Showing posts with label Linkdump. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Linkdump. Show all posts

Thursday, March 28, 2024

From Ian:

Andrew Roberts: The West’s shameful betrayal of Israel gives Hamas the chance to kill again
Have we forgotten? Have we really forgotten so quickly the monstrous events of October 7 last year that we genuinely want an immediate ceasefire in Gaza before Hamas has been utterly destroyed as a military force and potential government there?

As we watched the British ambassador to the UN raise her hand at the Security Council meeting this week to vote for a ceasefire, alongside the Chinese and Russians, leaving our ally the US in the cold as the only member abstaining, do we not feel embarrassed, even ashamed? I know I do.

How proud I would have felt if we had actually had the guts to veto a resolution that is designed to prevent Israel from genuinely exercising her right to self-defence, which Britain and America were so quick to declare they believed in back in October – however, hypocritically, as it turns out. For Israel’s “right to self-defence” is utterly worthless if its forces are stopped from entering Rafah and annihilating the Hamas leadership there.

Hamas has already stated – and in this, at least, one can’t fault the group for its honesty – that it is committed to repeating October 7-style massacres as soon as it gets another chance.

As its spokesman Abu Obeida has stated, Hamas intends to make Israel “taste new ways of death”. The international community has clearly shown that it is happy to let Hamas have the opportunity, because the immediate ceasefire in the UN resolution is intended to be followed by “a lasting sustainable ceasefire”, in which Hamas would surely survive.

It will be hard even for Hamas to think up new ways of making Jews taste death considering what the terrorists did on October 7. Having dehumanised Jews after decades of officially-organised anti-Semitic propaganda to children as young as four, it visited death upon them in more vile, sadistic and depraved ways than can possibly be imagined. “Men, women, and children are shot, blown up, hunted, tortured, burned, and generally murdered,” wrote Graeme Wood in The Atlantic, “in any horrible manner you could predict, and some that you might not.”

Yet a mere five months later, we have shifted our position enough to give Hamas a lifeline, and have joined China and Russia in calling for a ceasefire before the terrorists are destroyed. In military doctrine, the word destruction means: “To render the enemy incapable of accomplishing his mission without reconstitution.”

Hamas’s stated mission is to destroy both Israel and Jews. Preventing any such reconstitution means forcing it into a Berlin 1945 moment in Rafah. As Benny Gantz, former Israeli deputy prime minister and Israel Defence Forces (IDF) chief of the general staff, has pointed out: “You don’t send the fire brigade to put out 80 per cent of the fire.”
Melanie Phillips: Israel’s Orwellian nightmare
President Joe Biden has conditioned military aid to Israel on the requirement that it submits a report within 45 days proving compliance with international law. Britain’s Foreign Secretary, Lord Cameron, has threatened to stop arms sales to Israel unless it allows the Red Cross access to Hamas detainees.

Seeking to explain this vicious treatment by Israel’s treacherous allies, commentators cite the need to appease American Muslims and radical Democrats in the U.S. presidential election; the anti-Israel Obama-era retreads in the Biden administration; and in Britain, the outsourcing of foreign policy by the inexperienced Prime Minister Rishi Sunak to Cameron, who shares the poisonous disdain for Israel that’s been entrenched in the Foreign Office for decades.

Plausible as those reasons are, there’s also a deeper issue. Israel’s current Orwellian treatment at Western hands should be no surprise because this treatment has been Orwellian for decades.

Under existential attack since its rebirth in 1948, Israel has repeatedly been forced by America and the West into making lethal concessions to its would-be destroyers that have left it in a state of permanent siege and under repeated attack.

America and the West have feted Palestinian leaders as statesmen even while those leaders brainwash generations into believing it’s their highest duty to kill every Jew. The Americans have armed and trained Palestinian police officers who have subsequently mounted terrorist attacks on Israelis.

The “two-state solution” is being insisted upon by the U.S. and Britain, even though it has been repeatedly offered to the Palestinians who have rejected it because their aim is to wipe Israel off the map.

The reason America and Britain have left Israel to swing in the wind is that they think the genocidal Palestinians have a legitimate case. The shocking treatment of Israel today by its so-called allies is merely a continuation of that decades-old Orwellian nightmare.
The President’s War Against the Jews
Biden owns this war imposed on Israel. The president inherited a Middle East marked by a bankrupt Iran and amicable relations between Israel and Arab countries with more in the works, thanks to President Trump’s historic Abraham Accords. Biden reversed course, enriched Tehran, funded terrorists and destabilized the Middle East—setting the stage for Oct. 7.

Biden shows no sign of reversing even one of his deadly failures. Instead of taking responsibility for his policy mistakes, he blames Israel for not going further and providing Iran with a launching pad on its border by establishing a Palestinian state. Perversely, the attacks of Oct. 7 have only led Biden to kick his effort to establish a Palestinian state into high gear.

Biden claims Hamas is different from the Palestinians. But an overwhelming majority of Palestinians, whether in Gaza or Judea and Samaria, cheered the Oct. 7 atrocities. Videos show Palestinians handing out candy in celebration, and a November 2023 research poll conducted by the Arab World for Research and Development (AWRAD) found, “[a]n overwhelming percentage of Palestinians support the October 7 massacre (75%), reject coexistence with Israel (85.9%), are committed to creation of a Palestinian state ‘from the river to the sea’ (74.7%) as the end of the Israeli Palestinian conflict … there is more support for the 10/7 massacre from the Palestinians resident in Judea and Samaria (83.1%) than those residing in the Gaza Strip (63.6%).”

Regardless of Biden’s wishes, the “river to the sea” crowd isn’t interested in living in peace next to a Jewish state: They don’t believe Israel should exist at all. While Israel’s cabinet overwhelmingly rejected Biden’s push for a so-called Palestinian state, with strong backing from 99 of the 120 members of Knesset also voicing their rejection, Biden and his administration continue to push their animus against the Jewish state while fueling rampant antisemitism in America. Biden’s silence, at his State of the Union, about the alarming rise of antisemitism throughout the United States, including the glorification of Hamas terrorism and intimidation and physical violence perpetrated against Jews in America’s towns and cities, was deafening. That’s because his party’s loyal foot soldiers among college and university administrators and professors or their K-12 equivalents, the media, Democratic politicians, or leftist NGOs, include a large number of antisemites, who live openly and happily in the Democratic Party. As Ryan Mauro, Capitol Research Center national security analyst explained, “the disturbing reality is that Hamas’s allies in the U.S. have a significant foothold in the non-profit sector. Major left-wing organizations are funding Hamas’s sympathizers and those who indirectly help Hamas by waging a political war against Israel.”

It was 50 years ago in 1973, when then Sen. Biden was in Israel, sitting with PM Meir. Biden recalled her saying to him that he “look[ed] so worried.” She assured him not to worry, sharing “we have a secret weapon in our conflict with the Arabs. You see, we have no place else to go.” Perhaps it took these 50 years for Biden to figure out how to exploit Meir’s words about Israel’s “secret weapon” to effectuate the ouster of the Jewish people from their ancestral homeland.

Whether Biden and his party are blinded by ideology, lack moral clarity, or both, the fact remains that the battle that Israel is fighting has existential stakes, not only for the Jewish state but for all Western civilization—regardless of party affiliation. Those who understand what is at stake in this fight must stand with Israel in her battle to achieve total victory—not only against Hamas and its barbaric ideology, but also against those in high places in our own country who support them.
Saving Israel from Itself?
The Israelis, according to some Americans, just don't understand their real interests and pursue policies that could lead to the ruin of the Jewish state. The role of Washington, as a friend, is to press Jerusalem to change its diplomatic direction.

American State Department official George Ball in 1977 published an article in Foreign Affairs titled: "How to Save Israel in Spite of Herself" - which soon became part of the American diplomatic lexicon.

The notion that the U.S. had to save Israel from itself to pursue Arab-Israeli peace is a meaningless intellectual exercise. Two years later (1979), Israel signed the peace agreement with Egypt that responded to its national security needs.

Moreover, the Oslo peace process with the Palestinians resulted from an Israeli initiative with very little involvement by the Americans, proving that Israel is an independent diplomatic player that is driven by its interests and can make peace with the Arabs without an American "savior."

In principle, the American president is elected to steward and secure U.S. interests rather than those of foreign countries like Israel. Israel's citizens didn't elect him, which suggests that he doesn't have an obligation to save them and certainly not to make decisions about war and peace in their name. The government elected by Israeli citizens has that responsibility.

Politicians and pundits have to understand that if they fail to convince the majority of Israelis that an independent Palestinian state would pose no threat to Israel, such a state will not be established.

Wednesday, March 27, 2024

From Ian:

Seth Mandel: Why Israel’s Critics Keep Changing the Rules
Compared to Israel’s November operation at Shifa, this one has attracted far less press attention (aside from the usual perfunctory stenographic work mainstream newspapers in America do for Hamas). One reason for this is that in November, Israel had to spend time searching the hospital after securing it and committing to the slow process of finding and neutralizing the tunnels. This meant the world spent weeks criticizing Israel before informed criticism was even possible, and then moved the goalposts every time Israel revealed a Hamas war crime in the hospital complex. It was a round of Calvinball. By the time the scope of Hamas’s use of the complex was made clear, the press had moved on.

This time, the press had no excuses even before the operation. Everyone already knows how Hamas turned a large hospital into a war zone. As well, the presence of senior Hamas military commanders makes even the attempt to spin this is an Israeli overreaction look ridiculous. Hamas has been caught in the act, which should theoretically be a headline-dominating story for days. There should be a tidal wave of condemnations from foreign ministries around the world and apologies from medical NGOs and media organizations for having—wittingly or unwittingly—aided a terrorist army’s unprecedented assault on international law and coopting journalists and doctors into undermining the safety and credibility of their peers in other conflict zones.

Ah, but that wouldn’t be Calvinball. The rules adjust, and Israel must adjust with them—and as soon as it does, the rules will change again.

“Israel’s opponents are erasing a remarkable, historic new standard Israel has set,” writes John Spencer, perhaps the leading expert in the field at the moment.

But of course they are; if there is no potential for a Hamas victory, even a public-relations one, there is no story. Israel’s critics should be overjoyed at the blueprint Jerusalem is providing for new and creative ways to protect civilians in urban warfare. But to Israel’s critics, international law isn’t stagnant; those were the laws of war in the last round of Calvinball. And hey, why is Israel’s army always fighting the last war, anyway?
The Accused
Hannah Arendt once called the Dreyfus affair a “dress rehearsal for the Holocaust.” For more than a decade, the saga of a Jewish military officer wrongfully convicted of treason riled turn-of-the-century France and foreshadowed the European horrors to come. Yet there has been a curious tendency by some historians to remove both Dreyfus and his Jewishness from the center of the story. In his authoritative new book, Alfred Dreyfus: The Man at the Center of the Affair, the historian Maurice Samuels rectifies this error, while challenging long-standing myths.

As Paul Johnson pointed out in his magisterial History of the Jews, the Dreyfus affair brought a “decisive end to an epoch of illusion in which assimilated western Jews had optimistically assumed that the process of their acceptance in European society was well under way and would shortly be completed.” It upended Jewish life, leading Jews as far away as the United States to ponder whether they would ever be truly accepted in the lands in which they were a tiny minority. It gave a shot in the arm to political Zionism and eventually mobilized much of the French left against anti-Semitism. And it led to years of political upheaval, toppling French governments and revealing divisions that, as Samuels notes, are still evident today.

Born in the Alsatian town of Mulhouse in 1859, Dreyfus grew up in an upper-class Jewish family. Alfred’s father, Raphael, made his fortune in the mill industry and was able to provide a comfortable life.

The Franco-Prussian War of 1870–71 shattered the family’s serene existence. The forces of Prussian minister Otto Von Bismarck defeated Napoleon III and France. A new nation, Imperial Germany, was declared at Versailles. And the provinces of Alsace and Lorraine were annexed by Germany. This amputation was a severe blow to the French psyche, which mourned the loss for the next half-century. It also made quite the impression on young Alfred, who watched enraged as Prussian troops entered Mulhouse. It spurred his desire for a career in the military.

At the time, it was not unusual for a French Jew of Dreyfus’s social and economic background to pursue such a calling. Indeed, as scholars such as Derek Penslar have highlighted, in the 19th century the armed forces of many European nations opened their ranks to Jewish officers. This was certainly true in France, which had played a historic role in emancipating Jews after the French Revolution. An ardent patriot, Dreyfus wanted to serve.

“The Dreyfus family,” Samuels notes, “had embraced French culture because it was socially advantageous, but they also felt a great loyalty to France for having been the first country to emancipate the Jews.”
Holocaust Re-Revisionism
What more can there possibly be to say about the Holocaust? Plenty, as Dan Stone demonstrates in The Holocaust: An Unfinished History, his sobering and meticulous exploration of aspects of the Shoah that have remained, until now, under-analyzed. And these aspects of the Holocaust are especially salient today, as the Nazis’ carefully orchestrated murderous program has been adopted and adapted by Hamas and other jihadist groups and abetted by their fellow travelers in the West.

“There are still major parts of the history of the Holocaust that have not been understood in the prevailing narrative,” writes Stone, a historian at the University of London and the director of the Holocaust Research Institute. These include a comprehensive genocidal ideology originating with and propagated by, but transcending, the Nazis themselves; the “ubiquity” of collaboration throughout Europe and North Africa; and the extraordinary nature of the trauma suffered by the survivors and the slaughtered alike.

The conspiracy that fed the genocidal instincts of the Nazis and their collaborators began and ended with Nazi race “science.” Stone writes, “To understand the drive for Lebensraum, the creation of a German empire in Europe in which the racial community could thrive, one has to grasp the overriding significance of race for the Nazis.” Invoking the historian Eric Voegelin, Stone contends that the fuzzy, mystical notion of race unified German philosophy, politics, and culture.

Specious as this racial theory was—even “pseudoscience” doesn’t do it justice—it galvanized both Nazi elites and everyday Germans young and old. “It is plain to all who are willing to see,” said Nazi culture minister Karl Weber in the mid-1930s, “that this philosophy involves a call to the younger generation to heroic living, for this reality of race is something which claims them, gives them a standard and orientates their whole life.” Jews became, simultaneously, subhumans who were unworthy of polluting the German gene pool and a collective global superpower that threatened German geopolitical interests.

This nascent worldview reached its first apotheosis on November 9, 1938, when the Kristallnacht pogrom erupted across greater Germany. Some 177 synagogues were burned down, 8,000 Jewish businesses were destroyed, 100 Jews were murdered, and 30,000 others were hauled off to proto-concentration camps in Dachau, Buchenwald, and Sachsenhausen. The attack, Stone reckons, evinced “an alarming degree of consensus and cooperation among local inhabitants” and signified a key turning point for what the Nazi race ideology endorsed—and what it could get away with.

The entire Nazi war machine, police and Wehrmacht included, began to dedicate itself to the mission of eradicating global Jewry. Stone’s research gives the lie to historical analyses that blamed only the SS and exonerated the regular German army. Field Marshal Walter von Reichenau, in his “Orders for Conduct in the East,” instructed the Wehrmacht in no uncertain terms to “liberate the German people once and for all from the Asiatic-Jewish danger.” That the SS’s focus on killing Jews was more single-minded than that of other military organs does little to excuse the latter.
From Ian:

What Would Victory Mean in Gaza?
Decision/victory is the only optimal outcome of a military campaign. In the last three decades, deterrence has become the desired outcome of an IDF military campaign, while decision/victory has essentially disappeared as the primary goal. This pushing aside of victory and centralization of deterrence was largely due to the limitations the State of Israel and the IDF placed on themselves regarding the use of force.

The goals of these limitations were to reduce casualties among IDF soldiers; reduce civilian losses from rockets hitting the home front; reduce enemy collateral damage; reduce international criticism of Israel over its military conduct; and avoid the need to provide a civil response to the needs of a local enemy population.

Israel's belief that it can rely on intermittent deterrence operations was painfully shattered on Oct. 7. It took a severe blow to national security to force a review of the security doctrine and a rediscovery of the concept of victory/decision. It was quickly understood that victory/decision is required in the current campaign and probably also in future campaigns.

Tactical victory is not about killing all opposing military soldiers or terrorist operatives, but about breaking their ability to fight as a combatant framework. In the current war, operational victory does not mean the threat of guerrilla warfare and terrorism has been removed from Gaza, but that Hamas' ability to cause damage, especially to the Israeli civilian home front, is declining dramatically.

Strategic victory is the removal of the enemy's ability to pose a military threat in the operational arena for many years to come. It is achieved by continuing military operations in order to weaken the enemy's guerrilla warfare and terrorism capabilities until they either stop completely or are reduced to the scale of individual events. Grand victory in Gaza would mean a years' long process until the creation of fundamental change. A civilian authority would be established with an effective police force and the capacity for civil, economic and law enforcement governance. The population would implement a basic approach of coexistence with Israel. Yet such a process does not yet appear practical or feasible.

This means the Israeli military will continue to fight guerrilla and terrorist operatives in the strip alongside extensive activity by a local civilian government with an effective police force and international and regional economic and civil backing. But the absence of a fundamental change in the situation on the ground is likely to lead to a long-term erosion of security quiet and the re-creation of challenges to Israel.
WSJ: U.S. Pushes to Shape Israel’s Rafah Operation, Not Stop It
In two days of meetings between the Israeli defense chief and senior officials in the White House and Pentagon, discussions on Israel’s planned military operation in southern Gaza focused not on how to stop it, but on how to protect civilians during its rollout.

The businesslike tone of the talks was a departure from previous weeks, when top U.S. officials bluntly warned Israel against an all-out offensive on Rafah—where more than a million displaced Palestinians have taken refuge—while Israel’s prime minister defiantly vowed to press ahead.

Rafah has been at the center of a growing rift between Israeli and U.S. political leaders. Those tensions boiled over on Monday, when Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu canceled a visit to Washington by top aides to discuss U.S. concerns over the planned offensive on Rafah, where Hamas fighters are making a final stand. The tit-for-tat move was in response to the U.S. abstaining from a United Nations Security Council resolution that called for an immediate cease-fire while also demanding the release of hostages.

Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, however, proceeded with his meetings at the White House and Pentagon on Monday and Tuesday, which had been previously scheduled. Gallant is part of Israel’s three-member war cabinet that includes Netanyahu and Benny Gantz, the prime minister’s chief political rival.

While President Biden’s relationship with Netanyahu has frayed, the channel between U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and Gallant remains strong. Since Hamas’s Oct. 7 attack on Israel, the two defense chiefs have met several times and talked by phone about 40 times.

In Gallant’s closed-door meetings in Washington, a more pragmatic conversation began to emerge in which the discussions were on conducting a phased operation to reduce the potential harm to civilians while still ensuring that Israel dismantles Hamas’s four battalions in Rafah.

“I think there is an understanding we have to dismantle Hamas,” Gallant said, following his White House meetings.

At a Tuesday meeting at the Pentagon, Austin pressed his Israeli counterpart to ensure that effective arrangements were in place to protect civilians before an Israeli military operation is mounted to attack the Hamas fighters there.

“There is a sequence,” a U.S. defense official said. “The military aspect of the operation should not proceed until the humanitarian aspects have been fully addressed.”

Both sides also agreed that the Hamas battalions in Rafah must be dislodged so that the militants cannot attempt a comeback or continue to smuggle weapons into the enclave, which are prerequisites for ending the war and paving the way for a new political authority in Gaza. And that means trying to find ways to work with Israel on its Rafah strategy, for lack of better options.
Washington Denies a Bedrock of Warfighting
The Biden administration recently pressed Ukraine to halt attacks on Russian oil refineries. Ukrainian strikes on refineries and tankers in the Black Sea have contributed to a rise in the global oil price, and specifically of oil products, especially diesel. Almost the last thing the Biden administration wants in an election year is higher fuel prices and associated inflation in other goods and services. But in acting to halt rising oil prices, Washington is undermining the Ukrainian war effort. Denying energy supplies to the adversary in war has long been a bedrock of military strategy. Washington’s policy toward adversary fuel supplies is likely to lengthen the Ukraine-Russia war, as well as the Gaza war.

With oil and fuel product prices rising, Washington has now slammed the brakes on Ukraine’s effective strategies, effectively constraining Ukraine at a time that the war with Russia is likely to escalate soon. This is not the first time the administration has blocked an ally’s effort to choke off its enemy’s energy supplies. In the war in Gaza, the U.S. has demanded that Israel not only desist from disrupting such supplies but actually provide energy to Hamas. As a result, Hamas has been able to sustain tunnel warfare, which depends on liquid fuels. The provision of fuel to Hamas fighters enabled them to continue waging war from underground, prolonging the conflict and thereby endangering the lives of even more civilians in both Gaza and Israel.

In both cases Washington has imposed conditions on its allies that fly in the face of one of the cardinal principles of military strategy: disrupt an enemy’s energy supplies to cripple its forces. Allowing adversaries access to fuel extends a conflict and leads to more deaths as well as delays the conclusion of hostilities. Washington needs to let Ukraine and Israel finish the job, or indeed stop the wars. But hamstringing American partners is the worse option, since it extends the wars.
Bernard-Henri Levy: What If the U.S. Helps Hamas Win?
Let's imagine that Israel yields to the pressure, refrains from entering Rafah to finish off Hamas' four surviving battalions, and agrees to the general cease-fire of indeterminate duration that the U.S. administration seems to push. If that came to pass, Hamas would declare victory - on the verge of defeat, then the next minute revived. These criminals against humanity would emerge from their tunnels triumphant.

The Arab street would view Hamas terrorists as resistance fighters. In the West Bank, Hamas would quickly eclipse the corrupt and ineffective Palestinian Authority, whose image would pale next to the aura of martyrdom and endurance in which Hamas would cloak itself.

After that, none of the experts' extravagant plans for an international stabilization force, an interim Arab authority, or a technocratic government presiding over the reconstruction of Gaza would stand long against the return of this group of criminals adorned with the most heroic of virtues. Hamas would set the ideological and political agenda, and hope for peace harbored by moderates on both sides will be dead.

Tuesday, March 26, 2024

From Ian:

Lies of Hamas and antisemites bear fruit at UN
Like a house of cards, the artifice of lies built by Hamas and its supporters has begun to crumble.

A few weeks ago, statistician Abraham Wyner published a report in Tablet Magazine conclusively proving that Hamas is lying about the casualty figures in Gaza. The deaths reported by the Hamas-controlled Health Ministry rose in a ridiculously linear fashion on a day-by-day basis that is virtually impossible in a real war. In addition, given Hamas’s acknowledgment that at least 6,000 of its fighters have been killed, its claim that 70% of the casualties in Gaza have been women and children is impossible unless male civilians are being miraculously spared. The extent of this lie is apparent when the true casualty numbers for terrorists and combatants killed in Gaza are taken into account, over 13,000.

Yesterday, former Al Jazeera director Yasser Abu Hilala admitted that the accusations that IDF soldiers raped women during the recent operation at the al-Shifa Hospital were fabricated.

"It was revealed through Hamas investigations that the story of the rape of women in Shifa Hospital was fabricated," Hilala wrote, adding that "The woman who spoke about rape justified her exaggeration and incorrect talk by saying that the goal was to arouse the nation’s fervor and brotherhood!"

Anti-Israel forces have made up rape allegations against Israel whole-cloth in order to distract from and excuse the well-documented mass rapes committed by Hamas terrorists on October 7 and the reports that the hostages still held in Gaza face constant sexual assaults and abuse from their captors.

However, the same day that the rape allegations against Israel collapsed, the constant stream of lies against Israel bore fruit as the Biden Administration caved to the pressure from those who spread these lies and refused to use its veto power against a UN Security Council resolution calling for an immediate ceasefire during the month of Ramadan.

This resolution is merely declarative and creates no legal obligations, but it will still make everything worse. Hamas will be further convinced that its strategy of intentionally causing the deaths of its own people and constantly lying to inflate the number of civilian deaths is working and should continue, and it will be encouraged to dig in its heels and refuse any deal to see the hostages released in exchange for a temporary ceasefire. It will be seen as further evidence of Israel’s wrongdoing by those around the world who support Hamas’s genocidal goals, giving a tailwind to the antisemites making life more dangerous for Jews everywhere.

Ironically, hours after this shameful betrayal at the UN, the American government stated that it knows the accusations of Israeli war crimes are lies. Addressing Israel’s compliance with an executive order signed by President Biden last month mandating that recipients of US military aid demonstrate that they are complying with international law, State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller said that “We have not found them (the Israelis) to be in violation, either when it comes to the conduct of the war or the provision of humanitarian assistance.”
Western Guilt
The Germans will never forgive the Jews for Auschwitz,” runs a bizarre quip ascribed to the Israeli psychiatrist Zvi Rex. To deconstruct it, consult Dr. Freud. “A convenient way to dispatch guilt,” he might expound, “is to project it onto your victim” — like a schoolyard bully who huffs that the fight started when the other guy hit back.

Guilt-swapping is precisely what Hamas’s cheerleaders around the world did even before Israel struck back after October 7. Hamas had tortured, raped, and murdered 1,200 Israelis. Instead of condolences, Israel reaped a global orgy of antisemitism, be it masked or overt, that also engulfed Jews everywhere, especially university students (demonstrating that higher education is no antidote for frenzy). It was a perfect reversal of cause and effect.

To plumb the Freudian mechanism, go back to postwar Germany, whose Nazi precursor had committed the crime of all crimes. After total defeat and “reeducation,” antisemitism was out. Democracy established strong roots, and philosemitism became the creed of the land. The government paid billions in restitution to the survivors of the Holocaust and the young state of Israel. At Yad Vashem, German officials from the president down would bow their head to the 6 million dead. The arms trade flourished; German-made U-boats are now one leg of Israel’s nuclear triad.

Yet the moral burden stuck, and so Schuldabwehr — “repelling guilt” — crept into contrition and atonement. By the first intifada, in 1987, Germans were telling themselves: “Israel is doing to the Palestinians what we did to the Jews.” “They are conducting a Vernichtungskrieg” — Nazispeak for a war of annihilation. “Gaza is like the Warsaw Ghetto.” “Haven’t the Jews learned from the past?” Auschwitz, then, was a kind of reform school.

Freud might muse: “Such parallels betray projection. Culpability continued to chafe, and, eventually, Germans sought relief by shifting it onto the victims.” Steeped in the Torah, Freud would add: “Three thousand years before I set up my couch, the Jews invented the scapegoat in Leviticus who ‘shall bear all their iniquities to a barren region; and the goat shall be set free in the wilderness.’” But he would explain: “Such displacement, as I call it, spelled vast moral progress — no more human sacrifice to appease the Gods.”

There is no such advance in our days as we run through the third iteration of Jew-hatred.

The first chapter was written by Christianity. Jews were charged with killing God’s son, desecrating the Host, and committing ritual murder. A bitter Jewish joke makes the point. When a little girl was killed just before Passover, the shtetl’s Jews cowered in the shul awaiting an imminent massacre. Suddenly, the rabbi barges in, jubilating, “I have wonderful news. The girl was not Christian, but Jewish.”

The second chapter was authored by Hitler, who went from faith to race, fingering Jews as cosmic enemies of Germany and the world. Once, Jews poisoned the wells; now it is the bloodstream of the Aryans. They had to be quashed like super-deadly bugs.

Chapter 3 unfolds as we speak. “From the river to the sea,” a classic Palestinian refrain, sounds like a geographic reference, but its thrust is ethnic cleansing and extinction. Chanting this mantra, the crowds on Western campuses and squares haven’t read the 1988 charter of its leading exponent, Hamas, which in the name of Allah orders Muslims to kill Jews wherever they hide. Nor do the infuriated know the venom continually oozing from the language of Hamas, Hezbollah, and Tehran. “Israel remains a foreign body,” thundered Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah years ago, as if cribbing from Mein Kampf. Before the International Criminal Court, Israel stands accused of Nazi-like “genocide.” Hamas official Ghazi Hamad: “We must remove that country, because it constitutes a . . . catastrophe for the Arab and Islamic nation.” As for the October 7 massacre, we will do it “again and again.” And “everything is justified.”
Far Right and Far Left Converge — Against the Jews
An extremist distributes a flier about “Zionists infiltrating the media.” A political activist tweets, “Nothing is creepier than Zionism.” A pundit writes about “the dirty tactics of Zionist censorship.”

Can you tell which of these haters is coming from the political right, and which from the political left? The world of antisemitism has become so muddled that it’s almost impossible to tell one from the other.

Consider: One of these three haters was recently arrested for painting the slogan “White Power” on synagogues. One co-chaired the Women’s March on Washington. One is a former New York Times correspondent and speechwriter for Ralph Nader. Can you tell which one is which?

One of the three is a Presbyterian minister. One is a devout Muslim. One owns a Ku Klux Klan robe. Still can’t tell who’s who?

Although these three bigots come from very different places on the political and religious spectrums, they have managed to find something in common: hatred of Jews, thinly disguised as hatred of “Zionists.”

Among the most troubling phenomena of our time is the extent to which antisemitism has become interchangeable among individuals who hold starkly differing views on other issues, from abortion to immigration to civil rights. Yet they all hate Jews.

There is no simple explanation for this because there is no simple explanation for antisemitism. Some bigots hate Jews for religious reasons, some for political reasons. Some focus their ire on Jewish philanthropists, some focus on Jews in the media, some focus on the Jewish state.

And sometimes they focus their hate on each other. In the 1930s, Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union both violently persecuted their Jewish citizens, even as the two regimes went back and forth between being enemies and being allies. The Germans oppressed Jews and Judaism in the name of Aryan racial purity, the Soviets oppressed them in the name of working-class solidarity. Even when Hitler and Stalin hated each other, they never stopped hating Jews.

Leafing through the American Communist press in the 1930s is a ride on an intellectual roller-coaster. U.S. Communists dutifully followed the Soviet line, regularly and passionately denouncing Nazi Germany—until the Soviets signed a nonaggression pact with the Nazis in August 1939, at which point the American far left suddenly declared that the British, the French, and “the capitalist press” were the real enemy, to cite an editorial which appeared in that month’s issue of Young Communist Review. Two years later, Hitler tore up the pact and America’s Communists returned to being anti-Nazi. All the while, Jews and Judaism remained in the crosshairs of both Marxism and Nazism.
From Ian:

Melanie Phillips: Israel alone Weep for America
America is punishing Israel for a catastrophe that the Biden administration itself facilitated. The atrocities of October 7 that started the war took place because Hamas’s patron, Iran, correctly perceived that America would ultimately abandon Israel rather than itself get stuck in. If the Biden administration hadn’t shown such weakness in defending the interests of the free world from Afghanistan to Yemen and Iraq and Ukraine, Hamas would not have been unleashed on October 7.

After the war started, despite the two aircraft carriers the US dispatched to the region, the Biden administration responded to continued attacks by Iranian proxies — even against its own interests — with a mere limp wrist. It has done nothing to deter Iran’s proxy army Hezbollah from bombarding northern Israel from Lebanon with hundreds of rockets and anti-tank missiles.

It could have stopped the war in its tracks by telling Hamas’s protector Qatar that, unless it instructed Hamas to release the hostages and surrender, the US would end their profitable relationship and treat Qatar instead as a global pariah. Instead, the US is not only feeding Israel to its mortal enemies; by failing to use its muscle to end this war, it is also facilitating Hamas’s war crimes against the civilians of Gaza by using snuff movies of their distress to incite hysterical hatred of Israel in the west.

Biden and Cameron fail to acknowledge that Israel is fighting in this manner because it has no choice. With Hamas almost entirely underground, Israel cannot get at it in any other way. If it doesn’t defeat Hamas, Israel will continue to face genocidal attack. Only by defeating Hamas and killing or capturing its Gaza leader, Yahya Sinwar, does Israel have any chance of getting any of the hostages back. Only by defeating Hamas does Israel have any chance of avoiding an infinitely more terrible all-out war with Hezbollah.

This is the rupture with America that some of us have seen coming for a very long time. But the US and UK don’t realise what they have now done. This isn’t just about Israel. It’s also about them.

The October 7 pogrom was a clear inflection point for the west. Would it support Israel in the battle for civilisation against barbarism? Now we have the answer.

But there’s a deeper question. The UK is busily destroying itself by making a bonfire of its historic culture and values. Its public administration has all but collapsed, its indigenous people are dying out and it has lost control of its borders.

In the US vicious culture wars are raging, there are unbridgeable political and social divisions, its elites have torn up its historic global mission of exceptionalism — and it has also lost control of its border.

Do the US and UK actually want to survive, or are they now in a death spiral?

Throughout centuries of persecution, the Jewish people have survived against impossible odds — while every civilisation that has tried to destroy them has disappeared. Whatever horrors lie ahead, Israel will survive. The same certainty cannot apply to Britain and America. Today has demonstrated that they don’t even know how to do so.
Richard Goldberg: Bring them home . . . or not — Biden just sold out Israeli hostages at the United Nations
Against the backdrop of a hostage negotiation in which Hamas remains maximalist in demands and the arrival of Israel’s defense minister in Washington to meet with senior White House officials, the United States needed to veto any Security Council resolution that could further embolden the terrorist group.

Biden chose a different path: abstaining on a resolution that decoupled a demand for a cease-fire from a demand for the release of hostages, thus severely undercutting Israel at the hostage-negotiating table.

The resolution had other severe flaws that demanded a US veto.

It made no mention of Oct. 7 or Hamas, let alone note Hamas is a terrorist organization, as if the world woke up one day in a vacuum outraged to find Israel at war in Gaza and Palestinian civilians in distress.

Why Israel is at war, who Israel is targeting and who is to blame for civilian suffering are unimportant questions for a resolution that simply says Israel must lay down its arms and hope a terrorist group that savaged 1,200 people and took 250 hostages will care what the Security Council demands.

These outrageous omissions, however, were no longer automatic triggers for a US veto.

During his recent State of the Union address, the president pledged to the families of Hamas-held hostages, which include American citizens, that “we will not rest until we bring their loved ones home.”

Apparently that vow did not include vetoing resolutions that disconnect demands for hostage releases from any potential cease-fire — reducing the odds of bringing them home.

The State Department claimed Monday the resolution reflected the administration’s “principled position that any ceasefire text must be paired with text on the release of the hostages.”

But that explanation itself reflects how far Biden policy has shifted. No longer must a cease-fire be conditioned on the release of hostages; the two demands must only appear next to each other for optics.

On a policy level, the two demands now exist independently — meaning America supports a cease-fire even without the release of hostages.

Israeli strength backed by American political support is needed to bring hostages home, defeat Hamas in Gaza and deter Iranian threats throughout the Middle East.

To counter the perception of an Israel crumbling under American pressure, Jerusalem must respond with reaffirmed determination to destroy Hamas on the battlefield.

And members of Congress should reaffirm their support for that objective, including a potential operation in Rafah.

Hamas scored a political victory with Biden’s help.

Israel must now fight that much harder to reverse the damage — with or without Biden’s approval.
John Spencer: Israel Has Created a New Standard for Urban Warfare. Why Will No One Admit It?
In its operation at Shifa hospital in Gaza to root out Hamas terrorists, the Israel Defense Forces took unique precautions to protect the innocent. Doctors accompanied the forces to help Palestinian patients if needed. The IDF also brought in food, water and medical supplies for the civilians inside.

I've never known an army to take such measures to attend to the enemy's civilian population, especially while simultaneously combating the enemy in the very same buildings. In fact, Israel has implemented more precautions to prevent civilian harm than any military in history - above and beyond what international law requires and more than the U.S. did in its wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The international community, and increasingly the U.S., barely acknowledges these measures while repeatedly excoriating the IDF for not doing enough to protect civilians - even as it confronts a ruthless terror organization holding its citizens hostage.

The predominant Western theory of executing wars seeks to shatter an enemy with surprising, overwhelming force and speed. No warnings to the civilian population or time to evacuate cities is given. Yet Israel has abandoned this established playbook in order to prevent civilian harm.

The Hamas-supplied estimate of over 31,000 deaths in Gaza does not acknowledge a single combatant death (nor any deaths due to the misfiring of its own rockets or other friendly fire). The IDF estimates it has killed about 13,000 Hamas operatives, a number I believe credible because I believe the armed forces of a democratic American ally over a terrorist regime. That means 18,000 civilians have died in Gaza, a ratio of 1 combatant to 1.5 civilians - a number that would be historically low for modern urban warfare.

Monday, March 25, 2024

From Ian:

Seth Mandel: Loser of the UN Resolution: Biden
The pauper’s diplomacy of the Biden administration was on display today as it facilitated the passing of a UN Security Council resolution heavily weighted against Israel.

Every minor concession to moral decency was rejected in favor of “an immediate ceasefire for the month of Ramadan.” Beggars can’t be choosers, explained Biden’s ambassador to the UN after abstaining from the vote, thus allowing the resolution to pass: “We did not agree with everything in the resolution. For that reason we were unfortunately not able to vote yes. However, as I’ve said before, we fully support some of the critical objectives in this non-binding resolution.”

Let’s be crystal clear about why this was a bad resolution.

Last week the U.S. put forth a version of the resolution that was vetoed by Russia and China. That version asked for Security Council backing for “diplomatic efforts to secure such a ceasefire in connection with the release of all remaining hostages.” [emphasis added]

If you don’t connect a long-lasting ceasefire to the release of the hostages, you are telling Hamas to walk away from the negotiations led by the U.S. to secure those two aims. After all, that same UN ambassador fumed at the time, “we should not move forward with any resolution that jeopardizes the ongoing negotiations.”

Russia’s deputy UN envoy disagreed, insisting that everyone should be comfortable with telling the hostages to rot: “At the coordination stage, almost all Security Council members expressed the view that the demand for an immediate ceasefire should not be conditional on the release of hostages or the condemnation of Hamas.”

Today, the Biden administration declared Russia to be correct. Let the hostages rot or else Joe Biden may lose a few thousand votes in Michigan.

As for the cynical use of “Ramadan” in the ceasefire, the Biden administration should be ashamed of itself for enabling it. The language implicitly portrays Israel’s counteroffensive as a war of religious persecution, or at the very least contempt. That alone will inflame the violent resistance to the mere survival of the Jewish nation. Was there a Hanukkah resolution passed by the UNSC that demanded the release of hostages? Yesterday was Purim; the holiday came and went without a UNSC demand for Hamas to at least return the children it is holding. Next month is the holiday of Passover, in which we recount our ancestors’ prolonged suffering while they were held against their will. How does the godforsaken nest of cretinous trolls at Turtle Bay plan to honor that one?
Intl. law expert: Biden team's moral backbone collapsed
Prof. Anne Bayefsky, president of the Human Rights Voices NGO and director of the Touro Institute on Human Rights, spoke to Israel National News - Arutz Sheva Monday about the US government's decision to abstain rather than use its veto against a UN Security Council resolution calling for a ceasefire in Gaza during the month of Ramadan.

"The failure of the Biden administration to veto this resolution is a shocking redefinition of American priorities: mollifying Iran and its terrorist partners is on the ascent while supporting Israel in its existential battle against terror is plummeting," Prof. Bayefsky said.

She noted, "Last week the United States "demanded" the UN Security Council finally condemn Hamas for the October 7th atrocities - which the Council has never done. The Arab group of states, the Russians and Chinese said no. Just forty-eight hours later, the moral backbone of the Biden team collapsed. The United States allowed the adoption of the third Council resolution since October 7th that fails to condemn its perpetrators."

"Moreover, in her statement before the Council American Ambassador Thomas-Greenfield said Hamas should achieve a ceasefire - in effect saving the terror organization and its plans for more October 7's - with the release of one hostage! In her words: “A ceasefire can begin immediately with the release of the first hostage.” American hostages have been abandoned in Hamas hell holes, by their own government. And U.S. credibility and honor has taken a tremendous hit - to the detriment of Israel, the Jewish people and America," Prof. Bayefsky concluded.
David Singer: The UN sows the seeds of its own demise
Guterres has been responsible for filing only documents from 1947 – not from 1917 - with the International Court of Justice in relation to the UN General Assembly seeking the Court’s advisory opinion on the Legal Consequences arising from the Policies and Practices of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem. The Court’s opinion will be based only on those documents lodged by Guterres– which will exclude the Court considering the 1922 Mandate for Palestine and the 1936 Peel Commission.

Guterres has been the UN front man – supported by UNESCO head Tor Wennesland - pushing for the creation of an independent Palestinian Arab state between Israel and Jordan as called for in Security Council Resolution 2334 adopted on 23 December 2016 – when Obama refrained from vetoing it - that misleadingly claims Jews have no legal right to live anywhere west of the Jordan River. Rescinding Resolution 2334 remains an imperative to rectifying this anti-Jewish canard.

Guterres and Wennesland have refused for the last 18 months to bring before the Security Council for its consideration an alternative solution emanating from Saudi Arabia - authored by an advisor to Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman: The Hashemite Kingdom of Palestine solution published in Al Arabiya News on 8 June 2022. Their extraordinary decision ensures the 100 years-old Jewish-Arab conflict will continue – not end.

Emboldened by these clearly anti-Israel UN decisions – increasingly strident Moslems have caused Jewish communities worldwide to become greatly concerned for their own safety as they foment demonstrations around the globe calling for Palestine from the River to the Sea to be free of Jews – supported by lawyers from Australia to artists in the USA signing letters calling for a ceasefire in the Israel-Gaza War.

Under Guterres’s leadership the UN has become the epicentre for fostering anti-Israel hatred and Jew-hatred.

The UN has lost its moral compass and is sowing the seeds for its own demise.
From Ian:

David Brooks: What Would You Have Israel Do to Defend Itself?
If the current Israeli military approach is inhumane, what's the alternative? Is there a better military strategy Israel can use to defeat Hamas without a civilian blood bath? In recent weeks, I've been talking with security and urban warfare experts in search of such ideas.

This war is like few others because the crucial theater is underground. The tunnel network is where Hamas lives, holds hostages, stores weapons, builds missiles and moves from place to place. Building these tunnels cost the Gazan people about a billion dollars. Hamas built many of its most important military and strategic facilities under hospitals and schools. Its server farm was built under the offices of the UN relief agency in Gaza City.

As Barry Posen, professor at the security studies program at MIT, has written, Hamas' strategy is to maximize the number of Palestinians who die and in that way build international pressure until Israel is forced to end the war before Hamas is wiped out. Hamas' survival depends on support in the court of international opinion and on making this war as bloody as possible for civilians, until Israel relents.

John Spencer, the chair of urban warfare studies at the Modern War Institute at West Point, told me that Israel has done far more to protect civilians than the U.S. did in Afghanistan and Iraq. Israel's measures to warn civilians when and where it is about to begin operations "have prolonged the war, to be honest."

As the leaders of Hamas watch Washington grow more critical of Jerusalem, they must know their strategy is working. Yet if this war ends with a large chunk of Hamas in place, it would be a long-term disaster for the region. Victorious, Hamas would dominate whatever government was formed to govern Gaza. Hamas would rebuild its military to continue its efforts to exterminate the Jewish state, delivering on its promise to launch more and more attacks like that of Oct. 7.

Moreover, if Hamas survives this war intact, it would be harder for the global community to invest in rebuilding Gaza. It would be impossible to begin a peace process. So I'm left with the tragic conclusion that there is no magical alternative military strategy.

The lack of viable alternatives leaves me to conclude that Israel must ultimately confront Hamas leaders and forces in Rafah rather than leave it as a Hamas beachhead. Absent some new alternative strategy, Biden is wrong to stop Israel from confronting the Hamas threat in southern Gaza.
Biden and Harris throw Israel under the Gaza bus
President Joe Biden has prioritised a ceasefire over and above the safe return of the 134 hostages — including five Americans — held by Hamas.

The implication of this is that the Israeli military should lay down their guns and let Hamas continue torturing and raping the hostages who will be left with no hope of rescue.

Of course, he didn’t announce this shift in policy from the Oval Office. It was slipped out in the text of last week’s US resolution at the UN that was designed to fail, but also to telegraph his callous change in position.

A month ago the US floated a draft resolution that gave equal importance to a ceasefire and release of hostages, tying the two together tightly.

Biden dropped that direct link in the final resolution last week. It stated that a ceasefire is imperative for the protection of civilians. But merely expressed support for diplomacy “to secure such a ceasefire in connection with the release of all remaining hostages.”

There we have it. Biden has again, as in Afghanistan, given up on Americans and America’s allies.

The resolution was vetoed by Russia and China, as the US knew it would be, but its insidious message was received loud and clear.

By forcing a ceasefire, Biden will allow Hamas to claim victory and force Israel to remove its boot from the neck of the terror group, the only thing pressuring them to release the hostages. Without it, all hope for their safe return is surely lost.

Even talk of a ceasefire may embolden Hamas to hang on and reject a hostage deal, anticipating that the US will eventually force Israel to stop its military campaign.
Jake Wallis Simons: Feeble Britain is now letting Hamas win the propaganda war
We have entered a topsy-turvy universe. International institutions are used as weapons of Hamas, while those fighting for freedom and democracy are smeared as the agents of genocide.

British Foreign Secretary David Cameron has vowed to halt arms sales if Israel attacked Rafah. Given their small amount, it is hard to see what this is supposed to achieve.

But showing that you care about the Palestinians is apparently more important than destroying jihadism.

While Israel has achieved a civilian-to-combatant casualty ratio that is likely lower than in any comparable theater of war, Hamas has convinced the world that it is acting out of wanton bloodlust.

In the broadcast media, footage of suffering civilians is ubiquitous, but have you ever seen a picture of the thousands of dead or wounded terrorists?

Hamas censors this material. No Western media outlet makes this clear to its viewers.

This is a deceit that turns public opinion against Israel, furthering the aims of Hamas.

In a sane universe, the democratic world would pull behind Israel until the war is won. It would express its differences behind closed doors, working together to limit civilian casualties while freeing the hostages and beating the jihadis.

This would reassure Saudi Arabia that the West stands by its friends, encouraging it to normalize relations with Israel.

Instead, the international community is mobilizing to block an Israeli victory, and at the same time it is blocking peace.

Deep underground, the leaders of Hamas must be licking their lips.

Sunday, March 24, 2024

From Ian:

Why antisemitism and anti-Zionism are so deeply intertwined
Statehood is built into Jewish consciousness. Israel is more than just a place where Jews can be free and safe. As Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook, the first Ashkenazic chief rabbi of pre-state Israel said: Israel is not external to Judaism but inherently part of Jewish consciousness. To wit: Jews across the religious denominations pray for the return to Zion in their daily liturgy. And religious or not, the vast majority of Jews feel inextricably, soulfully bound to Israel and describe themselves as Zionists.

So while anti-Zionists defend themselves by claiming they are not anti-Semites, when anti-Zionists declare “no Zionists allowed,” they are actually saying, “No Jews allowed.” The fact that so many anti-Israel demonstrations are targeting Jewish rather than Israeli institutions underscores this dynamic.

The interfacing of anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism was never more apparent than on October 7. The goal of Hamas, like their antecedent Haman, goes beyond destroying Israel; its mission – as articulated in the founding Hamas charter – is to kill as many Jews as possible. Jews worldwide felt personally attacked that day, understanding that if Hamas could, each and every Jew would have been murdered.

This doesn’t mean that every anti-Zionist is an anti-Semite. There are always exceptions to a rule. But the exception doesn’t void the rule. It’s one thing to disagree, even vehemently, with some core Israeli policies. But anti-Zionism goes well beyond that to object to the very notion of Jewish self-determination, and thereby target 7 million Jews, half of the world’s Jewish population who are now living in Zion, and many thousands more who yearn to make “aliya,” or move home to Israel.

Indeed, Zionism is a play on the Hebrew word “tziun-metzuyan,” meaning a stamp of excellence. It is there in Israel that all Israelis living in a sovereign nation have the potential to do their humble share to make this world a better place.

Purim is the story of a vulnerable, powerless Jewish people living in the diaspora threatened with physical and spiritual annihilation. Its unwritten message is the necessity for Jews to be Zionist, to live in Zion, to have a homeland wherein it is in their power to protect themselves with strength, and what Israel’s army calls the “purity of arms.”

According to the Book of Esther, the Jews in ancient Persia were ultimately saved by the grace of the king. But the State of Israel allows Jews to save themselves.
Andrew Pessin: The Emirate of Palestine?
There are many competing ideas about “the day after” the Israel-Hamas war, about how to fill the dangerous vacuum left in Gaza should Israel succeed in destroying Hamas. Overlooked, however, is a particularly intriguing suggestion by the anonymous blogger Elder of Ziyon that deserves wider attention.

Thanks for reading Pariah--But The Truth, You Know, Ain't A Democracy! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

What are the main possibilities?

Israel doesn't want Gaza back. It doesn't want to govern two million hostile Palestinians, nor take over day-to-day governance. Imagine the suicide bombings at every governmental office. And, of course, it would be "occupation."

Israel has tried empowering local clans as alternate rulers for years and it has never worked out: they fight amongst themselves, there are too many threats from armed Islamists, and no one wants to look like a puppet of Israel.

Some (such as the U.S.) have pushed for a “revitalized” Palestinian Authority (P.A.) to reassert control, but the P.A. is corrupt and weak, despised by its own citizens, in fact complicit in terror against Israelis, and “revitalization” is a farce. The P.A. lost Gaza to Hamas once and would likely lose it again, either by election or by force.

Others have proposed a multinational force or rule that would include Arab states, a kind of “Arab mandate.” Though there are advantages, it means that Gaza would become a hot spot for geopolitical rivalries between at least Qatar and Saudi Arabia. But Qatari influence would be disastrous. Qatar supports Hamas both directly and through Al Jazeera, the most influential source of “news” in the Middle East. Saudi Arabia might want more influence, but without peace with Israel, it is limited in what it can do. Egypt doesn't want Gaza. Egyptians hate everything about it. After all, it was Egypt that turned it into a virtual prison for Palestinian refugees after the 1948 war and to this day.

So who should run Gaza the day after Hamas is eradicated?

When Israel left Gaza in 2005, optimists thought it could become a new Singapore. Palestinian incompetence and Hamas ended that fantasy. Hate for Israel was more important than helping Palestinians thrive.

But, as Elder of Ziyon points out, there is one country that could turn Gaza into that wonderful place: the United Arab Emirates (U.A.E.). Gaza should become the eighth United Arab Emirate.
Ruthie Blum: The Russian dictator’s double terrorism standards
This is rich, coming from a leader who has been cementing relations with Iran, the globe’s greatest state sponsor of terrorism, and its proxies. One of these is Hamas, whose foot soldiers invaded Israel on Oct. 7, raping, torturing, beheading, burning alive and abducting men, women and babies.

Less than three weeks later, Russia hosted a delegation of their honchos in Moscow. The purpose of the chummy get-together, also attended by Ali Bagheri Kani, deputy foreign minister of the ayatollah-led regime in Tehran, was to come up with ways to stop the “Zionist crimes supported by the United States and the West.”

In other words, the aim of the meeting was to devise a plan to prevent Israel from defending itself and retaliating against the perpetrators of the worst pogrom against Jews since the Holocaust. Oh, and to plot the demise of America and Europe.

More recently, Putin went a step further in his pursuit of terrorism ties. Russia’s envoy for the Middle East and Africa, Mikhail Bogdanov, mediated talks in Moscow on Feb. 29 between Hamas, Fatah, Islamic Jihad and other Palestinian organizations operating in the region, primarily in Syria and Lebanon.

The goal of the three-day event, which concluded on March 2, was to unify the disparate factions towards the creation of a Palestinian government—for a future state—whose members cease infighting and invest all their energy in the shared objective of annihilating Jews.

So, Putin is pre-disposed to Islamist terrorists, as long as he and Mother Russia are not their target. Meanwhile, the ease with which he slaughters those who get on his bad side doesn’t put a dent in his passing of moral judgment on Jerusalem and Washington. His disdain for the latter, by the way, caused him to pooh-poohed its warning this month about an imminent attack in Moscow.

His hypocrisy pales in comparison, however, to that of Hamas, which on Saturday “condemn[ed] in the strongest terms the terrorist attack that targeted civilians in Moscow, killing and wounding dozens of people.”

Putin’s response to the carnage at Crocus City Hall, like the reaction on the part of the genocidal butchers with whom he sided after Oct. 7, gives the term “double standards” a whole new meaning.

Saturday, March 23, 2024

From Ian:

‘Reactionary Anti-Imperialism’ as the new Totalitarian Temptation, from Foucault to 7 October
It may seem ridiculous, but it is a serious matter in both senses when some queer activists— apparently with suicidal disregard for what they are endorsing—express their solidarity with Hamas. One can only imagine how long a queer solidarity group would survive in the realm of Sharia [it’s worth noting that anti-Israel Palestinian LGBTQ activists have their headquarters in Tel Aviv and not in Ramallah]. But one doesn’t have to use imagination to see the enthusiasm that the annihilation of Israel, explicitly propagated by Hamas and Iran, generates among millions upon millions of sympathisers of these Palestinian ‘freedom fighters.’ The most prominent advocates of Hamas, Yanis Varoufakis and Judith Butler, waited until Israel reacted (as Hamas had no doubt expected) with counter-strikes, which have since resulted in the deaths of an appalling number of civilians in Gaza, before publicly denouncing the Israeli counter-attack while ignoring the gang of murderers who massacred more than 1,200 people on October 7thjust because they were Jews or associated with Jews [the sort of people that the Nazis had called ‘Jew servants’].

Others didn’t wait that long. Like some of her American counterparts, the Austrian Nicole Schöndorfer (who is very prominent on social media) rushed the very first day after the pogrom to celebrate on Instagram the terrorists who themselves died in the butchering of Jews as ‘martyrs.’ One remembers the atheist Foucault, who denounced religious criticism of the Islamist movement; so why should we be surprised by women who explicitly describe themselves as feminists and yet celebrate as martyrs of a just cause the young men who raped, mutilated, murdered or kidnapped Israeli women and presented them as trophies to the mob? A linguistic collateral damage of today’s misery is that laudable terms like anti-racism, anti-colonialism, and anti-imperialism are so thoroughly discredited by those who misuse them that one has to ask oneself whether new terms will be necessary in order to make linguistic sense of the old ones—to name them correctly to stand up against racism, colonialism, and imperialism.

A few weeks before the Hamas massacre, I was asked what was the easiest way to fuel antisemitism. Today I would have to answer: by massacring as many Jews as possible. Nothing has fuelled hatred of Jews more than the worst attack on Jews since the Shoah, and because the attack was carried out against Jews, the rapists and murderers can only be called ‘resistance fighters’ motivated by a ‘holy Hatred’ against foreign Jewish rule in Palestine. ‘Heilige Hass’ (holy hatred) is, by the way, a motif that literally comes from Julius Streicher’s Nazi magazine Der Stürmer and which has been taken over in anti-colonial discourse. There are forms of ignorance that are entirely culpable. One of these is when Israel haters, who see themselves as left-wing, simply refuse to acknowledge the political foundations of Hamas.

Hamas has never made a secret of the fact that it is not concerned with national equality, social justice or a so-called ‘two-state solution’, but only with the destruction of Israel—which Hamas says represents the most important stage in the battle for final victory between believers and unbelievers. Its foundational charter from 1988 is a compact collection of anti-Semitic stereotypes and a blatant declaration of intent: that an Islamic theocracy will one day be established ‘between the river and the sea.’

When the Israeli army withdrew from Gaza in 2005, Hamas won free elections. Richly supplied with funds from all over the world, it then had the opportunity to establish self-government for the benefit of the residents of Gaza. But that was not its goal; rather, it quickly set about liquidating its Palestinian opponents and imposing a series of fundamentalist laws on the population. Hamas has done everything in its power to turn Gaza into the ‘largest open-air prison in the world,’ while denying that it was they who had created it. In 1970, after Israel had taken over Gaza, 280.000 people lived there. When Israel withdrew completely in 2005 there were about 1.2 million residents, and after fewer than twenty more years there are now 2.2 million: This is what the demographic development looks like when the ‘Zionist aggressor’ engages in ‘genocide’ for more than five decades.

Forty-five years after Foucault abandoned his intellectual and moral standards to support ‘political spirituality,’ the most sensitive youth in the West are forming an alliance with one of the most brutal terrorist representatives of ‘political spirituality.’ There are some new things that the anti-Zionists put forward between Berkeley and Berlin—such as the rigorous rejection of the Enlightenment legacy, which is denounced in self-loathing as a weapon of white supremacy; but the core of their accusation is ancient.
The US sees situation in Gaza throughout Hamas' optics
The administration’s policy is gradually but consistently drifting toward hope-based and optimism-based policy, rather than being pragmatic, which raises serious concerns regarding their ability to develop realistic plans for the conflict going forward.

For the United States, the optics of the situation in Gaza supersedes long-term thinking, which would put in place the conditions for improving the lot of the people in Gaza - in other words, by toppling Hamas' rule in Gaza.

As a terrorist organization and a non-state player, Hamas is able to use the most powerful weapon in its arsenal, which is to create a humanitarian crisis in Gaza in order to generate international pressure. This tool of theirs is a force multiplier, which it uses to the utmost effect on world public opinion which, quite justifiably, is shocked by the human suffering there.

In such a situation, a terrorist organization will always be able to extract concessions from the other side. Hamas loses nothing when Gazan civilians die. It can only gain from this. Therefore it has no interest whatsoever in avoiding actions that would exacerbate the humanitarian predicament in Gaza while still maintaining the pretense of fighting for the good of the Palestinian people.

When American humanitarian aid enters Gaza by sea, there is no guarantee Hamas won’t commandeer it. In an extreme scenario, which is by no means unrealistic, Hamas might indeed attack the American warships using the ever-effective excuse - defending the Palestinian people against a Western invasion, rejection of aid from a world power that is aiding the Israeli “occupation” in Gaza or other propaganda-friendly pretexts.

Anyone who has a genuine interest in stabilizing the Gaza situation and preventing Hamas' growth long term, must insist on three conditions: 1. Destruction of Hamas’ military and governmental capabilities. 2. Prevention of any dependency between the civilian population and Hamas, which will exploit its distress to pursue its own goals and 3. De-radicalization of the education system, purging it of incitement, in such a way that it will no longer toxify the next generation of Gazan children, preventing them from becoming tomorrow’s terrorists.

To achieve these goals, and to reduce the number of dead in the long term, Hamas must be defeated at all costs. Failure to get the job done is going to be much more costly to Israel and to the Gazan population in the long term.

The United States, too, was forced to make some highly agonizing decisions during World War II, such as the fateful decision to drop two Atomic bombs on Japan. In the short term, the bombs killed hundreds of thousands, but in the long term, they saved millions of Japanese lives since that country surrendered several days later.

This, according to historical estimates, prevented the unnecessary death of millions more on both sides - American and Japanese. Israel, for its part, is not even seeking to end the war in Gaza in this same painful way - it only seeks legitimacy for the eradication of Hamas’ military and government apparatus and is doing so with the greatest surgical precision possible under the difficult circumstances presented by the battlefield.

To be able to comprehend this simple principle, it is advisable first to begin understanding the Hamas enemy itself - instead of assuming it is ultimately interested in the good of the Gazan population.

Friday, March 22, 2024

From Ian:

Caroline Glick: The triumph of the blood libel
Israelis and Jews around the world were stunned by the swiftness and ferocity of the propaganda campaign Hamas’s supporters in the West launched in the immediate wake of Hamas’s orgy of murder and sadism in southern Israel. Less than 24 hours after the news broke, Hamas supporters at Harvard University kicked off the hate campaign by getting 31 student groups to sign a statement blaming Israel for Hamas’s atrocities.

As details of the crimes began to flow, Hamas’s supporters in the West responded with violent denials of all of them. No rape. No immolation of children. No torture. No nothing. It was all Israel’s fault, they said. Israel killed and raped its own people. And now the Jews are raping Palestinian women. How do we know? Because they are Jews.

On the face of things, the rapidity and shamelessness of the projection of blame and culpability onto Israel was shocking. Normal people could be forgiven for assuming that in the face of crimes of this enormity, Hamas’s supporters would lay low. But that assumption misses the point.

Oct. 7 was one battle in a larger jihad to annihilate Israel. Propaganda in the form of blood libels is a central component of the war. The libels against Jews and the Jewish state today play the same role as they played in the Middle Ages, just on a national scale. If Jews deserved to be killed because Jews are evil, then the Jewish state deserves to be annihilated because it is the evil Jewish state. Everything that happens to Israel is proof of its evil. Every crime committed against Israel is a crime Israel committed. And if Israel doesn’t commit crimes attributed to it, then that’s because good people like Power and Borrell stood in its way.

The depressing thing, of course, is that Hamas’s strategy is working. The latent Jew-hatred in the West was widespread enough to support their crimes. The propagation of the blood libels by the United Nations, the European Union and the State Department is a disturbing indicator of just how bad things really are.

The question is what can Israel—and Jews more broadly—do in the midst of this avalanche of blood libel? The answer is twofold.

First, Israel must stop trying to prove a negative. No one cares if we are really blood-thirsty vampires. Persuasion doesn’t work with people moved by emotion, particularly hatred. Instead, Israel and Jews worldwide need to concentrate on rallying the people who viscerally understand what is going on and aren’t taken in by anti-Semitic cartoons and Hamas propaganda, even if it is spoken by Samantha Power.

As for the haters, countering them means going on the offensive. On the battlefield in Gaza, it means destroying Hamas completely so that everyone understands that attacking the Jews is a bad idea. And on the battlefields of the United Nations, the European Union, the State Department, Harvard, Berkeley, New York City and London, the answer is to expose the haters with as much vigor and ferocity as they demonize the Jews.
Bret Stephens: Directing a Movie Doesn’t Make You a Mideast Authority
In 1978 the English actress Vanessa Redgrave won an Oscar for her role in the film “Julia” and used the occasion to denounce “a small bunch of Zionist hoodlums whose behavior is an insult to the stature of Jews everywhere.”

Later in the ceremony, the screenwriter Paddy Chayefsky used his own turn onstage to offer a memorable rebuttal: “I would like to suggest to Miss Redgrave,” he said to applause, “that her winning an Academy Award is not a pivotal moment in history, does not require a proclamation, and a simple ‘thank you’ would have sufficed.”

Forty-six years on, history repeated itself.

Last week, Jonathan Glazer, director of the Holocaust-themed film “The Zone of Interest,” accepted the Academy Award for best international feature film and delivered a diatribe to “refute” having his “Jewishness and the Holocaust being hijacked by an occupation which has led to conflict for so many innocent people.”

It took a few days, but the spirit of Chayefsky came roaring back. In a “Statement From Jewish Hollywood Professionals,” hundreds of signatories, including the actress Julianna Margulies and the producer Lawrence Bender, denounced Glazer for “drawing a moral equivalence between a Nazi regime that sought to exterminate a race of people, and an Israeli nation that seeks to avert its own extermination,” arguing that it could fuel antisemitism.

Politically speaking, I’m with the signatories. People can have varying views of the war in Gaza, but comparing it with the Holocaust, as Glazer did, is profoundly wrong. Among other differences, Jews did not provoke the Holocaust by murdering, raping and kidnapping German civilians in a deliberate effort to start a war.

But I’m also allergic to what Eli Lake, in a brilliant recent essay in Commentary magazine, called the “As a Jew” phenomenon: the habit of prefacing political opinions with a declaration of identity, as if an opinion about Israeli politics (usually, an anti-Israel opinion) somehow becomes more credible and significant because the speaker happens to be Jewish.
At the Anti-Israel Carnival
More disturbing than costumes are the carnivalesque inversions of ideals central to a university education. Thus, when JFAS has sought co-presenters for lectures by entirely mainstream scholars, we have struggled to find a single academic department willing to put its name on a poster. On the other hand, those same departments and university-sponsored research centers present seemingly endless, one-sided propaganda that vilifies Israel. Even the concept of “diversity” is blatantly inverted. In February, a university-sponsored research center hosted a lecture by Omar Shakir of Human Rights Watch, who is notorious for demonizing Israel. During the Q&A period, a professor began by saying: “I am speaking as an Israeli, I am speaking as a Jew, and I am speaking as a Zionist. . . . We are here. We want to talk, and we look forward to talking about this issue and all issues with all of you.” The Jewish professor was interrupted and heckled. Later, Students for Justice in Palestine posted a video of the incident, asserting, “This is extremely unprofessional, insensitive, & makes his students and many students across the Rutgers Newark campus feel unsafe.” Dozens of comments on the post predictably agreed that a request for dialogue was really an act of violence, with some stating openly that the diversity of the student population was reason to silence Zionists.

A main feature of the carnivalesque is its celebration of the carnal or profane. True to form, campus protestors have consistently celebrated actual bodily violence. Everyone is, by now, familiar with the rationalization and even cheering of Hamas’s atrocities on October 7. Even more shocking was the promotion of violence that took place at a protest here at Rutgers in January. Shouting into a megaphone, a leader of the protest glorified precisely such violence when she proclaimed, “dying as a Martyr, dying as a hero is one of the greatest sacrifices you can do as a Palestinian and as a Muslim.” She then led a series of chants in Arabic: “Even if you aren’t Muslim, if you say these chants, you are resisting on behalf of the Palestinians.”

Like many cultures, Judaism has its own spring carnival in the holiday of Purim, with all its mandated excesses, masks, and inversions in celebration of the defeat of Haman and his allies. Over the centuries, the rabbinic tradition has been largely successful in curbing and sublimating the darker aspects of the carnivalesque in the service of its higher ideals. Yet Jews are not immune to the violent excesses of the carnivalesque; witness Baruch Goldstein’s massacre on Purim in 1994. Especially now, as Israel’s justified, defensive war against Hamas is being sullied by unsanctioned violence by extremist Jews in the West Bank, we all bear responsibility for ensuring that the levity of Purim is channeled toward “light and joy,” to borrow a phrase from the Book of Esther.

Mikhail Bakhtin thought that the chaotic spirit of the carnival would “free human consciousness, thought and imagination for new potentialities.” Perhaps. But the university is an institution carefully constructed over centuries to advance consciousness, thought, and imagination through the free and open pursuit of truth. It will have to find a way to reject masked intimidation, brazen inversions, and the celebration of violence if it is to remain one.

At Rutgers and on countless other campuses nationwide, the carnivalesque has given license to an ugly hatred that has now been unmasked. Undoing the inversions, lies, and base behavior that this hatred has engendered will require a renewed commitment to the central mission of American colleges. My university would be a good place to start.
From Ian:

Seth Mandel: Freezer Burn
Welcome to the new Ice Age. Though the temperatures may be on the rise, and the Middle East is once again on fire, our era will be marked by conflicts frozen in place.

The good news is that it’s a manmade crisis—anthropogenic geopolitical cooling—and therefore it can be stopped. The bad news is we seem to have lost the will to do so.

It’s very easy to understand why frozen conflicts are increasing: The rogue states that power these conflicts have discovered that an Achilles heel of the American-led world order is that the United States considers a conflict that is frozen to be over, when in fact its status is precisely the opposite. These wars are locked in place in perpetuity.

President Biden claims to understand this, at least as it relates to Hamas’s perpetual war on Israel. But just as we have defended Biden when his actions have been better than his words, so too it’s impossible to ignore the administration’s movement away from its earlier, principled stance that a nation attacked has a right to win, and not merely survive, the ensuing war.

“A major military operation in Rafah would be a mistake, something we don’t support,” Secretary of State Antony Blinken is loudly warning Israel. “There’s a false choice involved. It is possible, and indeed necessary, to deal with the ongoing threat posed by Hamas, but without a major military operation.”

“Deal with the ongoing threat posed by Hamas” is quite the choice of phrase. In fact, the war aim is to destroy Hamas. Fewer words, clearer prose—Blinken needs an editor.

The entire point of this conflict is that there should never again be a threat posed by Hamas. There shouldn’t even be a Hamas. This is what happens when you invade a neighboring country, massacre innocents, take hostages—and then refuse to surrender and return those hostages.
Melanie Phillips: The American betrayal of Israel
Israel is not just fighting to defend itself against genocide. It is on the front line of the West’s defense against its enemies and the defense of civilization against barbarism.

Western liberals can’t acknowledge this because they can’t allow their unchallengeable orthodoxies of Palestinian powerlessness, “peace processes” and Western iniquity to be destroyed. So they have turned on the Jews. Jewish suffering has to be erased because it gets in the way of the narrative.

That’s why the eruption of Palestinianism throughout the West is so shattering. People wonder why the forests of Palestinian flags at the incendiary anti-Israel demonstrations are in themselves so intimidating.

It’s because the Palestine cause is not two states side by side. Palestinian identity consists entirely of the intention to eradicate Israel by the hijack and appropriation of Jewish history. Palestinianism stands for the erasure of Jewish national identity and wiping the Jewish people out of their own historic homeland.

That’s why anti-Israel thugs have ripped apart a painting in Cambridge University of Arthur Balfour, the British prime minister who gave his name to the 1917 declaration of British support for a Jewish homeland in Palestine. It’s why people across the West have been ripping down the posters of the Israeli hostages. They are all trying to rip Israel and the Jews out of their headspace and their world altogether.

That’s why the betrayal by Schumer and American Jews who still support the Democratic Party and its Israel-bashing agenda is so devastating.

According to the Oxford University Press Dictionary of American Family Names, “Schumer” derives from a German word that means a “good-for-nothing.”

Schumer claims instead that his name derives from the Hebrew shomer, or “guardian”; and so he boasts to be the shomer of Jewish values. “What horrifies so many Jews especially,” he said, “is our sense that Israel is falling short of upholding these distinctly Jewish values that we hold so dear.”

How dare he. He is not a shomer. What has horrified so many is that Schumer and other liberal American Jews who are taking aim at Israel’s “right-wing” are using “Jewish values” as a shield behind which they are betraying Israel and the Jewish people and delivering them to their enemies.

Along with the shills for Israel’s surrender in the Biden administration, they present an obscene and disgusting spectacle.

“In every generation,” say the Jews at Passover, “they rise up against us.” To the enemies of the Jewish people today—Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran—we must add the Biden administration, Chuck Schumer and the liberal Jewish fifth column.

AddToAny

EoZ Book:"Protocols: Exposing Modern Antisemitism"

Printfriendly

EoZTV Podcast

Podcast URL

Subscribe in podnovaSubscribe with FeedlyAdd to netvibes
addtomyyahoo4Subscribe with SubToMe

search eoz

comments

Speaking

translate

E-Book

For $18 donation








Sample Text

EoZ's Most Popular Posts in recent years

Hasbys!

Elder of Ziyon - حـكـيـم صـهـيـون



This blog may be a labor of love for me, but it takes a lot of effort, time and money. For over 19 years and 40,000 articles I have been providing accurate, original news that would have remained unnoticed. I've written hundreds of scoops and sometimes my reporting ends up making a real difference. I appreciate any donations you can give to keep this blog going.

Donate!

Donate to fight for Israel!

Monthly subscription:
Payment options


One time donation:

subscribe via email

Follow EoZ on Twitter!

Interesting Blogs

Blog Archive