Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Monday, January 25, 2021

Time To Read The Tea Leaves: Where Is Biden Headed In The Middle East? (Daled Amos)

Now that Biden is president, Israel and the Jewish community look on as the various pieces of his new administration fall into place, waiting to see what this means for both the Jewish community and for Israel.

Everything becomes part of the cup of tea leaves that Jews are trying to read.

One of the things that got this process going in earnest was the change made to the Twitter account of the US Ambassador to Israel.

Last Wednesday, the account suddenly read:

The question was: why change it to US Ambassador to Israel, the West Bank and Gaza?

Legal Insurrection quotes from the original article in the Washington Free Beacon which sounded the alarm:

The change in title marks a significant shift in policy toward Israel. The United States has for decades declined to take a policy position on the West Bank and Gaza territories, maintaining the Israelis and the Palestinians must decide in negotiations how the areas will be split up for a future Palestinian state. By including Gaza and the West Bank in the ambassador’s portfolio, the Biden administration appears to be determining that neither area is part of Israel—a move that is certain to rile Israeli leaders. [emphasis added]

In the end, it apparently turned out to be a false alarm, as the page was quietly changed back to "US Ambassador to Israel" and WFB updated their article accordingly. No one knows if it was the work of an overeager staffer or whether Twitter accidentally refreshed the old page.

But this is a good example of the eagerness to jump at the most trivial indication of Biden's new Middle East policy, especially in terms of what policy changes we should expect, especially when it comes to Iran.

Attention dutifully went back to following the procession of Biden nominees for various positions within his administration.

Biden's new National Security Adviser is Jake Sullivan.

Last May, Sullivan co-wrote an article in Foreign Affairs about America’s Opportunity in the Middle East, which advocated

a phased approach that delivers nuclear progress up front and creates space to address regional challenges over time. Under such an approach, the United States would immediately reestablish nuclear diplomacy with Iran and salvage what it can from the 2015 nuclear deal, which has been fraying since the Trump administration abandoned it in 2018. The United States would then work with the P5+1 and Iran to negotiate a follow-on agreement. In parallel, the United States and its partners would support a regional track.

It is to be expected that Sullivan supports some kind of return to the Iran deal, albeit cautiously.

On the other hand, Sullivan also praised the Abraham Accords back in September, saying it was a "positive accomplishment" that was "good for the region, it’s good for Israel, it’s good for peace" while balancing that with "we should praise this deal for what it is but not for more than what it is...It’s been a long time coming. This is not a bolt out of the blue."

But over the weekend, when Sullivan spoke by phone with Israeli National Security Advisor Meir Ben Shabbat, the White House released an oddly phrased statement that

They discussed opportunities to enhance the partnership over the coming months, including by building on the success of Israel’s normalization arrangements with UAE, Bahrain, Sudan, and Morocco.

Lahav Harkov, the Jerusalem Post's diplomatic correspondent, noted on Twitter

She also pointed out that while in Israel it was reported that

The two agreed to discuss soon the many topics on the agenda including Iran, regional issues and advancing the Abraham Accords.

in the White House statement, there was no mention of Iran at all.

There are those tea leaves again.

And then there is Tony Blinken.

During his confirmation hearings last week, Tony Blinken -- Biden's choice for Secretary of State -- was asked about Biden's Middle East policy.

The Biden administration would consult with Israel and Arab allies before taking any action regarding returning to the Iran deal, though he admitted that he "believes that if Iran comes back into compliance, we would too"

But Blinken went on to say, on the issue of compliance:

But we would use that as a platform with our allies and partners, who would once again be on the same side as us, to seek a longer and stronger agreement, and also as you and the chairman have rightly pointed out, to capture these other issues, particularly with regard to missiles and Iran’s destabilizing activities. That would be the objective.

Having said that, I think we are a long way from there. We would have to see once the president-elect is in office what steps Iran actually takes and is prepared to take. We would then have to evaluate whether they were making good—if they say they are coming back into compliance—[on] their obligations, and then we would take it from there. But in the first instance, yes, we absolutely will consult with you, and not only with you, I think as the chairman suggested, it’s also vitally important that we engage on the takeoff, not the landing, with our allies and with our partners in the region, to include Israel and to include the Gulf countries. [emphasis added]

First of all, Blinken seems to be taking an awful lot for granted about getting Israel and the Gulf Arab states on board negotiations with the leading state sponsor of terrorism in the Middle East.

Secondly, his metaphor about engaging US allies "on the takeoff, not the landing" implies a willingness to push those US allies off the plane -- if not under the bus.

And Blinken is nothing if not a party man, who claimed during his confirmation hearing:

In my judgment, the JCPOA, for whatever its limitations, was succeeding on its own terms in blocking Iran’s pathways to producing fissile material for a nuclear weapon on short order. [emphasis added]

But overall, the general consensus does seem to be that Biden's picks for his staff have been reassuring on the issue of Iran.

Except for one.

There are indications that Biden could pick Robert Malley as his special envoy to Iran, which Eli Lake describes as a reason to believe that Biden’s First Foreign Policy Blunder Could Be on Iran. The problem is that Malley favors talks with Iran as the only way to get any results, and claims that pressure does not work.

Lake demurs:

More important, the notion that Iran’s regime does not respond to pressure is a talking point of the Iranian regime, especially Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif. It also happens to be false. Obama’s maximum pressure campaign between 2011 and 2013 ultimately coerced the regime to enter open nuclear negotiations with the U.S., China, Russia, France, Germany and the U.K. [emphasis added]

More to the point, appointing Malley would directly contradict statements that Biden made just last year while on the campaign trail:

Biden himself during the campaign has said he would support targeted sanctions to punish Iran for human rights abuses, developing ballistic missiles and support for terrorism. And Blinken and Sullivan have committed to working with regional allies to press Iran to change its ways. What message would it send if the administration’s envoy to Iran believes no Iranian leader could ever agree to stop making war on its neighbors?

Part of Biden's problem is that he is beholden to the progressive wing of the Democratic Party, one that favors the Iran Deal and supports for a Palestinian Arab state on the one hand and is antagonistic to Israel and Saudi Arabia on the other, and is not impressed by the Abraham Accords either.

So it's no small thing that while praising the Abraham Accords, Blinken made a point to leave this window open:

However, he said the Biden administration would “take a hard look at” some of the “commitments” that were made in tandem with those accords.

Is Biden going to try to thread this needle -- both in terms of his Middle East policy abroad but also in terms of satisfying his progressive base that expects to be rewarded handsomely for their support?

And if he does make this attempt, will he succeed?

Or are we already seeing signs of it beginning to unravel?

01/25 Links Pt1: Palestinians Need to Rethink the Way They Treat Israel; The Jordan Valley as Israel’s Strategic Line of Defense; 75% of Jailed PA Terrorists Vaccinated by Israel

From Ian:

Peres Center for Peace Chairman Chemi Peres: Palestinians Need to Rethink the Way They Treat Israel

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has promoted: "peace for peace," a rejection of the traditional paradigm of land for peace. He says the UAE deal sets a precedent: Israel doesn't need to cede land to the Palestinians in order to win friends in the Arab world. In the Persian Gulf, a new generation of Arabs is less consumed by the never-ending Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

"This is a model of how the peace needs to be with the Palestinians. Mutual respect and acceptance...looking forward to doing business together and living together," said Israeli investor Simcha Fulda after business meetings in Dubai.

"I think that the Palestinians need to rethink the way they treat Israel," said Chemi Peres, son of the late Israeli President Shimon Peres, who won a Nobel Peace Prize for peace efforts with Palestinians. Peres' son runs the Peres Center for Peace and Innovation, which is prioritizing Israeli business ties with the Emiratis, an approach he wants Palestinians to adopt in forging peaceful ties with Israelis.

"Their point of view has been, let's first solve the political issues and then we can start normalizing things and move forward. I believe those days are gone," Peres said. "I believe that the only way for us to really, really achieve peace, comprehensive peace, and save the region from backwardness, is to focus on moving forward together."

In Focus: The Jordan Valley as Israel’s Strategic Line of Defense

Following the 1967 Six Day War initiated by Arab countries, Israel, by virtue of its resounding victory, expanded the territory under its control. While the Sinai Peninsula was subsequently returned to Egypt as part of the 1979 peace agreement, and whereas Israel in 2005 fully withdrew from the Gaza Strip, the Jewish State has to date not fully relinquished the West Bank (also known by its biblical name, Judea and Samaria), which for two decades beginning in 1948 was administered by Jordan and, crucially, includes the Jordan Valley.

Historical, religious and legal claims aside, successive Israeli governments have often cited security considerations as a reason for retaining the area, which has been referred to as “Israel’s eastern line of defense.” As such, the issue has often featured prominently in US-mediated peace talks with the Palestinians, who claim the entire West Bank as part of a future state.

In this respect, while newly minted President Joe Biden’s exact policies regarding the West Bank are not yet known, his nominee for secretary of state secretary, Tony Blinken, has asserted that the current administration views Israel’s security as “sacrosanct.” At the same time, he said that the 46th American president would promote the two-state solution and oppose unilateral steps by both Israelis and Palestinians.

Israel’s Need for Strategic Depth
Defense experts have repeatedly acknowledged the need for so-called “strategic depth.” The 1921 journal of the US Infantry Association summarizes this military philosophy: “All essential elements of the defense should be organized in depth. If the forward defensive areas are captured, resistance is continued by those in rear.”

Before the UN Partition Plan of 1947, some prominent members of the Zionist movement warned against establishing a Jewish state in the absence of what they considered defensible borders. In a 1937 address to members of the British parliament, Ze’ev Jabotinsky described such a prospective country:
Most of it is lowland, whereas the Arab reserve is all hills. Guns can be placed on the Arab hills within 15 miles of Tel Aviv and 20 miles from Haifa; in a few hours these towns can be destroyed, the harbors made useless, and most of the places overrun, whatever the valor of their defenders.”

More recently, Israeli leaders have gone so far as to call the pre-1967 lines “Auschwitz borders,” pointing out that Israel is, by comparison, similar in size to New Jersey or Wales and therefore vulnerable to attack. Before the Six Day War, Israel proper at its narrowest measured only 15 kilometers (9 miles) wide across its middle.

Israel’s first ambassador to UAE ready for his historic mission

For Ambassador Eitan Na’eh, the excitement of being Israel’s first senior diplomat in the United Arab Emirates began even before he landed in the Gulf state this week.

Speaking from self-quarantine in Abu Dhabi on Monday, Na’eh spoke of “national and personal excitement mixed together,” which began “from the first time the foreign minister summoned me and asked me to come here.” That continued on Sunday, when Na’eh “got on a flight going east, over Saudi Arabia and landing in Dubai,” something that, as an Israeli, he still did not take for granted.

Now, Na’eh is the charge d’affaires of Israel’s new embassy in the UAE, opened five months after the countries announced the peace and normalization agreement called the Abraham Accords. Na’eh is in charge of the embassy until a permanent ambassador is chosen after the next government is formed, which will likely take at least three months.

Na’eh said he is in Abu Dhabi “with clear instructions to expand the ties,” because previously, Israel only had diplomatic representatives to the International Renewable Energy Agency based in the UAE, and not to the country itself.

“We need to build relations for the long term,” he said.

From Naharnet:

Fifteen Israeli soldiers on Sunday opened the border gate at al-Wazzani and scoured the area facing the parks, Lebanon’s state-run National News Agency reported.

“Before their withdrawal, they seized seven cows,” the agency added.

Lebanon is accusing the Israeli army of opening a fence, stealing seven cows, and bringing them to Israel.

Does this make any sense whatsoever? Only to people already predisposed to antisemitism, who consider all Jews to be thieves.

Some Lebanese made fun of the absurd news, even making a hashtag #freethecows.

Fortunately, Lebanon still have some independent news sources. The Daily Star Lebanon disputes the official state version of events:

A small Israeli force combed a border area with Lebanon early Sunday, seizing seven cows that had strayed into Israel, a Lebanese security source said.

The source said 15 Israeli soldiers searched an area facing parks and restaurants on the Wazani river in south Lebanon. The soldiers did not cross into Lebanon but as they pulled back they seized seven cows who appeared to have strayed across the border while grazing in the area.

The fate of the cows was not immediately clear.

Perhaps the seven cows represents seven years of plenty.

Israel always ends up returning cattle that cross over, but they have a real concern for Hezbollah booby trapping animals - something that Palestinians have done repeatedly.

The IHRA does not include Holocaust inversion (saying Israel is acting like Nazis) in its definition of Holocaust distortion. Why the hell not?

We have discussed the excellent IHRA definition of antisemitism many times, and praised the recent handbook released by the EU as one of the best explanations of that definition and how it can be practically used.

In 2013, the IHRA also came out with a working definition of Holocaust denial and distortion.

The "distortion" part of the definition says:

Distortion of the Holocaust refers, inter alia, to:

Intentional efforts to excuse or minimize the impact of the Holocaust or its principal elements, including collaborators and allies of Nazi Germany;
Gross minimization of the number of the victims of the Holocaust in contradiction to reliable sources;
Attempts to blame the Jews for causing their own genocide;
Statements that cast the Holocaust as a positive historical event. Those statements are not Holocaust denial but are closely connected to it as a radical form of antisemitism. They may suggest that the Holocaust did not go far enough in accomplishing its goal of “the Final Solution of the Jewish Question”;
Attempts to blur the responsibility for the establishment of concentration and death camps devised and operated by Nazi Germany by putting blame on other nations or ethnic groups.

Recently it released a handbook, "Recognizing and Countering Holocaust Distortion: Recommendations for Policy and Decision Makers," to help apply these principles.

This is essential work.

But unlike the IHRA working definition of antisemitism, the IHRA working definition of Holocaust distortion ignores one of the most widespread examples we see today: Holocaust inversion.

Lesley Klaff describes Holocaust inversion:

What has been called ‘Holocaust Inversion’ involves an inversion of reality (the Israelis are cast as the ‘new’ Nazis and the Palestinians as the ‘new’ Jews), and an inversion of morality (the Holocaust is presented as a moral lesson for, or even a moral indictment of ‘the Jews’). More: those who object to these inversions are told that they are acting in bad faith, only being concerned to deflect criticism of Israel. In short, the Holocaust, an event accurately described by Dan Diner as a ‘rupture in civilisation,’ organised by a regime that, as the political philosopher Leo Strauss observed, ‘had no other clear principle except murderous hatred of the Jews,’ is now being used, instrumentally, as a means to express animosity towards the homeland of the Jews. ‘The victims have become perpetrators’ is being heard more and more. That is Holocaust Inversion.

This reprehensible comparison of Israel to Nazi Germany, so widespread among the antisemitic Left, is ignored by IHRA in its working definition of Holocaust distortion, and even in the expanded examples given in the new handbook.

The closest it gets it this:

The use of imagery and language associated with the Holocaust for political, ideological, or commercial purposes unrelated to this history in online and offline forums.

This refers to things like comparing slaughtering animals for food, or abortions, to the Holocaust. As disgusting as those comparisons are, the motivation behind Holocaust inversion is much different than those types of Holocaust distortion. The people who make such a comparison are saying that the Holocaust and Israeli actions are tightly linked - that Jews learned cruelty from the Nazis and now apply it to Palestinians, which is much different than making a rhetorical, specious comparison of non-related events to the Holocaust.

Which means that this obvious example of Holocaust distortion by Carlos Latuff is not covered by the IHRA working definition.

We cannot know for sure why these sickening and antisemitic distortions of the Holocaust are excluded by the IHRA, but it appears to be deliberate - and political.

Every example of Holocaust distortion mentioned by the IHRA are those that typically come from the Right, while Holocaust inversion is nearly exclusively from the Left.

Most troublingly, the source of this omission may come from Germany itself.

German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas gives some of the background behind this new handbook in an op-ed for CNN:

As the current chair of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA), Germany therefore wants to move forward the fight against such dangerous lies, the distortion of facts and the trivialization of the Holocaust, also at a global level. We have therefore initiated a Global Task Force Against Holocaust Distortion so that, together with our partners, we can defend these universal values. This week, leading international researchers have presented to us their recommendations for countering Holocaust distortion. These indicate there is an urgent need for action...

[T]he current digital nature of anti-Semitism means that it knows no borders. That is why, now more than ever, we must combat it globally, in a coordinated way. It may not always be easy to draw a line between freedom of opinion and hate speech, between ignorance and the deliberate distortion of facts.

So, as a first step, it is important for us and our global partners to develop a common understanding of what we consider as Holocaust distortion, and how to combat it. We are working on this together with our partners in the IHRA, the European Union, UNESCO, the United Nations, the Council of Europe and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE). However, domestic authorities, too, must be part of the effort. A recent study shows how, already today, right-wing terrorists and conspiracy theorists are forging close networks online. Our security authorities must counter them by working in even closer coordination.

Maas even says "anti-Semitism has not disappeared. It just keeps shape-shifting," which is a good description of the new antisemitism from the Left that is covered by the IHRA Working Definition of Antisemitism. Yet the only examples he gives come from right-wing antisemites - even though the most prevalent types of Holocaust distortion nowadays are almost exclusively from the Left.

It appears that the IHRA group that worked for years on this project has been hijacked by politics to exclude the worst kinds of Holocaust distortion that can be seen every day.

The IHRA's entire moral authority comes from it being above such politics. When it seemingly deliberately excludes Holocaust inversion from its definition of Holocaust distortion, it loses some of its credibility - which in turn weakens the other excellent work it does.

This handbook should be revised immediately to include Holocaust inversion as a prominent example of modern Holocaust distortion.

Anti-Israel activist warns of "Zionist" plan to divide Morocco into six parts

One of the favorite Arab antisemitic themes has always been the Jewish desire to divide their countries into tiny, indefensible states, supposedly written in the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion.

Old habits die hard.

The head of the "Moroccan Laboratory for the Struggle against Normalization," Ahmed Ohman, has warned Moroccans against a supposed Israeli plan to cut up Morocco.

“Naturalization with the Zionist institution has reached all spheres, such as politics, economics, the arts, and sports,” Ohman said. “On the whole, Moroccans need to understand that there is no area that is not protected by Zionist invasion.

“So this is no longer normalization, this is infiltration. The plan, which aims to divide Morocco into six countries in the smallest detail, was to be published with photos, along with their maps and flags and even their national anthems, and a secret organization which loves Israel."

Morocco already has 12 regions, so I am not sure how the six countries would be divided. But I'm sure he has a map somewhere.

Arab monetary support for Palestinians plummeted 81% in 2020

Al Resalah has an article about how the Palestinian Authority has been without a published budget for three years now, a situation that allows a great deal of corruption.

Instead, the PA has been creating "emergency budgets" which lack transparency.

In previous years, the budget was about $4.5 billion a year.

One stunning statistic in this article:

Grants and financial aid from Arab countries to the Palestinian budget declined by 81.5% on an annual basis during the first eight months of last year.

Reports issued by the Ministry of Finance indicate that the total Arab support for the budget from the beginning of 2020 until last August reached $38.93 million.

That's less than 1% of the total budget!

A few years ago, Arab nations would routinely pledge hundreds of millions of dollars to the PA every year. As recently as April 2019, the Arab League pledged $100 million a month - $1.2 billion a year - to aid the Palestinian budget.

Clearly, they never even paid a single installment in 2020.

The Arab world has completely given up on the Palestinian Authority, just as the new administration is expected to give it a boost.

01/24 Links: What apartheid?; Martin Luther King and the Jews; Biden Appoints Former Palestinian UNRWA Official as Director of NSC Intelligence

From Ian:

What apartheid?

Last week, I woke up one morning in my Nazareth home and was astonished to discover I was living under a racist, apartheid regime whose only purpose is “the promotion and perpetuation of the superiority of one group of people—the Jews.” I rubbed my eyes, read the story in greater depth, and calmed down as soon as I realized the reports were based on yet another report by the left-wing NGO B’Tselem.

The problem is that this report has spread like wildfire around the world, and the propaganda is working.

B’Tselem, which presents itself as a human-rights organization, is in fact known for its clear political stance that is in contrast to Israel’s position. As it turns out, people have no boundaries. How dare they claim that I, an Arab-Israeli who served along with Jewish soldiers in the Israel Defense Forces and managed hundreds of Jewish employees, live under an apartheid regime?

How can anyone say our society is living under an apartheid regime when among us you will find doctors, judges and even lawmakers? How can you say Samer Haj-Yehia lives in an apartheid regime when he is the head of the biggest bank in Israel? B’Tselem has already broken the record for hypocrisy, but to compare Israel to an apartheid regime is not only a distorted lie but an insult to all those South Africans who actually lived through apartheid. It is contempt for and cynical exploitation of the concept.

I am not here to claim that everything in Israel is perfect. Some things need to be fixed—and how. But show me a country where everything is perfect. I look around at our neighbors in the region and thank God I was born in the State of Israel, the only democracy in the Middle East. True, the Arab minority in Israel faces challenges, just as other national minorities do in other countries. Yet while minorities of all kinds across the Middle East—Shi’ite Muslims, Sunni Muslims, Yazidi, Kurds, and, of course, the Christians—are persecuted, Israel is the only country that grants minorities equal rights and the ability to influence their future.

Martin Luther King and the Jews

With deference, Prof. Bontemps relayed many instances of Dr. King acknowledging the organized and individual contributions of Jews, as well as bravery demonstrated while helping people of color during especially difficult and dangerous times. These included demonstrations where dogs, police batons, fire hoses and projectiles were employed.

There was no differentiation in treatment shown white Jews and blacks detained or arrested. Jews were often targeted upon release by waiting white mobs. In fact, during the 1950s and ‘60s, whites who aided in the cause of black civil rights and voter registration generally received harsher treatment as the price for what was construed, race betrayal.

That was then and this is now. While African-Americans are finding a modicum of better acceptance, the message of the Holocaust seems to have vanished. Antisemitism once again afflicts our nation, as well as much of the world, and is escalating. Shame upon those who choose silence or purposeful ignorance: black, white and brown; Jew, gentile, Muslim and others.

People, who know better and should be speaking up all too frequently seek cover within the silent majority. This includes people of color who have forgotten their history as they close their eyes, cover their ears and shut their minds to the painful malice afflicting Jews, and their tiny promised refuge in the Middle East, Israel.

I cannot imagine Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. approving of the way Jews are being treated in today’s America. I strongly suspect, at the very least, he would not stand idly by, in the face of torment endured by Jewish brothers and sisters – no matter if the ranks of the perpetrators included fellow reverends spewing antisemitic rhetoric, or a US president whose memory feeds unjustified hostility toward Israel – each would be held to account. Gut-wrenching falsehoods permeating today’s society, including the labeling of the Holocaust nonexistent or greatly exaggerated, would not be summarily dismissed.

Dr. King, a Zionist in his own right, would not have chosen silence as that would have violated his belief of an injustice done to one is an injustice done to all, and must not be excused by any.

A toast to Mike Pompeo

Pompeo separated himself from the current chaos and discord and summarized the legacy he was leaving behind in a logical, methodical, and clear manner. He placed the world's largest superpower on the side of good, fighting against the bad guys. That may sound simplistic, but it is a reflection of the simple line that refuses to be politically correct and refuses to play that all-too-familiar game of polite smiles, meaningless Nobel Peace Prizes, and a submission to the bullies around the world the likes of which the world witnessed with the late British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain's talk of "peace in our time" at a time when everyone knows war is knocking at the door. Or as Pompeo succinctly put it, "Wishful thinking won't restrain authoritarians in Caracas, or in Beijing, or in Tehran."

And so, beyond our little slice of heaven, the US has been revealed in all its glory as a supporter of Hong Kong, Taiwan, and a nation that stands up to the Chinese communist party and with the Uighurs, adopts a maximist policy of pressure on Iran, fights Al Qaeda, stands with the Iranian people and breaks through fossilized conceptual norms on the Middle East that saw the world hang its hopes for peace on the capricious tendencies of the Palestinians.

Nor did Pompeo hesitate to speak matter-of-factly about international bodies. "The U.S. is stronger when we acknowledge the failings of international institutions like @UN and try to fix them," he tweeted, noting the US had not wasted taxpayer money on failed and corrupt institutions like the UN agency for Palestinian refugees, the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, the World Health Organization, and others.

He was one of the most important figures in the administration and left behind an impressive legacy. He also declared that "America has no greater friend than Israel and the people of Israel."

In an honest and genuine world, he would have received the Nobel Peace Prize. Pompeo, however, isn't waiting for recognition. He was excited about the Golan Heights and about Judea and Samaria. On the occasion of the end of his tenure, we should raise a glass of fine Pompeo from the Binyamin vineyards in his honor.

The Palestinian Center for Human Rights condemned a "work accident" explosion that leveled buildings in Gaza yesterday:

According to PCHR investigations, at approximately 08:30 on Saturday morning, 23 January 2021, an internal explosion occurred in the home of a member of a Palestinian armed group in the center of Beit Hanoun town, northern Gaza Strip. Two families occupied the house, a total of 10 persons, including five children and three women. The explosion resulted in 47 injuries among the house’s residents and neighborhoods, including 19 children and 15 women; they were transported to Beit Hanoun Governmental Hospital, where the houseowner was deemed in a critical state. He was referred to al-Shifa Hospital for treatment. The injuries of 22 persons were classified as moderate, and the injuries of the remaining 24 were deemed minor. Additionally, the explosion caused the collapse of parts of the 2nd floor ceiling (western) where the explosion occurred; neighboring houses sustained varied damage, and windows were shattered in the Beit Hanoun Governmental Hospital, the Beit Hanoun Police Station; and 3 United Nations Works and Relief Agency (UNRWA) schools, located eastern of the explosion site. Local electric and communication networks were also damaged.

Field investigations indicate that the houseowner is a member of an armed group, and that the accident resulted from the explosion of a large-sized explosive device stored inside the house.
PCHR calls upon the competent authorities to enforce stringent measures, including banning the storage of explosives in populated areas, in order to avoid the recurrence of similar tragedies and maintain civilians’ lives and their properties. PCHR emphasizes that the constant disregard for such demands alerts to further civilian causalities and portends other tragedies.

Of course, Hamas and other terror groups build their explosives manufacturing facilities in residential areas on purpose, both to deter Israel from bombing them and to put Israel in a position of looking like it deliberately bombs civilians when it does attack them (which is all legal under international law when the target is of significant military value.)

Only this month, Islamists deliberately placed weapons in civilian areas.

In response to a presumed massive Israeli attack in Syria on January 13, Iranian allied forces deliberately moved weapons into residential areas of Deir Ezzor.

From Al Monitor:

Iranian forces and affiliated militias in Deir ez-Zor province in eastern Syria carried out new redeployment and repositioning operations after their military sites and barracks were subjected to airstrikes, believed to be carried out by Israeli aircraft Jan. 13.

Ahed Slebi, a journalist in the Naher Media Network, which covers news about Deir ez-Zor, told Al-Monitor, “The Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps [IRGC] and its militias in Deir ez-Zor governorate have carried out unprecedented military action, due to the violent bombing that targeted their sites. The Iranian militias transferred the bulk of their members and military equipment to residential neighborhoods in Deir ez-Zor, al-Bukamal, and al-Mayadin. The new deployments included transferring rockets and heavy weapons and hiding them inside the tunnels that Iranian forces had previously dug in the vicinity of al-Bukamal and al-Mayadin and on the outskirts of Deir ez-Zor.”

Slebi added, “The IRGC and its affiliated militias fear more violent bombings during the coming period, which is why they are fortifying their sites and hiding their weapons and military headquarters inside residential neighborhoods. They have also lowered flags from the roofs of the buildings where they are stationed. They removed all signs indicating their presence to avoid being targeted, and imposed a security cordon around their military sites.”

Needless to say, there was no condemnation of this deliberate war crime by Amnesty or Human Rights Watch.

An antisemite in Congress

Louis Thomas McFadden was a Republican member of Congress from Pennsylvania for twenty years, serving from 1915 to 1935.

He was also a virulent antisemite.

Wikipedia summarizes:

In 1934, he made several anti-Semitic comments from the floor of the house and in newsletters to his constituents wherein he cited the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, claimed the Roosevelt administration was controlled by Jews, and objected to Henry Morgenthau, Jr., a Jew, becoming Secretary of the Treasury. Drew Pearson claimed in his "Washington Merry-Go-Round" column that, in a publication by the American fascist Silver Shirts, McFadden had been "extensively" quoted "in support of Adolf Hitler".[ In September the Nazi tabloid Der Stuermer praised McFadden. He was also lauded by the publications of William Dudley Pelley, leader of the Silver Shirts, on several occasions.

According to McFadden's Jewish Telegraphic Agency obituary: "In January 1935, he announced his candidacy for president with the backing of an organization called 'the Independent Republican National Christian-Gentile Committee' on a platform to 'keep the Jew out of control of the Republican Party!'"

McFadden was apparently an excellent orator. In this section of the Congressional Record where he quoted the Protocols, (May 29, 1933, page 4539), his antisemitic statements were followed by an appeal to patriotism which was greeted with applause in the halls of Congress:

Mr. Chairman, the provisions of this repudiation bill were foretold by a writer in the Dearborn Independent some years ago. There is, therefore, nothing novel or original about them. The writer of the article in the Dearborn Independent made the following quotation prophesying some of the measures which have been introduced here by the President of the United States:

(2) Confiscation of money in order to regulate its circulation.
(3) We must introduce a unit of exchange based on the value of labor units, regardless of whether paper or wood are used as the medium. We will issue money to meet the normal demands of every subject, adding a total sum for every birth and decreasing the total amount for every death.
(4) Commercial paper will be bought by the Government, which will grant loans on a business basis. A measure of this character will prevent the stagnation of money, parasitism, and laziness, qualities which were useful to us as long as the Gentiles maintained their independence, but which are not desirable to us when our kingdom comes.
(5) We Will replace stock exchanges by great Government credit institutions, whose functions will be to tax trade paper according to Government regulations. These institutions will be in such a position that they may market or buy as many as half a billion industrial shares a day. Thus all industrial undertakings will become dependent on us. You may well imagine what power that will give us.
"Remember that when next you hear the Jewish plan that 'Gentiles' shall do business with their own bits of paper, while Jews keep the gold reserve safely in their own hands. If the crash comes, 'Gentiles' have the paper and the Jews have the gold."

Says Protocol XXII: "We hold in our hands the greatest modem power-gold; in 2 days we could free it from our treasuries ln any desired quantities."
The Jews are economists, esoteric and exoteric: They have one system to tangle up the "Gentile", another which they hope to install when " Gentile " stupidity has bankrupted the world. The Jews are economists. Note the number of them who teach economics in the State universities.
Says Protocol VIII: "We will surround our Government with a whole world of economists. It is for this reason that the science of economics is the chief subject of instruction taught by the Jews."

Mr. Chairman, have not most of these predictions come to pass? Is it not true that, in the United States today, the "Gentiles" have the slips of paper while the Jews have the gold and lawful money? And is not this repudiation bill a bill specifically designed and written by the Jewish international money changers themselves in order to perpetuate their power? What else do you make of it, Mr. Chairman? ...
Mr. Chairman, I demand that the gold stock of the United States be taken from the Federal Reserve banks and placed in the United States Treasury. I demand an audit of United States Government financial affairs from the top to the bottom. I demand a resumption of specie payments based on full gold and silver values. I demand the currency of the Constitution. I demand the rights of the people guaranteed to them by the Constitution, and that means that I demand a vote which will defeat this repudiation bill. No man can serve two masters. A vote for this bill is a vote for the money changers. A vote for an audit and an investigation of the Government's financial affairs is a vote for the people.

Mr. Chairman, all I ask of this House, and I ask it in the name of all the people, Jews and Gentiles, citizens and resident aliens alike, is that it, the people's own representative legislative assembly, shall stay close to the people and vote in their interest. Do not cancel the war debts and bind down upon our suffering veterans and our men of toil and our broken-hearted mothers and our starving children, the endless slavery of paying tribute to . the "united front" of the war debtors. Do not force Americans to pay tribute to foreign rulers and potentates. Take back this country or perish in the attempt. Let this be our own country again. Let us rebuild it for our own. Let us keep the Stars and Stripes floating over the roof of the Capitol. Let us cling to the Constitution of the United States. This is the way to freedom and prosperity. The way of repudiation is madness. Remember, Mr. Chairman, that the ship of state has women and children aboard. Do not, therefore, guide it into uncharted waters. Do not allow the great Democratic Party to steer it onto the rocks while the world waits for it to founder and go down so that the international salvage crews may set to work on the wreck of it. [Applause.]

A reporter from the Jewish Telegraphic Agency interviewed McFadden, where he denied being an antisemite by saying, literally, "some of my best friends are Jews." When asked why he quoted the forged Protocols in Congress:

McFadden replied that, whether the Protocols be authentic or fraudulent, they are, nevertheless, prophetic. He viewed the document as an accurate picture of present political developments throughout the world, in which governments are slipping into the hands of a scheming, destructive organization of Jews. McFadden saw the “new dealers” of the present administration as a part of this insidious Jewish plan, and prophesied that unless something influences the President to return to good Christian economics there will be a horrible reaction, a Fascist revolution perhaps, against the “Jewish controlled administration.”

One member of Congress, a Jew named Emmanuel Celler, responded to McFadden's antisemitic screed (p. 4552)

Mr. Chairman, I was not in the Chamber when the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. McFADDEN] rose to address this body. I have taken the trouble, however, to read his remarks as they appeared. He apparently prepared them in advance and read them verbatim. His attack is therefore all the more vicious because it was carefully prepared and deliberately read. It is unforgiveable, I assure you, my good friends. I say to those who heard the remarks and those who read them that you will rarely see anything as false or as utterly cruel, particularly since read at a time when in Germany insane religious prejudice is causing so much havoc, so much ruin, so much misery and suffering. I would that the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. McFADDEN] saw fit to withdraw his remarks voluntarily, or that if he does not change them that at least the spirit of fan· play in this House will prevail upon him to withdraw them entirely.

I appeal again to the sense of fair play and justice of this House, which I know is diametrically opposed to the aberrations of the gentleman from Pennsylvania, to prevail upon him to say he was mistaken. Only then will he exculpate himself from the charge of stooping so low as to attempt to fan the flame of religious prejudice in order to influence the House.

I would be craven if I remained silent in the face of his defamation of my people. I would be a coward not to hurl the be to his teeth. In the brief time allotted to me to reply, I would remind him, when he falsely brings silly indictments against our people. and charges that the Jews will have the gold and the non-Jews the bits of paper money, of the long record of patriotic service of the people against whom he delivers his tirade.

He speaks of Concord Bridge in the Revolution. What about the fame of Hymn Solomon, who sacrificed much, if not all, of his fortune to aid in the financing of the Revolution? In the diary of Robert Morris are to be found scores of favorable references to the patriotism and sacrifice of that Jew. It has been said that were it not for the benefactions of Solomon to the patriotic Madison, Monroe, and others, these men could not have carried on. I would remind the gentleman from Pennsylvania that this banker Jew died a martyr's death as a result of his trials and tribulations brought on by the Revolutionary War. He was captured by the British and died of prison fever. He Indeed sacrificed his fortune on the altar of American freedom.

I would remind him also of the Lost Battalion to the Argonne Forest. That battalion was composed primarily of East Side Jews. many of whom went through the Valley of the Shadow. The mere mention of these heroes should belie the utterances of the gentleman from Pennsylvania.

He should indeed hang his head in shame. He will when he realizes finally the sin that he has really committed. Let him reflect on the words of Lincoln in the second Inaugural: "With charity for all and with malice toward none." If Mr. McFadden . does not withdraw his remarks from the Record he is . devoid of charity and is animated by malice.

Washington received generous praise and congratulation from the members of the Portuguese congregation at Newport upon his elevation to the Presidency. The great President replied in the kindest spirit, and said he now rejoiced that at last in this fair land of ours the people of the stock of Abraham could sit under their own vines and fig trees, and there were none to make them afraid. Surely, if the gospel of the gentleman from Pennsylvania is repeated and is allowed to spread, and the wild dogs of religious hatred and enmity are let loose, the time may come when not only the people of the stock of Abraham, but others as well, will be unable to remain under their own vines and fig trees. There will then indeed be those to make them afraid. [Applause.]

Antisemitic BDSers support selling wine from Israel - as long as it isn't from Jews.

Karen Rodman is a BDS activist based out of Toronto.

She is also the director of Palestine Just Trade, a Canadian company that imports and resells Palestinian products.

Palestine Just Trade sells Ashkar Wines.

Ashkar Winery is in...Israel.

The winery is owned by Nemi Ashkar, an Israeli Arab Christian.

How can BDS sell Israeli wines?

If you look at the bible of companies to be boycotted by BDS, "Who Profits,"Ashkar isn't listed - and neither is Jascala, a similar Galilee winery which is owned by Arab Israelis.

We've noted this before. BDS claims it is anti-Zionist, but it only advocates boycotting Jews, not Israeli Arabs.

That same Who Profits? database can search for the names of the owners of the Israeli companies it boycotts - it has 500 companies in its database. If you look for typically Jewish first names like "Moshe" or "Yosef" you'll find plenty of companies with owners with those names, but if you look for "Mohammed" - nothing.

How much more proof do you need to know that BDS is antisemitic, and not just "anti-Zionist"?

(h/t Andrew and Bnai Brith Canada)

01/23 Links: ‘Jews Don’t Count:’ Former New York Times Editor Bari Weiss Breaks Down Antisemitism on Left and Right; Explosion in Gaza home used for weapons storage injures dozens

From Ian:

‘Jews Don’t Count:’ Former New York Times Editor Bari Weiss Breaks Down Antisemitism on Left and Right in Megyn Kelly Interview

“Right now, Jews are in a very precarious and strange position,” said author and former New York Times editor Bari Weiss in a wide-ranging interview Friday, with former Fox News and NBC host Megyn Kelly.

“Jews don’t count,” she argued. “If someone said to another editor at the New York Times, ‘are you writing about the Blacks again? Are you writing about the trans again? Are you writing about the gays again?’ — think about how that sounds to your ear; it’s disgusting. And yet some people think it’s acceptable to say about Jews.”

The former opinion section editor resigned from The New York Times in July 2020, publishing an open letter that criticized colleagues for “harassing” behavior.

“They have called me a Nazi and a racist; I have learned to brush off comments about how I’m ‘writing about the Jews again,'” she wrote in the letter.

Kelly, the former news anchor who launched The Megyn Kelly Show podcast in 2020, asked Weiss on Friday why antisemitism had recently become more prominent.

“In the antisemitic conspiracy theory … Jews or the Jewish state comes to stand for whatever a given culture or civilization defines as its most loathsome or disgusting qualities,” said Weiss, who in 2019 authored the book How to Fight Anti-Semitism. “That’s how the Jews can be so many things at once,” under ideologies like Nazism and Communism.

“You have the accusation that comes from the far-right — from people like the killer who stormed into my synagogue in Pittsburgh two years ago, and he said ‘all Jews must die,’ and he killed eleven of my neighbors,” said Weiss, referring to the 2018 Tree of Life massacre in her home town.

I loved this conversation with @bariweiss on leaving the @nytimes, fighting anti-Semitism and her engagement -she's brave & brilliant. Check it out:https://t.co/K0ZhCbI4xV https://t.co/tfHp6MUFu9
— Megyn Kelly (@megynkelly) January 22, 2021

Fighting Terrorists while respecting International Law

Fighting Terrorists while respecting International Law: Col. (ret) Adv. Pnina Sharvit Baruch, former head of the IDF's international law department and Col. (ret) Richard Kemp CBE, former commander of British forces in Afghanistan, chaired by Natasha Hausdorff, Barrister.

Two exceptional speakers discuss the challenges facing moral armies when confronting terrorists, while seeking to avoid civilian casualties and comply with international law.

Col. Adv. Pnina Sharvit Baruch is a senior research fellow and the head of the program on law and national security at the Israel Institute for National Security Studies (INSS). She is also vice president of the International Association of Jewish Lawyers and Jurists (IJL) and active in Forum Dvorah - Women in Foreign Policy and National Security.

Pnina retired from the Israel Defense Forces in 2009 with the rank of Colonel after twenty years in the International Law Department, heading the Department from 2003. She was responsible for advising on international law, including the laws of armed conflict. Pnina served as a legal advisor and member of Israel's delegations to the negotiations with the Palestinians and with Syria.

After 2009 Pnina taught courses on public international law and on the legal aspects of the Israel – Arab conflict in the law faculty of the Tel Aviv University and at the National Security College. She has published numerous articles on issues relating to these topics. She holds an LL.B and LL.M from Tel-Aviv University.

Col. Richard Kemp CBE served in the British Army for 30 years, retiring in 2006. He completed eight operational tours fighting terrorism in Northern Ireland, including intelligence work, and was wounded in action. He took part in the 1990-91 Gulf war in Iraq and Kuwait. He served with the UN Protection Force in Bosnia in 1994 and was counter terrorism adviser to the Prime Minister of Macedonia in 2001.

He commanded British Forces in Afghanistan in 2003 and subsequently served again in Iraq during the second Gulf War. From 2002-2006 he was head of the international terrorism intelligence team at the British Cabinet Office and a member of COBRA.

Since leaving the Army he has addressed the UN Human Rights Committee in Geneva, refuting allegations of war crimes aimed at the IDF. He has also addressed the Knesset and several legislatures around the world on these issues as well as the threat from Iran. He is a media commentator and writer on defence, security, terrorism and intelligence and author of "Attack State Red", an account of the war in Afghanistan.

Grand Mufti’s Jerusalem mansion to become synagogue

Hajj Amin al-Husseini, the notorious mufti of Jerusalem in the 1920s and 1930s who spent much of World War II in Berlin as a Nazi collaborator and war criminal, must be spinning in his grave. In Jerusalem has learned that the landmark hilltop mansion he built 88 years ago in affluent Sheikh Jarrah between the Old City and Mount Scopus is slated to become a synagogue in a future 56-apartment Jewish neighborhood in east Jerusalem.

The 500-sq.m. manor house, called Qasr al-Mufti (the Mufti’s Palace) in Arabic, today stands deserted at the center of a largely completed 28-apartment complex, which itself lacks a tofes arba occupancy permit. The reason the new neighborhood is not being finished – and indeed has not been marketed in the 10 years since demolition and construction began – is that the developers have applied to rezone the 5.2-dunam site to double the number of units to 56, according to Daniel Luria, a spokesman for Ateret Cohanim, which backs the housing project.

Luria was unclear when the rezoning application, originally meant to build 70 apartments, would be approved. The historic house at the core of the site will be preserved and repurposed for communal needs including a synagogue and perhaps a day care center, he said.

“There is a beautiful poetic justice when you see the house of Hajj Amin al-Husseini crumbling down,” Luria noted.

Though al-Husseini built the mansion, he never lived in it. Following the outbreak in 1936 of the Arab Revolt against the British Mandate government, the mufti became a fugitive hiding in the Old City’s Haram ash-Sharif. When the British attempted to arrest him in 1937, he fled Palestine and the British made do with confiscating his property. The al-Husseini clan owned numerous properties in Jerusalem, among them the Palace Hotel (today the Waldorf Astoria), the Orient House, and the mansion subsequently turned into the Shepherd Hotel in Sheikh Jarrah on a plot of land known as Karam al-Mufti, named for al-Husseini.

01/22 Links Pt2: Room where it didn’t happen: US mediators reveal failed Israel-PLO peace talks; Tikvah Podcast: Michael Oren on Writing Fiction and Serving Israel

From Ian:

Room where it didn’t happen: US mediators reveal failed Israel-PLO peace talks

Why, after more than a century of bloody conflict, have Israelis and Palestinians failed to reach a peace agreement? Israeli director Dror Moreh goes behind closed doors of the sincere, though largely failed efforts spearheaded by the United States by interviewing a handful of the American negotiators in his new documentary, “The Human Factor,” opening January 22 in the US.

This past November marked the 25th anniversary of the assassination of Israeli prime minister Yitzhak Rabin by right-wing Jewish extremist Yigal Amir. Moreh sees this as a fitting time to reflect on the derailment of the peace process Rabin worked so hard on. He does so from the unique perspective of the Americans who devoted decades of their careers trying to create a more secure and tranquil Middle East.

Moreh, whose work often focuses on geopolitics, is the director of the critically acclaimed, Oscar-nominated 2012 “The Gatekeepers.” In it, he conducted unprecedented on-camera interviews with all six former heads of Israel’s secret service — the Shin Bet — who were still living at the time.

In “The Human Factor,” we hear from well-known figures special Middle East envoy Dennis Ross, Ambassador Martin Indyk, Ambassador Daniel Kurtzer, State Department analyst Aaron David Miller, special assistant to president Bill Clinton for Arab-Israeli affairs Robert Malley, and State Department interpreter and Middle East advisor Gamal Helal. Most of these men have penned books sharing their insights on the peace process, but now they collectively reflect on what went right and wrong.

“The Human Factor” tracks in detail the diplomatic maneuvers carried out by American delegations at the behests of presidents George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton from the 1991 Madrid Peace Conference through to the failed Camp David summit in July 2000.

Haim Ramon: Former minister's autobiography blows through history

Supporters of Israel growing up in the United States in the late 1980s and early to mid-1990s saw two young politicians who explained Israel well in American media and were said to have bright futures as Israel’s leaders.

The one on the Right, Benjamin Netanyahu, became Israel’s longest-serving prime minister.

The one on the Left, Haim Ramon, never fulfilled his potential.

Ramon’s new Hebrew autobiography, Against the Wind, does a good job of explaining why.

The book takes readers through history, with each of 20 chapters representing another fight he led publicly or behind the scenes on issues in which he believed strongly. Each fight was an uphill battle, and whether he won or lost, he made enemies along the way.

In an interview with the Magazine, Ramon said he had no regrets about rubbing people the wrong way and earning those enemies, because it was worth sacrificing his own political future to ensure the future of the country.

“Basically, when I was involved in revolutions, I fought hard for my ideas,” he said. “I didn’t plan for the consequences that would prevent me from becoming prime minister. I did things that people didn’t like, and they never forgave me, even long after I was proven right.”

The title of the book is the same as those of classic songs in both Hebrew and English. The Hebrew song, by Shalom Hanoch, describes feeling like the most isolated person in the world but continuing onward anyway. The English song, by Bob Seger and the Silver Bullet Band, describes a man looking back at the independence and naiveté of his youth.

The Tikvah Podcast: Michael Oren on Writing Fiction and Serving Israel

Very few contemporary public figures have had as many successes in as many fields as Michael Oren. A writer-statesman in the model of Thucydides, Oren was Israel’s ambassador to the United States during the Obama years, and was before that a historian of the Jewish state, the author of perhaps the best single book on the Six-Day War. He’s also worked in think tanks, been a professor at Ivy League institutions, and served as an MK in the Israeli parliament. Now, with the recent publication of The Night Archer, a collection of short stories, Oren returns to the genre of fiction, a pursuit that animated his younger years.

This week on the podcast, Oren joins Mosaic’s editor Jonathan Silver to discuss how his varied career fits together—how the writing of fiction relates to the writing of history, how the study of history relates to the practice of diplomacy, how diplomatic service and writing both require the same aptitudes of perception, and how all of this came together in the service of Zionism and the state of Israel.

Biden’s inauguration, Blinken’s confirmation hearing, Iran, BDS and what to expect from the first 100 days. ?Our guests: @DanielBShapiro? & ?@dpletka?. All that and a look inside “Air Adelson” on Episode 2 of ?@JIPodcast?. Subscribe now. https://t.co/lSSCRQE52A
— Richard Goldberg (@rich_goldberg) January 22, 2021