01/02 Links Pt2: The New York Times in Bibi-land; A new book challenges progressive Jews; Posters Glorifying Palestinian “Martyrs” Found in LA

From Ian:

The New York Times in Bibi-land

The New York Times is in panic mode. A front-page article by Jerusalem reporter Isabel Kershner (Dec. 30) began with an expression of trepidation that Israel’s “right-wing and religiously conservative government,” led by newly elected Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, “will undermine the country’s liberal democracy.”

How so? By ensuring “increased tensions with Palestinians,” “undermining” judicial independence, and “the rolling back of protections for the L.G.B.T.Q. community” and “other” (unidentified) “sectors of society.”

But for Kershner it gets even worse. The Netanyahu governing coalition has “declared the Jewish people’s exclusive and inalienable right to all parts of the Land of Israel,” including biblical Judea and Samaria (until the Six-Day War identified as Jordan’s “West Bank”). It has also “pledged to bolster Jewish settlement in the West Bank,” which would undercut the “recognized formula for resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict based on establishing a Palestinian state alongside Israel.” In translation, Israel would reclaim its biblical heritage.

Netanyahu’s right-wing coalition, Kershner writes, might “complicate” Israeli-American relations. Although President Biden proclaimed his eagerness to work with Netanyahu (“my friend for decades”), he reiterated American support for “the two state solution” that the Palestinian Authority and President Mahmoud Abbas (now beginning the 18th year of his four-year term) have repeatedly rejected.

A new book challenges progressive Jews

David Bernstein’s “Woke Antisemitism: How a Progressive Ideology Harms Jews” is making waves in Jewish communities across the Western world.

David Bernstein is the founder and CEO of the Maryland-based Jewish Institute for Liberal Values (JILV), as in classical liberalism and moderate politics. He has been involved with Jewish organizations throughout his life, leading several, and identifies as politically liberal. But changes in recent years inspired him to leave these organizations and create a new one.

“I have spent my entire career in the Jewish world, and had always felt proud of the openness to varied opinions, even if the organizations ultimately took sides on an issue,” Bernstein shared with JNS. But starting “around 2020….People refused to discuss and debate key topics, especially on sensitive issues.”

He soon realized that the same ideology that was shutting down debate was also fueling antisemitism.

Realizing the harm that this does by labeling Israel and Jews as “oppressors,” he was inspired to write his book, “Woke Antisemitism: How a Progressive Ideology Harms Jews.” The tome is full of Bernstein’s anecdotes on his journey from being a child bullied in school for being Jewish, to a liberal Jewish student on college campus witnessing a new form of antisemitism.

He also details the origins of woke ideology on the far left and how it has begun to attack Jews and Zionism. Troublingly, it is being gradually adopted by many mainstream American Jewish organizations.

In the book, Bernstein isn’t shy about admitting that he considers himself a Democrat and supports socially-liberal causes. Yet he points out that much of the political movement he considered himself a part of has drifted away from the values it claims to espouse.

He says that American Jews must fight against antisemitism from all fronts–Islamists, the far right and the far left–or else American Jews will begin to feel disenfranchised and see life become unbearable.

Posters Glorifying Palestinian “Martyrs” Found in LA

Various posters glorifying Palestinian “martyrs” were found in Los Angeles on December 16.

The Palestinian Youth Movement announced in an Instagram post that they had put the posters around Los Angeles, Orange County and the Inland Empire; some posters were found on Wilshire Boulevard. The posters stated, “Glory to our marytrs!” and featured the faces of various Palestinians that were killed by “Zionist forces.” One such face was Shireen Abu Akleh, the Al Jazeera journalist who was shot and killed while covering an Israel Defense Force (IDF) raid in Jenin in May. The State Department announced in July that their investigation concluded that the bullet that killed Abu Akleh “likely” came from the IDF but was probably unintentional; however, damage to the bullet “prevented a clear conclusion.” A separate CNN investigation, on the other hand, concluded that the IDF had intentionally fired at Abu Akleh.

Other faces included on the posters included Oday al-Tamimi and Tamer al-Kilani, who were both members of the Lion’s Den terror group, according to the Anti-Defamation League (ADL). The ADL listed al-Kilani as a founding member of the terror group. The poster also included faces of those killed during clashes between the IDF and Palestinians in the West Bank, such as Omar Manna. Manna was killed on December 5 when the IDF were executing a raid to arrest three members of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP); the IDF said at the time that “during the operation, suspects threw stones, Molotov cocktails, and explosives at the troops, who responded by shooting.”

The posters on Wilshire Boulevard were taken down on December 21.

Jewish groups denounced the posters in statements to the Journal.

“There is nothing wrong with mourning those who die from the tragic and ongoing violence between Palestinians and Israelis,” StandWithUs CEO and Co-Founder Roz Rothstein said. “However, this anti-Israel poster includes and glorifies terrorists, such as former Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) commander Farooq Salameh. It implies Israel alone is to blame, ignoring that groups like PIJ seek to destroy Israel and trap both peoples in an endless cycle of suffering and conflict. Hopefully one day Palestinian leaders will accept that Israel is in the region to stay, so both peoples can focus on building a better future together.”

Simon Wiesenthal Center Associate Dean and Director of Global Social Action Agenda Rabbi Abraham Cooper also said, “Importing [a] culture of death where children are brainwashed to believe [that] martyrs are not mere cannon fodder for genocide-seeking Hamas and corrupt pay-to-slay Jews Palestinian Authority teaches youngsters here to hate Jews is a disaster in the making.”

“Their martyrs are our murderers,” Stop Antisemitism Executive Director Liora Rez said. “It’s always disturbing to see people idolizing terrorists like this.”

Read More

01/02 Links Pt1: UN's advisory board on Israeli 'occupation' is hypocrisy; 'Even animals get better treatment': Tortured by Hamas, man finds refuge in Israel

From Ian:

JPost Editorial: UN's advisory board on Israeli 'occupation' is hypocrisy

It asked the ICJ to define how Israel’s practices affected the legal status of Israel’s “occupation” of territory over the pre-1967 lines, which would include the West Bank (Judea and Samaria), Gaza (from which Israel unilaterally withdrew in 2005) and east Jerusalem.

The UNGA resolution specifically included the “Holy City of Jerusalem” and referred to the Temple Mount, Judaism’s holiest site, only by its Muslim name of al-Haram al-Sharif.

When a preliminary vote on the request for an ICJ opinion was held in November, 98 countries voted in favor and only 17, including Israel, opposed it.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu credited the drop in support for the Palestinians’ position and the additional support for Israel to his efforts, along with those of President Isaac Herzog, the Foreign Ministry and UN Ambassador Gilad Erdan.

“This is once again a one-sided Palestinian move that undermines the basic principles for resolving the conflict and potentially harming any possibility for a future process. The Palestinians want to replace negotiations with unilateral measures. They are once again using the UN to attack Israel.”
Yair Lapid

Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Mohammad Shtayyeh praised the UN vote as “a new victory for the Palestinians.” Hamas also welcomed the UN vote.

It is a dangerous move that is far from solving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and is likely to further inflame it, giving the Palestinians no incentive to sit down and negotiate in good faith.

Furthermore, the UN and ICJ are making a mockery of their own mandates and are being hijacked by the Palestinians. This is similar to the open-ended UN Commission of Inquiry into Israel headed by Navi Pillay.

The Palestinian push for the ICJ ruling is part of its ongoing lawfare against Israel. The court must avoid giving the impression of built-in bias against Israel when choosing the panel it appoints.

'Even animals get better treatment': Tortured by Hamas, man finds refuge in Israel

E., a resident of the Gaza Strip, talks to us from an apartment in greater Tel Aviv, where he has been residing for the past week, helped by friends, who have provided him with a roof over his head. E. has been put on Hamas' blacklist after he made several public statements and published posts, in which he dared to criticize Hamas' policy in Gaza. He attacked the Hamas leadership for violating human rights, criticized the discrimination against women in public areas, and expressed his infuriation with the way Hamas' security institutions handle anti-regime activists.

It is quite bizarre that the one who initially defended political prisoners, eventually became one himself. The Hamas' long arm found E. and he very quickly found himself subject to threats, intimidation, and physical and mental harassment.

"In the initial investigations I was severely beaten, with bruises all over my body; it was very brutal. Even animals are not treated this way. One investigator would walk past me, punch me, then another one would come and beat me mercilessly," says E. "In the later investigations, I suffered less physical torture, but more mental torture. They would offend me, curse my mother and father and threaten them. For example, on one occasion they threatened to kill me and told me, 'Tomorrow we will shoot you and throw you to the dogs, and tell everyone that you collaborated with Israel'."

Another time they wanted me to sign a document saying that after I was released I was forbidden from talking to anyone about what they did to me during the investigation, and not to share what I went through with human rights organizations. Each time after you are arrested and released, you have to take painkillers and rest for three to four days to physically get over what happened. Mentally, it stays with you. You can't forget. This is one of the things that made me leave Gaza."

A Journey in search of livelihood
Two years ago, E. was forced to leave the Gaza Strip following an investigation, during which it was made clear to him that the Hamas security forces had information about his plan to initiate mass demonstrations in Gaza. E. went to Egypt, tried to make a living from a restaurant business, and last August he managed to return to his family in Gaza. "I saw that I had returned to the same Gaza, with the same problems. There is no freedom, there are no jobs, and the jobs that are there are given to Hamas and their loyalists. There is no stability in life. The situation is bad and people live from hand to mouth. Everything I earn – it all goes, nothing is left.

"The children grow up, they have needs. You have to buy them clothes for the winter and heat the house. There are so many everyday needs, and then you ask yourself, 'what future awaits them and me? It makes you think, is this how I want to live? It doesn't make sense. The family eats fresh meat only once a week. Some people eat half portions just so that they can get through the day. Every house in Gaza has debts to the electricity corporation and people have to pay off loans that they took.

"It's getting to the point where residents are not using their cars unless there is something essential because they do not want to waste money on fuel. Many factories in Gaza are closed. Business owners are in and out of prison because of debts, but it's not just because of money. It's in almost every area of ​​life. There is no infrastructure and no projects. People avoid going to hospitals because they don't trust the medical treatment there. Hamas doesn't provide services. There is no future."

Read More

01/01 Links: From Jew vilification to the delegitimization of Israel; Netanyahu slams ‘disgraceful’ UN request for ICJ opinion on Judea and Samaria; The NYTs Rush to Whitewash Palestinian Terror

From Ian:

From Jew vilification to the delegitimization of Israel - opinion

From the dawn of time, Jews have been maligned and slandered. Apion's vilification, the blood libels, the Dreyfus trial, and of course, the antisemitic propaganda of the 20th century are just a few examples. All of these manifestations of antisemitism got an "upgrade" to vilifying Israel, where the majority of world Jewry resides, by taking away the very legitimacy of Jewish presence in its ancestral homeland.

This effort began when the Roman emperor Hadrian renamed the land of Israel "Palestine" in order to detach the Jews from their homeland. In a nutshell, the vilification of the Jew has evolved into the delegitimization of the State of Israel. Words have power, and we still suffer the consequences of those words written and spoken over the last two millennia.

Today, the effort to delegitimize Israel has gone global and has permeated organizations like the United Nations and Amnesty International, which routinely try to undermine Israel's right to exist as a Jewish and democratic state within any borders. Furthermore, with the democratization of communication due to the emergence of social media, the average person has been handed the power and platform to throw misinformed accusations at Israel with the click of a button.

Making matters worse, influencers and celebrities can reach three, four, or even ten times the number of all Jews on the planet, spreading incorrect information. They share inaccurate content out of ignorance (like the star of Netflix's hit show Wednesday, Jenna Ortega) or out of pure malice (like antisemite Kanye West). Thus, the average person, who forms their opinions, including geo-political stances, based on memes, Instagram stories and TikTok videos, will easily be misinformed by these influencers. I experienced this firsthand when my friends around the world would easily share misinformation, while terrorist organizations were unleashing thousands of rockets upon Israeli civilians.

Seth Frantzman: The UN's vote against Israel and its historic contradictions

This is the essence of the contradictory policies behind “international law.” Western colonial powers were able to set up various administrations all around the world, sometimes only for a few decades. During that time they often carved up areas and created arbitrary lines on maps and then partitioned the areas they had taken over. But the Western powers were rarely accused under international law of “illegal occupation.” The concept of “international law” was primarily inaugurated after western colonial powers left most areas of the world.

The remaining vestiges of colonial-era rule, such as some islands here and there, are not considered “occupied.” In this narrative, Western countries never “occupied,” but when they decided to partition countries or draw arbitrary lines on maps, cutting peoples and tribal territories in half, it was always "legal." This was the case in the partition of India and the creation of the Kashmir dispute.

It was also the case with areas in the Middle East. The Golan Heights are part of Syria, not because of some ancient legal reason, but because the British and French colonial authorities demarcated the border this way. Neither side of that equation was ever “occupying.” Only when the European countries decided to give “independence” to various states or leave, did international law suddenly swoop in and say that the borders the former powers had drawn would be set in stone. Now any changes were against international law.

The strangest thing is that the partition plan the British and UN left behind in 1947 was unworkable. International status for Jerusalem and a patchwork of areas for two states, one Arab and one Jewish, in what had been British mandate Palestine. Yet the “law” today isn’t entirely based on the 1947 decision. Instead, there was a ceasefire in 1948 and then a war in 1967. International law has a way of swooping in only when changes are made in Israel’s favor.

For instance, there was no “occupation” of Jerusalem or “demographic change” issue between 1948 and 1967 when Jordan ran east Jerusalem. Even though Jews were ethnically cleansed from areas of the Old City, this was not a “demographic change.” When Israel took over Jordanian-occupied east Jerusalem, then international law says the situation in 1967 must be set in stone. Not the situation in 1947 or 1887. How does the law know when to draw the line?

Similarly, it’s not clear why international law often portrays Israel as an “occupier” of Gaza. The Gazans were not consulted on whether they wanted to be occupied by the British or the Egyptians. Yet the “law” seems to only relate to Israel’s temporary control of Gaza and in essence forces Israel to forever be the “occupying power.” This is the same international concept that underpins the Oslo Accords, in a sense abrogating those very accords and making it impossible for Israel to give up control. This is problematic because even if Israel wanted to withdraw from parts of the West Bank and enable a full-fledged Palestinian state, the “law” would always portray Israel as continuing to “occupy” something. This is the case in Lebanon, for instance, where even though Israel withdrew in 2000, Hezbollah continues to accuse Israel of occupying the Har Dov/Sheba’a farms area. It’s hard to imagine a way Israel can ever extricate itself from the endless UN focus, even if it wanted to. The focus on Israel is convenient since it means more contentious issues such as focusing on Turkey’s occupation of Syria, are not spotlighted. Many countries agree to shift the focus to Israel.

The related features of international law, that it is often rooted in arbitrary European colonial power decisions, and in arbitrary dates, create many contradictions. It’s hard not to see it as merely being made up as it goes along to single out Israel. Some of the countries that created the “law” and the chaos of 1948, then condemn Israel for controlling the very thing they created and also refuse to let Israel leave areas they demanded Israel leave. Increasingly this is a tool of countries in the global south and authoritarian regimes. Many western countries do not see the constant focus on Israel as helpful. Some countries have realized that letting Iran and Russia hijack international forums is also no longer helpful. It is unclear if there will be more pushback against these kinds of resolutions and decisions that focus on Israel.

What are possible legal ramifications of an ICJ advisory opinion on Israel?

International Legal Forum CEO and human rights attorney Arsen Ostrovsky, agreed that “Such opinions of the ICJ are non-binding on the parties involved. They are purely of an advisory nature,” but warned that “they do carry considerable moral weight and are regarded highly as a reference point by the legal community, as well as civil society and the United Nations.”

Daphné Richemond-Barak explained that the ICJ advisory opinion “doesn’t obligate a state as such” but the body could urge member states to take action. Member states could use the ruling as a basis to make political decisions. Whether the states’ local courts would use the advisory as legal precedent was not the main concern. The opinion was more relevant in international fora.

“It’s not so much what the opinion is going to say but how it's going to be used in the future,” she said.

Richemond-Barak gave the example of the 2004 ICJ advisory opinion on the security barrier, and how it became the keystone for many reports and resolutions by international bodies. The ICJ’s opinion of the legal consequences Israel’s practices and control of the territories would likely be held in high regard due to the court’s prestige and air of authority.

Shany said that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s new government would have to decide how to approach the ICJ opinion.

“There is always a question about what Israel should do, participate in the process or boycott.” said Shany. “If you don't make your case you may politicize the process but may face a more hostile decision.” He said that in the case of the 2004 advisory opinion on the security barrier, that Israel made a compromise between the two

In response to the ICJ’s 2004 evaluation on the “Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory,” the government submitted a statement challenging the “jurisdiction of the Court and the propriety of any response by it on the substance of the request,” but refused to address the legality of the fence.

According to Shany the opinion could take between 1-2 years to formulate, and in that time, even if the new government doesn’t directly respond to the proceedings, statements made by ministers could influence the decisions. This legal specter could therefore impact the speech of Israeli ministers.

“Although the new process began prior to the new government, the statements made by the ministers will impact the deliberations,” said Shany. Talk of “exclusive rights of Jews over all the territory of Israel, while this may play very well to the home base, in the Hague proceedings could be damaging.”

Read More

12/31 Links: Where is the Middle East heading now?; Israel calls UN 'morally bankrupt' as assembly refers 'occupation' to Hague court; Happy 50th anniversary of the Dry Bones cartoons

From Ian:

Dore Gold: Where is the Middle East heading now?

Dr. Ebtisam Al-Ketbi, who heads the leading research center in Abu Dhabi, the Emirates Policy Center, pointed out that the overlapping crises afflicting the Middle East have made strictly bilateral solutions completely ineffective, which drew the major players in the region to try the Baghdad II mechanism. Perhaps they were thinking about a Middle Eastern version of the Helsinki Process that drew in members of NATO and the Warsaw Pact in 1975 at the height of the Cold War.

But Iran was glued to a policy of exploiting its Islamic Revolutionary Guard (IRGC) units as its chosen instrument for spreading its regional influence – not multilateral mechanisms that the strongest party in the room was prepared to ignore. Over the last few years, Iran effectively employed its Houthi allies in Yemen to successfully strike the heart of Riyadh, shutting down for a period of time a significant percentage of Saudi Arabia’s oil production.

Indeed, a Houthi drone attack knocked out half of Saudi Arabia’s oil production in 2019. Iran did not pay a price for this bold action. Clearly, it had little incentive to restrict its behavior, given the tepid regional reaction. In fact, Jordan’s King Abdullah disclosed on CNN in July 2021 that Iranian drones had attacked Jordanian territory in increasing numbers.

For years, Tehran had built up a military presence in Lebanon and Syria. Now, Iran had been showing its interest in spreading its influence into Jordan as well. Jordan was known to be the locale of a number of Islamic holy sites that were significant to both Sunni and Shi’ite Islam. Iran sought to expand its tourism in Jordan to these areas. Some had been battlefields for early Islamic armies when they had their first military engagements with the Byzantine Empire. They were located near what is today the Saudi-Jordanian border.

Some Middle Eastern leaders hoped that today the Iranians could be placated. That might have been another reason to invite the Iranian president to the shores of the Dead Sea in Jordan. Israel will have to monitor very carefully what is happening with its eastern neighbors – both Iraq and Jordan. Israel has intercepted convoys of weaponry crossing from the Iranian border, by land, to Syria and Lebanon.

It is logical that Tehran redirects its efforts to create an alternative route via Jordan. If Middle Eastern states can block this axis as well, they can assure the security of the region. But it is not clear at this stage that they will be able to achieve this goal.

To combat antisemitism, collaboration is needed - opinion

With growing displays of hatred for Jews evident among extremists across the ideological spectrum, the space and passive support for antisemitism seem to be growing. Jews are feeling this on the streets of their communities around the world, with record-high levels of antisemitic incidents recorded in 2022.

What has the US done as a result?
In the US, this has prompted Jewish institutions to adopt a European model of stricter security, including armed guards, higher walls and increased surveillance.

These measures, while necessary from a safety perspective, serve as a demoralizing daily reminder to Jews about the concrete threats they face. To identify publicly as a Jew means putting themselves on the frontlines of a battle they did not seek.

Nevertheless, amid this darkening reality, there is also light. While hate against Jews increases, many allies are stepping up to the plate and being counted.

As CEO of the Combat Antisemitism Movement (CAM), a global coalition engaging more than 650 organizations and nearly two million people from different religious, political and cultural backgrounds in the common mission of fighting the world’s oldest hatred, I have witnessed the power of partnership over the past year.

Recently, in Athens, we had more than 60 mayors and other top municipal officials from all over the world convene with the singular purpose of sharing and learning best practices about how to fight antisemitism. One key speaker, New York City Mayor Eric Adams, lamented the fact that antisemitism had become “normalized” and “popular,” and he called out its perpetrators.

Also last month, at the height of the Kanye and Kyrie furor, CAM helped organize the second annual awards ceremony of the Omni-American Future Project, a collaborative partnership strengthening ties between the black and Jewish communities in the US. These are just two recent examples of how prejudice can be countered with the fostering of cross-communal understanding and harmony.

However, this may have been best exemplified by CAM’s final event of 2022, when on the first night of Hanukkah, in the heart of Manhattan, a non-Jewish street artist painted a massive mural of Tibor Baranski, a courageous Hungarian-American who brought light to the world at the darkest moment in human history by rescuing more than 3,000 Jews during the Holocaust.

Of course, the Jews are not facing a Holocaust today, but we are under attack from an expanding number of hostile sources. To beat this network of hate, we must build, joined by our friends and all good people of conscience, an unbreakable web of togetherness, fraternity and comradeship.

Our enemies are gaining in strength, but so are our allies, and we must remember this. To turn the tide of rising hatred, we must reach more people who will stand by our side and say, “Enough!”

This is how we combat antisemitism.

Happy 50th anniversary of the Dry Bones cartoons

Yaakov Kirschen drew his first Dry Bones cartoon for The Jerusalem Post’s January 1, 1973, edition, and he never stopped. For 50 years, Dry Bones cartoons have been a beloved part of the Anglo Jewish world. Many children of English-speaking olim (immigrants to Israel) grew up in homes with faded Dry Bones cartoons that their parents had taped to the wall. Dry Bones cartoons have been mailed, shared, quoted, and forwarded between English-speaking Israelis, Christian Zionists, and our far-flung and embattled Jewish communities in the Diaspora.

Kirschen has made the lives of Anglo olim easier and more meaningful, and to his fans all over the world he has spread a deeper and stronger feeling for Israel and Zionism.

The Dry Bones cartoonist, who has been called a “national treasure of the Jewish people,” has received many awards, such as the Nefesh B’Nefesh Bonei Zion Award and The Golden Pencil Award.

Read More

12/30 Links Pt1: Can US Jews love the real Israel—or only the fantasy version?; Major Spike in Judea and Samaria Shooting Attacks, IDF Stats Reveal; Iran chess star fleeing to Spain after playing without hijab

From Ian:

Caroline Glick: Where the Netanyahu government differs from its predecessor

Over the course of the campaign, and in a steadily escalating fashion as he prepared to return to office, Netanyahu has spoken enthusiastically about the prospect of reaching a peace agreement that will formalize Israel’s relations with Saudi Arabia. Those still sub rosa relations were the foundation of the Abraham Accords.

The rationale for a Saudi deal is overwhelming for both countries. Leaving aside the economic potential of such an agreement—which is massive—the strategic implications are a game changer. An Israeli-Saudi normalization agreement, like the agreements Israel concluded with the UAE, Bahrain, Morocco and Sudan in 2020, is a means to withstand the Biden administration’s realignment away from America’s allies and towards Iran. By strengthening its bilateral ties with the Arab states bordering Iran and other key states in the region, Israel expands its strategic footprint and is capable of developing defensive and offensive capabilities by working in cooperation with likeminded governments. By working with Israel openly, Saudi Arabia sends a clear message to Iran and its people that Saudi Arabia will not be cowed into submission by the regime that is currently brutalizing its youth.

Netanyahu has already made a statement in support of the revolutionaries in Iran. At this point, with most experts assessing that Iran has crossed the nuclear threshold and has enough enriched uranium to produce up to four bombs per month, it is obvious that Biden’s nuclear diplomacy has nothing to do with nuclear non-proliferation.

There are only two ways to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear-armed state—direct action targeting Iran’s nuclear installations and regime change. Netanyahu’s willingness to stand up to the Biden administration and stand with the Iranian people and Israel’s regional partners makes regime change more likely, and direct action against Iran’s nuclear installations more likely to succeed.

Over the two months since the Israeli elections, the opposition and its supporters on the Israeli and American Jewish left have stirred up hysteria by claiming that the most significant distinction between the Lapid-Gantz government and the Netanyahu government centers on social policies related to non-religious Jews. This claim is false, and maliciously so. The Netanyahu government has no intention—and never had any intention—of curtailing the civil rights of non-religious Jews. Their goal is to expand civil and individual rights, by among other things, placing checks and balances on Israel’s hyper-activist Supreme Court and state prosecution.

There are many differences between the previous government and the Netanyahu government. None of them have to do with civil rights. The main distinction is that the Netanyahu government has made securing Israel’s national interests its central goal in foreign and domestic policy. Its predecessors were primarily interested in getting along with the hostile Biden administration, under all conditions. Netanyahu and his ministers will work with the Biden administration enthusiastically, when possible.

Jonathan Tobin: Can US Jews love the real Israel—or only the fantasy version?

For the first decades of Israel’s existence, the above differences with Americans were papered over by the dominance of Labor Zionism, whose universalist rhetoric meshed nicely with liberal sensibilities, even if the security policies it pursued did not. But even in its most idealized form, a particularistic project such as Zionism has been a difficult sell for American Jews, the overwhelming bulk of whom see sectarian concerns not only as antithetical to their well-being, but possibly racist, as well.

Having found a home in which they were granted free access to every sector of American society, and in which the non-Jewish majority proved willing to marry them, they unsurprisingly have had difficulty coming to terms with an avowedly ethno-religious state with such a different raison d’être.

Moreover, an American-Jewish population in which the acceptance of assimilation has created a large and fast-growing group the demographers call “Jews of no religion” is bound to take a dim view of a country that specifically defines itself as a Jewish state, no matter how generous its policies toward the Palestinians or the non-Orthodox denominations might be. If many American Jews are no longer certain that their community’s survival matters, how can one possibly expect them to regard the interest of Israeli Jews in preserving their state against dangerous foes with anything but indifference?

Many Jews talk about their willingness to support a nicer, less nationalist and religious Israel than the one that elected Netanyahu and his allies. They support efforts by Democrats to pressure it to make suicidal concessions to Palestinians who, whether Americans are willing to admit it or not, purpose Israel’s elimination. They also want it to be more welcoming to liberal variants of Judaism that Americans practice, and for the Orthodox have less influence.

But even if you think those changes would make Israel better or safer, a majority of Israelis disagree. So, while much of the criticism is framed as a defense of democracy to sync with Democratic Party talking points that smear Republicans, there’s nothing democratic about thwarting the will of a nation’s voters or seeking to impose a mindset they regard as alien to their needs.

The challenge for liberals is not just how to cope with an Israel led by Netanyahu, Smotrich and Ben-Gvir, or to put aside the partisan hyperbole branding it as a fascist or fundamentalist tyranny. It’s accepting the fact that Israel is not a Middle Eastern variant of the blue state enclaves where most American Jews live.

They need to grasp that simple, but still difficult-to-accept concept and forget about the Israel of liberal fantasies. If they can, it should be easy for them to understand that no matter who is running Israel—or how its people think, worship or vote—the sole Jewish state’s continued survival is still a just and worthy cause.

Ruthie Blum: Israel’s new government and ‘Pauline Kael syndrome’

Following the late and former US president Richard Nixon’s landslide re-election in 1972, New Yorker magazine film critic Pauline Kael voiced a mixture of dismay and surprise.

“I live in a rather special world,” she commented. “I only know one person who voted for [him]. Where they are I don’t know. They’re outside my ken. But sometimes when I’m in a theater, I can feel them.”

Her famous acknowledgment of existence in an elitist bubble, insulated from a faceless mass of aliens lurking menacingly in the shadows, may have been irritating, but at least it was honest. It also perfectly described the chasm between the chattering classes and the majority of the voting public.

Though this type of divide in the West tends to be viewed and treated as political – since it’s inevitably expressed at the ballot box – it’s actually more cultural in nature. The response in Israel and abroad to the outcome of the November 1 Knesset election is a case in point. What were the reactions to Netanyahu's coalition?

The initial shock and subsequent hysteria surrounding the emergence of Benjamin “Bibi” Netanyahu’s “full, full right-wing” coalition has been emanating from circles of the Pauline Kael variety. To them, it’s worse than irrelevant that the new government in Jerusalem is the result of the people’s clear choice; they call the rejection of the Left’s increasingly woke post-Zionism “undemocratic” and a sign of societal downfall.

Such baseless charges on the part of the “anybody but Bibi” camp would be funny if they weren’t welcomed so heartily by those in the international community who delegitimize the Jewish state, regardless of its leadership, and by fellow travelers putting Israel on perpetual probation. Take the hundreds of American rabbis (none Orthodox, of course) who signed “A Call to Action for Clergy in Protest of Israeli Government Extremists,” for instance.

Read More

Why has the media give Yair Lapid a pass when he was more aggressive against Palestinians than Bennett or Netanyahu?

For the past two months, the media has been churning out article after article on how the incoming Netanyahu government will be extremist, a disaster for Palestinians and Israelis alike. In an unprecedented move, US President Joe Biden gave a public warning to the incoming government that he will oppose policies that the US feels are against the two state solution.

For a six months, Israel has been led by a centrist politician, Yair Lapid. By nearly all measures, Lapid was more aggressive against Palestinians than his two predecessors, Naftali Bennett and Benjamin Netanyahu.

The six months of Bennett  and of Lapid this year makes it fairly easy to compare the two.

According to the UN's OCHA, when Lapid entered office, Israel had killed 60 Palestinians in operations in the West Bank in 2022 under Bennett. Since then, 86 more were killed. Compare with all of 2020, under Netanyahu, when the number killed was 24.

Under Bennett, about 340 Palestinian structures were destroyed this year. Under Lapid, about it was about 550. Combined, this is a modest increase over the total in 2020.

Under Bennett, there were about 1620 search and arrest operations in the West Bank this year. Under Lapid, the number was over 1800. (The total number is roughly the same as under Netanyahu in 2020.)

Lapid the centrist has been clearly more aggressive than the "settler" Bennett and the "fascist" Netanyahu.

While there may be good reasons for Israeli actions under Lapid, and it is entirely possible that under Bennett or Netanyahu the numbers for past six months would have been similar, with the data we have, Lapid has been given an enormous pass by the media, which has chosen to ignore his decision-making role in Israel's moves to root out terrorists. 

Which is the point. The media does not report on objective reality: they report on the things that fit their preconceived narratives, and downplay or ignore those that do not. Netanyahu has been considered personally responsible for IDF actions under his leadership, while Lapid was not. Netanyahu is regarded as an aggressive warmonger, Lapid is not. The reporting follows the bias, not the reality.

The media and NGOs will publish and trumpet the statistics that fit the story they want to tell - and bury those that contradict it.

And similarly, even though it is not a fair comparison, the number of Israelis killed this year in attacks under the Bennett/Lapid governments is 24. In 2020, under Netanyahu, the number was 3. There are many factors in statistics like that, but Netanyahu is rarely credited in the media with reducing terror attacks in Israel which steadily decreased from 2015 to 2020.

---

---

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!

 

Read More

Some over-the-top articles about the new government in Israel

Here are some excerpts of articles about the new Netanyahu-led government, showing how over-the-top and hysterical some analysis is:

The alarm clock rang long ago already. It rang at fascist speeches by ministers. It appears that we turned it off and slept on. Now it is ringing again . . . One feels like weeping in view of the darkness that is slowly descending on our lives; in view of the takeover of extremist and racist opinions and worldviews, sometimes in such flagrant fashion as in this instance, and sometimes without our even being aware that it is happening. (1)

The new, anti-liberal Israeli Right and Religious Zionism have joined forces, following the logic that guides totalitarian regimes, [aiming] to capture the souls of the pupils and to transform them from lovers of people into stuck-up nationalists. This is the way to turn Israel from a Jewish and democratic state into a religious-nationalist state with a thin veneer of democracy. (2)

It looks like Weimar, it smells like Weimar; it’s malignant like Weimar. We aren’t the Weimar Republic, but a lot of what is happening here is reminiscent of what happened there’. (3)

‘Think of the media as a giant keyboard that the government can play on,’ famously declared Joseph Goebbels, Minister of Propaganda in Nazi Germany, who certainly knew a thing or two about communications and cinema, and about the psychology of the masses. On this point, at least, the present Israeli government is acting as though in agreement with him. (4)

This is a sophisticated revolution, full of scheming, that rests on an obedient, ‘normative’, even liberal and tolerant Revolutionary Guards. The sort whose very inaction and habituation feed the revolution. They are sure that we are not Iran, and that we won’t become like Egypt or Turkey. No one is going to surprise them one morning with the execution of intellectuals and the burning of books. There will be no need for that. What happens here is that people march politely along with the revolution, saluting it proudly. (5)

Don’t be surprised if one day someone in civilian dress knocks on your door and takes you for questioning. For two days no one will know your whereabouts, and then you’ll be released, with no explanation . . . We will howl that its ‘undemocratic’. . . and they’ll say, ‘You can say “undemocratic” in Sweden; not by us’. (6)

I'm sorry, did I imply these articles are recent? No, they are from seven years ago. 

1. S. Kadmon, “Between the Wall and the Fence” (Yedioth Aharonoth, December 31, 2015)

2. M. Kremnitzer, “Human Rights? A Whole Lot of Nonsense” (Globes, December 9, 2015).

3. N. Barnea, “Not Even Death will Liberate from Betrayal” (Yedioth Aharonoth, January 28, 2016).

4. N. Anderman, “Regev Learned from Netanyahu How to Crush the Cinema” (Haaretz, March 29, 2017).

5. Z. Barel, “We, the Revolutionary Guard Corps” (Haaretz, February 24, 2016).
6. Y. Klein, “Please, Censor Me” (Haaretz, January 27, 2016).

None of the confident predictions about the government came true.

I have no idea what the new Israeli government will do. But the point is - neither does anyone else. Especially the types of people that made these confident predictions in 2015 and whose jobs rely on their newspapers getting eyeballs. 

I found these excerpts in a recent academic paper in Israel Affairs titled, "‘It’s a war on Israel’s liberal democracy’: the Israeli left as a moral panic community, 2015-19." The abstract is worth reading:

This article examines the discourse of the Israeli Left in the years preceding the succession of general elections in 2019–21, with a focus on claims of the purported threats to democracy presented by the right-wing government. Rhetorical analysis of opinion pieces and political commentary in the press on issues relating to education, science, and culture shows recurrent use of appeals to fear – such as comparisons with totalitarian regimes and invocation of other dystopian spectres resulting from nationalist indoctrination and processes of ‘religionization’. This article defines the appeal to fear and other forms of the Left’s identity claims making during this period as moral panic discourse, around which the Left sought to revive its relevance in the public debate at a time when it was viewed as a marginal political force in ideological decline. The article’s main argument is that while the labelling of the Right as a ‘danger to democracy’ has been entrenched in leftist discourse since the 1977 ‘Upheaval’, during the period in discussion it became the principal – almost sole – theme in leftist publicist discourse, serving as a flag issue around which the Left reorganised its identity as the ‘democratic camp’.

---

---

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!

 

Read More

12/29 Links Pt1: Why Does the EU Disproportionately Fixate on Israel?; The forgotten speech of Yasser Arafat; Why Israel Cannot Send Its Iron Dome to Ukraine

From Ian:

Amb. Alan Baker: Why Does the EU Disproportionately Fixate on Israel?

As part of its "Joint Strategy in support of Palestine," the European Union recently circulated a confidential document that proposes various measures to finance and advance monitoring, undercutting and undermining Israel's policies in Area C of the West Bank, including providing support and legal assistance to Palestinian residents prosecuting land claims in Israeli courts.

Under the 1993-1995 Oslo Accords, signed and witnessed by the EU, Israel and the Palestinian leadership (PLO) agreed to divide the West Bank areas of Judea and Samaria into three distinct areas of control and administration, pending the completion of negotiation on the permanent status of the territories. It was agreed that Area C would remain under Israel's full control, jurisdiction and administration.

In attempting to undermine and to intervene in Israel's legitimate and agreed-upon jurisdiction and governance in Area C, and in supporting Palestinian attempts to violate the Oslo Accords, the EU is in fact violating the terms of the very agreement to which it attached its signature as witness.

The EU claim that Area C is "to be preserved as part of a future Palestinian state in line with the Oslo Accords" is simply a mistaken and misleading interpretation of the Oslo Accords. They made no reference whatsoever to any "future Palestinian state" or "two-state solution." On the contrary, the Palestinian leadership and Israel agreed that the ultimate fate of the territories will be agreed upon in permanent status negotiations. No determination was made as to the outcome of such negotiations.

The EU document notes the EU's commitment to "contribute to building a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders." However, the Oslo Accords made no mention whatsoever of the 1967 borders. On the contrary, there has never been any 1967 border but an Armistice Demarcation Line established in the 1949 Armistice Agreements. These agreements stated specifically that the Armistice Demarcation line was not intended to constitute a border but rather a temporary line separating the forces pending negotiation of peace agreements.

It is high time that Israel's government take a far more assertive role in clarifying to the EU and its member states that the anti-Israel fixation of its staff and its actions in undermining Israel's legitimate authority and jurisdiction in Area C will no longer be tolerated.

Face it, the United Nations Is Antisemitic

The UN General Assembly passed 15 resolutions critical of Israel in 2022, compared to 13 resolutions for all other countries. Since 2015, the UN General Assembly has passed 136 resolutions critical of Israel, compared to 58 against all other nations combined. Selectively holding Israel to a higher moral standard than all other nations is classic antisemitism because its real purpose is to delegitimize the world's only Jewish state.

Hillel Neuer, executive director of UN Watch, said, "The UN's automatic majority has no interest in truly helping the Palestinians, nor in protecting anyone's human rights. The goal of these ritual, one-sided resolutions is to scapegoat Israel."

How the EU Is Undermining International Law in the West Bank

The 1995 agreement known as Oslo II divided the West Bank into three parts: Area A, to be administered directly by the Palestinian Authority (PA); Area B, to be administered jointly by the PA and Israel; and Area C, to be controlled directly by Israel pending further negotiations. In July, the European Union’s mission in eastern Jerusalem produced a document, recently leaked to the press, stating the EU’s commitment “to contribute to building a Palestinian State within 1967 borders,” and outlining a program to build Palestinian settlements in Area C even where not authorized to do so by Israeli law. Jenny Aharon writes:

The EU . . . insists that its positions are based on meticulous compliance with international law, its own laws and charter, and also the Oslo Accords. This claim is surely [belied] by the leaked document in which we can see an activist EU striving to help the Palestinians take over Area C, the very area that is designated to Israel’s control per the Oslo Accords preliminary agreement which the EU claims to uphold.

The claim [made by the EU] is that the construction is meant for humanitarian ends and is not politically motivated. Yet the EU construction takes place in locations that are highly sensitive, precisely for the purpose of creating new facts on the ground and preparing the area for a Palestinian takeover without any final peace agreement.

Oftentimes the political motivation [of EU-funded construction projects] is obvious, as it is conducted without permits and in such places where Israel has no choice but to demolish it—for example, a school adjacent to a dangerous highway or in places where there are no facilities and thus are not considered habitable environments. The political motivation becomes even more obvious as the document explicitly states the EU’s plan to curb Israel’s archeological activities in order to minimize the Jewish connection to the land.

Moreover, the EU does not seem to consider building in Area A and Area B where all they would need is a permit from the Palestinian Authority. Apparently, in those areas, there is no need for humanitarian aid at all.

Palestinian Authority Paved Illegal Highway in Gush Etzion with Foreign Funding

The Gush Etzion Regional Council and local residents recently discovered the construction of a highway starting at Za’atara village, 11 km southeast of Bethlehem in Gush Etzion, north of the Herodion site, and reaching into the Judean Desert. At the start of the new road stands a sign in Arabic saying it was paved with foreign funding and assistance from the Palestinian Authority.

Mind you, the new highway is built in an agreed upon safeguarded reserve area, where roads and buildings are not allowed to be constructed per the Oslo Accords.

According to the Gush Etzion Regional Council, the road is another part of the ongoing effort to damage the contiguous Jewish territory in Gush Etzion. It provides access to new, illegal Arab neighborhoods in the Gush Etzion area, facilitating faster development.

Back in 2009, Salam Fayyad, then prime minister of the Palestinian Authority and its finance minister, issued the “Fayyad Plan,” aimed at creating facts on the ground, especially in Area C, with major international support, to transform international recognition of a de facto Palestinian state into a de jure state should Israel fail to deliver on its Oslo promises. Over the past 13 years, with increasing speed, the PA has been pursuing Fayyad’s policy, often with the tacit approval of the IDF civil administration and most defense ministers in Netanyahu’s and Lapid’s governments.

The Gush Etzion Regional Council says the paved road was built on preserved territories which the Palestinian Authority undertook in the Oslo Accords not to build homes or roads. Naturally, they had no intention of keeping their commitment, and Area C, especially near the robust Gush Etzion Jewish community, is flooded with illegally built PA homes and roads.

Palestinian Muslims are violating the Oslo Accords paving a road with foreign funding that cuts off the heart of the Judean desert from the Jewish continuum. There is no justification for this act of colonialism and land grab. pic.twitter.com/B2ZnIUUTOM

— Brooke Goldstein (@GoldsteinBrooke) December 29, 2022

Read More

What you can learn from Fatah's anniversary slogan

Fatah's pro-violence logo

On January 1, Fatah will celebrate its 58th anniversary. 

Well, not really. It is the 58th anniversary "of the launch of the contemporary Palestinian revolution," meaning the anniversary of their first terror attack, That attack was meant to disrupt Israeli's access to water. It was a direct attack on civilian infrastructure, and those terror roots are an inherent part of Fatah, today.

It came up with a typically unwieldy slogan for the occasion: "Just as we dropped the deal of the century and the annexation project...we will defeat the neo-fascists."

Fatah is taking credit for Donald Trump's "Deal of the Century" not being successful. 

How did they accomplish this Herculean task? 

By saying "no."

The same way they "defeated" every other chance for peace and an end to conflict with Israel.

Their desire to keep the conflict going is something they are very proud of!

What happened after their latest rejection of any peace plan without a counter-offer? Bahrain and the UAE said, we've had enough of the Palestinians acting like spoiled babies, so we will normalize our own relations with Israel, ignoring their long standing demand that they hold veto power over our foreign policy.

But we want something in return - so they demanded that Israel rescind a partial annexation plan. The far-right extremist Netanyahu, wanting peace, agreed. 

So I guess, in a convoluted way, the Palestinians were responsible for the shelving of that plan! I somehow doubt this is what they intended, though. 

And how will they defeat the "neo fascists" of Israel's new government? Well, in a few years there will be new elections again, with different ministers, so then the Palestinians will claim that they "defeated" them.

The Palestinian leadership is incompetent and impotent, supporting terror to the last penny and unable to do anything remotely constructive.  But they want to pretend that they are in the center of everything.

For a long time, much of the West believed it. Now, even the most hardened Israel hater realizes that the Palestinian leaders have become irrelevant, which is the worst thing that can happen to you in an honor/shame society. 

Fatah still holds on to that pretense. 

---

---

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!

 

Read More

12/27 Links Pt1: The World Has Forgotten Two Israelis Held by Palestinian Terrorists; ISIS-inspired terrorist arrested for deadly Jerusalem bombings

From Ian:

The World Has Forgotten Two Israelis Held by Palestinian Terrorists

Where is Hisham? Where is Avera? It has been more than 3,000 days since Avera Mengistu, an Israeli citizen and member of the Ashkelon Ethiopian community, climbed over the border fence in Gaza and was captured by Hamas. His family has had zero contact with him since.

Roughly six months later, the same fate befell a 34-year-old who is part of Israel’s Bedouin community, Hisham al-Sayed, who crossed over into the terrorist-controlled enclave.What was the reason these young men ended up in the Gaza Strip? They have a long history of suffering from mental illness, and often wandered hundreds of kilometers from their homes.

On September 7, 2014, Avera was highly agitated; his mental well-being had begun to deteriorate after the tragic death of his brother. As a result, Avera left home and began to wander. Video surveillance showed that he took off and walked approximately 10 kilometers, where he was eventually spotted, unusually close to the Gaza border fence, by Israeli soldiers. The soldiers tried to get his attention; instead, he was startled and climbed over the border fence and disappeared into Gaza.

Hisham has a similar story. In the past, he had entered Jordan, the West Bank, and even Gaza, but he was always returned by security personnel who were aware of his mental status and vulnerability. In 2015, however, he was taken hostage by Hamas. Fast forward to now, and Hamas only released a video clip this year, which appears to show Hisham lying in a bed, looking dazed, and wearing an oxygen mask — the first sighting of him since he disappeared seven years ago.

The holding of Hisham and Avera is a human rights violation on several counts.

Firstly, they are civilians who have no part in the war between Israel and Hamas, and cannot be held or treated as enemy combatants.

Secondly, withholding information about captives, as Hamas has done, amounts to an “Enforced Disappearance” and is illegal under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which has been signed by the Palestinians. It also goes against another piece of international law they signed, called The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, which provides protections for people with psycho-social, or mental health disabilities, including freedom from inhuman treatment and equal access to justice.

Finally, any detainees have the right to contact their families and receive visits from the International Committee of the Red Cross. All of these international rights are violated each moment that Hamas continues to hold Hisham and Avera hostage. Even the likes of Sarah Leah Whitson, Middle East director at Human Rights Watch, a fierce critic of Israel, has said that “Hamas’s refusal to confirm its apparent prolonged detention of men with mental health conditions and no connection to the hostilities is cruel and indefensible.”

David Singer: Israel set to uncork Hashemite Kingdom genie at UN

The UN stands to become totally irrelevant if it continues to refuse to discuss the Saudi Solution following Danny Danon - Israel's former ambassador to the United Nations – claiming at the first Abraham Accords Global Leadership Summit - that Saudi Arabia may be one of the next nations to normalize relations with Israel.

Danon stated:
“We have been in contact with the Saudis for years. I worked personally with them at the United Nations on matters of regional stability and security. It’s just a matter of time before courageous leaders step out of the shadows and full peace is achieved between all the children of Abraham. .. I expect we’ll see an agreement between Israel and Saudi Arabia this year”

This was good news for those seeking an end to the 100 years-old Jewish/Arab conflict – but bad news for the UN which continues to stubbornly support the two-state solution whilst refusing to even acknowledge the existence of the game-changing Saudi Solution since its publication six months ago.

It beggars belief that on 30 November the UN General Assembly adopted five resolutions on the questions of 'Palestine' and the Middle East without one speaker uttering the words. “Hashemite Kingdom of Palestine Solution” - whose successful implementation would see the Arab populations in Gaza, part of the 'West Bank' and the wretched UNRWA camps in Lebanon and Syria becoming citizens of that newly-created territorial entity.

Cheikh Niang (Senegal) - Chair of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People - introduced its annual report containing developments relating to the question of Palestine between 1 September 2021 and 31 August 2022 – which contained not one reference to the Saudi Solution in its 27 pages.

Israeli Prime Minister designate Bibi Netanyahu has made his intentions crystal-clear:
“I think the big prize is peace with Saudi Arabia, which I intend to achieve if I go back into office… The rise of Israeli power facilitated the Abraham Accords, and the continual nurturing of Israeli power will also nurture a broader peace with Saudi Arabia and nearly all of the rest of the Arab world. I intend to bring the Arab-Israeli conflict to a close.”

The 2022 Saudi Solution offers Israel:
sole sovereignty in Jerusalem,
sovereignty in part of Judea and Samaria (West Bank) and
abandonment of the 74 years-old Arab claim to return to Israel
The UN must respond to the hope of peace offered by the Hashemite Kingdom of Palestine genie.

Abdullah in the middle

Millions of Jordanian citizens descend from families who lived in eastern Palestine when it was ruled by the British Empire or, before that, the Ottoman Empire. Others moved to Jordan, fleeing wars launched by Israel’s Arab neighbors—Jordan among them—in 1948 and 1967. In other words, millions of Jordanians identify as Palestinians.

“While Jordanian officials may not say so explicitly,” Dr. Schanzer writes, “the animosity harbored by Jordan’s Palestinian population toward Israel has a significant influence on the kingdom’s foreign policies.”

A chapter of history Israeli leaders seldom discuss publicly: When the first Arab-Israeli war came to a halt in 1949, Jordanian forces had conquered the biblical lands of Judea and Samaria (quickly renamed “the West Bank”), from which they expelled the Jewish population. Even Jews living in the Jewish Quarter of the Old City of Jerusalem were driven out, and their homes and synagogues destroyed.

Upon taking east Jerusalem in the defensive war of 1967, then-Defense Minister Moshe Dayan decided to award a Jordanian waqf (a government-controlled religious entity) authority over the two important Muslim sites—Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock—that stand atop the Temple Mount, the holiest of all Jewish sites. This profound gesture of conciliation has never been fully appreciated, much less reciprocated.

Nor do Jordanians express gratitude for the essential goods Israel currently provides, for example, water (Israel is a world leader in desalination technology) and energy (40 percent of Jordan’s electricity comes from Israeli gas). Israel also cooperates closely with Jordan on “a wide range of security-related issues.”

Dr. Schanzer notes that King Abdullah, in a conversation with former U.S. National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster last May, “voiced concerns that Iranian forces in Syria could soon destabilize his country…Jordan also faces a threat from Iran-backed militias in Iraq to the north. Additional threats loom in the south, with Iranian assets reportedly operating in the Red Sea.”

Though the enemy of Jordan’s enemy should be Jordan’s friend, Dr. Schanzer expects relations with Israel to deteriorate further. He notes the king’s “unabashed distaste” for Benjamin Netanyahu, who is now forming a new government.

Netanyahu, for his part, is undoubtedly reading with distress “reports that Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal has been spending more time in Jordan with the approval of the Hashemite Kingdom.”

The king of Jordan is a moderate, modern and savvy sovereign. But without Israeli support, his future and that of his country will be precarious.

And if there is to be peace between Israelis and Palestinians, Jordan will need to join the pragmatic Arab states advocating for a new regional order, one based on stability and prosperity.

For King Abdullah to explain all this to his subjects—penetrating the fog of Palestinian irredentism and rejectionism—will not be easy. But that is his job.

Read More

12/25 Links: Melanie Phillips: Happy inclusive holidays!; Israel should terminate the Oslo Accords; Israeli mayor attends funeral of terrorist who wounded 3 policemen

From Ian:

Melanie Phillips: Happy inclusive holidays!

What a minefield this whole identity thing is. Thank goodness Chanukah doesn’t present this problem, eh?

For many diaspora Jews, Chanukah is regarded as Christmas-lite with gifts, diet-destroying delicacies and a lighted menorah in place of a glittering tree.

And there can hardly be much danger of offending anyone with a card displaying a chanukiah, dreidel or doughnut, or standard anodyne message such as “Festival of lights”, “Love, light, latkes” or “Peace, love and miracles”.

Hold on a minute. Chanukah is not actually a festival of peace and love. It celebrates instead the victory of the Maccabees who went to war against both the Seleucid Greeks and the Hellenists, Jews who were themselves drawn to the pagan ways of their Greek overlords.

The Maccabees were not apostles of peace. They were more like resistance commandos, fierce and uncompromising warriors who fought their Greek oppressors.

Moreover, they also committed violent atrocities against the Hellenised Jews who had absorbed Greek universalism and as a result had taken aim at circumcision, Shabbat observance and Torah study.

The Maccabees regarded those overly-assimilated Jews as traitors to Judaism and dealt with them accordingly.

In the saccharine world of much Chanukah observance, the Maccabees are commonly presented as heroes fighting and defeating the tyrannical Greeks. This was undoubtedly true.

But other commentators equally plausibly describe them as zealots, violent religious extremists who forced Jews to conform to a strict interpretation of Judaism and expelled non-Jews from the land. To the Hellenised Jews, they were religious nuts.

Ring any bells? Today, many diaspora Jews (and liberal Israelis) are hyper-ventilating over the likely inclusion in the new Israeli government of three men whose agenda has distinct echoes of the Maccabees.

Itamar Ben-Gvir, the putative security minister, called in his younger days for the expulsion of the Arabs from Israel (although he says he has changed his views). Bezalel Smotrich, tipped as a finance minister, has said his ultimate aim is an Israeli theocracy.

And Avi Maoz, who is set to run an office of “Jewish identity”, has taken explicit aim at the “Hellenising Jews” of the Israeli left and progressive denominations whom he terms “the real darkness”.

Celebrating the Maccabees might therefore be seen as celebrating Ben-Gvir, Smotrich and Maoz.

Well that’s the end of Chanukah cards, then.

PMW: Jesus the Palestinian terrorist and his 72 dark-eyed virgins

One of the many ways in which the Palestinian Authority distorts history in order to invent a centuries-old Palestinian identity, is to turn Jesus the Judean (Jew), who promoted peace on earth, into a Palestinian terrorist who was murdered by the Israelis, thus becoming the first Palestinian “Martyr,” who is now reveling in heaven with Allah, in the arms of 72 dark-eyed virgins.

While the language the PA uses to describe Jesus as a terrorist and as someone enjoying his virgins is less direct, the meaning is the same.

When referring to Palestinian terrorists, the PA calls them “self-sacrificing fighters,” or “fidai”. So, when the PA and its officials use the same terms to describe Jesus, they are in fact saying he is a terrorist.

As Palestinian Media Watch has shown, here, here, here, here, and here, among other places, the definition of Jesus as a terrorist enjoying his virgins is not a fringe idea, but rather one expressed by the highest order in the PA.

Jesus the “Palestinian” terrorist murdered by the Jews

When PA Prime Minister Muhammad Shtayyeh sought to declare Jesus a terrorist, and link him to Palestinian terror, he referred to him as a “Palestinian self-sacrificing fighter” who, similar to the PA descriptions of suicide bombers, “paid for his mission with his life” and whose birth takes place “at the same time as the anniversary of the outbreak of the Palestinian revolution” – i.e the anniversary of the first Fatah terror attack:
“The birthday of our lord Jesus, peace be upon him - the first Palestinian self-sacrificing fighter from whom we learned Martyrdom-death, and who paid for his mission with his life - takes place at the same time as the anniversary of the outbreak of the Palestinian revolution (i.e., the anniversary of “the Launch” of Fatah, counted from its first terror attack against Israel), for which thousands of Martyrs have paid with their lives so that we will live and remain, and so that our children will dream of a better future.”

[Official PA daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Dec. 28, 2020]

Muwaffaq Matar, a member of the Revolutionary Council of PA leader Mahmoud Abbas’ Fatah party and regular columnist for the official PA daily similarly adopted Jesus as a Palestinian and compared him to terrorists calling him a “self-sacrificing fighter”:

Read More

12/24 Links: “Rabbi” Who Said Kaddish for Hamas Threatens to Boycott Israeli Government; Police release body cam footage from Kfar Qassem terror attack

From Ian:

Far-right MKs said to agree not to impede Netanyahu efforts to normalize with Saudis

The far-right elements of Israel’s incoming government have agreed not to hinder any efforts by incoming prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu to reach a normalization agreement with Saudi Arabia, according to a Saturday report.

Such a deal has been one of Netanyahu’s greatest goals since signing the historic Abraham Accords with Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates in September 2020, as he has stated several times since.

While Morocco and Sudan also joined the accords later, Saudi Arabia has been reluctant.

The Saudis have been widely reported to maintain clandestine ties with Jerusalem. Though Netanyahu himself is reported to have flown to the country in secret to meet with Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman, Riyadh has continued to insist publicly that a two-state solution between Israel and the Palestinians was a “requirement” for any normalization agreement.

Still, Netanyahu is optimistic that such a deal can be reached with the Gulf state and his political partners understand this, according to Channel 12.

The report said there was an understanding between Netanyahu and far-right lawmakers Itamar Ben Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich to not sabotage any effort to normalize relations with the Saudis.

As one example, the unsourced report cited the vague wording of Netanyahu’s agreement in principle to advance annexation of West Bank land as part of the coalition deal with Smotrich, head of the far-right Religious Zionism party.

The agreement was worded in a way that could allow Netanyahu to make no movement on the issue if he chooses. And the report said Smotrich understands that such a scenario is dependent on US approval, which would only be feasible under a Republican president. It hinted he may remain quiet on the matter for the time being to allow Netanyahu to make overtures to Riyadh.

A second example given was Ben Gvir’s statement that though he wants to advance bills providing security forces with immunity from prosecution and looser open-fire rules, he has also agreed to adhere to international law — another apparent agreement not to rock the boat.

Ron Dermer meets Netanyahu, will only join gov’t if made foreign minister — report

Incoming prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu reportedly met this week with Ron Dermer, a close confidant and a former Israeli ambassador to the US, to continue talks on bringing Dermer into the government in a top role.

Netanyahu is said to have been considering appointing Dermer as foreign minister, an idea that has been contested by senior Likud members who, in recent weeks, have seen a number of key cabinet portfolios handed over to the Likud’s far-right and ultra-Orthodox coalition partners as the Likud leader has tried to cobble together a coalition. As the number of top jobs dwindled for lawmakers within his own party, Netanyahu has faced tough criticism for such decisions.

Netanyahu announced Wednesday that he has finally come to agreements with his coalition partners to form Israel’s 37th government. The Likud leader has yet to finalize coalition agreements with any of his party’s intended partners, however. Knesset Speaker Yariv Levin will announce the development during Monday’s legislative session. Netanyahu will then have until January 2 to swear in his coalition.

On Friday, Channel 12 reported that Dermer and Netanyahu met a day prior and that the ex-envoy expressed a strong willingness to be part of the incoming government but only in the position of foreign minister. The unsourced report also said Netanyahu was pitched the idea of appointing two foreign ministers, Dermer and a senior member of the Likud, but this move was deemed unlikely.

The report said Netanyahu sees Dermer as very closely aligned with his right-wing ideology and a future part of the Likud. Get The Times of Israel's Daily Edition

Palestinians slam Israeli coalition deals, warn of Middle East ‘explosion’

Palestinians have expressed deep concern over the agreements signed between Prime Minister-designate Benjamin Netanyahu and his far-right coalition partners, especially Otzma Yehudit head MK Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich of the Religious Zionists Party (RZP).

They warned that the policies of the incoming government will lead to an “explosion” and urged the Palestinian Authority and the international community to prepare for the worst scenarios.

The Palestinian Authority called on the international community, the US administration, and the European Union to link their relationship with the Netanyahu government “to the extent of its commitment to international law, international legitimacy decisions, and human rights principles.”

The Palestinian foreign affairs ministry said that it views “with great seriousness” reports in the Israeli media regarding Netanyahu’s “ill-fated agreements with his far-right fascist coalition partners.”

Palestinians fear move giving West Bank control to Smotrich
KAN News reported Friday that as part of the coalition agreement with RZP, Netanyahu has agreed to relinquish significant control over the approval process for settlement construction to Smotrich.

Netanyahu reportedly agreed to hand authority over the two key bodies responsible for Israeli control in the West Bank – the Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT) and the Civil Administration – to Smotrich’s party.

The Palestinians fear the move would pave the way for the new government to extend Israeli law to large portions of the West Bank, especially Area C, which is exclusively controlled by Israel.

The Palestinians, in addition, are concerned about Ben-Gvir’s insistence on including a clause in the coalition agreement that imposes a death sentence on convicted terrorists.

“Rabbi” Who Said Kaddish for Hamas Threatens to Boycott Israeli Government

Israel has a new conservative government and its enemies, and by that, I mean anti-Israel leftists, couldn’t be angrier. Ron Kampeas at the JTA has another anti-Israel press release disguised as a news story promoting a push by anti-Israel activists to boycott members of the incoming Israeli government.

“More than 330 American rabbis, including some who occupy prominent roles in major cities, are pledging to block members of the Religious Zionist bloc in Benjamin Netanyahu’s new government from speaking at their synagogues,” Kampeas gushes.

The list largely consists of anti-Israel clergy, many, if not most of them, also members of the ‘Rabbis for Hamas”. This was a list that Annie of Boker Tov Boulder put together back in the day of leftist clergy who signed a letter urging “constructive engagement” with Hamas.

Over the years I’ve noted the same bunch of names on assorted anti-Israel letters as the ‘Rabbis for Hamas’.

Sure enough, Melanie Aron, a speaker at the Islamic Networks Group, has signed both letters. As did Elliot Baskin, James Bennett, Phil Bentley, Leila Berner, Jonathan Biatch, Rena Blumenthal and Jonathan Brumberg-Kraus. And that’s just the A’s and B’s.

That’s impressive considering that a number of these people must have died or retired since then.

While I won’t bother going through the list, a few names do pop out. Most notably, Sharon Kleinbaum.

Sharon Kleinbaum, the girlfriend of teachers’ union boss Randi Weingarten, is infamous for her role at a gay temple in New York City where her hatred of Israel was so extreme that it drove the members away.

Read More

12/23 Links Pt1: Report by UN Middle East envoy ignores Israeli terror victims; Showing gratitude to the IDF, the modern-day Maccabees; Omnibus Bill Would Let U.S. Rejoin Antisemitic UNESCO

From Ian:

Report by UN Middle East envoy ignores Israeli terror victims

UN coordinator to the Middle East Tor Wennesland, reported to the Security Council on Thursday that more than 20 Israeli victims have been killed as a result of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict since the beginning of 2022 – a number lower than Israeli estimations.

The Envoy reported 150 Palestinian casualties during the same time span, the largest number in recent years.

According to the Foreign Ministry, Wennesland relied on data taken from the UN’s Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), which only recognized 19 Israeli victims in terror attacks in 2022.

According to Israeli estimations, 31 Israelis and foreign workers were killed as a result of terror attacks, while the UN claimed the cause of the additional 12 fatalities were inconclusive or their perpetrators remained at large.

The Foreign Ministry said the UN’s report ignored terror attack victims including Aryeh Shchupak and Tadese Tashume who were killed in a bombing attack in Jerusalem last November, Shulamit Rachel Ovadia who was killed by a Palestinian terrorist in September, Victor Sorokopot and Dima Mitrik who were killed in a terror attack in Bnei Brak last March.

Also not mentioned were Ivan Tarnovksy who was killed in a stabbing attack in Jerusalem in March, Rabbi Moshe Kravitsky, Laura Itzhak, Doris Yahbas, and Meha and Menach Yehezkel who were killed in a terror attack in Be’er Sheva also in March, and Border Police officers Shirel Abukarat and Yezen Falah who were killed in a terror attack in Hadera that same month.

Wennesland did not mention that out of the 150 Palestinians who were killed since the beginning of 2022, at least 80% were what the ministry called "terrorists," describing them as Palestinian civilians.

Israel’s ambassador to the UN Gilad Erdan’s appeals to the OCHA for the reevaluation of the data presented, have so far, remained unanswered.

Want to know why a @UN Special Rapporteur is advocating on behalf of a terrorist who murdered 7 people?

It's because she is a JEW HATER who believes that Palestinian terrorists have the right tto murder Jews!

She is a stain on the already tainted UN!https://t.co/8TWouT5djw

— Maurice Hirsch, Adv. ???? ??''? ????? ???? (@MauriceHirsch4) December 23, 2022

Showing gratitude to the IDF, the modern-day Maccabees

As we reflect on the joyous holiday of Hanukkah, a commemoration of the notable and valiant fighting prowess of the Jewish people in ancient times, we also celebrate the unyielding resilience and determination of the Jewish people and our homeland.

From Maccabees to modern miracles
For this year’s Festival of Lights, Friends of the Israel Defense Forces (FIDF) organized a “Live the Miracle” campaign. On each night of Hanukkah, Jewish celebrities and influencers welcomed soldiers from the IDF into their homes to light candles together in a symbolic act of solidarity with Israel and the never-ending fight against the darkness that is antisemitism.

The candle lighting took place at the homes of Lizzy Savetsky, a social media influencer, matchmaker and unabashed Zionist activist; Alexei and Loren Brovarnik, stars of the hit series 90 Day Fiancé; Modi Rosenfeld, a stand-up comedian and actor; Tova Friedman, an 86-year-old Holocaust survivor and recent TikTok sensation; Ashley Waxman Bakshi, a beauty, travel and fashion creator; Cathy Heller, an author and podcast host; Kosha Dillz, a rapper; and Noa Tishby, an Israeli actress, writer and activist.

In the face of social media attacks, these nine brave individuals stood up for morality, for dignity and for the young men and young women who are literally at the front line of humanity.

Hanukkah is the celebration of miracles, of right over might: of the small yet fearless Maccabee army’s defeat over the formidable Greco-Syrian forces and a tiny vessel of oil, enough to light the menorah in Jerusalem’s Temple Mount for 12 hours, that burned instead for eight days.

A group of educators, the Maccabees fought to defend the religious freedom and basic human rights of the Jewish people. Their victory over their imposing enemy ultimately emancipated the Jewish people so that they could live freely and exult each day in their fundamental humanity.

It’s time to light the candles—for Shabbat and the 6th night of Hanukkah!

Shabbat Shalom and Happy Holidays from the IDF ????? pic.twitter.com/hdcCLQeX67

— Israel Defense Forces (@IDF) December 23, 2022

Read More

12/22 Links Pt1: Melanie Phillips: The European Union’s subversion of Israel; Returning the Palestinians to Center Stage Undermines Stability in the Middle East

From Ian:

JCPA: The EU's Secret Palestinian Building Plan for Area C

Its actions in unilaterally advancing a Palestinian state in Area C, territories assigned to Israel both administratively and regarding security responsibilities by both the PLO and Israel in a mutually signed agreement of September 28, 1995, represent a violation of international law and call into question the EU’s ability to continue serve in any capacity as diplomatic interlocutor.

The EU’s unpublished policy plan also violates Israel’s legal rights as affirmed by the EU at Oslo and reveals a pro-PLO bias that renders the EU as de facto supporters of the official PA policy of allocating payments to Palestinian terrorists who were killed, captured, or imprisoned as a result of their jihadi terror activity. Israel and the international community bear a responsibility to reveal the EU’s gross violations of its diplomatic responsibilities and those of Josep Borrell, High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, as well as European Commission President Ursula Gertrud von der Leyen.

This latest revelation is only the most recent example of EU malfeasance as an entrusted diplomatic interlocutor. Ambassador Alan Baker, former legal advisor to Israel’s Foreign Ministry, pointed out in a July 2022 policy brief for the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, that EU member states restored funding to six Palestinian civil society organizations designated by Israel as terror-supporting organizations, rejecting evidence submitted by Israel that these organizations are linked to the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, an EU-, U.S.-, and Israel-designated terror group.

As Baker notes, contrary to its special status as witness, sponsor, and facilitator of the Oslo Accords, the EU and specifically Norway have consistently conducted a one-sided, partisan policy aimed at prejudging the issues that are still to be negotiated between the parties, such as the issue of Jerusalem and the permanent status of the territories.

Baker added that, “Facilitating international funding to support and encourage Palestinian terror, including providing funds for salaries and benefits of terrorists serving prison sentences, is the antithesis of any genuine international action to promote human rights, peace, and stability in the Middle East.”

Melanie Phillips: The European Union’s subversion of Israel

Now this is out in the open. The E.U. can no longer pretend it is merely contributing to Palestinian “civil society.” Yet even now, there is no mention of any of this by the Western mainstream media. In Britain, the BBC has instead been busy fomenting yet more anti-Israel feeling by telling its audience that Netanyahu has finalized “the most extreme right-wing government in Israel’s history.”

Similar denunciations by Israel’s outgoing leftist prime minister, Yair Lapid, have been fueling hysteria in the West, not least among liberal-minded Diaspora Jews.

These have been heard describing the yet-to-be-formed Israeli government as “horrific,” and have already been blaming Israel for putting them in danger as a result.

Now the E.U. has been engulfed by revelations of a corrupt relationship with Qatar—the sponsor of Hamas and mortal foe of Israel. While details are still unfolding, this axis isn’t surprising. There’s a nexus between the universalism embodied by the E.U. and the desire to bring down Israel, the nation state of the most particularist culture in the world.

And it’s no coincidence that the majority of British Jews, who in 2016 voted for the U.K. to remain in the E.U. partly through their ludicrous belief that universalism actually protected them against antisemitism, have also swallowed many of the lies about the Palestinian cause—and, like their liberal American counterparts, are now clutching their pearls over Smotrich, Ben-Gvir and Maoz.

While concerns about the extremism of this trio are justifiable, the people they most resemble are the Maccabees. They were Jewish religious zealots who fought the Hellenized Jews because the Hellenizers were adopting Greek universalist precepts and, as a result, taking a wrecking ball to Jewish practices such as circumcision and Shabbat observance.

But the Maccabees fought and defeated the Jews’ Greek oppressors. While being rightly excoriated for violent extremism, the heroes of the Hanukkah story saved the Jewish people from tyranny.

It may be that today’s Maccabean Three are channeling Jewish history once again.

Israeli MKs slam EU policy document for ignoring Jewish land rights in West Bank

A group of 40 Israeli lawmakers led by Likud MK Amichai Chikli sent an open letter on Tuesday to the European Union protesting an official policy document that they say denies historical Jewish ties to the so-called Area C of the West Bank.

The classified June 2022 document exposed by Israeli media gives an overview of the continental bloc's policy toward Area C of the territory, which is fully administered by Israel.

According to the Oslo Accords, a series of interim peace agreements between Israel and the Palestinians signed in the 1990s, this territory is supposed to be gradually relinquished to Palestinian control, with an option for land swaps under a final status agreement. The document shows that the EU is working in concert with the Palestinian Authority to integrate Area C into a future Palestinian state.

The EU criticizes Israeli policies of building in Area C of the West Bank, which the Israeli government refers to by its biblical name — Judea and Samaria.

In the letter, lawmakers criticize EU policies in the West Bank as favoring the Palestinians and ignoring the historical claims of the Jewish people to the land.

"In the last decade, we've witnessed the increasing involvement of the European Union in construction, planning road projects and erecting water and solar energy facilities in hundreds of outposts in Area C," Chikli told i24NEWS.

"The document uncovered this week shows that this is a deliberate strategy that completely ignores Israel's position and sovereignty in the area.

Moreover, the construction moves show that the goal is for the most part to interrupt the sequences of Jewish settlement and to create choke rings around the settlement blocks that will make it difficult for Israel to exercise its sovereignty in the future." "These moves constitute serious damage to the relations between the European Union and the State of Israel."

Israeli lawmakers slam EU policy document on West Bank

Ex-Israeli Military Officers Call EU's Area C Policy "Hostile and Aggressive"

Letter from Israel Defense and Security Forum calls EU policy 'to advance illegal Palestinian development' a threat to Israel's national security

An Israeli organization consisting of more than 16,000 former military, security, and police officers called the revelation that the European Union is working on a Palestinian takeover of Area C of the West Bank "an act of blatant hostility and aggression."

In an open letter sent Wednesday from the Israel Defense and Security Forum (IDSF) and addressed to Dimiter Tzantchev, head of the EU delegation to the State of Israel, the NGO slammed the EU for its confidential policy document revealed by media outlets on Tuesday.

The EU policy document, which was leaked by Israeli media, gives an overview of the EU's policy toward Area C, which is administered by Israel. The document shows that the EU is working with the Palestinian Authority on making Area C a part of a future Palestinian state. The EU criticizes Israeli policies of building in Area C, which the Israeli government calls by its biblical name, Judea and Samaria.

"According to our professional understanding of national security, the dominant terrain of Judea and Samaria in Area C is key strategic terrain that controls or can threaten most of the modern State of Israel’s infrastructure and strategic assets," the letter stated. "The EU’s reported clandestine activity to undermine Israeli control in Area C and to advance illegal Palestinian development in those areas constitutes a clear and present threat to the security of the State of Israel, and is an act of blatant hostility and aggression."

The letter was signed by 12 former military officers and includes the names of dozens more. The IDSF describes itself as a "Zionist, security-based movement" that includes senior officers from all branches of Israel's armed forces, as well as researchers, academics, and Israeli citizens.

The founder and director of the IDSF Brig. Gen. (Res.) Amir Avivi told i24NEWS that the EU's activity undermines the Oslo Accords, which established Israel's control over Area C.

"These areas are crucial to Israel's existence in the long term. It's an existential issue," said Avivi.

"We are the only ones who can define what we need, talking about national security, talking about the Jewish national aspirations. No European country can decide for us what we need, and certainly not go against an accord that everybody should adhere to."

Read More