone so as to avoid a crush of journalists attending every event and making it even more unmanageable. Maybe someone should have explained that part a bit better to the security guy.

If things can get a little heated when diplomatic protocol and stringent preparations are in place, it can get even uglier when unofficial visitors attract even more attention than the leader of the world's Roman Catholics....

Cue Leonardo diCaprio visiting Jerusalem two years ago with his Israeli girlfriend Bar Refaeli and a private security escort to keep the couple out of harm's way....

Two of diCaprio's security guards were arrested for their part in the scuffle.

Perhaps its only fitting to leave the last word to the Pope himself who said, as he left the Holy Land for Rome: "It remains only for me to express my heartfelt thanks to all who have contributed in so many ways to my visit. To the government, the organisers, the volunteers, the media..."

(PHOTO CREDIT: Pope Benedict during the Nazareth mass REUTERS/Tony Gentile)

Crossing back and forth through the checkpoints that dot what Israelis call the "separation barrier" -- and which Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas told the pope was "the apartheid wall" -- is a routine part of life for many people here. Yet it can shock newcomers to see this physical manifestation of the conflict in a region that is just a pocket-handkerchief on the map of the world. It is a measure put in place for security (as per the Israelis) or annexation and grabbing of land (as per the Palestinians). One wonders what the Pope was thinking as he crossed through.

Here's some video of the Pope in Bethlehem. Click here to see the script and shotlist, including translations of the comments, that accompanies the vid.

PHOTO: Security men and clergymen surround Pope Benedict's car as he drives from Israel in to Bethlehem (Pool)