Pages

▼

Friday, March 25, 2022

03/25 Links Pt2: Behind the Scenes of Amnesty International’s Report on Israel; Glick: Becoming the strong tribe of the Middle East; What Biden Gets Wrong About UNRWA

From Ian:

Behind the Scenes of Amnesty International’s Report on Israel
A recently published Amnesty International report declared that Israel practices a policy of apartheid against the Palestinians, both in Israel and the Palestinian Authority. In my view, this is a ridiculous claim, but since this is a case of a detailed report by a prestigious organization, cries of antisemitism will clearly not be helpful here. Readers around the world would rather believe an organization that is considered reliable and neutral and not the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

I wish to address the report itself, particularly at the methodological level.

Amnesty International’s reports are written anonymously. There is no way to know who authored the report, how many researchers were involved in its preparation, what their professional experience is and so on. In addition, when examining the sources on which the current report is based, a disturbing picture emerges. The report contains about 1,600 footnotes, the majority of which refer to past reports and policy papers by Amnesty International, B’Tselem, Adalah, HaMoked, Ir Amim, Bimkom, Al-Haq, and additional far-Left Israeli organizations, as well as reports by the UN Human Rights Council and similar international bodies. When these are the sources for “research” that purports to examine the State of Israel’s attitude toward its Arab population from 1948 to the present, it is clear that the result will be biased and one-sided. While I am not familiar with all the legal experts quoted in the report, if one relies on people like John Dugard, who is known for his critical attitude toward Israel, it is clear that the views of people like him will lead any reasonable person to similar conclusions. Furthermore, despite the fact that the report claims to confirm the theory that Israel, since its inception, has aspired to discriminate against Arabs on racial grounds, the number of sources concerning Israel’s first fifty years is negligible compared to those concerning recent decades.

Amnesty International prides itself on the organization’s high level of research and its neutrality. This report is an extreme example of how baseless that claim is. If one writes a report based almost entirely on all one-sided sources, does not bother to engage with civil society organizations that hold a different perspective, and does not turn to mainstream academics and legal experts, then he is conducting biased and negligent research with the main purpose of smearing Israel and harming its international status. His aim is not to promote human rights. Anyone who seeks to have a dialogue with Israel and improve its human rights situation should not label it an apartheid state, which by definition makes it illegitimate.
Rep. Torres urges American Jews to worry more about anti-Israel sentiment in Congress
A New York congressman who has been taken to task by the left and faced social media harassment for his strong defense of Israel is cautioning the Jewish community to avoid complacency over bipartisan support for Israel in Congress.

“We cannot afford to lull ourselves into a false sense of security,” Torres, a first-term Democrat representing the South Bronx, said in a talk at Manhattan’s Central Synagogue on Wednesday. “We live in a time where nothing can be taken for granted.”

Torres, 34, pointed to the House vote on the replenishment of Israel’s anti-missile Iron Dome defense system in September which was opposed by nine members, including eight progressive Democrats. Pro-Israel groups celebrated the fact that Israel still enjoys overwhelming bipartisan support and dismissed the opposition as a fringe group.

“But nine today could be 90 in five years,” Torres warned. “It could be 190 in 10 years.”

Interviewed by author Abigail Pogrebin, a Forward contributor, Torres was asked whether he sought to engage with his progressive colleagues about the vote. He said that while a majority of Americans “are persuadable on the issue,” he is sticking with his principle “not to reason with people who refuse to be reasoned with.”

Torres has been an outspoken supporter of Israel ever since he was elected in 2013, when he was 24, to represent the South Bronx on the City Council. His first trip to Israel in 2015 was met by protests from far-left activists, but he credits that experience with helping him form his views of the Jewish state.


Caroline Glick: Becoming the strong tribe of the Middle East
The only fight Bennett, Lapid and Gantz are (half-heartedly) waging is against the administration's reported plan to withdraw Trump's terrorist designation of Iran's Revolutionary Guards Corps. While this is important, it misses the point and sets a trap for Israel. The biggest problem with Biden's deal with Iran is that it legitimizes Iran's efforts to build a nuclear arsenal and become the region's hegemon. Withdrawing the IRGC's terrorist designation would be a terrible thing, but it is a much lower level of disaster than the deal itself. Moreover, if Bennett, Lapid and Gantz succeed, and Biden retains the IRGC's terrorist designation, he and his team will use the concession as "proof" that they is pro-Israel, even as their main policy imperils Israel's very existence.

The Saudis and the Emiratis have responded to the administration's hostility by refusing to speak with Biden or his advisors. US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken, who is scheduled to come to Israel and the Palestinian Authority, was forced to cancel his planned follow-on trip to Saudi Arabia and the UAE because their governments refused to host him. Rather than learn from Israel's Arab partners, and begin to extract a price from the administration for its hostility towards Israel, Bennett is reportedly trying to lobby the Saudis and Emiratis on the administration's behalf. On Thursday reports said Bennett was even trying to organize a summit in Jerusalem during Blinken's visit with MBZ.

These actions don't raise Israel's star in Arab capitals. Bennett's slavish devotion to the abusive administration makes him look weak and foolish to the Arabs who are deliberating now whether to bet their future on Israel or Iran. If MBZ does come to Jerusalem, he is liable to walk away from the summit with a US and Israeli agreement to rehabilitate Syria and so empower Iran.

It isn't that Israel doesn't have another play. It does.

Earlier this week, Bennett claimed that there was no point in campaigning against the nuclear deal because it was already completed and irreversible. This is false. The Biden administration is much weaker politically than the Obama administration was. Several Democrats are publicly opposing Biden's deal with Iran. It isn't too late to kill it.

And even if the campaign fails to stop the deal from going forward, it's still imperative that Israel fight it. Doing so will mobilize US public opinion against it, and energize politicians from both parties. It will also drive home that Israel will not be bound by the deal, which endangers its very existence.

Even more critically, in the face of MBZ's Syria initiative at Sharm Tuesday, Israel must fight it to broadcast its power and seriousness of purpose to the Arabs at this critical moment when they are trying to choose between working with Israel or groveling to Iran.

Maybe a Republican administration will be inaugurated in 2025 that will work to restore America's standing as the strongest tribe in the Middle East by reinstating its commitment to Israel and the Sunnis and fighting Iran. But Israel can't place its trust in such a prospect. Today, in the face of Biden's abandonment, Israel has but one option – to become the strong tribe of the Middle East.
The Caroline Glick Show Ep44 – Biden and Obama’s Putin Two-Step in Ukraine and Iran
How can Biden call Putin a war criminal for his aggression in Ukraine while subcontracting his signature foreign policy – cutting a deal that makes Iran a nuclear state and regional hegemon – to Putin?

For answers to this key question, in this week’s Middle East News Hour I spoke to Mideast scholar Tony Badran from the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. Last week Tony published an important article on this topic in Tablet online magazine.

Towards the end of our discussion we moved from the administration’s policy of empowering Iran to its policy of pretending that Hezbollah is not in charge in Lebanon.


Israel to host Blinken and FMs of UAE, Morocco and Bahrain in ‘historic summit’
Foreign Minister Yair Lapid will host his counterparts from the US, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Morocco for a “historic diplomatic summit” next week, the Foreign Ministry announced on Friday.

The summit will take place on Sunday and Monday, according to its statement, which said more details would follow.

The announcement came a day after US Secretary of State Antony Blinken announced his visit to Israel and the West Bank, a move that had taken some analysts by surprise as the top US diplomat had visited less than a year ago and is not expected to announce a major diplomatic initiative.

Blinken will be joined by the UAE’s Abdullah bin Zayed Al Nahyan, Bahrain’s Abdullatif bin Rashid Al- Zayani and Morocco’s Nasser Bourita in the latest gathering that would likely not have taken place if not for the signing of the Abraham Accords. The 2020 agreements saw Israel normalize ties with the three Arab countries in a matter of months in deals brokered by the Trump administration.

Israel has made strengthening the accords a top priority, scheduling regular diplomatic meetings to member countries. It also is looking to expand the agreements to include other countries as well, though that is likely to prove a tall task, given that governments most interested in joining would likely have done so while former president Donald Trump was still in office and the incentives the US was willing to offer were more substantial.

US President Joe Biden, whose administration has expressed weariness over Trump’s decision to sell F-35 fighter jets to the UAE and recognize Moroccan sovereignty over the disputed Western Sahara region as part of the Abraham Accords, has focused largely on strengthening existing agreements.

Initial desires to finalize the normalization deal between Israel and Sudan have been complicated due to the military coup that spiraled the latter country further into crisis late last year.

Sunday’s meeting of foreign ministers will take place less than a week after Bennett traveled to the Sinai resort town of Sharm el-Sheikh for the first-ever trilateral summit with Egyptian President Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi and UAE Crown Prince Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan — another development likely made possible by the Abraham Accords.

The State Department said Thursday that Blinken will use his trip to coordinate with US allies on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, “Iran’s destabilizing activities,” the Abraham Accords, and efforts to improve Israeli-Palestinian ties.
The Tripartite Summit in Egypt: Behind the Meeting of the Three Regional Leaders
Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi hosted a triple summit in Sharm el-Sheikh with Israeli Prime Minister of Israel Naftali Bennett and UAE Crown Prince Mohamed bin Zayed. The spokesman for the Egyptian President stated that the meeting dealt with energy, market stability, and food security, along with other international and regional developments.

Egyptian commentators noted that the meeting reflects an interest in forming new regional alliances in light of reduced US involvement in the region and the countries’ need to provide together for their shared security and economic affairs, in the absence of a world power that will necessarily support them. Indeed, the photo of the three leaders, with the Egyptian president in the center, symbolizes the formation of a regional axis that shares common concerns and interests on several issues:

First, the Iranian nuclear program. The three countries are interested in presenting a cohesive front to the US administration regarding a possible return to the nuclear agreement. While the Israeli and Emirati reservations about some of the clauses in the agreement have been expressed publicly, Egypt, too, has an interest in increasing security coordination and preventing violent flare-ups. Cairo's main concern is an increase in Iran's subversive activities under the cover of the apparent agreement, particularly in relation to the Houthis, who target Egypt’s Gulf allies and could disrupt the Suez Canal, which serves as an important source of foreign exchange revenue.

Second, the war in Ukraine. Although the three states see themselves as Washington’s allies, they strive to maintain room for legitimate maneuver between the blocs in light of their direct security and economic interests vis-à-vis Moscow. Egypt, for example, imported about 50 percent of its wheat from Russia until the war, relied on Russian tourism, and placed hope in a number of Russian economic projects in its territory – from the power plant in el Dabaa to the industrial area in the Suez Canal. These join the Russian-Egyptian cooperation on the Libyan front, and the importance Egypt attaches to Russia's position on the Renaissance Dam crisis.
Israel discourse in the West, Arab world couldn't be more different
Unfortunately, Israel seems to exist in two parallel, contradictory worlds.

One universe has been constructed – a false, hackneyed, out-of-date and threatening universe – that extends from Ramallah to New York, Geneva and other unfriendly places.

This universe, dominated by so-called Western progressives in cahoots with Arab and Islamic radicals, disses rather than embraces the Abraham Accords and is stuck in a time warp where Israel is an evil actor. It is a malign universe where recalcitrant and violent Palestinian leaders are venerated and admirable Israeli leaders are criminalized. It is a tragic, forlorn universe.

The other universe is real, promising, forward looking, and stabilizing, and is marked by a peace dynamic that runs from Jerusalem to Dubai, Manama, Rabat, Cairo and Amman; and from Jerusalem to the most important leaders in the world.

In short, the discourse about Israel in corrupt international institutions and in some aspersive western campuses and capitals couldn’t be more different than the discourse in Arab capitals, and other calm and considered decision-making centers. It’s confrontation versus cooperation, demonization versus solidarity.

It is time for more Western leaders and democratic activists to discover the true, new Middle East, and the real Israel: a force for peace, progress, security and stability.
UAE Daily: New Arab-Israeli Coalition Was Born During Egypt-UAE-Israel Summit
The summit held this month by leaders of Egypt, Israel and the United Arab Emirates in the Red Sea resort of Sharm el-Sheikh was described by a recent article in the London-based Emirati daily Al-Arab as giving birth to an Arab-Israeli coalition.

According to a report by the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), the paper said this coalition begins with economic and commercial cooperation among the three nations but is likely to develop into a security and military alliance as well. (Commercially, Israel and Egypt announced on March 16 that they are opening a new direct flight route between Ben-Gurion International Airport and Sharm el-Sheikh.)

The article noted that a military coalition with Israel is favorable to Egypt and the UAE because of Iran’s malign behavior in the region, coupled with its ongoing nuclear program. Such an alliance would also counter an assessment by certain Gulf states that the United States is working against their interests in the effort to revive the 2015 nuclear deal between Iran and world powers.

The article stated, according to MEMRI: “Egyptian sources told Al-Arab that energy and food security are a ‘practical starting point for cooperation between the three countries, and for taking a step that Egypt was apparently reluctant to take [until now]—namely, taking its relations with Israel from the bilateral level to the regional one.’ ”
IDF staff make first official visit to Morocco
Senior IDF military officers took part in the Israeli military’s first official visit to Morocco, meeting with senior officers of the North African kingdom and agreeing to military cooperation between the two countries.

The visit, which began on Thursday, was held in Rabat between the Head of the IDF’s Strategy and Third-Circle Division Maj.-Gen. Tal Kalman, the Head of the IDF’s Foreign Relations Division Brig.-Gen. Efi Dafrin and the Head of the Operations Division in the Intelligence Division Brig.-Gen. G.

They met with the Chief of the Moroccan military Inspector General Belkhir el-Farouk and senior Moroccan military officers including the head of the country’s intelligence division and the head of the operations division in Rabat.

“The officials discussed the historical and cultural connection between the countries and mutual interests in the Middle East, and expressed their desire to promote extensive military cooperation,” the IDF said in a statement on Friday.

The parties also discussed regional and global security concerns, as well as "key areas in which the IDF has gained operational knowledge and experience," the statement continued.

The IDF staff also discussed the possibility of cooperative efforts with their Moroccan counterparts, including potential collaboration in intelligence and operational training and multinational exercises.

"During the visit, a memorandum of understanding was signed for the areas of cooperation and an agreement was reached by a joint military committee to sign a working plan," the spokesperson said.
UN wants references to Jerusalem as capital nixed from exhibit on Knesset — report
The UN has conditioned Israel’s request for an exhibit on the Knesset at the organization’s headquarters in New York on the removal of some content, including references to Jerusalem as the country’s capital, Israeli television reported Thursday.

The exhibit, titled “The Knesset Celebrates 70 — Parliament Shaping Israeli Society,” was previously displayed at Ben Gurion Airport in 2019.

According to Channel 12 news, the Israeli delegation to the United Nations asked to display the exhibit at UN headquarters, but was told a number of items would have to be removed.

Among the reportedly objectionable content was an item about a quasi-constitutional Basic Law passed in 1980 that recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s “complete and united” capital.

“Please erase slide 43: According to relevant General Assembly and Security Council decisions, the Basic Law: Jerusalem, Capital of Israel, is not valid from our point of view,” the UN was quoted as saying in its instructions.

“This is a most sensitive issue and the information in the slide contradicts international law.”
Republicans introduce bill opposing a Palestinian consulate in Jerusalem
A new proposed Senate concurrent resolution is seeking to state that the United States “should be represented by a single diplomatic mission in Jerusalem.” The Republican move was introduced by Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) and 11 other GOP Senators.

Last year, the Biden administration announced that it would like to reopen the consulate general in Jerusalem dedicated to Palestinian affairs. The consulate was closed during the Trump administration. The Republican Senators noted that the 1995 Jerusalem Embassy Act “recognizes that Jerusalem is the undivided capital of Israel and the US embassy to Israel should be in Jerusalem.”

The nonbinding resolution seeks to express “the sense of Congress” in opposition to the establishment of a new Palestinian consulate or diplomatic mission in Jerusalem.

“Jerusalem has served as the diplomatic capital of Israel for decades and has remained the cultural center of Israel and of the Jewish people for millennia,” the text reads. “Large, bipartisan supermajorities in the Senate and the House of Representatives voted for the Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995.”

They also noted that the plan to reopen the consulate “has received bipartisan criticism among members of the Government of the United States and the Government of Israel,” and that “the United States Embassy in Jerusalem’s Palestinian Affairs Unit already manages, in a timely and effective manner, the proposed responsibilities of the Biden administration’s planned Palestinian consulate in Jerusalem.”

“The opening and maintenance of a new and unnecessary consulate in Jerusalem would require a substantial expenditure of American taxpayer funds,” they added. The text of the proposed resolution also states that “any establishment of a new consulate or diplomatic mission in Jerusalem should not move forward without congressional approval through the passage of new legislation.”
Most Americans support Israel despite media narrative - poll
The preliminary evidence, at least from this poll, is the opposite, as sympathy for Israel dropped overall from 58 points to 55 since Bennett came into power. This is not a statistically overwhelming figure, but a drop nonetheless, one that should be kept in mind when government officials speak of how the very diverse Bennett-Lapid government has improved ties with America.

The graph from the poll that will attract the most attention shows that almost as many Democrats are sympathetic toward the Palestinians (38%) as they are toward the Israelis (40%), or a net gap in favor of Israel of just two points among Democrats, as compared to a net gap of 35 points in 2013.

But that does not necessarily mean all those 38% who said they were more sympathetic to the Palestinians are not supportive of Israel, and the high favorability rating (63%) given to Israel by Democrats bears that out.

Just because a person says he is sympathetic to the Palestinians does not make him hostile to Israel. Sympathy for the Palestinians among Democrats has not bled into hostility toward Israel – though that is obviously what some organizations, such as Amnesty International, are trying to bring about by issuing reports saying Israel is an apartheid state.

Then why do Democrats who express support for Israel in one question, turn around and say they sympathize with the Palestinians in another? Because it has to do with a liberal worldview that maintains that the weak are in the right, and that might makes wrong. In the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Israel is the mightier party.

None of that is to say that Israel does not have serious problems with the progressive wing of the Democratic Party, something shown in the poll where self-described liberal Democrats sympathize with the Palestinians more than with Israel by a 24-point margin. But the data show neither a collapse of support for Israel in the Democratic Party as a whole nor among the general American public.

More significantly, on the question of how public to make the fight with Biden over Iran, the data do not show that Netanyahu’s aggressive approach on the matter harmed public support. This is something that goes very much against the widely accepted narrative, a narrative driving the Bennett government’s decision to fade deep into the background when it comes to fighting the Iran deal.
What Biden Gets Wrong About UNRWA
Even the Obama administration acknowledged that the 2014 Gaza War generated bad publicity for UNRWA. American legislators demanded investigations into how Hamas weapons found their way into UNRWA schools. For the State Department, the matter is pressing, particularly given that Section 301(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (amended) states that
No contributions by the United States shall be made to [UNRWA] except on the condition that [UNRWA] take all possible measures to assure that no part of the United States contribution shall be used to furnish assistance to any refugee who is receiving military training as a member of the so-called Palestine Liberation Army or any other guerilla-type organization or who has engaged in any act of terrorism.

As if there was any doubt about the Biden administration’s commitment to UNRWA, the United States already renewed its financial commitment to UNRWA when the State Department’s Population, Refugee and Migration Bureau stated on Twitter that the money to UNRWA will “provide education, health care, and emergency relief to hundreds of thousands of Palestinian children and families during a time of need.” The State Department has even gone so far as to hire Elizabeth Campbell, formerly UNRWA’s Washington lobbyist who helped disseminate hate education via UNRWA textbooks.

Washington has supported UNRWA for decades largely because it does not wish the Palestinian issue to threaten other policy imperatives. During the Cold War, these were defined as containing communism through various security arrangements and maintaining the flow of energy resources from Arab, oil-producing states. American diplomatic efforts toward establishing a Palestinian state began in the post-Cold War context of unchallenged American power and rising regional hegemons. But energies were directed through the Oslo process and the Palestine Liberation Organization, which led to the creation of the Palestinian Authority, an entity that has deliberately failed to create stable foundations for a functioning state.

Nides, Campbell, and others are representative of the Biden administration’s animus towards Israel. Biden is following the Obama administration’s playbook of “tough love” vis-à-vis Israel, rushing to embrace Iran and a perilous nuclear deal that has terrified Arabs and Israelis alike. Support for Palestinian causes like UNRWA, as well as Nides’ hysteria about Israeli construction in the West Bank, are sops thrown to the shrinking number of ideologues who think the world revolves around Palestine.

But the one place where Palestine does increasingly matter is in American politics, where the issue has been taken up by the progressive wing of the Democratic Party. It is unclear how promoting the Palestinian ideology—that claims they are entitled to return to places once occupied by parents, grandparents, and great-grandparents which are now in Israel, and in the process transform Israel into a Jewish minority state—serves U.S. policy, much less the cause of peace. Pouring more money into UNRWA is bad all around as it is an unaccountable black hole. Ultimately, Americans’ tax money would be better spent promoting independent civil organizations and private-sector growth.


Q & A on the ‘Apartheid’ Slur
Q: Then why are they doing this? What’s the goal of this anti-Israel campaign?

A: As CAMERA has explained elsewhere, there is nothing new in these attempts to delegitimize Israel’s very existence: The dogma of anti-Israelism — not criticism of Israel, but opposition to the survival of the Jewish and democratic state — is many decades old. Palestinian leaders violently opposed immigration by the children of Israel to the Land of Israel before the State of Israel even existed. In 1948, the Arab world went to war to prevent a United Nations compromise calling for both a Jewish and an Arab state on the coveted territory. And for decades, the Palestinian national movement has viewed the struggle against Jewish self-determination as, in the words of historian Benny Morris, a “zero-sum game: if the Jews win, we are lost.”

While Middle Eastern fundamentalists continue to issue pithy calls to “wipe Israel off the map,” radical NGOs have taken the longer route, using reams of paper and scores of footnotes to demand the same. Now, even organizations that were once mainstream have radicalized and joined that number.

If in the 1920s, Arab opposition to Jewish immigration, emancipation, and empowerment could take the form of murderous riots and chants that “Palestine is our land and the Jews are our dogs,” today’s lawfare targeting Israel’s continued survival seems mild in comparison.

But the goal of eliminating the Jewish state remains the same, as is clear from the anti-Israel reports.

The implication of Amnesty’s demand that the international community impose an arms embargo against Israel, a tiny country surrounded by enemy states and various well-armed terror organizations should be clear — as should the morality of Amnesty’s attempt to shift the military balance of the region in a way that harms Israel relative to Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran, Islamic Jihad, and other antisemitic groups.

Even more clear is the implication of Amnesty’s demand for a so-called “right of return” into Israel for the descendants of Palestinian refugees from the 1948 war. For the past seventy years, those sworn to Israel’s destruction have been clear about the purpose of this demand. “If the Arabs return to Israel, Israel will cease to exist,” an Egyptian president explained. “To put it quite clearly, the intention is the extermination of Israel,” an Egyptian foreign minister said about the demand. “To us, the refugees issue is the winning card which means the end of the Israeli state,” a Palestinian official noted more recently.

But there’s no need to extrapolate from the policy demands to their obvious end. While discussing and defending his organization’s report, Paul O’Brien, the director of Amnesty International USA, plainly argued that Israel “shouldn’t exist” as a Jewish state. Amnesty is “opposed to the idea” that Israel “should be preserved as a state for the Jewish people,” he told his audience.

(Remarkably, this same Paul O’Brien was, prior to his joining Amnesty, employed as an advisor for the “Islamic Republic” of Afghanistan, when its constitution barred non-Muslims from running for president, barred political parties from contravening the principles of Islam, and characterized “We the people of Afghanistan” as “adhering to the Holy religion of Islam.”)

Lynk, the UN Rapporteur, has likewise made clear that he wants Israel wiped off the map. “He used to think the critical date in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict was 1967, the start of the occupation,” notes a summary of comments made by Lynk several years before he was selected as Rapporteur. “Now he thinks the solution to the problem must go back to 1948,” the date of Israel’s independence.

The descent of these organizations to radical and effectively anti-Jewish politics couldn’t be clearer. They seek to undo the tiny Jewish state. They seek to eliminate only the Jewish state, though it is surrounded by the “Arab Republic of Egypt,” the “Syrian Arab Republic,” the constitutionally defined “Arab state” of Jordan, the legally defined “Arab Islamic State” of Saudi Arabia, the constitutionally defined “Arab, Islamic” Republic of Yemen, and the “Islamic Republic of Iran.”

They seek to engineer away the one country with a Jewish majority, a majority meant to ensure the country’s continued commitment to the rescue and absorption of Jews, one of history’s most oppressed peoples, who in living memory saw millennia of antisemitism culminate in the genocide of six million Jews, and whose population still today hasn’t numerically recovered to pre-Holocaust levels.
‘Diversity Is Definitely There’: Former Miss Iraq Sarah Idan Defends Israel Against ‘Apartheid’ Charge
Former Miss Iraq Sarah Idan dismissed claims that Israel is practicing “apartheid,” a charge frequently levied by anti-Zionist activists, while visiting South Africa this week.

Speaking with South African radio personality Bafana Modise, the human rights activist and former beauty queen spoke about her personal experience witnessing coexistence between Arabs and Jews in Israel.

“I didn’t see any apartheid [in Israel],” Idan said, noting that Israeli Arabs hold “high government positions,” including as members of Knesset and ambassadors to foreign countries. “Diversity is definitely there.”

Modise likewise criticized the claim, saying, “I’ve been there more than twice, I’ve never seen apartheid there.”

Idan also argued in the interview that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is not comparable to the situation in apartheid-era South Africa.

“What amazes me is that the people use this term but what happened in South Africa was done by the government against its own people. What we have in Israel is a war between two nations,” she explained. “How can you use the word apartheid in Israel? They’re two different nations. They’re two different governments. How can you apply that term to the country? All Arabs who live in Israel have exactly the same rights as Israelis.”


Seth Frantzman: Iran will blackmail world using nuclear threat to Ukraine
It is also no surprise that Western media have said that Moscow is weighing using chemical weapons in Ukraine. Russia backed the Syrian regime, which used such weapons. Now The New York Times and The Guardian have both said that there is a threat of Russia using them. Russia has also pushed conspiracies about chemical weapons being stored in Ukraine.

This is all a game plan that Iran will soon use if it gets a nuclear deal. It will use the threat of nuclear weapons constantly to claim that any attempt to oppose Iran’s control of Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen could result in “an existential threat to Iran.” This would then become a “nuclear redline” for Iran and it would be “escalation” and “risk WW III” if anyone challenges Tehran in the region.

Up until now, Israel has had some impunity – and also US support – for opposing Iran’s entrenchment. However, an Iran that gets closer to a nuclear weapon will be able to use the Russian model regarding Ukraine. Russia invaded its southwestern neighbor illegally but now makes it seem like any attempt by other countries to have a role there would “risk war” – even though it is Russia that started the war.

We can see the Russian logic of using this threat in Ukraine. It wants to be able to have a right to destroy and control Ukraine, which it sees as a “near abroad.” Iran also thinks about Iraq in the same way. It has taken over parts of Iraq and has the impunity to fire rockets at it and target US forces there.

But Iran’s control of Syria is still contested. Nevertheless, Iran would like to make this more iron-clad and be able to draw a redline to safeguard its bases in Syria. Iran may soon roll out the Russian blackmail model regarding Syria and Iraq. It has already said that it doesn’t want foreign involvement in Yemen, even as Tehran already interferes in the Middle Eastern country south of Saudi Arabia.


Call Me Back Podcast by Dan Senor: Iran Nuclear Negotiations – The Origin Story, with Ambassador Eric Edelman
While we are all following the minute to minute developments in Russia-Ukraine, a new international deal with Iran on its nuclear program may be on the cusp of finalization. While there are still key details to be worked out, the broad contours are out there, and the implications are massive. So we wanted to have a conversation with an expert and policy practitioner that could walk us through the history of how we got here, and where it’s going.

Ambassador Eric Edelman is Counselor at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. He’s also on board of the Vandenberg Coalition. He has served in senior positions at the Departments of State and Defense as well as the White House. As undersecretary of defense for policy he oversaw the Pentagon’s bilateral defense relations, war plans, special operations forces, homeland defense, missile defense, nuclear weapons and arms control policies, counterproliferation, counterterrorism, arms sales, and defense trade controls.


What we’ve missed about Iran: On its ideology of antisemitism and why it matters
The Islamic Republic’s interest in taking on Palestine’s cause was not born from a desire to stand for the oppressed and destitute of the world. The simple fact that Tehran has worked to sustain terrorist organizations seeking to exact revenge on civilians stands testimony to that. When Tehran speaks of Palestine and the need for its people to exist within the boundaries of their own state, it speaks not of political emancipation for the Palestinians but of the existential annihilation of the Jews.

For years I peddled Iran’s propaganda, believing that Tehran’s ambition was to create a space in which Palestinians could express their national identity and exercise political self-determination. Many like me over the decades have fallen for such lies. This is how fascism gains itself supporters to its cause – through calls of liberation and grand talks of freedom for an alleged oppressed minority.

Having lived and traveled across much of the Middle East over the years, I’ve witnessed many iterations of antisemitism. But only in Iran – and here I mean those men and women who hold Iran’s regime together, not the common people – have I experienced such absolute and blind hatred for the Jewish people. I believe the Islamic Republic’s particular brand of antisemitism to be an echo of that of Nazi Germany. I do not make the comparison lightly. Unless the world wakes up to the true meaning of Iran’s language, it risks giving implicit support to Iran’s genocidal designs.

The world failed collectively in the 1930s to assess the danger of Nazism, for nations could not comprehend the nihilistic ambition of a system that sought supremacy through the negation of a people – not only on the basis of their faith or ethnicity, but the nature of their being. And though a lot has been said since on antisemitism so that its rationale could be forever extinguished from the world consciousness, I believe our failure to eradicate it stems from our inability to identify its root, even though we know its rhetoric.

For any responsible people or nation to give in to the belief that Iran could be sincere in its desire not to develop its nuclear capacity for military means is folly. And this folly puts millions of innocent people in direct mortal danger. Iran’s nuclear ambitions are directed to carry out its ultimate agenda – the extermination of the Jews of Israel.

It is because I have moved in Iran’s circles of power that I feel compelled to write those lines. I can only hope that my words will be heeded.


The Main Reason the IRGC Must Stay On the FTO List That No One Wants to Mention
Worst of all, listening to State Department spokesman Ned Price, it seems the Biden administration is even considering lifting the designation of the IRGC as a Foreign Terrorist Organization…in return, perhaps, for some vague promise from the jihadist regime to “de-escalate” in the ME region, whatever that means. Never mind that the FTO designation is not the only place the IRGC (or its subordinate unit, the Qods Force) is listed as a terrorist organization: removing it from this designation would be touted among jihadis everywhere as a feather in the Tehran regime’s cap and a selling point to attract business investment. As Matt Levitt writes at The Washington Institute, granting this coveted concession would allow Iran to continue sidestepping any accountability for its terror support, human rights abuses, illicit financing, and more.

The Iranian regime has long been named the foremost state sponsor of terrorism in the world. It has never stopped funding, training, and weapons support to terror proxies like HAMAS, Hizballah, the Houthis in Yemen, Gaza’s Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), and a clutch of Iraqi Shi’ite terror militias. But for some reason, what’s hardly ever mentioned is the Iranian regime’s decades-long jihad terror relationship with al-Qa’eda and collaboration with it in the attacks of 9/11. Not one president, from G. W. Bush, through Barack Hussein Obama, and even Donald J. Trump, not to mention Joe Biden, has ever publicly held the Iranian regime to account for its role in the most devastating attack ever on American soil. The IRGC, and especially its Qods Force (then under the command of MG Qassem Suleimani), worked closely with Hizballah, Saudi Arabia, and the Taliban in the conception, direction, and execution of those horrific attacks. The Havlish, et al vs. Osama Bin Laden, Iran, et al. legal case concluded in December 2011 with Judge George Daniels of the Southern District of New York ruling from the bench that Iran and Hizballah were co-responsible with al-Qa’eda for the 9/11 attacks. Of the 41 total affidavits supporting that decision, it is Exhibit 6 (co-written by this author) that details the history of the Iran, Hizballah, al-Qa’eda relationship, including extensive open source citations that document the role of the IRGC and Qods Force.

It’s hard to think of a more important reason why neither the IRGC nor the Qods Force must ever be removed from the FTO list.


Academic Middle East Scholars Spent Two Decades Making Themselves Irrelevant
And yet, Middle Eastern studies still matter, not because of what the academics say or write but because of what they teach.

The most prestigious universities are no longer the beacons on a hill they once were, but their degrees are still coveted. One still gets mileage from a Princeton degree, or one from Harvard. These are the most durable brands in America, some predating American independence. So it is not surprising that young people still compete ferociously to get into these schools. And from there, they will go on to make policy, form opinion, and command U.S. power in the world.

The best guess is that the indoctrination in these places is as bad as ever. It is a "guess" because the classroom is not public domain. But if academics teach in the classroom what they say and write in the public domain, then it is still a closed circle. Back around 9/11, there were maybe half a dozen universities where a student could find enough balance to get a credential worth having. Today, one would not need all the fingers of one hand.

Previously, the government might have been able to balance things in institutions subsidized by the taxpayer, such as university Middle East centers. Now, that is doubtful. Higher education has an effective lobby in Washington, and the White House and Congress do not care much because, in relative terms, the money is quite small. So yes, by all means, let us have accountability for biased outreach programs. And let us have universities disclose foreign funding as required by law. But let us not delude ourselves because this will not make much of a dent.

What does seem to work, at least in certain cases, is shaming. Of course, much of academe is shameless, and in those places, the game is long lost. But even in this era of rampant "wokeness," there are university administrations that care about quality. Calling out error and bias in these settings—as Middle East Forum's Campus Watch does—has some value. It is not going to reverse the trend. It is not going to stop it. But it might slow it down.
BDS? Never heard of it.
In light of recent events, I was curious to find out how students on my campus, the University of California at Berkeley, felt about anti-Israel boycotts. With the help of several of my students, I stepped out to Sproul Plaza, the very heart of the Berkeley campus, and surveyed one hundred passers-by. The location of our survey was symbolic: This is the square where Berkeley’s free-speech and anti-war activism began and, until about a decade or so ago, it is where its anti-Israel protests used to take place, back when such protests were still in fashion.

My survey, ostensibly about Russia and Ukraine, focused on boycotts, specifically academic boycotts. Of the 100 students who took the survey, nearly three-quarters (73%) described themselves as Democrats or Progressives. I asked only one explicit question about Israel: I offered a list of countries and asked students whether they would like to visit one or more of these countries. Nearly half the students (47%) chose Israel. As for sanctions, Berkeley students expressed skepticism. Only 13% of students were confident that sanctions could yield concrete results. In contrast, 35% thought that sanctions don’t work (and another 51% were unsure).

Students were even more skeptical about academic boycotts. Only 3 students out of 100 thought academic boycotts were legitimate and effective. Another 17% thought that, while permissible, such boycotts would not work. In contrast, 45% were vehemently opposed to academic boycotts. Even among those few who thought that other types of sanctions could be effective, 60% explicitly opposed academic boycotts, arguing that we need to learn more about other countries, even rival countries, and do what we can to protect their scholars.

The most surprising result of my survey appeared when I asked students whether they knew what “BDS” stood for. Out of 100 students surveyed, only 7 were familiar with the acronym. Another student knew that the term had something to do with Israel but couldn’t quite remember what it was. Yet another student guessed that the term had “something to do with bondage and sadism”. The rest responded with a question mark or left their answers blank. Even among students who had some knowledge of the Middle East (they knew what “OPEC” or “UAE” stood for, for example, or had taken a class on the Middle East), only 15% were familiar with the term “BDS”.

A closer look at those seven surveys suggests that even the seven students who had heard of BDS were not fans. Four of the seven noted that they would like to visit Israel. Six of the seven stated that they vehemently opposed academic boycotts. I only met one student on the Berkeley campus that day who both knew what “BDS” was and who supported academic boycotts. And that student noted that they did not expect such boycotts to work.

Twice in Berkeley’s history have anti-Israeli students tried to persuade the campus to pass BDS resolutions. Both attempts failed. This situation is mirrored on other campuses across the US. Despite the efforts of several student groups over the years, not one student referendum on BDS has passed and no university has boycotted Israel or its academic institutions. The question is no longer why BDS has failed so badly. The question is: Why are we still treating BDS as an issue, when students at America’s most progressive university don’t even have a clue what it is?
Johnson Criticizes UK Universities for ‘Being Tolerant of Antisemitism’
British Prime Minister Boris Johnson said universities in the United Kingdom have for “far too long been tolerant of casual or indeed systematic anti-Semitism.”

The prime minister made the remark on Wednesday in response to a question by Parliament member Andrew Percy during the “Prime Minister’s Questions” event in the Commons Chamber, reported Britain’s news channel GBN. Percy asked about the National Union of Students inviting British rapper, activist and conspiracy theorist Lowkey to appear at its annual conference.

Lowkey was due to perform at the conference at the end of March but pulled out on Friday after Jewish students expressed concerns about his participation in the event.

Percy said Lowkey has “engaged in anti-Semitic conspiracy theories.”

The British MP called on Johnson to do “everything in his power to ensure campuses were a safe place for Jewish students,” according to Jewish News. He also noted the rise of anti-Semitism on college campuses and cited examples of Jewish students facing anti-Semitic attacks, and being “marked down by their own professors.”

Johnson said it was important that the United Kingdom have an anti-Semitism task force “devoted to rooting out” the problem “in education at all levels.” He also said it was “very important [that] we now have—and I hope everyone understands—the need for change, for rapid and irreversible change.”
Will Cornell University Tolerate Anti-Israel Hate?
On Friday, March 25, Cornell University’s Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) chapter and the Department of Near Eastern Studies plan to co-sponsor an event titled “A Conversation With Mohammed El-Kurd.”

It is inappropriate and deeply upsetting to see a Cornell department attaching their name to a speaker like El-Kurd.

As a proud Jew and passionate Zionist, I implore my peers to do their due diligence in educating themselves in order to create an inclusive and accepting community on campus. And the Cornell administration should request that the Department of Near Eastern Studies remove their name from this event.

Mohammed El-Kurd is a Palestinian journalist, writer, and activist, infamous for making libelous and inflammatory remarks about Jewish people and the state of Israel.

As HonestReporting has documented for The Algemeiner:
El-Kurd [previously] posted a video to Twitter that he claimed proved Israelis were “readying themselves” to “invade” the Al-Aqsa Mosque. In reality, the clip showed Jews praying at the Western Wall. El-Kurd also disseminated a fake story about a stabbing attack by Israeli “settlers.”

While I am extremely grateful that we live in a country that supports and celebrates free speech, it is crucial to contextualize speech, such as El-Kurd’s, that is misguided and harmful. He has not just equated Israelis with Nazis but has done so in the vilest of ways, alleging that they “are the sadistic barbaric neonazi [sic] pigs that claim to be indigenous to our land,” and then stated that “​​I dont care who this offends they have completely internalized the ways of the nazis.”
Jewish Groups Praise Iowa Governor for Signing Bills to Combat Antisemitism, ‘Discriminatory Boycotts of Israel’
Major Jewish American groups on Thursday praised Iowa’s governor for signing bills that aim to combat antisemitism and “discriminatory boycotts of Israel.”

The first measure endorsed by Gov. Kim Reynolds, HF2220, adopts the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism, which will be used as an educational tool for state officials and taken into consideration when determining if an alleged discriminatory act is motivated by antisemitism.

“The bill demonstrates a firm commitment to the safety of the Jewish people, which is particularly essential at a time when acts of antisemitism are on the rise at home and abroad,” said the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, an umbrella group representing 50 national Jewish groups.

The IHRA definition has now been adopted by 23 US states, according to the Conference.

The second bill, HF2373, modifies an earlier law restricting investments of public funds in companies participating in the Palestinian-led boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) campaign, which seeks to isolate Israel.

“The critical amendment further excludes any entity that is a ‘wholly-owned subsidiary, majority-owned subsidiary, parent company, or affiliate of such business,’” said the Conference, in a “direct rebuke” to companies like Unilever and its subsidiary Ben & Jerry’s, which in July announced that it would stop selling ice cream in the West Bank and eastern Jerusalem.

Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds said the bills signal Iowa’s “enduring support for the State of Israel and our categorical rejection of antisemitism.”

“Iowa continues to stand shoulder to shoulder with the State of Israel, one of America’s most important and reliable allies, while fighting all forms of religious and ethnic discrimination,” Reynolds continued.

Israeli Consul General to the Midwest Yinam Cohen, who was at the signing, said Iowa and the Jewish state “can continue to work together to create lasting partnerships that are beneficial to both states and local economies.”

The American Jewish Committee (AJC), which helped draft the text underpinning the IHRA definition, separately thanked Reynolds for enacting the legislation.
Australian Jews Applaud NSW Parliament for Adopting IHRA Definition of Antisemitism
The New South Wales (NSW) Parliament’s Legislative Council adopted the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s definition of antisemitism on Wednesday night, drawing applause from Jewish groups.

The motion was brought to the floor by Christian Democratic Party member Fred Nile, several months after NSW became the first Australian state to adopt the IHRA definition in December.

Darren Bark, head of the NSW Jewish Board of Deputies (NSW JBD), welcomed the “historic decision.”

“The IHRA definition provides clear examples of antisemitism to educate and guide community action against it, and as [NSW] Premier Dominic Perrottet said last year, to fight something you need to be able to identify it,” he told The Australian Jewish News.

The news was also commended by the Australia/Israel & Jewish Affairs Council (AIJAC), which called on other governments and organizations to use the definition in their training programs and policies.

The group also responded to several parliament members who criticized the IHRA definition for its potential to affect Palestinian advocacy, including Green Party member Abigail Boyd who said it “is liable to suppress legitimate criticism of human rights abuses against Palestinians by defaming critics of Israel as antisemitic.”

While the IHRA definition includes examples of contemporary antisemitism that target Israel as a Jewish collective, it also notes that “criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic.”

The AIJAC expressed regret “that there are still those, even in Parliament, who believe they know better than the group of scholars and academics from around the world who dedicated years to developing a consensus working definition of antisemitism.”
Australian Jewish Association: Mark Latham defends Israel in NSW Parliament
The Hon Mark Latham MLC, leader of One Nation in NSW, moved a motion in the NSW Parliament on 24 March 2022 against public funding of individuals or organisations involved in BDS.

Listen to his excellent speech defending the Jewish Community and Israel from bigots.

AJA briefed Mark Latham and other MPs on the issue. We thank Mark for his noble and principled efforts.




The Guardian's attack on AIPAC falls flat
Moreover, AIPAC’s single-minded commitment to fostering a strong American-Israel alliance means that they sometimes endorse candidates who’ve previously taken stances at odds with its own on important issues – as long as their seen as, overall, pro-Israel. For instance, AIPAC is currently backing 27 Democrats who supported the 2015 Iran Nuclear Deal, despite the fact that, in an attempt to kill that deal, the group embarked on what was described as one of the most intense lobbying efforts in its history.

If AIPAC were to decide not to endorse candidates who voted for the Iran Deal, it would likely alienate Democratic Party leaders, thus compromising its bipartisan reputation, as someone close to the lobbying group stressed to JTA.

Excluding, from its list of endorsements, Republicans who voted against election certification – an issue that, unlike the Iran Deal, is not even tangentially related to AIPAC’s mission – would do the same to its relationship with the GOP.

Finally, as most of our followers know, the Guardian’s Chris McGreal is viscerally hostile to Israel and its supporters, would love to see an erosion of Americans’ consistently strong support for the Jewish state, and therefore holds groups like AIPAC in contempt. To say that he’s the last journalist who should be covering the AIPAC ‘scandal’ in an understatement. It’s akin to someone like Tommy Robinson covering the British Muslim community.

As the American-Israeli relationship goes from strength to strength, McGreal continues to be the curmudgeonly, bigoted ideologue who refuses to admit that he’s fighting a lost cause.
Slovakia parliament condemns mass Holocaust deportations of Jews to Nazi death camps
Slovakia’s Parliament condemned on Friday the mass deportation of Jews from the country to Nazi death camps during World War II.

Marking the 80th anniversary of the first transport to Auschwitz, the lawmakers said they consider “particularly reprehensible the forced deportation of the citizens of the Jewish origin from the territory of what was then the Slovak republic between March 25, 1942, and Oct. 20, 1942.”

The Slovak authorities paid Nazi Germany for each Jewish citizen who was transported.

“We condemn such activities of the regime and express sorrow over the tragedy imposed on innocent victims,” the resolution approved by Parliament said.

The lawmakers also asked for the forgiveness of all those who survived and the relatives and descendants of the victims.

Slovakia was a Nazi puppet state during World War II. It sent over 70,000 of its Jewish citizens to Nazi concentration camps, where most of them perished.
‘Don’t Look Away’: Dutch Jew Reveals Personal Ordeal With Antisemitic Gang
A Dutch Jew regularly subjected to antisemitic harassment in the town where he lives has spoken about his experience publicly to raise awareness of how Jew-hatred impacts its victims.

Kevin Ritstier, 34, a Jewish resident of the town of Wijchen in the eastern part of the Netherlands, this week highlighted his situation in interviews with local media as well as a lecture at a local museum.

Ritstier said he had been subjected to antisemitic harassment from the same gang of young males for two years. His ordeal began in 2020, when he attended a Bar Mitzvah in the nearby city of Nijmegen.

“I wore a kippah and a tallit,” Ritstier told newspaper de Gelderlander. “I think I was spotted then.”

From that point on, Ritstier has been continually targeted at his home in the center of Wijchen, where he lives with his wife and their one-year-old son.

“They shout all kinds of slogans,” Ritstier said. “‘Hamas, Hamas, Jews to the gas,’ ‘cancer Jew.'” The gang also follows Ritstier when he walks down the street, taunting him with antisemitic invective and sometimes attempting to kick him.

On one occasion, Ritstier was beaten up outside his front door. “My leg was cut open and I had a burst lip and bruises,” he said. Following that attack, local police placed him on a rapid response list in case of future outrages.

However, none of the gang members have been arrested for their harassment of Ritstier. He said that a fine had been handed to one of his tormentors, while police officers have held conversations with the gang members, but the harassment has continued.
Israel’s OurCrowd to open global AI innovation and research center in Abu Dhabi
Israel’s OurCrowd, a leading investment firm and the most active investor in the country, is set to open a global artificial intelligence (AI) innovation center in the United Arab Emirates’ capital Abu Dhabi later this year that will provide finance-focused, AI-based research as a service, a company official told The Times of Israel.

The center will operate as an “internal startup” of OurCrowd, which will be its first client, and will aim to grow its customer base from there, said Sabah al-Binali, a partner at OurCrowd and executive chairman of OurCrowd Arabia. In Israel on his first visit, he spoke to The Times of Israel on Wednesday on the sidelines of Fintech Week Tel Aviv, a three-day financial tech event.

OurCrowd received a license to operate in the UAE last November, becoming the first Israeli venture capital firm to be approved by the Abu Dhabi Global Market (ADGM), the international financial center in the capital.

Al-Binali said the global AI innovation center will provide advanced financial services and could prove as a model for additional projects in other industries such as medtech (medical technology) and agtech (agricultural technology).

He said OurCrowd was working with six of its portfolio companies to set up commercial activity in the UAE, including an Israeli medical tech company that is set to launch clinical trials and a possible manufacturing line. Al-Binali declined to name the companies as agreements were still being finalized, he said.

Last month, OurCrowd portfolio company ThetaRay, a developer of fintech software that mimics human intuitive decision-making to detect financial fraud, signed a deal to provide its services to the UAE’s oldest private banking institution, Mashreq Bank PSC.

Al-Binali hailed the agreement and said it will serve as a steppingstone to secure additional large banks in the UAE and the wider region as clients.
UAE-based retail giant Lula negotiates operation in Israel
Indian-owned supermarket giant Lulu Group International, with headquarters in Abu Dhabi in the United Arab Emirates, is negotiating with Israeli officials about operating stores in Israel, financial daily Globes reported Tuesday.

The talks are reportedly headed by officials from the Israeli Economy Ministry.

Founded in 1995, Lulu operates 227 stores and 24 malls in 22 countries in the Gulf, Middle East, Asia, Europe and the United States, reporting annual revenue of $8 billion.

LuLu Group International also owns Twenty14 Holdings, which owns hotels across the world.
Israeli, Emirati, Bahraini, Moroccan Soccer Players to Team Up at Abraham Accords Games in Dubai
The United Arab Emirates will host a festive dinner and soccer game next week with top players from Abraham Accords countries, in a bid to promote peace between Israel and Arab nations through their shared love of sports and food.

The multinational initiative, led by US Ambassador to Israel Tom Nides and UAE Ambassador to Israel Mohamed Al-Khaja, seeks to deepen cultural cooperation and build people-to-people ties after Israel normalized diplomatic ties with Arab countries — UAE, Bahrain, Morocco, and Sudan — under the so-called Abraham Accords in 2020.

Nides described the event as an “opportunity to forge long-lasting connections between athletes, restaurateurs, and other doers and makers who have created such vibrant societies in the UAE, Israel, Morocco, and Bahrain.”

“Culture is the best way to create lasting connections,” he added.

The one-day “Abraham Accords Festival” will kick off on Tuesday at the Expo2020 Dubai, with a soccer match between a combined Israeli, Emirati, Bahraini, and Moroccan squad named “Abraham Accords Classics” team, which will play against against the “World Legends” team, featuring international soccer stars.

Israeli players Tal Ben Haim, Salim Tuama, and Maor Buzaglo will play on the Abraham Accords team along with Salaheddine Bassir, Noureddine Naybet, and Mustapha Hadji of Morocco; Bakheet Saad, Basheer Saeed, and Humaid Fakher of the UAE; and Talal Yousif Mohamed, Faouzi Mubarak Aaish, and Mahmood Abdul Rahman Mohamed of Bahrain.

The world legends team includes Brazil’s Kaká and Julio Cesar; Spain’s Carles Puyol and Michel Salgado; Argentina’s Javier Saviola; Nigeria’s Jay Jay Okocha; France’s Robert Pires, Bacary Sanga, and Claude Makélélé; and Holland’s Clarence Seedorf.
Book Review: Sephardi Voices: The Untold Expulsion of Jews from Arab Lands
Not only does this hand­some, glossy hard­cov­er include a gallery of stun­ning por­traits mak­ing it a per­fect gift and cof­fee table book, but the tim­ing of its pub­li­ca­tion is essen­tial. Hen­ry Green and Richard Sturs­burg have cap­tured the voic­es and faces of the still-liv­ing gen­er­a­tion of Jews who have expe­ri­enced first­hand — as chil­dren and adults — the great uproot­ing from their home­lands in Africa and the Mid­dle East in the twen­ti­eth cen­tu­ry. This is not a book that lingers in dis­tant his­to­ries of dead Jews, but one that puts front and cen­ter the ongo­ing sto­ries of Sephar­di and Mizrahi Jews who have lost so much, strug­gled, and yet also rebuilt rich, mean­ing­ful lives in their new home­lands, pre­dom­i­nant­ly Israel, France, Cana­da, and the Unit­ed States.

We are increas­ing­ly see­ing more and bet­ter reports, his­tor­i­cal research, and sto­ries that appear about Jews from Islam­ic lands, not just in acad­e­mia but also in the press and not the least on social media. In France and Israel, this rec­ti­fi­ca­tion has in no small part been due to the fact that Sephar­di and Mizrahi Jews make up the major­i­ty of the Jew­ish pop­u­la­tion and that they have con­tributed to an impor­tant revi­tal­iza­tion of Jew­ish cul­ture and joie de vivre in coun­tries where the shad­ow of the Holo­caust hangs heavily.

Pub­li­ca­tions on the top­ic in Eng­lish have lagged behind, but books like Lyn Julius’s recent Uproot­ed: How 3000 Years of Jew­ish Civ­i­liza­tion in the Arab World Van­ished Overnight, and now Green and Stursburg’s stun­ning and much-antic­i­pat­ed con­tri­bu­tion, help fill the lacu­nae on the top­ic. While the authors of Sephar­di Voic­es have cre­at­ed an aes­thet­i­cal­ly pleas­ing pub­li­ca­tion, they also pro­vide ample his­tor­i­cal con­text to give the read­er a sol­id sense of the gen­er­a­tions of Jews that called places like Moroc­co, Tunisia, Iran, Iraq, and Ethiopia their homes.

Before 1948 there were 856,000 Jews, many self-iden­ti­fied as Arab Jews, liv­ing in Islam­ic lands; today, less than 4,315 remain. In 2014, the Israeli Gov­ern­ment des­ig­nat­ed Novem­ber 30th as Yom HaGerush, or Expul­sion Day, a memo­r­i­al day for Jew­ish refugees from Arab lands and Iran. This rel­a­tive­ly recent annu­al mark­ing incen­tivizes Jew­ish com­mu­ni­ties around the world to cre­ate pro­grams that com­mem­o­rate this unique his­to­ry and legacy.

Final­ly, Green and Sturs­burg pro­vide many rel­e­vant sources — orga­ni­za­tions, films, video archives with inter­views and tes­ti­monies, and books — for the read­ers to turn to for more infor­ma­tion. But their great­est accom­plish­ment is that they have made these sto­ries come alive on the page. Through inti­mate glimpses and snap­shots of life before, dur­ing, and after expul­sion, we glean a vast col­lage of human des­tinies. The dra­mat­ic stu­dio por­traits — artis­tic close ups in black and white — give a sense of inti­ma­cy and urgency; ​“I’m talk­ing to you,” the faces seem to say, ​“and my sto­ry matters.”






Read all about it here!
at