Showing posts with label Arab League. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Arab League. Show all posts

Tuesday, July 04, 2023




From the EUISS webpage:
The European Union Institute for Security Studies (EUISS) is the Union’s Agency analysing foreign, security and defence policy issues. Its core mission is to assist the EU and its member states in the implementation of the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), including the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) as well as other external action of the Union.  

One would think that the EUISS' analyses would be in line with mainstream EU thinking.

Last year, Algeria hosted a forgettable Arab League summit. The EUISS used this as a springboard to evaluate how well and how poorly the League of Arab States (LAS) does what it was meant to do - avoid intra-Arab wars, for example.

But one of its threads of analysis was quite concerning:

The LAS has lost credibility in recent decades due to the weakness of its institutional mechanisms,and its failure to translate the lofty statements of its leaders into action. The inability to take a united stance on the Palestinian issue, when several Arab leaders decided to normalise relations with Israel, is probably its most profound failure, especially given that an overwhelming majority of 88% of Arab citizens disapprove of their governments’ recognition of Israel, and only 6% accept a formal diplomatic recognition.

 It sure sounds like the EUISS is saying that a unified Arab consensus against even recognizing Israel is far preferable to a situation where some Arab nations establish relations. 

An official EU organization that apparently considers  several Arab states making peace with Israel to be a "profound failure" seems to be a pretty big deal. Does this mean the EU considers earlier peace between Israel and Jordan and Egypt to have been a net negative as well?

In fact, the EUISS site does not have any analysis of the Abraham Accords at all. Even though these agreements have been perhaps the most far-reaching change in the Middle East since the Iranian revolution, they do not merit a single article. 

The longstanding EU position is that the Palestinian issue is the center of any Middle East peace (the "linkage" claim)  and the Abraham Accords showed that this assumption has never been true, and indeed the Arab League was the impediment to peace by pretending that its members were obligated to act as a single anti-Israel bloc instead of in their own self-interests.

In 2020, the EASS  - the diplomatic service of the EU - officially welcomed the normalization agreements  without using the name "Abraham Accords," but then spent more time discussing how a two state solution should be the main goal and blamed only Israel for the lack of progress on that front. Whether it is stated formally or not, the EU position seems to be that Israel has no rights or legitimate claims to the Old City, Area C or any historic Jewish sites outside the Green Line. It appears that the EU regards the Abraham Accords as a net negative because they reduced diplomatic pressure on Israel on ceding its claims and they took the focus away from the "Palestinians are virtuous, Israel is intransigent" mantra that has been its foreign policy towards the conflict since the Palestinian refusal for peace and the second intifada.

(h/t Irene) 



Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Thursday, June 29, 2023

BEIRUT, Lebanon, Sept. 16— Haj Amin el Husseini, the exiled Mufti of Jerusalem, and his Arab Higher Committee have started. a move to create a solid belt of Palestine Arab settlements around Israel and prevent-the moving of refugees away from Israel borders.

This change of front has come with the present evident collapse of the. former insistence by the Arab League, the Arab Higher Committee -and the Arab governments on the return of Palestine Arab refugees to their original homes under the terms of a 1948 United Nations resolution.,

The Arab Higher Committee was the last to demand that the refugees must return to the territory now under Israeli control. This demand not only has been abandoned. for practical, as opposed to political, purposes but the Arab Higher Committee and certain Arab statesmen now are opposed to. any return of Palestine Arabs to Israel territory. This change has been brought about by the fact that Israel will accept only a few Arabs into their old home, and that it is better to avoid the impression that the Palestine case has been settled. by agreement for a few to return.

...Strongly nationalist elements apparently are rallying around the Mufti and the Arab Higher Committee’s program for a belt of thickly settled Palestinians surrounding Israel.

...‘The shift in. the Mufti’s policy was apparently connected with the enthusiasm which Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Syria displayed for the preservation of the independent Kingdom of Jordan, and their strong opposition to its unification with Iraq. The Palestinian element is becoming increasingly predominant in Jordan in which it constitutes not only some two-thirds of the. population but is an educated and trained element that is pushing the original Jordanians, largely of Bedouin stock, into the background.
At the time, UNRWA was actually trying to solve the problem: it was pushing hard for Palestinian Arabs to be resettled in areas of Syria and Lebanon where they would be given plots of land and could become financially independent. And Israel had agreed to allow tens of thousands of Arabs to return but only in conjunction with the Arab world naturalizing the rest. 

But the Mufti did not care about what was best for the Palestinian Arabs. He wanted to destroy Israel. If he couldn't flood Israel with hundreds of thousands of refugees, he intended to turn Jordan into a temporary Palestinian state whose only purpose would be to destroy Israel - and that included building settlements surrounding Israel where they could be used as a means to attack Israel from a short distance. 

While his entire plan was not realized, during the 1950s and 1960s Israel suffered numerous terror attacks from Palestinian "fedayeen" who lived in nearby communities in Syria, Jordan and Gaza.

The Mufti's plan still lives, though. The PA, with the EU, are building their own settlements non-stop in Area C specifically to block Israel from controlling the land it is supposed to control in the Oslo Accords. Hundreds of illegal structures and ramshackle communities have been built, and Palestinians moved in from Areas A and B, daring Israel to tear them down in front of the cameras. 

It is an updated version of the Mufti's plan for settlements being built in Judea and Samaria not to benefit Palestinian Arabs but to hurt Israel. 

(h/t Charles)



Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Friday, June 16, 2023

From AP/Palestine Post, June 17, 1948:



This is exactly what the Palestinian leaders have been proposing as well, many decades later. They just couch the destruction of the Jewish state in terms of "right to return" and releasing thousands of terrorists from prison, two of the unwavering demands by the Palestinian Authority leadership since 2000. 

The intent has not changed one bit since 1948: their aim remains to abolish  the Jewish state. They just learned that if they call the planned ethnic cleansing of Jews from the region "human rights" then they can attract many latent "progressive" antisemites to their position. 

Notice there is no hint of compromise for peace. 

Also note that they don't say that they want an Arab state there, or anything about the "rights of Palestinians." The number one demand is no Israel, and everything else is secondary.

Those haven't changed in 75 years, either.




Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Thursday, June 08, 2023

During the War of Independence in 1948, on a few occasions the Palestine Post could not publish the newspaper properly. The editors nearly always managed to get something out, even if it was typewritten.

That is what happened on June 7, 1948.

But one of the stories includes an important quote that I have not seen elsewhere, possibly because of the newspaper looking the way it did.


"ARAB REFUGEES ARE FIFTH COLUMNISTS"

The Arab radio stations are broadcasting appeals to Arab refugees from Palestine to return to their homes. The Arab authorities are offering financial support to those who come back, while men of military age are promised exemption from duty.

In Cairo, Azzam Pasha [secretary general of the Arab League - EoZ] has stated that the refugees constituted a fifth column in the Arab states, where they are spreading despondency and alarm.
The closest I could find was a second hand quote from Aharon Cohen, in his book "Israel and the Arab World" (1964), where he says that Arab leaders were very critical of "fifth columnists and rumormongers" behind the flight from Israel.

The juxtaposition of the two reports in the newspaper shows the contempt that the Arabs leaders had for Palestinian Arabs and how much they wanted to rid their countries of them. 

Which is still true today.

The only difference is that soon after 1948, the Arab leaders came up with a better sounding plan. They still wanted to get rid of the refugees whom they considered cowardly and a threat to their own stability - but they started couching their desire to rid themselves of them as being "pro-Palestinian" because they supported "return" and avoided naturalization - ostensibly for the Palestinians' own good.




Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Thursday, February 16, 2023

From Times of Israel:

The Knesset approved a law on Wednesday to strip convicted terrorists with Israeli nationality of their citizenship — provided they receive funding from the Palestinian Authority or an associated organization.

The law, an amendment to Israel’s 1952 Citizenship Law, applies to both Israeli citizens and permanent residents incarcerated following a conviction for terror, aiding terror, harming Israeli sovereignty, inciting war, or aiding an enemy during wartime, and enables the interior minister to revoke their status after a hearing.

The law enables citizenship to be revoked even if the person lacks a second citizenship, provided they have a permanent residence status outside of Israel. Once citizenship is revoked, the person would be denied entry back into Israel.


The Palestinian prime minister Muhammad Shtayyeh reacted angrily, claiming the law is "racist" and illegal:

Prime Minister Muhammad Shtayyeh said in a statement that this decision is a racist practice and a flagrant violation of international law and international humanitarian law. calling on the United Nations, the United States, and the European Union to denounce the resolution, and to put pressure on Israel to force it to cancel it .

 Is it illegal to revoke citizenship of terrorists? Of course not. Western nations do it all the time. The US Department of Justice has an entire section for pursuing denaturalization for terrorists and other criminals. The UK, France and Britain have laws to strip citizenship away from terrorists, and the European Court of Human Rights has upheld their decisions.

There are two potential arguments against stripping citizenship. 

One is that this law is discriminatory, since it only applies to Palestinians and not Jewish terrorists. But that is only because the only recipients of Palestinian Authority payments are Arabs - if Jews would be convicted of terrorism for the Palestinian cause, and if the PA would pay them, the law would apply to them as well. Similarly, any Israeli Arab in prison can refuse to accept payments from the Palestinian Authority and therefore be immune from being denaturalized. The fact that they accept money from those who want to see Israel destroyed is a pretty good argument that they are not good citizens.

The second argument is that stripping nationality, leaving someone stateless, is illegal altogether. There is a UN Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness written in 1961 that never received a majority of UN votes - but even many of its signatories included reservations that made it clear that they maintain the right to revoke citizenship for specific acts by citizens. For example, Austria said, "Austria declares to retain the right to deprive a person of his nationality, if such person enters, on his own free will, the military service of a foreign State."

Shtayyeh's calling denaturalization "illegal" and "racist" is especially hypocritical. Only a day beforehand, he called on Western nations to revoke the citizenship of Jews (and only Jews!) who live across the Green Line. Arabs who moved across the Green Line are, of course, not "settlers." 

There would be a further irony if critics refer to the UN Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness to claim that this is illegal. Because nearly all Arab states refuse to sign that convention - if they did, they would be required to provide citizenship to children born to Palestinians there, and the Arab League says that Palestinians should remain stateless!

Once again, we see that "critics of Israel" aren't basing their critiques on international law, or morality, or really any framework that doesn't prove that they are hypocrites. The only consistency they show is antisemitism. 




Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Wednesday, December 21, 2022

From the December 21, 1947 Palestine Post, a report that the Arab League decided to forcibly conscript Jews or consider them the enemy.



And at the same time, more threats against the Jews of Aden (Yemen) materialized:


"Anti-zionism" or classic antisemitism?




Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Friday, December 02, 2022

All from newspapers published on December 2, 1947. 










General overviews of the conflict often skip over the period from the Partition resolution to May 14, 1948, when Arab armies officially attacked. The threats and attacks on Jews in Palestine and throughout the Arab world are downplayed. But the media at the time documented it.



Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Thursday, December 01, 2022

During the UN partition negotiations in 1947, the Arab side said they wanted a single Arab state. When that didn't fly, they said they wanted am Arab state that would protect Jewish rights. And when the partition vote passed, within hours, Arabs attacked Jews on the streets, showing how much they would have respected those Jewish rights. 

Meanwhile, as I reported this morning, the Arab states had no interest in a Palestinian Arab state - they were planning to divide up Palestine as soon as they could after the British left. 

And also, as always, the Palestinians themselves want their "refugees" not to help build their state - but to "return" to what they consider a criminal, apartheid, racist state. 

Of course, these same Arab states didn't say a word about an independent Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza when they controlled those areas. 

If the goal of Palestine is to have an independent state for Palestinian Arabs, why didn't they do it then?  If the goal is to give Palestinians rights, then why do Arab states not give them rights today? Why did they pivot between the ideas of a Palestinian state and none, and back again in 1968?

If we take the Arabs and Palestinians at their word, none of this makes sense. Their claims as to what they want - independence, freedom, justice - do not fit with their actions. Especially since they have rejected every plan that would have given them exactly that. 

There is only one consistent thread that explains all of this - the unifying theory of Arab attitudes towards Israel. And that is antisemitism. 

The goal has never been to build a Palestinian state. Even the Palestinians don't want that. They have had more time between Oslo and today than the Zionists had between the Mandate and 1948 to build the functioning apparatus of a state - and unlike the Zionists, they have had lots of aid and EU consultants  to do exactly that. Yet today their government is a joke, a dictatorship under the control of one person, with institutions that are corrupt or incompetent. It is all window dressing, not a serious attempt at building a real government. 

Two recent cartoons in Felesteen illustrate a great truth, especially on the 75th anniversary of the UN Partition resolution.



"Palestine" is not meant to be a state, and it never was. It is meant to be a weapon, a means to end the Jewish state. That's what it was in 1947 and that's what it is today. 

That's how Palestinian leaders look at it. That's how Jordan and Egypt and Syria still look at it. 



Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

During the UN debates before partiotion in November 1947, st the very same time that Arab leaders were at the UN insisting that they wanted an independent Palestinian Arab state, they were already planning on dividing the area up between themselves.

This article in the Palestine Post is from November 27, 1947:





There was a similar article in the Palestine Post on November 30, 1947, the day of the partition, from a completely different source.



ARAB STATES PREPARE TO FIGHT ABDULLAH
By JON KIMCHE, Special to The Palestine Post 

LONDON , Saturday  —Representatives of the Arab States here express serious disquiet following reports that King Abdullah's Arab Legion will occupy the Arab State sector of Palestine when the British withdraw. One British source normally very close to these representatives has stated , however, that what will happen, according to his information, is rather different .

The Arab Legion , together with a token force from Iraq, will occupy, he said, the central sector of the Palestine Arab State. Syria and the Lebanon will occupy the coastal stretch of the Arab State north of Acre, and Egypt, with a token Saudi Arabian force, will occupy parts of the Negev and the desert frontier area. What will _happen after such a "partition of partitioned Palestine", he added, is anybody's guess, but one thing is certain : that the Arab States will not accept Trans-Jordan taking over by itself, and that TransJordan will oppose Syrian and Lebanese inroads.
Literally hours earlier the Arab leaders were posturing in the UN about how dedicated they were to a Palestinian Arab state.

I once created this map of what "Palestine" would look like today if Israel lost in 1948. It was a guess, but it is in line with this article.








Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Tuesday, November 29, 2022



In the hours before the UN voted to partition Palestine into a Jewish and Arab states, the Secretary General of the Arab League, Abdul Azzam Pasha, warned that such a decision would result in a war of genocide against Jews in the Middle East.

This is the most complete text I can find of what he said, as the representative of the entire Arab world. speaking in English to a Western audience. 

It is worth studying, because it is a blueprint for virtually every Arab statement about Israel since then, including those of Mahmoud Abbas today. 

The speech is a combination of threats, bullying, fearmongering, hyperbole and incitement to genocide against Jews. 

From the International News Service, November 29, 1947:

Arab Official Says Partition To Mean War Against Jews
Abdul Azzam Pasha. secretary general of the Arab League, warned today that a United Nations decision to partition Palestine could mean only one thing for Arabs —war against the Jews." 

In a statement made as the UN general assembly prepared to vote on the explosive issue he declared: 

"Such a decision would mean the end of the first phase of the Arab struggle to have Palestine become an independent Arab state. The second phase of the struggle will now begin . . . the Arabs will have a long run of victories even it it takes us until 1950 or 1960.

"We have justice. time and numbers on our side—everything but arms— and we shall get them too." 

He said that tribesmen in Iran. Iraq and Saudi Arabia are "itching to fight." 

Azzam Pasha. just back from a six-weeks' tour of Arab states. said a meeting of the Arab League is scheduled for the near future. He added: "There is no question of the Arab countries leaving the United Nations or severing diplomatic relations with nations which vote for partition." 

The Arab spokesman said that if Haganah. army of the Jewish agency for Palestine. tries to enforce a partition decision after the British leave and Palestine Arabs seek the help of other Arab states "we shall not hesitate."

He declared: "Every Arab from Morocco to Afghanistan would rise in answer to the call of their Arab brethren." 

He forecast "disturbances" and "persecution" of Jews in neighboring Arab countries "in an atmosphere of hatred and animosity which will prevail in case of trouble." The spokesman added: 

"Palestine Arabs will not stop to find out who is Zionist and who is not. They will be fighting one enemy--Jews.

Azzam Pasha said it is impossible to estimate the strength of Arab volunteers who would fight for Palestine. 

He explained that Arab men will not rally in great numbers if the Arabs are victorious from the start but that "if we suffer any defeats in the beginning then the Arabs will rally in huge numbers because it will be a question of racial pride."
Let's analyze this.

"The Arabs will have a long run of victories even it it takes us until 1950 or 1960" - As always, Arab predictions are wrong - but the intent behind them has not changed. Arab media today, outside of those from the Abraham Accords countries, still has the subtext that Israel is an aberration that will be wiped out as soon as the Arabs can get their act together. Instead of saying Israel will be destroyed in a decade, they often point to the Crusades, where it took about 200 years to reverse the Christian control of Jerusalem, saying that they are equally patient as their ancestors were. 

 "We have justice. time and numbers on our side—everything but arms— and we shall get them too." The theme of "justice" has been taken up by the Left against Israel, even though in this speech we see what it means - the total destruction of Jews in the Middle East. It is brilliant rhetoric meant to obfuscate genocidal intent.

 "There is no question of the Arab countries leaving the United Nations or severing diplomatic relations with nations which vote for partition." This was a baseless threat, but Arabs can engage in hyperbole in threatening the West without consequence. And the Western world still remembers the oil shock of the 1970s: when the Arab nations had the power to use economic means to seriously threaten Western support of Israel, they did so. The repercussions, combined with the threat of Palestinian terror in Western cities, continue today. 

"Every Arab from Morocco to Afghanistan would rise in answer to the call of their Arab brethren." This entire speech is part of  pattern of the past 150 years where Arabs and Muslims take advantage of Western perceptions of them as irrational savages. The spectre of hordes of Arabs, willing to die for their cause, brandishing scimitars under a flag of jihad, is one that the Arabs have played to the hilt - and the West still falls for it. 

But there is a grain of truth to it. Most Arabs just want to raise their families in peace, and have little interest in fighting wars for "Palestine." However, decades of antisemitic incitement in their media and schools results in a small percentage who swallow that narrative. These are the ones who join ISIS and Islamic Jihad and Hamas. This is useful to the Arab leaders, as Pasha continues:

"He forecast 'disturbances' and 'persecution' of Jews in neighboring Arab countries 'in an atmosphere of hatred and animosity which will prevail in case of trouble.'" The Arab leaders may not support the fanatics, but they are quite willing to keep them around for a game of good cop/bad cop. Their consistent message is that if world doesn't do what they demand, they cannot stop the crazies (or the "Arab street") from doing horrible things. If the fanatics slaughter the Jews, the Arab leaders who incite that slaughter in Arabic cannot be blamed - it is the West's fault for not listening to their sage advice. 

"Palestine Arabs will not stop to find out who is Zionist and who is not. They will be fighting one enemy--Jews."  Pasha is again pretending to distance himself from the Palestinian Arab fanatics when Arab leaders were directly inciting exactly such a bloodbath in Arabic. And note how he tries to manipulate the West in the aftermath of the Holocaust: his message is that "you didn't protect the Jews for the past decade, if you want to avoid another Holocaust you should do what we demand."

"It will be a question of racial pride" - this is what passed for politically correct antisemitism in 1947. Of course Arabs cannot accept Jews in positions of power, for racial reasons. He is saying that Arabs are a racial group and Jews are considered inferior - it would be an insult to Arab pride to accept Jews as equals. 

This Nazi ideology made some inroads into mainstream Arab thought, and Abdul Azzam Pasha was still comfortable enough after World War II to evoke that same ideology. 

In the end, though, it wasn't Nazi racial theories that animated this speech. It was age-old antisemitism.

When Mahmoud Abbas threatens that there will be worldwide terror unless Palestinians get their demands met, he is engaging in exactly the same threats that Pasha did. When Arab leaders pretend that Western capitulation to their demands will weaken, rather than embolden, Islamist terrorists, they are using Pasha's playbook. When an Arab leader like King Abdullah only yesterday threatens the West with more "escalation, violence, and extremism" unless Palestinian demands are met, he is copying Pasha's tactics.

The Arabs keep using that methodology because it works.

As mentioned, the predictions by Arab leaders are often way off, but the intent behind these threats are not. And that is a problem the West continues to ignore.

The Western reaction to these kinds of genocidal threats haven't changed in 75 years. There is no direct response, but the message becomes accepted. The myth of "linkage" of the Palestinian issue to every other Middle East problem comes from statements like Pasha's, and the West never called the Arab world on it. Instead, they believed it. 

These statements are threats and incitement, and the Western world should respond with outrage, not meek acquiescence and winks that "they don't really mean it." 

Finally, the other thing that hasn't changed in 75 years is that the "anti-Zionism"stated here was indistinguishable from antisemitism. The threats were of genocide against Jews, both within and without Palestine, with barely a pretext of the coming bloodbath being about Zionism. 

Apologists will keep trying to draw a tortuous line between the two, but they are the same thing. And they always have been. 





Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Friday, October 14, 2022

From Ian:

Lapid's Two State Solution
What did Yair Lapid mean by his foregoing statement? Did he mean 2 states in an undivided Jerusalem or Jerusalem undivided as an Israel state with the Palestinian Arab state established elsewhere? If the former, he would find a majority in Israel would not accept this. If the latter, no Palestinian Arab or Arab leader would accept it.

What he should have done was to make use of an expert historian to proof positive Jewish indigenous rights to the Land of Israel, After all, during Temple Times , we learn of the Jews and the Romans. Subsequently the Greeks. The words, "Palestinians" and Arabs" don't appear until many centuries later.

To begin with, he could share the words of Lloyd George, who was outraged by the claim that Arabs had been treated unfairly in Palestine---":

"No race has done better out of the fidelity with which the Allies redeemed their promises to the oppressed races than the Arabs. Owing to the tremendous sacrifices of the Allied Nations, and more particularly of Britain and her Empire, the Arabs have already won independence in Iraq, Arabia, Syria, and Trans-jordania, although most of the Arab races fought throughout the War for the Turkish oppressors---[In particular ] the Palestinian Arabs for Turkish rule."[ A Mandate for Israel by Douglas J. Feith].

Perhaps the greatest lesson for Lapid is demonstrated by history - Appeasement mostly does not work and it certainly does not win.
Ruthie Blum: It makes sense to be suspicious of the maritime deal
Jaw-dropping press conference
LAPID’S PRIME-time press conference was just as jaw-dropping. Lauding the great “achievements” that Israel made by (ostensibly) rejecting a set of Lebanon’s additional demands, he boasted that the cabinet had approved the deal and thanked Biden and French President Emmanuel Macron for their help and support. Oy.

He proceeded to acknowledge that the agreement “staves off the possibility of a flare-up with Hezbollah,” quickly averring that “Israel is not afraid of Hezbollah. The IDF is stronger than any terror organization, and if we went to battle, we would deal it a heavy blow. That being said, if it’s possible to prevent war, it’s the job of a responsible government to do so.”

Questioned by a reporter about the government’s consent to circumvent a Knesset vote, he blabbered about the legality of the decision. Then he let the cat out of the bag.

“In light of the utterly profligate behavior of the opposition, we didn’t think that it would be [the] right [thing to do],” he explained.

In other words, the risk of Hezbollah interference in Israel’s gas mining is smaller in Lapid’s eyes than a potential parliamentary thumbs-down. Which brings us to Iran.

Biden's horrific foreign policy
DESPITE THE ongoing protests across the Islamic Republic that are providing a glimmer of hope about the ultimate fall of the regime, the US administration is continuing to convey its desperation to revive the nuclear pact and fill Tehran’s coffers with billions of dollars. This travesty is typical of Biden’s horrific foreign policy.

Israel cannot afford to follow in such ill-fated footsteps. Nevertheless, National Security Adviser Eyal Hulata defended the gas deal on the ridiculous grounds that it “goes against Iran’s interest in Lebanon and weakens Hezbollah’s hold on the government in Beirut.”

Really?

No wonder Udi Adiri, Israel’s longtime lead maritime border and gas extraction negotiator, resigned a couple of weeks ago in exasperation over the contents of the document that was crafted against his better judgment. This didn’t have an effect on what is going to be a signed, sealed and delivered deal on October 31, the day of Aoun’s exit and 24 hours before Israelis head to the polls.

No, you don’t have to be a maritime expert to grasp the magnitude of the gambit. Common sense and experience ought to suffice, if not in Israel’s soon-to-be-shuffled halls of power, then at least at the ballot box.
'All my family and friends turned against me when I enlisted in the IDF'
The Israel Defense Forces' Desert Reconnaissance Battalion is one of a kind: not only are its fighters volunteers, but they come from Muslim, Christian, and Circassian backgrounds, often having left their families and friends, who opposed their enlistment, behind.

They have served on the border with the Gaza Strip for many years, protecting Israel and putting their lives on the line.

According to one of the fighters, "there are people here whose identities cannot be revealed not because of the operational aspects, but because of what would happen to them if their photos or names were made public." The unit was established in 1986 in order to regulate the enlistment of Bedouin youth in the IDF. What began as a small unit has over time grown into a battalion.

When the Oslo Accords were signed in 1993, the unit became operational and was stationed along the Gaza border. During the Second Intifada, between 2000 and 2005, the fighters participated actively in operations in the strip, especially the Philadelphia Route, combating underground tunnels and the spread of terror.

In January 2002, four of the battalion's fighters were killed in an attack on an outpost near the Kerem Shalom border crossing, where several years later Gilad Shalit would be captured, and where the fighters carried out patrols with us, the journalists, in the dead of night.

Lt. Col. Guy Madar, 33, married and father of five from the Karmei Katif settlement in southern Israel, has been commanding the battalion for the past three months. He grew up in the Givati Brigade, and when he reached the rank of major general, he naturally wanted to continue his service in the purple brigade.

But today, he says, he could not be prouder of his fighters, even though sometimes the Arabic language, which is used outside of operational activity – as that is only conducted in Hebrew – is a challenge for him.

"I manage. The soldiers know Hebrew, and othertimes, they help me. My ambition is to learn Arabic. This is my first job as a battalion commander, but I got to know the Bedouin patrol unit because they are trained in a Givati base. But you only think you know something before you actually do it. Before that, there are a lot of preconceived notions. When I joined, I discovered how amazingly they operated. I grew up in Givati and I wanted to be an officer in Givati, and I will honestly say that at first, I was a little disappointed because I had a lot of fears, we all have our prejudices. It was only when I joined that I found out how serious this unit is. The fighters really don't get the appreciation they deserve.

"When I say that I am the commander of the Bedoun patrol unit, everyone tells me that it must be challenging and asks how I manage. My answer is that it is like any fighting unit in the IDF. That it is a group of fighters who want to contribute. They are strong, good fighters, and know the sector like the back of their hand. I have a company commander who has been here since 2013. Everyone who comes across the unit discovers that they are wonderful guys, not spoiled, who just want to fight and contribute to the country."

Friday, August 19, 2022


Criticizing antisemitism is criticizing Palestinians, according to Palestinians.

Palestinians got the Arab League to issue a statement of condemnation against - Germany. Because Germany doesn't like antisemitism, and therefore their criticizing Mahmoud Abbas' antisemitism (and his non-apology) is an anti-Palestinian stance.

The General Secretariat of the League of Arab States expressed its rejection and surprise at what appeared to be a German campaign of bullying against Palestine and President Abu Mazen, commenting on his use of the term "Holocaust" to express the Israeli crimes committed against the Palestinian people, which takes matters out of their proper context.

An official source in the General Secretariat expressed, in a statement today, Friday, the condemnation of some German reactions, which went too far, and in an unprecedented manner and without a convincing and rational justification, in demonizing the Palestinians and underestimating their enormous suffering for decades, as if the facts were turned on their head and the victim turned into the real culprit, and the Israeli occupation turned into a victim.

The source added that the Arab League understands the weight of the historical legacy on contemporary German governments and to the same extent that it understands the sensitivity and privacy of the term "Holocaust" and the heinous and condemned crimes associated with it. However, this should not turn into an entry point for scoring political points against the Palestinian cause and its leader, which contributes not only to obliterating the daily Palestinian suffering from the crimes of the occupation, but also to benefiting from the occupying power at the expense of the afflicted Palestinian people.

The source concluded his statement by noting that it is important and in everyone's interest to put a quick end to the media and political exchanges on this issue.
As far as I can tell, no German official said anything against Palestinians. Which proves that antisemitism is central to Palestinian philosophy, and any attack on antisemitism is regarded as an attack on Palestinians.

There is rarely such a clear moment that proves that "anti-Zionism" is simply antisemitism in a new package.




Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Wednesday, August 03, 2022



From KUNA, the Kuwait News Agency, July 31:

The Arab League called on the Arab States on Sunday to reactivate the boycott of Israel, describing it as a peaceful resistance to press Israel to abide by international resolutions.
The League Assistant Secretary-General for Palestine and the Occupied Arab Territories Affairs Saed Abu Ali made the remarks at the 95th meeting of the Arab boycott offices in Cairo.
He said Israel's international boycott had achieved success at both popular and official levels.
Compare with an Arab League press release from October 24, 2017:

The Arab League (AL) called on Arab States on Monday to reactivate boycott of Israel, describing it as a peaceful resistance to press Israel to abide by international resolutions.
AL Assistant Secretary General for Palestine and the Occupied Arab Territories Affairs Saed Abu Ali made the remarks at the 91st meeting of the Arab boycott offices in Cairo.
He said that the international boycott of Israel had achieved success at both popular and official levels.  

Yes, they are practically word for word the same.

And the idea of an Arab League boycott is now a joke with direct trade relations between Israel and Egypt, Jordan, Morocco, Bahrain and the UAE, and indirect relations with who knows how many others.

But the Arab League Boycott Office continues with its annual or semi-annual meetings, and they have to justify their existence, so they call the reactivate the boycott. Again and again. 

 



Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Sunday, June 26, 2022




A week ago, the Iraqi parliament unanimously passed a law criminalising any form of normalisation with Israel.  The law threatens the death penalty or life imprisonment for anyone calling for normalisation.

The law says that any Iraq who visits Israel will be sentenced to life imprisonment, and those who establish any political, economic, or cultural relations with Israel institutions, even through social media, will be sentenced to death. 

An analysis in The New Arab - which is very anti-Israel - indicates that Iraq might suffer from this law if it enforces it, which it might not do:

The new anti-normalisation law could also be weaponised against Sunni Arab dissidents, warned Tallha Abdulrazaq, an expert in Middle Eastern strategic and security affairs, in an interview with The New Arab.

“I’m a British-Iraqi and in my academic work I engage sometimes with Israeli academics, policymakers, and even lawmakers on occasion…I’m exactly the kind of target whom they’d like to sweep up in this sort of thing because I’m a dissident of the political process and I’m a Sunni. There’s a political aspect and a sectarian aspect to this…So, if you have any interactions with an Israeli entity, they can target you with this law.” He added that “this is going to have a chilling effect on academics abroad and people who work in the media.”

This legislation could also have negative implications for Iraq’s economy and foreign investment climate. Depending on the extent to which authorities enforce this law, investors might worry more about the potential risks of doing business in Iraq on top of concerns surrounding the country’s overall state of insecurity.

There could be “possible obstacles to foreign direct investment in Iraq by companies that feel constrained by their own policies or the laws in their home countries that would penalise anything that looks like cooperating in a boycott of Israel,” according to analysts Yerevan Saeed and Hussein Ibish.

Yet, Abdulrazaq believes that this law will not be weaponised against foreign corporations with links to Israel given Iraq’s current economic problems.

“The Iraqi economy is in absolute shambles…They need these foreign companies [and] foreign direct investment…This is more for popular consumption. It’s not meant as a stick meant to beat foreign companies with. They need them for their economy…If these guys were to leave, then that’s it for Iraq. There’d be almost nothing there for them. Even in terms of their oil sales, it’s not enough. It’s not enough to sustain Iraq itself. They will not chasing any foreign corporations any time soon.”
The initial consensus is that this law is simply a means to unite Iraqis with anti-Israel rhetoric, a time honored tradition in the Arab world that is quickly losing its effectiveness. There seems little appetite to have Iraq allow foreign investors to be chased away because they also have ties to Israel, which was the Arab League position for decades. 


(h/t JW)



Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

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 20 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:

Follow EoZ on Twitter!

Interesting Blogs

Blog Archive