From Ian:
Seth Mandel:
Israel’s Irish Goodbye
The debate over whether Israel should formally establish diplomatic relations with Germany was an impassioned, often vicious, deeply emotional probing of national trauma. It came long after Israel’s internal fight over whether to accept German reparations, which nearly tore the government apart. By the time the two countries proposed exchanging ambassadors, the wound had clearly not yet healed, and maybe never would.
In the end, diplomatic pragmatism and a shared hope for moving forward prevailed. Israel’s first embassy in Germany was opened in 1965.
Do you know when Israel’s embassy in Ireland was established? 1996.
So please, Irish President Michael Higgins and Prime Minister Simon Harris, spare us the feigned offense and the community-theater histrionics and the supposed shock in reaction to Israel’s announcement that it would close its embassy in Dublin. Ireland’s history with Israel is uniquely shameful among supposed Western democracies. Whether that justifies the closing of the embassy is another matter, but let’s stop pretending we’re talking about a normal situation. Ireland was the last EU country to host an Israeli embassy, and the gesture was watered down by making the same offer to the PLO, a terrorist organization that did not represent an existing nation-state.
Here’s the point: Ireland has always treated Israel with special contempt. Decades after Eamon de Valera offered Germany his condolences on the death of Adolf Hitler, the country he helped found seemed permanently stuck in time. Ireland had to be dragged kicking and screaming into recognizing the Jews. The Israeli embassy barely predates the Good Friday Agreement.
This is not ancient history, in other words. The closing of the Israeli embassy in Dublin, whatever its merits, is not the end of an era; it’s the end of an insulting modern experiment that Irish leaders spent a couple decades routinely sabotaging. Irish leaders thought they could have a Jewish pet who would crawl around on all fours and eat out of a bowl on the floor. And they have the chutzpah to scold him as he stands up on two feet and walks out.
Jonathan Tobin:
Don’t expect any humor about antisemitic ‘genocide’ smears
It’s easy to dismiss this story as a minor kerfuffle about a misguided effort to inject comedy into the debate about the Middle East. But it should be seen as providing more insight into the gap between the two sides than perhaps many liberal Jews who are still seeking dialogue have been willing to admit. The failure of this initiative speaks volumes about how toxic leftist ideas like critical race theory, settler-colonial theory and intersectionality have made dialogue or efforts to promote compromise solutions on a whole range of topics—of which Israel is just one—impossible. It also shows how the pervasive influence of this destructive intellectual fashion is more or less killing comedy.
If the debate about the Middle East were really, as liberals have long insisted, about the imperative for Israel to trade “land for peace” or its need to avoid building homes in Jerusalem or Judea and Samaria, then dialogue intended to build trust on both sides would be not only possible but necessary. But as decades of Palestinian rejection of every compromise offered to them have shown, if that would mean recognition of the legitimacy of a Jewish state in the Middle East, that is a price they are not willing to pay. Meaning, the conflict is not about borders or settlements.
The Palestinian Arabs and their supporters abroad who have rallied to their cause since Oct. 7 have made no secret of the fact that what they desire is turning back the clock to 1948 or 1917 and the elimination of Israel. Being so quick to manufacture lies about Israeli actions and intentions is not just a manifestation of Jew-hatred, though that’s part of it. Those who buy into the myth that Israel is a manifestation of a “settler-colonial” imperialism are drawn inevitably to the conclusion that there is nothing at all to talk about with Israelis or their supporters.
The anti-Israel movement’s adoption of this frame of reference is reflected in more than just the intolerant invective employed in the social-media ravings of those comics and others who believe that even a debate with Zionists would compromise their moral standing as progressives. Much like the best-selling book by anti-Zionist author Ta-Nehisi Coates, their accusations hurled against Israel are not merely divorced from the facts of what has actually happened in Gaza; they ignore the genocidal goals of the Palestinians, their embrace of terrorism and their unwillingness to compromise.
Such sentiments have, due to the progressives’ adoption of woke ideologies that falsely label Jews and Israelis as “white oppressors,” migrated from the ivory towers of academia to the political grassroots. This was made apparent as first President Joe Biden and then Vice President Kamala Harris spent the 2024 presidential campaign trying to placate their party’s left-wing base, which has grown increasingly intolerant of any stand on the Middle East that isn’t resolutely opposed to Israel.
Woke is killing comedy
The impact of these toxic ideas is not limited to politics. It is also a major reason why comedy—or at least the sector of it that is pitched to appeal to the half of the country that didn’t vote for Donald Trump—is dying.
For years, comedians have decried the stultifying impact that a spirit of political correctness has had on their craft. As anyone who has watched the political skits that appear on NBC’s “Saturday Night Live” or the monologues of the late-night comedy shows that don’t appear on Fox News, liberals can only accept humor that pokes fun at their political foes or those who hold different views about religion and culture. Edgy humor that doesn’t respect the shibboleths of woke sensibilities about certain protected minorities is no longer tolerated. Groundbreaking comedians of the past, like Lenny Bruce, had to navigate the intolerance of established society and the conservative values of the 1950s and early 1960s. Today, someone like him doesn’t have to worry about being arrested for offending decency codes. But they would surely be canceled by the left that dominates popular culture.
The result of this cultural trend is that much of what is now considered comedy is humorless virtue-signaling, essentially a nod to audiences’ shared contempt for those outside of their group.
Until mainstream culture shakes itself free of this leftist orthodoxy, efforts to arrange such joint events will always fail. Conversations between pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian comics, as well as their audiences, are impossible in a cultural context where progressives in America have declared that we are all locked in an endless race war between oppressors and victims.
Under these circumstances, pursuing dialogue across the unbridgeable gap between those who want to destroy Israel and those who work to support it is a fool’s errand. And that’s no joke.
Qatar: The Arsonist and the Firefighter
On Qatar National Day, as the Gulf nation celebrates its sovereignty and development, it’s essential to examine the darker side of its international role. While Doha projects itself as a stabilizing force and a mediator in global conflicts, evidence reveals a more duplicitous reality. Qatar has acted both as the arsonist and the firefighter—publicly advocating for peace while covertly funding and supporting extremist actors like Abu Mohammad al-Julani and Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), who destabilize the Middle East and threaten Western interests. HTS, which has links to al-Qaeda and ISIS, has been widely recognized as one of the most dangerous jihadist groups in the region, posing a direct threat to global security.
The Roots of the Allegations
Abu Mohammad al-Julani’s prominence as the leader of the al-Nusra Front, which initially aligned itself with al-Qaeda, and its later rebranding efforts under Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), have drawn significant international attention. While HTS has sought to distance itself from extremist origins, its links to Qatar have remained under scrutiny. Despite its rebranding, HTS retains strong ties to al-Qaeda, with its leadership and operations deeply intertwined with global jihadist networks. Furthermore, its battlefield alliances with ISIS-linked factions have amplified its capacity for terror.
A 2016 U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency report suggested that the al-Nusra Front “probably received logistical, financial, and material assistance from elements of the Turkish and Qatari governments.” This report, while cautious in its language, highlighted Qatar’s role in supporting extremist groups.
Qatar’s Public Denials and Its Hidden Agenda
While Qatari officials have consistently denied connections to al-Nusra Front or its successor organizations, their actions tell a different story. In a 2017 interview with Middle East Eye, former Qatari Prime Minister Hamad bin Jassim bin Jaber al-Thani admitted that Qatar “maybe” supported al-Nusra Front during the early years of the Syrian conflict but insisted such support had ceased. These admissions expose Qatar’s strategic duplicity—courting extremist groups to expand its influence while publicly denying culpability.
Media Appearances and the Role of Al Jazeera
Al Jazeera, Qatar’s state-funded media outlet, has amplified the voices of extremists like Abu Mohammad al-Julani. In December 2013, the network aired an exclusive interview with al-Julani, marking his first televised appearance. This was followed by a 2015 interview where al-Julani emphasized his focus on fighting the Assad regime and denied plans to target Western nations. These interviews legitimized al-Julani and HTS, bolstering their recruitment and propaganda efforts, all while Qatar claimed to be an ally of the West in counterterrorism efforts.
From Ian:
Can Israel Save the World from a Nuclear Iran?
For the last 20 years, two primary fears have held Israel back from launching a preemptive military strike to eliminate Iran's nuclear program. The first was a concern that a military strike would not succeed. Senior defense officials in Israel and the West warned that the Israeli Air Force could not reach Iran, could not overcome the advanced Russian air defense systems that surrounded its strategic facilities, and could not penetrate some of the nuclear installations, which are buried deep underground beneath layers of thick concrete and steel.
The second fear was the practical price Israel would pay if it attacked. Iran is believed to have about 2,500 long-range ballistic missiles capable of striking Israel; Hizbullah, until recently, had an arsenal of 150,000 missiles; Hamas had around 40,000 and the Houthis in Yemen have hundreds. Lastly, the regime of Bashar al-Assad in Syria, until recently, was in possession of hundreds of Scud missiles and several tons of chemical weapons.
These fears are no longer relevant. In October, more than 100 Israeli Air Force aircraft flew more than 2,000 km. and struck more than 20 targets throughout Iran, including Iran's S-300 surface-to-air missile systems, knocking out Iran's ability to defend itself and repel a future attack. All this means Iran is today vulnerable.
Israel, whether on its own or in coordination with the U.S., has a unique opportunity to remove the primary threat that it has warned about for more than 20 years - Iran's nuclear program. This window of opportunity is not unlimited. If Israel or the U.S. fail to act, Iran will take the final steps and build a nuclear bomb.
Danny Danon calls for UN to designate IRGC as a terrorist organization
Israeli Ambassador to the United Nations Danny Danon addressed the Iranian regime directly in Farsi during Wednesday's session of the United Nations Security Council, saying to not miss this rare, historic opportunity and "take action now."
"I am telling the Iranian people, we know the cost of freedom and the courage it demands," Danon said before the Security Council. "Your fight is not just for yourselves but for the millions of lives the regime has destabilized and destroyed. In your hands lie the power to restore the beautiful Iranian nation, to rebuild a land rich in history, culture and resilience."
Danon was the last diplomat to speak in Wednesday's session centered on the Palestinian question and Israel's ongoing war with Hamas. Earlier in the session, Michael Levy, brother of Israeli hostage Or Levy, testified before the council about his family's experience as a hostage family.
The chance before us is clear, Danon said, to finally end the Islamic regime of Iran's aspirations for a Shiite supremacist Empire, the chance to "liberate the world from the most corrupt, most violent, most destabilizing regime."
"Israel has acted decisively," he said, by striking terror networks that once "cast a shadow over our region."
A New Era of Hezbollah Defeat
In the eighteen-year interwar interregnum, Israel shifted to a strategy of preventing the outbreak of a major war. Employing its intelligence-gathering skills to maximum effect, the Israelis struck repeatedly at Iranian weapons transfers to Hezbollah, primarily in war-torn Syria. This became known in Israel as the “campaign between the wars.” But the pinprick Israeli strikes, meant to slow Hezbollah’s arms buildup—specifically precision guided munitions—never challenged Hezbollah’s overall strength.
But in preparation for this war, the Israelis seem to have spent at least the past decade penetrating every level of Hezbollah’s organizational apparatus. Indeed, when the time came to fight, no Hezbollah official and no Hezbollah asset was safe. Israel seized the initiative and crippled the group’s military apparatus before it could even mobilize. The Israelis located and liquidated one Hezbollah “ghost” commander after the next, including the elusive mid-level Radwan force commanders who had invested heavily in anonymity. Israel’s campaign this go-round even demonstrated a better understanding of the pressure points on Hezbollah’s support base and the group’s broader Lebanese environment. Hezbollah’s path to regeneration, while not impossible, is more complicated than ever before.
On the Israeli home front, the Israeli public was steeled for this fight. The October 7 horrors and Hezbollah’s ability to conduct its own identical attack created an unprecedented recognition among Israelis that Hezbollah would need to be defeated, no matter the price. Compounding this, Hezbollah’s strikes drove an estimated 160,000 Israelis from their homes since October 8. According to one Israeli official who spoke on background to us, Hezbollah has destroyed $10 to $15 billion in Israeli insfrastructure in the countries north.
The war may not be over yet. And more damage could still be sustained. But after nearly a year of indecision, the IDF gained the conventional upper hand, and this time employed it to maximum effect. Israel deployed its forces according to a combined-arms doctrine that was specifically developed over the past eighteen years to confront Hezbollah. This included internal restructuring of the IDF to create forces like the Oz Brigade, which brought all the IDF’s special forces units under one umbrella, to confront an irregular actor like Hezbollah. When Israel entered Lebanon this time, it favored powerful and agile ground maneuvers over armor or standoff firepower.
Israel had also invested in building a multitiered missile defense array, including the short-range Iron Dome and and mid-range David’s Sling systems. These systems are defensive and not hermetic. They could not always neutralize Hezbollah drones and or “sniping” attacks on northern communities. There simply is no substitute for offensive action. Nevertheless, these systems blunted Hezbollah’s attacks just enough to minimize the group’s impact on the Israeli Home Front and to keep up public moralem a vital component of any democracy’s war effort.
Predictably, Hezbollah is now attempting to claim victory. Merely surviving is the group’s key metric in this regard. Admittedly, the group has scored several hits against Israel, killing 56 Israeli soldiers and wounding hundreds of others, and confounding Israeli defenses with anti-tank guided missile attacks and swarms of loitering munitions. But as the dust settles, a stark picture of the group’s defeat emerges: at least 2,500 members killed, many of them elite and irreplicable leaders, a decimated arsenal, and flattened military infrastructure. All of this will take years to rebuild.
From Ian:
Antisemitism is everywhere on this earth. Going to space gave me hope we might finally leave it behind
I am one of only a dozen or so Canadians who has been to space. In fact, fewer than 700 human beings have ever shared the experience.
On Nov. 22, with five other crew members, I rode Blue Origin’s New Shepard rocket beyond the Earth’s atmosphere.
About 30 minutes before launch, the capsule was sealed as the countdown was initiated . On top of a rocket 10-storeys high, I looked out the window at the west Texas desert. I was calm and unafraid. I thought back to my childhood dream of being an astronaut and to my family history — the remarkable confluence of events that brought me to this moment.
In the early 1900s, my grandparents escaped pogroms in Russia and Ukraine. My father-in-law is a Holocaust survivor. After the horrors they experienced, they came to Canada with nothing but the hopes and dreams for a better life.
I tensed a bit as the countdown reached its final seconds. After launch, G forces pressed against my body as the rocket soared straight up at speeds of more than 4,000 km/h. In less than three minutes it was dark and eerily quiet.
I floated from my seat and saw our planet and the narrow blue band of atmosphere that protects us against the infinite blackness beyond. Then I experienced a collision of emotions from joyful exuberance to despair. A few minutes later we were strapped back in and falling back to Earth.
Much of my life has been dedicated to fighting antisemitism. After Hamas’s barbaric attack on innocent Israelis on Oct. 7, 2023 and the manifestation of hatred toward Jews that followed, I saw this brief journey as an opportunity to inspire unity, resilience, and optimism.
My trip into space means more than fulfilling a childhood dream. It’s about carrying a powerful message to the world: the rise in antisemitism and hate has no place in our world. It must end now.
Antisemitism is the world’s oldest form of hatred. For centuries, Jewish people have been targeted, marginalized, and scapegoated, based on harmful myths and conspiracy theories.
Oct. 7 evoked memories of the darkest days in history and has exacerbated an already growing climate of hate. The spread of antisemitic hate on campuses, our streets, and online platforms has been terrifying.
We are witnessing the devastating consequences of unchecked antisemitism, which is regaining mainstream acceptance, as it did in the lead-up to the Second World War.
This fight against antisemitism is not just a Jewish issue. It is a matter that concerns all Canadians who value justice, equality and human dignity.
Israeli Soccer Fans Retain Legal Counsel After Facing Antisemitic Violent Attacks in Amsterdam
More than 47 fans of the Israeli soccer team Maccabi Tel Aviv who were targeted during the antisemitic violence that took place in Amsterdam in November have obtained legal counsel from The Lawfare Project, the international Jewish civil rights organization announced last week.
The Lawfare Project, a US-based global network of legal professionals, has been retained to provide strategic legal counsel to victims of the premeditated and coordinated attack that took place on Nov. 7 after a soccer match in Amsterdam between Maccabi Tel Aviv and the Dutch soccer team Ajax.
The Lawfare Project’s representation “focuses on combating rising antisemitism and advocating publicly for justice on behalf of the victims,” the organization said in a press release. It has yet to file a lawsuit on behalf of the victims and is currently reviewing legal options after helping clients also secure local counsel in Amsterdam, the organization told The Algemeiner. Peter Plasman, a partner at the Amsterdam-based law firm Kötter L’Homme Plasman, will serve as co-counsel.
“Our 47 clients have called for the court to convict the suspects and ensure that they are held financially accountable for the harm they have caused,” said Plasman. “While there were discussions about postponing the trial, I firmly believe we must move forward now to send a strong message: justice must prevail, and society must not tolerate such hatred.”
“The brutal assault on Jewish individuals in Amsterdam last month is just the latest example of the alarming rise of antisemitism in Europe,” added Brooke Goldstein, founder and executive director of The Lawfare Project. “Since the horrific events of October 7, 2023, Jews worldwide have been increasingly targeted with violence, harassment, and discrimination. We are calling on governments across Europe to take immediate action to protect their Jewish communities and ensure that those responsible for these attacks are held accountable.”
After the Nov. 7 soccer match as part of the UEFA Europa League, anti-Israel and pro-Palestinian gangs violently attacked fans of Maccabi Tel Aviv on the streets of Amsterdam. Israeli soccer fans were chased by assailants carrying knives and sticks, run over by cars, physically assaulted, and some were forced by their attackers to say “Free Palestine.” Some Israelis barricaded themselves in buildings, shops, and other places in the city to avoid the attacks. A number of the victims were hospitalized.
Amsterdam’s mayor called the attackers “antisemitic hit-and-run squads” and said the assailants were going “Jew hunting.” Both former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett and current Israeli Ambassador to the United Nations Danny Danon called the violence a “pogrom.”
Brussels venue de-platforms Al-Jazeera-funded conference over Hamas leader participation
A conference funded by Al Jazeera and led by Hamas officials in Europe was canceled by its Brussels host venue’s website following a recent US treasury designation.
The European Palestinian Council for Political Relations (EUPAC), a Belgium-registered lobbying organization, organized the event under the leadership of two Hamas officials in Europe, chairman Majed Al-Zeer and deputy chairman Mohammad Hannoun. The US Treasury only designated these officials this week as Hamas officials who raised millions of dollars for the terror group.
The conference was set to take place on Monday. As of Thursday, the invitation has been taken off the venue’s website, with a different event replacing it.
It was titled “The Genocidal War in Gaza One Year On: Humanitarian, Legal, and Political Implications in the European Context” and was supposed to feature members of the European Parliament, including Lynn Boylan from Ireland, Daniel Attard from Malta, and Vicent Marzà Ibáñez from Spain, with EUPAC chairman Majed Al-Zeer as a key speaker.
There has been no official cancellation of the conference, and it remains unclear if it will still take place at the venue or at a different location.
The Al-Jazeera-Hamas connection
The Al Jazeera-Hamas connection Al Jazeera funded the conference, intended to host a designated Hamas official. Hamas, which was designated a terrorist organization by the EU, Canada, the US, and many other nations, defines itself as the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, an Islamist political and social movement founded nearly a century ago in Egypt. It seeks to establish an Islamic state with Sharia as its law. Other tributaries of the Muslim Brotherhood include Al-Qaeda and ISIS, both of which are part of the Salafi Jihadist stream of the movement.
Qatar, which owns the Al Jazeera network, is known as one of the major patrons of the Muslim Brotherhood and has promoted its branches across the globe with funding and moral support. In Israel, local courts have recently argued that Hamas views Al Jazeera as its propaganda and intelligence arm. On many occasions, the Qatari-owned channel published exclusive footage and first-hand statements and information originating from Hamas and its military wing, the Al-Qassam Brigades.
The recent US designation, which was published on the one-year commemoration of the October 7 massacre, stressed that other parties are prohibited from providing funds, goods, or services for the benefit of the newly recognized Hamas officials, warning of “secondary sanctions” to those who engage in “certain transactions.” It is unclear whether Al Jazeera would also be subject to those sanctions in the case of funding this event.
Activists, politicians encourage cancellation Belgian MP Michael Freilich encouraged the Press Club to cancel the conference. He said, “I urge the Press Club to adhere to the US designation and cancel the event. However, regardless of the outcome, nothing would absolve Belgium of its responsibility.
From Ian:
Seth Mandel:
Welcome to the New Great Game
Where in the world is Bibi Netanyahu? Like the old Carmen Sandiego computer game, we’re following clues, tracking steps, investigating sightings. Turns out he’s on Mount Hermon in Syria today, at a briefing with top IDF brass.
He was rumored to be en route to Cairo for Hamas cease-fire talks, and while he wasn’t there this morning, he may be by tomorrow. Negotiations over a hostage deal appear, by all accounts, to be in the home stretch.
The visit to Mount Hermon is significant: it might be the first time a sitting Israeli premier has been in Syria (openly, at least) while in office. What his Syria trip and his expected Cairo trip have in common is that they are to assess the status of de-Iranization in the region.
The last time a power vacuum of this magnitude opened up in the Middle East was the fall of the Soviet Union. Before that, it was the end of the British Mandate for Palestine. Iran is not gone completely, of course—far from it. Yet its empire is collapsing in much the way the Ottoman Empire collapsed a century earlier: In a global conflict, it is aligned against the West and it is paying for that choice.
Netanyahu, Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, and Jordanian king Abdullah cannot wait for the dust to settle, because nature abhors a vacuum.
As does Turkey.
“Senior U.S. officials say Turkey and its militia allies are building up forces along the border with Syria, raising alarm that Ankara is preparing for a large-scale incursion into territory held by American-backed Syrian Kurds,” reports the Wall Street Journal today. “The forces include militia fighters, Turkish uniformed commandos and artillery in large numbers that are concentrated near Kobani, a Kurdish-majority city in Syria on the northern border with Turkey, the officials said. A Turkish cross-border operation could be imminent, one of the U.S. officials said.”
Turkey has backed a collection of rebel forces and has been newly empowered by those groups’ territorial gains in the wake of Assad’s fall. Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, the former al-Qaeda offshoot that has led the overthrow of Assad and now controls Damascus, is in alliance with Turkey, allowing Turkish forces to “operate within territories it controlled and the establishment of Turkish observation posts in northern Syria” before the fall of Assad, notes FDD analyst Ahmad Sharawi in a policy brief today. “HTS has even positioned itself as a gatekeeper for Ankara, curbing drug trafficking into Turkey, preventing ISIS infiltration, and apprehending individuals wanted by Turkish authorities. HTS leader Ahmad al-Shara, long known by his nom-de-guerre Abu Mohammad al-Jolani, had also allegedly supported Turkish military operations east of the Euphrates, according to a report by the Turkey-based Syria TV broadcaster.”
How Israel Can Win the War
It is important to remember that the war did not break out because Israel wanted it. The war is Israel's response to Hamas's barbaric assault on civilian communities on Oct. 7, 2023, and it was Hizbullah that opened fire on northern Israel the day after the attack.
The outbreak of war was rooted in Iran's ambitions and preparations for Israel's collapse and destruction. To this end, Iran conceived and implemented the "Ring of Fire" around Israel - a coordinated campaign from all fronts conducted by terror movements built with Iranian support with the aim of destroying Israel.
The war's end must make clear to the world, especially the Muslim world, that radical Islamic movements, both Sunni and Shiite, bring disaster to their people and destruction to their believers. Hizbullah is Iran's most robust proxy; the greater the damage done to Hizbullah, the more Iran is weakened.
After Iran on two occasions fired hundreds of missiles at Israel, the actual extent of its military power was revealed, and effectively the Iranian strategy collapsed. The Israeli operation on Oct. 26, in which 20 targets in Iran were hit, made clear to the Iranians the price of direct confrontation with Israel and its weakness in the face of the capabilities Israel demonstrated.
Israel is not operating as in previous wars to achieve "threat postponement" on its borders but based on the understanding that threats must be destroyed (Hamas) or at least drastically reduced in intensity (Hizbullah).
In Lebanon, no Hizbullah personnel and no Hizbullah infrastructure should remain in the south, which should become a buffer zone mostly without residents and without the presence of any entity threatening Israel. The IDF will oversee this. The buffer zone's purpose is to prevent flat-trajectory fire toward Israeli communities and to push Hizbullah's ground forces beyond the range of executing a surprise Oct. 7-style attack.
In both Syria and Lebanon, the IDF should employ the same kind of campaign between wars as it did in Syria over the last dozen years to continue degrading Hizbullah's capabilities and not allow it to rebuild.
How Israel Can Press for Victory on Its Northern Fronts
Just before the collapse of Syria took over the Middle East news cycle, the big question was the prudence, viability, and results of the cease-fire agreement that ended the war between Israel and Hizballah. Eran Lerman outlines Jerusalem’s strategic challenge going forward:
The IDF has already begun to implement a strict policy of enforcing the letter and spirit of the cease-fire terms, backed by the American position as conveyed in a crucial side letter. Swift reaction and retaliation are being used to restore deterrence, and reverse the patterns of past years, during which Israel often shrugged off Hizballah provocations, including the presence of Hizballah tents on sovereign Israel territory.
This is largely the belated lesson of October 7. . . . Only the IDF can be fully relied upon to deliver such necessary swift and decisive reactions.
Yet, Lerman emphasizes, the IDF’s campaign against Hizballah must be understood as “the beginning, not the end” of a war to break the Iranian attempt to encircle Israel with hostile forces. Responding to the fall of Bashar al-Assad, he adds:
Hizballah has not collapsed altogether, but it does face a multidimensional threat to its long-term survival as its routes of supply have been disconnected. Syrian rebels may resume direct pressure on Lebanon (as Islamic State did a decade ago—when Hizballah was the main force preventing the group’s entry into the country). Anti-Assad forces in Lebanon, hostile and vengeful toward Hizballah, may well gain the upper hand in Lebanon itself. These developments could significantly diminish Hizballah’s ability to resume its attacks on Israel or even re-establish its presence in south Lebanon, provided Israel maintains a policy of zero tolerance toward any violation of the November 2024 understandings.
Seth Mandel:
Iran Tries To Make a Stand in Jenin
The future of Gaza depends to some extent on what’s happening in Jenin this week.
The West Bank city is a hotbed of Iranian-backed militias who have spent years carving out a separatist haven there. It is a significant challenge to Mahmoud Abbas and the Palestinian Authority. Both Israel and the Palestinians who want self-determination share an interest in preventing the Iranian colonial project from accomplishing its primary aim in the West Bank: Palestinian civil war and the disintegration of the Palestinian Authority.
Since Oct. 7, 2023, that has only become more urgent. At some point, the PA is expected to take over the administration of the Gaza Strip after Hamas is removed from power. If Abbas cannot maintain control over the West Bank, the PA cannot take on Gaza as well.
And so Abbas’s decision to send Palestinian security forces into Jenin is a crucial test for the aging autocrat and his government.
“The gunmen in Jenin are not resistance fighters, but mercenaries serving the dubious agenda of an outside party,” declared PA spokesman Anwar Rajab.
The New York Times describes the riddle that the PA, Israel, and the U.S. are trying to solve. Israel has been stepping up its security raids in Jenin because Abbas is barely able to step foot in the city. Israel does not want an Iranian terror-and-tunnel project in the West Bank to match the one currently undergoing disassembly in Gaza. The U.S. wants Israel to back off a bit, to enable the Palestinian security forces to gather the strength to take back Jenin. But if Israel backs off too much or for too long, the PA will fail when it does try to restore order there.
From Ian:
The Democrats’ Anti-Israel Future
None of this foretold a friendly policy toward Israel had there been a Harris presidency. Her choice of running mate reinforced this inference. Pennsylvania’s popular governor, Josh Shapiro, was reported to be the front-runner for the position, with polls showing the Electoral College likely to pivot on Pennsylvania’s 19 votes, but a furious campaign was mounted against Shapiro as a Jew who strongly supports Israel. The New Republic’s David Klion, who led the charge, warned that the choice of Shapiro would “ruin Democratic unity.” Harris turned instead to Tim Walz, unknown outside of Minnesota, a state already safely in the Democratic column.
As a member of Congress from a rural district, Walz compiled a moderate record, including support for Israel. As governor, he turned progressive, but it was an office that rarely dealt with foreign policy. Once becoming the vice-presidential nominee, Walz commented that anti-Israel protesters were acting “for all the right reasons,” notwithstanding their calls of “From the river to the sea” and “intifada revolution.”
Her switch to Walz was applauded by James Zogby, founder and president of the Arab American Institute and the dean of pro-Arab, anti-Israel agitators. His comments also revealed his take on Harris: “We have every indication that she is going to turn a corner, and [Walz] does not impede that corner turn. Shapiro on the other hand would have become an issue.”
But the Harris-Walz team fell short, leaving us to ponder where the Democrats’ season of post-election breast-beating and introspection will leave Israel. Already, Biden’s defeat has let loose a new momentum against Israel. In late November a Senate vote on three resolutions introduced by Bernie Sanders to block certain weapons shipments to Israel received 19 Democratic votes, with one other Democrat listing herself as “not voting,” out of 49 Democratic members. Apparently none wished to dissociate from Sanders’s stated rationale that Israel’s actions in Gaza are “unspeakable.”
This marked an increase from the 10 votes Sanders had put together for an analogous measure early in the year. Moreover, according to the Times of Israel, Biden administration officials from the White House, State Department, and Pentagon all worked the phones, lobbying against Sanders’s resolutions. True, as a lame duck, Biden has less clout, but he is still president, and senators often take counsel from executive-branch leaders of their own party on foreign issues.
Even while supplying much badly needed weaponry to Israel, and pushing back against congressional efforts to impede this, the Biden administration itself withheld bombs to pressure Israel on Gaza and apparently acted similarly on Lebanon, announcing a large new package only after Israel agreed to a cease-fire with Hezbollah. Nonetheless, most observers feel that Israel came away with a victory.
Whatever arm-twisting Biden did, it is hard to doubt that the Democrats’ momentum away from Israel will continue after he leaves office. And if Donald Trump pursues a strongly pro-Israel policy, it is likely to receive a partisan flip.
How far will the Democrats’ turn from Israel carry them? That question remains to be answered. In the 1990s, Bill Clinton pulled the Democrats back from the left. It is not impossible to imagine that the Democrats could again be yanked back from their current trajectory by some new leader. For example, could Ritchie Torres, the brilliant black Latino gay representative from the Bronx who has emerged during this war as one of Israel’s most articulate and devoted advocates, make the leap last achieved by James Garfield in 1880? Stranger things have happened, but this seems a long shot.
The Republicans are now frequently described as “Trump’s party.” On Israel, the Democrats are, for the foreseeable future, “Obama’s party.” That party may well reflect the delicate balancing of Obama’s Pod Save America formula more than the unambiguous leap to Israel’s defense that was Biden’s initial response to October 7.
Richard Landes:
Palestinian Lethal Projections
Conclusions:
The lethal narrative – Israel’s deliberate, murderous cruelty – is not confirmed by footage: there are no elements of the visuals that are probative of the narrative claim of targeting the boy and anyone who helps him. Only the verbal overlay makes that claim, and given how often that script does not describe what the camera shows (torn to pieces… these are the injured), one can hardly consider that testimony decisive.
There is, on the other hand, nothing decisively probative that this is staged, like the boy getting up after the filming. And yet, as with Al Durah, the staged hypothesis does explain all the multiple anomalies. Odds that this is staged, 80-95%; odds it depicts the lethal narrative, under 1%.
From a journalist’s point of view, while this story does not offer sufficient evidence to denounce it as a deliberate fake, it certainly does not offer sufficient evidence to run it as a news story. No serious professional journalist, committed to not running war propaganda as news whether his side’s or the enemy’s, would consider this story viable. Apparently Evan Hill, did. And the Times of Israel sought fit to reproduce his piece without comment.
Finally, the storyline is noteworthy since it is not only a lethal narrative – Israelis excel in killing innocent children – but also a projected one. During the second intifada, Palestinian Jihadis developed precisely this technique of setting off an initial bomb and then, when Israelis gathered to help, setting off a second one to kill them as well. So here, people who know that doing so is evil and yet somehow feel authorized to so behave, accuse their enemies of that evil, and appeal to outsiders to take their side out of compassion.
Somehow, in the strange logic of the compassionate imperative, we are forbidden from saying that they deliberately lie to us, but must accept their claim that the Israelis are deliberately targeting their children.
Amnesty's Descent Into McCarthyism: The Case of Israel, Gaza and Genocide
Amnesty International's Secretary General Agnes Callamard has already made clear where her sympathies lie, publicly thanking for his "courage and principles" the former recent head of the Amnesty chapter who resigned his post because of what he said was the unequal treatment of Palestinians there.
Amnesty Israel's internal problems need to be addressed.
But once an organization turns against its own members, it is a dangerous day for human rights. Members who have dedicated their professional lives – and much of their private ones – to fighting their own government, occupation, and for Palestinian rights, often incurring the disdain of their own society for doing so.
It is a dark day when it portrays colleagues who have themselves initiated policies to include more Palestinian voices as hostile to them.
It is a frightening day when an international organization dedicated to free speech cuts off colleagues who posit an alternative legal interpretation, with allusions to racism and insinuations abound that they can't make a clear-eyed argument related to Israel because they are Jewish. Some people might even call this racist.
If these are the enemies of human rights, it's worrying to think about who human rights NGOs count as their friends.
In the 1950s, Joseph McCarthy ferreted out "enemies from within" by accusing them of Communism. Today's human rights NGOs raise different specters: racism, colonialism, oppression. But the contours remain the same. Ideology. Allies turned enemies. Demonization. Unwinnable fights. And a veneer of procedure and justice.
Eventually, the Senate censured McCarthy, and brought his reign of terror to an end. But the years of the Red Scare cast a long shadow until today –a somber reminder of what can happen when institutions are corrupted, power is left unchecked, and ideology takes the reins.
From Ian:
Andrew Fox:
The parroting of Hamas propaganda is an ethical crisis for journalism
This shameful and irresponsible media bias emboldens antisemitic conspiracies and justifies hostility toward Jewish individuals and communities, conflating criticism of Israeli policies with outright bigotry. The surge in antisemitic attacks worldwide underscores the dangerous real-world consequences of disseminating unverified figures that paint an incomplete picture of the conflict.
Accurate fatality data is not just an academic exercise — it is essential for fair reporting and policy-making regarding Israel. International humanitarian law acknowledges civilian harm as an inevitable consequence of war, provided efforts are made to minimise it. However, by inflating the proportion of civilian casualties, Hamas has manipulated perceptions to vilify Israel on the global stage. This tactic not only undermines Israel’s right to self-defence. It also obscures the role of Hamas in exacerbating civilian suffering through their deliberate strategy of the human sacrifice of Gaza’s civilian population.
The irresponsible reporting of fatality statistics also erodes trust in journalism, a cornerstone of democratic societies. The media’s uncritical acceptance of MoH data, combined with its reluctance to challenge Hamas’ propaganda, reveals a failure to uphold basic journalist standards of accuracy and impartiality. This negligence allows Hamas to weaponise casualty figures as a tool of psychological and political warfare.
The responsibility to counter disinformation lies with the global media. We hope this report serves as a wake-up call to journalists and editors who must exercise greater diligence in verifying sources, especially in conflict zones. Failing to do so risks perpetuating false narratives with devastating consequences for public trust and global stability.
By taking Hamas’ numbers at face value, the media undermines its credibility and amplifies a biased narrative that distorts the realities on the ground. Journalists must scrutinise all sources of data with equal rigour, ensuring that the public receives an accurate, nuanced understanding of conflicts like the one in Gaza.
The misreporting of Gaza’s fatality figures is more than a journalistic failure; it is an ethical crisis that has fuelled global antisemitism and polarised international discourse. Our report is a vital reminder that truth is the first casualty of war, and it falls to the media to guard it zealously. In a world increasingly shaped by disinformation, upholding journalistic integrity is not just a professional duty — it is a moral imperative. After 14 months of antisemitism sparked by irresponsible reporting of the war in Gaza, the Jewish community in the UK knows that better than anyone.
Seth Mandel:
The Most Important Revelation About Gaza Casualties
From April to August of this year, the report states that, according to Hamas hospital numbers, 45 percent of those killed were men and 37 percent were children. According to the more reliable family reports, men were 64 percent of casualties and children were 22 percent.
Except, “children” generally means under 18 and Hamas has been known to tweak it to 19. Which means we know for a fact a chunk of that 22 percent were combatants. Some of those combatants were children, some weren’t. The fact that Hamas uses child soldiers actually benefited the terror group in the media narrative, because the numbers never distinguish between civilians and combatants, and news consumers don’t read “children” and assume “combatants.” The press was broadly complicit in normalizing and incentivizing the use of child soldiers, a fact that should stain many reputations forever.
But wait, there’s more. The report notes that Hamas—and thus the press—includes natural deaths in the casualty count. There were more than 5,000 natural deaths in that time, by conservative estimate.
But wait, there’s even more. A review of the first 1,000 names on Hamas’s casualty list between the beginning of the war and the summertime found more than 100—that is, 10 percent—had their ages revised downward. In other words, between the time that Hamas numbers could be plausibly verified and the more recent counts, lots of people suddenly became “children.”
But wait, there’s still more. Gaza casualty numbers include those killed by Hamas or other Palestinian armed groups. Remember the al-Ahli hospital blast that was reported initially as a Israel’s fault, only to become clear soon after that it was an errant Palestinian rocket (likely from Palestinian Islamic Jihad)? Those deaths still get reported today by the press as caused by Israel because they are included in the casualty numbers—as are, if you can believe it, all Gazans murdered by Hamas security forces during the war.
But wait, there still even more. Cancer patients, the report shows, were listed as war fatalities by Hamas while still also being listed as alive and receiving treatment in Israel or some other treatment center outside Gaza.
Two main conclusions. First, once you drop the natural deaths, approximate the numbers of those killed by Hamas or other Palestinian groups, and adjust the demographic numbers to fit the actual family reports, you end up with about as many militants killed as civilians. In an urban environment with the Hamas soldiers stationed among civilians, this means Israel’s civilian-combatant ratio is not just low but unheard of.
Second, much of the reporting and commentary has framed this war as a “war on Palestinian children.” It’s a convenient reanimation of a classic blood libel, and it is demonstrably a lie. I don’t think anyone using the “Israel is murdering Palestinian children” talking point was ever interested in statistical accuracy, but it is important that the rest of society is aware of the level of deception being practiced by those who propagate it.
Those who put trust in the Hamas casualty figures should hang their heads in shame
The vast majority of broadcasters, news sites and newspapers ought to hang their heads in shame. Of 1,378 articles published over a four month period in spring 2024 in the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Guardian, CNN, the BBC, Reuters, the Associated Press and the Australian ABC, a full 84 per cent did not bother to distinguish between civilian and combatant deaths, Fox found.
A shockingly low 5 over cent of publications released any numbers from the Israelis, while 98 per cent – basically all – exclusively published the Hamas Ministry of Health figures.
The sheer force of the need to paint Israel as targeting civilians has been overwhelming. Trying to go against this need with the small sounds of sanity has inevitably been painful and confrontational. Some of those who lost their hats over my insistence that, while all civilian deaths in Gaza were tragedies, the IDF was not baying for the blood of innocents, may have been infected with anti-Semitism.
But most were just consumers of the news from sources they ought to have been able to trust. These sources, which Fox suggests were incorrect, not only let their readers, listeners and viewers down, but have viciously pursued the deepest embedding of fake history that Europe and the Anglosphere has seen since the propaganda tools of the Nazi and Soviet regimes.
From Ian:
How Israel Turned the Mideast Around
Israeli Strategic Affairs Minister Ron Dermer interviewed by Barton Swaim
Critics used to complain about the "Israel lobby" and its supposed ability to bend U.S. policy to its will. A saner case could be made that Israel is constantly doing America's dirty work at immense cost to itself. Its war against Hamas and Hizbullah isn't some regional conflict over disputed territory but a battle in a worldwide cold war between an alliance of democracies and a confederation of anti-American dictatorships.
Ron Dermer, 53, Israel's minister for strategic affairs who grew up in Miami Beach, was Israel's ambassador to the U.S. from 2013-21. He says, "A lot of people...think America is hated because of Israel. I think Israel is hated because of America. We're seen as an extension of your values. And guess what? They're right."
Six months ago, global opinion-makers spoke mainly about the "genocide" perpetrated by Israel in Gaza. Dermer says, "The Jews must be the dumbest genocidal force in history. We win Nobel Prizes, but we're idiots when it comes to genocide - the Palestinian population is about 10 times what it was in 1948."
He asks me to imagine I'm president of the United States and I have to pick one ally for the next half-century. "Just one, strictly in terms of American interest. You want an ally that can defend itself by itself and you don't have to send in troops to protect it. You want an ally with formidable intelligence capability and cyber capability and all the new forms of warfare. And you want an ally that can develop new weapons. If you're honest, you're down to Britain and Israel. And I think we have a bigger standing army than the Brits."
‘Very friendly’ Netanyahu-Trump call focused on hostages, victory
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had a “very friendly, warm and important” phone call with U.S. President-elect Donald Trump on the need to complete Jerusalem’s victory over Iranian-backed terror proxies and free the hostages held by Hamas, the Israeli leader said on Sunday.
Netanyahu in a statement said he and his “friend” Trump discussed the situations in Gaza, Lebanon and Syria during the call on Saturday night.
“A year ago, I said something simple: We would change the face of the Middle East, and we are indeed doing so. Syria is not the same Syria. Lebanon is not the same Lebanon. Gaza is not the same Gaza. And the head of the axis, Iran, is not the same Iran,” Netanyahu said in the video statement on Sunday.
“We are working today forcefully and with due consideration in order to have security regarding all the countries of the region and in order to have stability and security on all of our borders,” he stated, adding that challenges remain in fighting Iran’s “bloodied proxies.”
Netanyahu emphasized that Jerusalem has “no interest” in a confrontation with the incoming Syrian regime, stressing that his policies towards it will be determined “according to the reality on the ground.”
“Together with Defense Minister [Israel] Katz, I have directed the IDF to thwart the potential threats from Syria and prevent terrorist elements from taking control close to our border,” he stated. “Over the course of several days, we have destroyed the capabilities that the Assad regime took decades to build.”
The Israeli leader quoted Hezbollah leader Naim Qassem as confirming that the Iranian-backed terrorist group has lost its Syrian supply route. “This is, of course, additional testimony to the severe blow with which we have struck the entire Iranian axis,” according to Netanyahu.
“I would like to both clarify and warn: I would like to make it clear and to warn: We are committed to preventing the rearming of Hezbollah,” said the premier. “I unequivocally declare to Hezbollah and to Iran: In order to prevent you from attacking us, we will continue to take action against you as necessary, in every arena and at all times.”
Regarding the war in Gaza, he declared, “We will continue to act relentlessly to return home all of our hostages, the living and the deceased. Let me add that the less we discuss this, the better, and so, with God’s help, we will succeed.”
In an interview with NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Dec. 8, Trump made it clear that while he hopes for an end to the conflict, Jerusalem must secure a decisive victory. “I want [Netanyahu] to end it, but you have to have a victory,” he stated.
He also addressed the growing criticism of Israel and the downplaying of the Hamas terrorist attacks on Oct. 7, 2023, comparing it to Holocaust denial: “You know, you have Holocaust deniers. Now you have Oct. 7 deniers, and it just happened. No, Oct. 7 happened. What happened is horrible.”
Jonah Goldberg:
What the Headlines Missed about Amnesty International's Accusation that Israel Commits Genocide
Reporting on Amnesty International's new report about Israel's War in Gaza, the New York Times headline read: "Amnesty International Accuses Israel of Genocide in Gaza." The Los Angeles Times was similar: "Amnesty International says Israel is committing genocide in Gaza."
Calling the report unfair would be a profound understatement. Here's its first sentence: "On 7 October 2023, Israel embarked on a military offensive on the occupied Gaza Strip." In other words, the story begins not with Hamas's unprecedented terrorist attack on Israeli civilians that day. Rather, it begins with the Israeli response to the aggression of Hamas. This is a bit like reporting on America's "genocide" in Japan by stating, "On April 18, 1942, the United States embarked on a military offensive on the Japanese nation" - leaving out that whole Pearl Harbor thing.
The Genocide Convention of 1948 is very clear about what constitutes actual or attempted genocide: "acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group." But the Palestinian population has grown more than eightfold since Israel's founding, according to the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics, and the population of Gaza has increased 600% since 1960.
One of the most important words in the UN definition of genocide is "intent." If Israel, which even its enemies characterize as supremely competent and lethal, intends genocide, it's really, really, bad at it. Indeed, if genocide were the goal, you would think Israel would stop warning civilians to evacuate areas it's about to attack and sending Palestinians caravans of aid.
On page 101 of Amnesty's 296-page report, the authors essentially concede that Israel isn't committing genocide under prevailing interpretations of international law, as they reject "an overly cramped interpretation of international jurisprudence...that would effectively preclude a finding of genocide in the context of an armed conflict."
As Commentary's Seth Mandel writes, "So Amnesty International dissents from international law. That's fine. Just be up-front about it: Amnesty is not accusing Israel of 'genocide,' it is accusing Israel of a different crime which Amnesty has named 'genocide,' just so it could use that word." Amnesty didn't want a discussion about the proper definition of genocide. It wanted headlines alleging that Israel committed the crime - and it got them.
Wednesday, December 18, 2024
.jpg)
