Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Thursday, August 13, 2020

There Was A Time Zionism Was Attacked Because It WAS a Part of Judaism (Daled Amos)

By Daled Amos

You don't have to be on social media long before you notice that it is full of people who refuse to let their lack of knowledge get in the way of their self-proclaimed expertise.

One of those topics everyone seems to enjoy sharing their opinion on, is Jews.

Lots of people on social media are only too happy to tell you that Jews are white, and not only benefit from "White Privilege," but aren't the 'real' Jews anyway.

Then there are the people on social media who will eagerly explain to you what antisemitism is -- and isn't, claiming that the term is overused and that it is not nearly as "systemic" as Islamophobia.

So it is not surprising to find people who will knowingly inform you not only that Zionism is racism -- they will go even further, offering to enlighten you that Zionism has no real connection with Judaism anyway

Recently on Twitter, for example, you could find tweets informing you that

o   my problem is that too many equate Judaism = Zionism
that’s where you get problems such as Louis Farrakhan and his supporters
o   im not against Judaism,im with judaism against zionism
o   If you think Zionism=Judaism you clearly know nothing about Judaism

and so on.

But there was a time when Arabs made it clear that Zionism is part of Judaism.

In his book Emdat HaAravim B'SichSuch Yisrael-Arav, translated on the inside flyleaf as The Arabs' Position In Their Conflict With Israel, Yehosofat Harkabi uses sources from political works, periodicals and broadcasts to get the Arab attitude towards Israel. It is based on his doctoral thesis, and was published in 1968, though he wrote the book the previous year, months before the Six-Day War broke out.

An English translation was published in 1972, and that is where translations in this post of the Hebrew are from, unless noted otherwise. (The translation abridges the original -- and still manages to come out at over 500 pages.)

Chapter 4 of his book is dedicated to the Arab attitude towards Zionism -- and Harkabi devotes section 5 of that chapter to Arab writers who saw an "Identification of Zionism and Judaism."

He writes:

Arab writers and leaders repeatedly emphasize that they bear no hostility to the Jews but only oppose the Zionists. However, this distinction is not maintained, and Zionism and Judaism are often used as synonyms, a denunciation of Zionism leading naturally to a denunciation of the Jews. It is not a matter of confusing "Jew," Zionist" and Israeli" in the flow of speech or writing, in the same way as even Israelis do not always preserve the distinction; the identification is deliberate.

One expression of this tendency is the identification of Israeli and Jew as a figure in Arab caricatures, The Arabs draw the Israeli like a Jew in the anti-Semitic caricatures--a bearded figure with a large hooked nose. This image was already in existence before World War II ane was not created merely under Nazi influence.

Here is a typical example, from Al-Watan (Qatar), May 13, 2003, from the Tom Gross Media website:

The U.S. and Israel are shown eating from two sides of an apple that represents “the Arab states”.

But this identification of Zionism and Jews -- which is often exploited to disparage Israel -- was not always done on a purely derogatory level.

In section 2, "Judaism Was Always Zionist", Harkabi describes a recognition by some Arab writers that

The prolonged ties of Jews with Palestine and the place of that country in the Jewish faith show that there is an organic bond between Zionism and Judaism.

For example:

Rushdi explains that Judaism is not only a faith like others, but "also a political movement":

The bond between Judaism and Zionism is primordial, ever since Judaism and Zionism became coupled in the sense that one cannot be separated from the other, representing two sides of the one coin (1965, p. 19)

Obviously, Rushdi did his homework, because he goes on to write that the connection between Judaism and Zionism

...is clearly expressed in many provisions of Jewish law. In the Talmud it is stated that a Jew who leaves the Land of Israel cannot compel his wife to accompany him, and one who emigrates to the Land is entitled to divorce his wife if she refuses to come with him. There is also a similar doctrine in the Jewish faith which says that he who lives in the Land of Israel is forgiven by God for all his sins. (p. 20)

To illustrate the bond between Zionism and Judaism, Rushdi gives quotes from Solomon Schecter ("Wherever Zionists are active, there you will find Judaism alive and active" and "Judaism and Zionism cannot be separated from each other" [my translations]) and from Theodor Herzl ("The return to Zion must be preceded by the return to Judaism")

Harkabi notes that Abdallah Al-Tal, an officer of the Arab Legion during the 1948 War, also sees that Zionism predates Herzl. He did his homework too, giving examples of earlier Zionists such as the Maccabees, Bar Kochba, David HaReuveni, Solomon Molcho, Shabtai Tzvi, the Sanhedrin during the time of Napoleon, Moses Montefiore, Baron Edmond de Rothschild and others.

Another Arab writer, a Dr. Nasr, doesn't find Zionism 'primordial,' but doesn't think it is recent and unrelated to Judaism either. He writes:

Zionism is really nothing but the national behavior of the Jew in his reaction to the nations throughout history as it has taken shape under the pressure of modern Western civilization.

Of course, some Arab writers see a conspiracy -- not that Zionism is unrelated to Judaism, but rather the opposite: Jews have been trying to hide the connection between Judaism and Zionism, by deluding the world that Zionism is merely the actions of a small group.

According to Ahmad Shukeiri, the first Chairman of the PLO, the Zionist plan to rule over Israel is actually part of an old Jewish agenda. Originally, the Jewish infiltration of Israel was accomplished under the veil of religion, with the goal of establishing a religious center --

When the Zionist movement arose, under the direction of Dr. Herzl, they described it as a unique movement limited to a group of Jews, the Zionists. This was a well thought-out act to lead the nations opposed to them astray, a deception against the Arab world, so that they would not think the Zionist movement was a general Jewish movement. This is the source of the idle belief of many that the Zionist and the Jew are separate things when they are a single danger. [My translation]

Just don't tell those experts on Twitter that they have fallen for the Zionist trap.

The Soviet precursor to modern Leftist antisemitism pretended it wasn’t antisemitic, too

This 1968 article from The Sentinel features the anti-Zionist rhetoric that we are all familiar with from the Left – but it adds an extra insistence that it is in no way antisemitic.

Which is really funny, because the Soviet article quoted also says that “the religious morality of Judaism isolates religious Jews from other nations and justifies any crimes against the gentiles.”
They also accused Jews of being a fifth column in any nation they are in.

Yet they continued to say that “both Zionism and antisemitism are alien to Soviet society since they are equally a product of the bourgeois class system.”

This all sounds exactly like the writers of Jewish Currents and other socialist publications today. The idea that Zionism is antisemitism is a staple of Electronic Intifada and other outlets. It all came from the Soviets.

And just like the antisemitism of the Soviets is obvious nowadays, so is the antisemitism of today’s socialist Left – and they deny it just as vehemently as the Soviets did.

The haters just keep throwing stuff at the wall and hoping something sticks.

From The Inside Palestine and many other Palestinian news sites:

Palestinian detainee Mahmoud al-Ghalidh, 17, who has tested positive for coronavirus, is subjected to psychological torture in Israeli jails, al-Dameer Association for Human Rights said on Tuesday.

Al-Dammeer called for the immediate release of al-Ghalidh who is staying at an isolated room in Raymond Prison where he is denied basic necessities, such as clothing.

Israeli occupation forces arrested al-Ghalidh from his home in Jalazone refugee camp in Ramallah on 23 July, and on 3 August, the Israel Prison Service announced that he has coronavirus.

At the exact same time:

The head of the Prisoners and Editor s' Affairs Authority, Major General Qadri, said that the Government of Israel is practicing the policy of deliberate medical killing against prisoners, which is a crime that amounts to serious violations against sick detainees.

So if Israel would take al-Ghalidh out of quarantine, they would be deliberately killing other prisoners. Keeping him in quarantine is psychological torture.

This“child” was 18 when he was arrested. But “incarcerated children” get more headlines so a year was taken off of his age since he was found to have been infected with the coronavirus.

UPDATE: Now he is 15.

After Five years, the Duma Saga Approaches Conclusion (Vic Rosenthal)

Vic Rosenthal's weekly column

On the night of 31 July 2015, someone firebombed two homes in the Palestinian village of Duma, in the northern part of Judea, about 55 km. west of Tel Aviv. One of the buildings was empty, but sleeping in the other were Saed and Riham Dawabshe, and their children Ali (18 months) and Ahmad (5). Ali died in the fire, and the parents succumbed to their injuries a short time later. Ahmad was carried out by his father or grandfather and survived, though he was severely burned.
Almost immediately, government officials, including President Ruben Rivlin, let it be known that the attack was likely “Jewish terrorism” and the culprits would be found among “extremist settlers,” specifically the “hilltop youth,” religious teenagers and young adults who lived independently of their parents in Judea and Samaria, and who wanted to replace the democratic state with one governed by Jewish law. The nation was gripped by a paroxysm of guilt and self-flagellation over the allegation that Jews had done such an awful thing, although there were as yet no suspects. This happened at about the same time a religious fanatic stabbed several people, one fatally, at a gay pride parade in Jerusalem, and left-wing elements connected the events and blamed “settlers,” religious Jews, and PM Netanyahu for the “outbreak of Jewish terrorism.”
The Shabak (Internal Security Service) arrested several suspects in early August. They were held in administrative detention – that is, without being charged – and subjected to “enhanced interrogation techniques,” a euphemism for torture that may or may not fall short of the acts that are prohibited by customary international law.

Even at this point, there were good reasons to wonder if the official account that Jewish extremists had done it fit the evidence. On August 21, then-Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon said he was “confident” that the murderers were Jewish extremists, and that the exceptional measures taken against the suspects were justified. But there was a very good alternative explanation, which was that the firebombs were thrown by Arabs involved in an ongoing feud with the Dawabshe family. There were several other suspicious fires in property owned by the Dawabshes before and after the murderous attack. And the Shabak was unable to provide a sensible explanation (Hebrew link) for why this line of investigation hadn’t been pursued.
By December the Shabak had not succeeded in getting a confession out of the various suspects in its custody, and the best that Ya’alon could do was say that their actions (presumably “price-tag” vandalism of Arab property) “led to [הובילו], among others, the murder of three innocent Palestinians, and as a result, contributed to instability in the region, and worsened the security situation.” But “led to” is not the same as “committed.” Although there was still no proof that Jews were responsible for this atrocity, it became part of the accepted narrative in almost all segments of Israeli society.

In January 2016, one of the initial suspects was released (ultimately, they all would be), and two additional suspects arrested: Amiram ben Uliel (21), and an additional minor. Ben Uliel was charged with murder – the first time anyone had been charged in connection with the crime. He too was subjected to “enhanced interrogation,” and by 2018 he produced a “confession” and “reenactment of the crime.” While the other (minor) suspect also “confessed,” he was alleged only to have participated in the planning of the crime and was not accused of being present at the scene. Ben Uliel was accused of having perpetrated the firebombing by himself. Some confessions were thrown out after attorneys argued successfully that they were obtained by torture, but some of ben Uliel’s statements, plus the reenactment, were allowed to stand.

On 18 May 2020, Amiram ben Uliel was convicted by a three-judge panel (there is no jury trial in Israel) of murder, attempted murder, arson and “conspiracy to commit a crime motivated by racism.” His wife testified that he was at home with her all night, but the judges did not believe her. The prosecution asked for three life sentences, and he was to have been sentenced on 12 July. But in a dramatic development, lawyers for ben Uliel convinced the judges to delay sentencing in the light of new evidence (see also Hebrew link here).

Apparently, the one survivor of that terrible night, Ahmad Dawabshe, now ten years old, was interviewed in Arab media and described the events that occurred five years ago in detail; in particular, he said that there were several attackers and they came into the house and struggled with family members. This contradicts the official version that ben Uliel was alone and threw firebombs through the windows. It also agrees with other testimonies of Arab witnesses who said at the time that there was more than one attacker (of course the Arabs say it was a group of “settlers”).

The court agreed to consider the evidence and pass sentence next month (ben Uliel could be acquitted of murder and convicted of other offenses).

Can a 5-year old be a reliable witness? Maybe yes and maybe no. Certainly the events he witnessed were likely to be engraved in his mind. “If he saw what he said he saw, ben Uliel is innocent” says ben Uliel’s lawyer. But memory is a tricky thing, and who knows if he is capable of reporting events without interpretation.

This has been a long road. The state does not come out looking good, no matter what the outcome. In the best case, the Shabak is guilty of mistreatment of numerous suspects, most of whom were guilty of nothing more serious than vandalism and adolescent fantasizing. It is likely that the agency engaged in a theatrical provocation intended to slander the hilltop youth as vicious murderers taunting their victims. Many public officials – including President Rivlin and right-wingers like Naftali Bennett – jumped to conclusions when they should have kept quiet.

The worst case has the Shabak deliberately ignoring evidence that the arson/murders were carried out by Arab enemies of the Dawabshe family, and using the case to crush and discredit the admittedly extremist, and to some extent criminal, underground Jewish movement.

For what it’s worth (nothing, really) my personal opinion is that Amiram ben Uliel is innocent, perhaps guilty only of having grandiose plans for revenge. But of course I am only privy to the details that I can read in the media. In any case, the court will decide next month if he will be freed or spend the rest of his life in prison.

08/12 Links Pt2: The science of anti-Semitism; What do Jewish voters need to know about Kamala Harris?; Facebook Updating Hate Speech Policies to Include ‘Stereotypes About Jewish People Controlling the World’

From Ian:

In Harris, Biden chooses a traditionally pro-Israel Dem as his veep candidate

Former vice president Joe Biden made history Tuesday by choosing California Senator Kamala Harris as his running mate. The 55-year-old senator will be a VP candidate of many firsts: the first woman of color, the first daughter of immigrants and the first Indian American to be on a major party’s presidential ticket.

When it comes to US policy on Israel, her positions more or less reflect mainstream Democratic thinking over the last 10 years.

Harris supports a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and believes in a robust US-Israel relationship, including the continuation of American military aid to the Jewish state.

She backed the Iran nuclear deal and vowed to re-enter the landmark pact as a presidential contender last year, aligning her closely with Biden, who was a champion of the agreement in the Obama administration.

Unlike some of the more liberal members of the caucus, such as Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders and New York Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, she has not bucked the party’s traditionally supportive posture toward Israel, or called for fundamental changes to the nature of the alliance.

In November 2017, she visited Israel and met with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. In April 2019, the senator’s then campaign communications director Lily Adams told McClatchy that her “support for Israel is central to who she is.”

Even as insurgent progressives like Ocasio-Cortez have been deeply critical of Israel’s tactics in Gaza during flareups, Adams told McClatchy that Harris was “firm in her belief that Israel has a right to exist and defend itself, including against rocket attacks from Gaza.”

The Howard University graduate has also maintained a close relationship with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). The former prosecutor was very public about her private meetings with AIPAC officials in March 2019, amid the pro-Israel lobby’s annual policy conference.

At the time, there was pressure from liberal groups such as MoveOn to boycott the event. The public announcement of the private meetings was seen as a tactic to dispel the rumors that the campaign had been successful.

What do Jewish voters need to know about Kamala Harris?

The California senator, who made history Tuesday as the first Black woman to join a major party presidential ticket, is still in her first term. But during several years in public office, the 55-year-old lawmaker’s outspoken opinions on a range of issues and her presidential run have given Jewish voters plenty to scrutinize.

She is also married to Jewish lawyer Douglas Emhoff, who would become the country’s first Jewish second husband.

As a senator, Harris has been aligned with Biden on Israel: She is seen as a strong supporter with ties to AIPAC, the country’s largest pro-Israel lobby, and unlike some Democrats has not broached the idea of conditioning aid to Israel to influence its policies. During her presidential run, Harris separated herself somewhat from even the mainstream moderates in the pack, firmly opposing the idea of condemnatory UN votes or even strong public criticism aimed at swaying Israeli policy.

While the more liberal pro-Israel group J Street has endorsed the centrist Biden, who also has committed to keeping spats with Israel private and the idea of not allowing any “daylight” between the US and Israel in diplomatic terms, it has not backed Harris. J Street, which lobbies for a two-state solution, has endorsed more than half of Senate Democrats.

However, Harris has said that she would rejoin the Iran nuclear deal, an agreement that conservative Jews despise over its aid to Iran, a regime that routinely calls for Israel’s destruction. That keeps her aligned with Biden, who was part of the Obama administration that brokered the 2015 agreement over vehement objections by Israel.

“This nuclear deal is not perfect, but it is certainly the best existing tool we have to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons and avoid a disastrous military conflict in the Middle East,” Harris wrote in a statement in 2018 after Trump pulled the US out of the deal. “As the international community and the Administration’s own national security team has confirmed multiple times, Iran remains in compliance with the deal. In the absence of an Iranian violation, it is reckless to break this agreement without presenting any plan on how to move forward.”

5 Jewish things to know about Kamala Harris

1. She smashed a glass at her wedding
She met her Jewish husband, Douglas Emhoff, on a blind date in San Francisco, arranged by friends. They married in 2014 — Harris’ sister Maya officiated — and smashed a glass to honor Emhoff’s upbringing. It was her first marriage and his second — Emhoff has two children from his first marriage.

You thought Jews can be parochial? “Most eligible Indian American bachelorette marries fellow lawyer” is how one Indian American media outlet reported the story.

Emhoff took the Washington, D.C. bar exam in 2017 so he could work in the same city.

Emhoff’s Twitter feed is pretty much “I love my wife” all the time (take that, Kellyanne and George Conway).

2. She did the blue box thing
“So having grown up in the Bay Area, I fondly remember those Jewish national fund boxes that we would use to collect donations to plant trees for Israel,” she said at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee in 2017. “Years later when I visited Israel for the first time, I saw the fruits of that effort and the Israeli ingenuity that has truly made a desert bloom.”

3. She’s more AIPAC than J Street
Since being elected in 2016, Harris has spoken twice at the annual policy conference of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. Her 2018 speech, with the California delegation, was off the record (itself not unusual, although critics of Israel were unnerved), but she gave a good picture of where she stands in her 2017 speech.

She’s for two states — so is AIPAC, although, sometimes less than emphatically — but she doesn’t believe in big-footing either side.

“I believe that a resolution to this conflict cannot be imposed,” she said. “It must be agreed upon by the parties themselves.”

More than half of the Democratic caucus in the Senate gets the endorsement of J Street, the Jewish liberal lobbying group that believes pressure is necessary to start peace talks. J Street did not endorse Harris. Her only association with the group was in November 2017, when she was one of 17 local and federal politicians on the host committee (i.e., “yes you can stick my name on the invitation”) of a party thrown by J Street’s Los Angeles chapter. She also met in 2018 in her office with the group’s director, Jeremy Ben-Ami.
harris on stage speaking at a podium with an AIPAC logo behind her

Harris also co-sponsored a Senate resolution in early 2017 that essentially rebuked the Obama administration for allowing through a U.S. Security Council resolution condemning Israel’s settlement policies.

She supported the Iran nuclear deal, although she was not a senator in 2015 when Congress voted on it, and is on the record opposing the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement targeting Israel.

It can be difficult to explain Israel’s right to exist to the online haters and debaters. After all, not all of us are Eugene Kontorovich. And since we’re not, how can anyone expect us to have all the complicated legalese at the ready to plead the legal twists and turns of Israel’s case? It’s better, instead, to keep things as simple as possible: We were here first. It’s ours.

But that’s not always as easy as it sounds. Take Quora, where I’ve been answering questions about Israel since 2011. I try to keep my answers uncomplicated so they will be easy to remember in future debates.

Quora, however, has a policy called “Be Nice, Be Respectful.” Violate this policy and Quora will collapse your answer. At this point, the moderators generally give you the option of editing your answer and allow an appeal. For me, that’s good enough, since I can usually find a workaround and rephrase.

An edit may mean changing “Palestine doesn’t exist” to “At this point in time, there is no state called "Palestine.” Which is a lot more complicated, but satisfies everyone, all around. You get to the point where you can spot what language is likely to trigger a report, so you can avoid such language right out of the starting gate. And if there’s a hiccup and an answer is collapsed, I edit and resubmit, and there’s no further problem.

Note that the Israel-hating Quorans stand ready to pounce on any perceived policy violation by the Israel-loving Quorans. It’s a war out there on Quora. The hope is that by reporting us, the Israel haters will get us permanently banned from the site. Once that happens, our truthful answers about Israel will disappear.

I was a top writer in 2018, and the best Quora answers come up in Google queries. I therefore see it as kind of mission to keep my content diplomatic enough to suit Quora moderators so my responses will stay up there on the ‘net, offering a truthful account of what Ruth Wisse calls “The Arab War Against the Jews.”

This can be a delicate balancing act. Not everyone is capable of coloring inside the lines. That goes for either side of the fence.

Rima Najjar, for instance, was permanently banned on Quora for her (apparently) anti-Israel/antisemitic content. I never read her stuff so I’m only guessing. I’m not sure what, exactly, was objectionable. But according to her Jewish friend Benay Blend, Quora is biased in favor of pro-Israel voices like my own and in banning her, is discriminating against Najjar.

This supposed bias is the reason Najjar filed suit against Quora and it’s nonsense, as I explained a little over a year ago in this space (see: Blend and Najjar Implicate Me and the Israel Forever Foundation for Getting Banned on Quora). If Najjar was banned, it wasn’t because of a pro-Israel bias, but because she couldn’t figure out how to speak Quora-ese. She likely found it hard not to sound hateful when discussing the Jewish State. Thus, Najjar violated Quora’s Be Nice, Be Respectful, one too many times and was banned for life.

It would have been difficult for Najjar to prove bias, since Quora is an equal-opportunity hand-slapper, collapsing answers and banning users on either side of the Israel/Anti-Israel divide. Najjar must have realized this fact. Because the academic subsequently dropped her suit in March (h/t Elder of Ziyon).

As I said, there’s always a work-around on Quora and Najjar could have still been on Quora today, happily typing out her hate for Israel, as long as she couched things in neutral, inoffensive terms. But hiding the truth of what one really thinks is an art and it’s definitely not always easy. The other day, for example, I answered a question:

“Can you explain the Israel-Palestinw [sic] conflict to me like I'm 10 years old?”

“This will be fun,” I thought, rubbing my hands together with glee, before formulating an answer, which was this:

A long time ago, God gave the land of Israel to the Jews. It is a beautiful and special land, so everyone was jealous and they are still jealous now. Other people keep trying to take bits and pieces of the land, and when the Jews won’t let them, they attack the Jews in all sorts of cruel ways, for instance sending exploding balloons over the border so Jewish children will play with them and get hurt. Or they’ll explode a pizza shop at a time when it is likely to be full of Jewish kids on summer vacation, having fun.

Instead of seeing how wrong it is to steal Jewish land and hurt Jewish children, the world sides with the thieves, the people that keep trying to take Jewish land, the people hurting Jewish children. Why? Because the world is mad that the Jews don’t want to switch religions. They figure it makes their newer religions look phony and false and that hurts their feelings.

Also, Jews tend to be smart and successful, and even though there aren’t a lot of them, they tend to rise to the top no matter what they decide to do with their lives. This makes other people jealous of the Jews. Which is stupid. They should instead study the Jews and try to copy them.

Not long after I posted this response, I of course received a message that the moderators had collapsed my answer for violating the Be Nice, Be Respectful policy. I was invited to edit and appeal.

But for some reason, this time, I balked. I knew exactly what language needed changing to suit the moderators, but I just didn’t care. I had written the truth: this is what I would have said to a ten-year-old to explain things, to MY ten-year-old. To any ten-year-old.

I saw no reason to change my answer if that’s not the way I’d say it to a ten-year-old. Ten-year-olds don’t understand political correctness. It makes no sense to add a lot of language to obscure the truth and give it a neutral makeover. Such language would lengthen my answer and overly complicate things so that a child would come away more confused than before.

Which is why, after thinking it over for a couple of days, I opted to submit an appeal without editing my answer, as follows:

Dear Moderator, the question asks how I would explain things to a ten-year-old, not how I would couch things in a politically correct manner to satisfy the Quora moderators. This actually is what I would say to a ten-year-old. Using more neutral terms would render the explanation unintelligible or confusing to a young child. I say that as a parenting expert and a mother of 12.

Kids understand only the simplest language. As such, I would venture to suggest this was a trick question intended to trip up a pro-Israel Quoran, triggering by design, perceived violations of the Be Nice, Be Respectful policy. I believe this is the reason the question was edited after the fact: after I answered the question. This gives the question an entirely new meaning, so that my answer may seem mean-spirited in some lights, instead of merely honest.

Just as there are frivolous lawsuits, this was a frivolous report, to get me in trouble: collapsed or banned. I hope you will reconsider your decision in the interest of freedom of speech on Quora.
Thank you for your consideration.

Note that somewhere between when I answered the question and my response was collapsed, the original poster changed the question. It now says: “Can you explain the Israel-Palestine conflict to me (I'm 10 years old)?” The edit is meant to exaggerate the supposedly harmful effect of my response. We’re no longer discussing a thought experiment. Instead, my answer stands retroactively, as an actual response to a ten-year-old child.

Which is why I didn’t expect for a moment that I would win my appeal. I figured the moderator would determine that my answer is “hate speech” and collapse it for good. This has happened on occasion.

"So be it," I thought.

What some Quora moderators call "hate speech" I call "the truth.”

And sometimes I’m just not willing to lie.

I had a surprise, however, when I looked at my inbox this morning. There was a new notification: Quora had uncollapsed my answer.

Rima Najjar would say the moderator's decision reflects the same pro-Israel bias that led to her permanent ban from the social media network--that in responding favorably to my appeal, the moderator sided with Israel. But I think the decision is a sign that sometimes reason prevails, at least on Quora. On Quora, it turns out that speaking to a moderator like an adult, allows me to explain Israel to a ten-year-old.

This is a refreshing contrast to the prevailing ethos at social media giant Facebook, where "Death to Israel" fails to violate community standards. It's a whole 'nother ballgame from Twitter, where despots are deemed to be just rattling sabers when they call for the annihilation of Israel and the Jews.

Quora is different. At Quora I sometimes lose. But sometimes I win. In this round, I got to explain Israel to ten-year-olds. Which seems a good enough reason to stay in the game.

For now.

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

Some people are so antisemitic, they support Hezbollah

Yoseph Haddad posted a video on Twitter:

A Lebanese journalist asks Nasrallah a simple question and reveals to the world the truth about Hezbollah and Israel!
Must Watch video!

עיתונאית ליבנונית שואלת את נאסראללה שאלה פשוטה וחשפת לעולם את האמת על חיזבאללה וישראל!
חובה צפייה! pic.twitter.com/dy6UcsA8tR
— יוסף חדאד - Yoseph Haddad (@YosephHaddad) August 7, 2020

This isn’t the only Lebanese person I’ve seen who hates Hezbollah. The comments on Naharnet often are filled with people arguing about Israel with plenty of people defending it.

But Ben Norton, a pseudo-journalist who works for Max Blumenthal’s Grayzone site, is incensed at the Haddad tweet:

A white Westerner who considers himself a liberal is saying that Lebanese people who disagree with his rabid hate of Israel are “sellouts” for hating Hezbollah more. This is a typical racist condescending attitude that the only Arabs who are allowed to have an opinion are those whose opinions match the Leftist white man.

The Grayzone’s apologetics for the Hezbollah terror group are something to behold. Here’s a video where they blame everyone but Hezbollah for Lebanon’s problems, and where the person being interviewed says flatly that Israel doesn’t want a functioning, civil Lebanon but prefers that it be divided into sectarian groups that hate each other, because that is what Zionism demands. (starting at 20:00)

In the end, these people’s hate for Israel is so off-the-wall crazy that they feel that they must support any group that opposes the Jewish state, no matter how illiberal or murderous they might be.

This is the power of antisemitism – anyone who hates Jews is an ally.

08/12 Links Pt1: Hamas shoots, Israel reacts, and the Qataris pay; Israel hits Hamas targets in Gaza after over 60 fires sparked by arson balloons

From Ian:

Hamas shoots, Israel reacts, and the Qataris pay

It's the same, tired old story: Hamas carries out terrorist acts against the residents of the western Negev so they will pressure the Israeli government to find a solution, which is to send money and projects to Gaza in order to mollify Hamas into stopping its terror campaigns.

This has been Hamas' tactic since the violent events on the border began in 2018. After failing in all its attempts since Operation Protective Edge in 2014 to convince Arab and western states to help the impoverished, battered Gaza Strip, Hamas moved on to extortion: putting pressure on Israel.

That method has worked well for the past two and a half years. Both the protests and the balloons (both incendiary and equipped with explosives) that came after them prompted the Israeli government to broker the deal for Qatar to send Gaza monthly infusions of cash. At first, it was $5 million, then $10 million, and now it's $30 million every month. Supposedly, it is earmarked for the poor, but it actually goes to oil the wheels of the enormous machine Hamas has built in Gaza, and some of it – despite what the donors intended – also goes toward terrorism.

But this monthly aid is supposed to end in September. The money for August has already been transferred, and no one knows what will happen next. Will the money keep flowing, and if it does – for how long? Hamas is worried that it will be left without what is nearly the only assistance it receives and has resumed harassing Israel in order to get it to solve the problem. Money is the main issue on the table, but not the only one. There are also a series of infrastructure projects that are very important to Hamas (they range from an industrial zone to an electricity grid), and which Hamas says are being unreasonably delayed. Likewise, the organization hopes that what months of talks for a long-term arrangement couldn't accomplish, some fraught days of arson balloons and ensuing wildfires will. And if that doesn't help, Hamas will go back to its nightly disturbances … setting off explosions near western Negev communities to wake up and shake up the residents. It might also reinstate the Friday border protests.

Hamas is also applying more pressure because of the coronavirus crisis. Not only have they lost the ear of the international community, but the 7,000 Gazans who have visas to work in Israel are stuck in Gaza. Israel would be willing to let them in, but Hamas is worried that they will contract the virus and bring it back, causing a mass outbreak. The decision is understandable from a medical perspective, but it carries difficult financial ramifications. Less money is coming into Gaza, and many residents have been left without a livelihood.

Jonathan Tobin: How to help a failed state

The question we should be asking is not only what can be done about Hezbollah and Iran. Rather, we should be contemplating whether there is anything the West can do to fundamentally change these countries.

Much of the world wants to help the Lebanese recover from the port disaster (including Israel, though the Lebanese don't want their help since the Jewish state is demonized there, as is the case throughout the Arab world). France is taking the lead on this.

But no one is optimistic about a long-term solution for the problems that allowed this tragedy to happen because there are none. There is nothing that would fix Lebanon that wouldn't involve a foreign takeover and/or reimagining of it in modern and democratic terms. As the United States proved in Iraq, such a task is a fool's errand.

We can argue that Lebanon, like Syria and Iraq, are breeding grounds for terrorism that cannot be allowed to fall into the hands of bad actors. Still, the idealism that led Americans to believe that these countries can be remade in the West's image was a fantasy. We can and should wish their peoples well, and send aid if they wish to shake off the ancient quarrels that breed slaughter and have reduced them to penury. Yet they will have to do it on their own. Anyone who criticizes the refusal of most Americans to contemplate more military involvement there is not being fair or realistic.

Israel should be supported in its efforts to ensure that violence in Lebanon and Syria doesn't spread. And the West should continue sanctioning and isolating Iran so as to prevent it from creating more mischief. And sensible people should support Israel's refusal to create a Palestinian state that would be just as much of a disaster as Lebanon or Syria.

For too long, Americans have labored under the delusion that we can fix the Middle East. But the slaughter in Syria and Iraq, added to the catastrophe that is Lebanon, should remind us that the only sensible approach to these faux nations is to stay clear of being dragged into their endless and futile internecine conflicts.

Arab News: Who is to blame for Lebanon’s mess?

If any one group is to blame for the mess in what was once the “Switzerland of the Middle East,” it is the Iran-backed Hezbollah. For too long, these agents of doom have hijacked Lebanon’s opportunities, dreams and aspirations. They decide, unilaterally, to drag the country to war, or to be involved in the affairs of other Arab states. They have been given numerous opportunities to lay down their weapons (which have in any case been redundant since Israel’s withdrawal in 2000) and confine themselves to peaceful politics. Instead they stand accused of assassinating former Prime Minister Rafic Hariri in 2005, for an unnecessary war in 2006, and for the takeover of Beirut in 2008, which may have ended in the direct sense but continues indirectly.

Hezbollah backed Bashar Assad when he slaughtered his own people, they backed the Houthi militias in Yemen when they attacked Saudi civilians, and now they are slowly killing off any hope of Lebanon’s survival as a functioning state.

Many Arab and Western countries have offered help this week, but the truth is that aid will be limited while Hezbollah call the shots. No one wants to be in business with agents of Iran, or to contribute to the wealth of a corrupt political elite. Astutely, when a protester on Thursday urged Emmanuel Macron not to give money to politicians, the French president replied that he was there to help only the Lebanese people.

So what can be done? Realistically, by the good people of Lebanon themselves, probably not much. They could protest for years without breaking Hezbollah’s malign grip or ending decades of inept and corrupt governance.

Hezbollah, the root of this cancer, must be isolated, targeted, and removed. The imminent tribunal verdict on Hariri’s assassination may begin
that process, followed by an international “Marshall Plan” for Lebanon conditional on this terrorist group’s eradication.

But let us end on a positive note. If this disaster does not rid the beleaguered Lebanese people of their accursed leadership, nothing will. And the flood of aid already pouring in from countries such as France, Saudi Arabia and the UAE proves that the friends of Lebanon have not given up on it.

Neither should the Lebanese.

The Zionist side (in one sentence)

Ex-Muslim Laur on Twitter has a request:

Okay, so after being Muslim for the past decade, I've only heard or been taught one side of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

I want to hear the Zionist side.
— laur ️‍ 火影 (@pockyandpoke) August 9, 2020

Many people responded, often with links to websites or offers to have further discussion.

But sometimes I take it as a personal challenge to boil things down to a single tweet or a single sentence.

Here is my answer in nineteen words:

Jews just want to live in their own country, in their ancestral homeland, in true peace with their neighbors.

I’m pretty happy with that answer, although perhaps I should have added, “-and they will vigorously defend that right.”

France24 Arabic has a story about Palestinians being allowed to go into Israel for beach vacations using the headline “The entry of Palestinians to the 48 Lands for recreation ignites social media.”

The term “48 Lands” was made up by Palestinians to describe Israel within the 1949 armistice lines, to avoid using the term “Israel.” The entire point of the expression is to say that Israel has no legitimacy.

Previous uses of the term by France24 Arabic were all quotes of Arabs, with one exception last year where they used the term as “the ‘48 internationally recognized territories of Israel.”

As far as I can tell, this is the first time that a major international news service has used the term “48 lands” as a normative term for Israel.

It is a huge insult for France24 to use the term in a straight news story.

(h/t Yoel)

70 years ago: The death of Saly Mayer, who may have saved tens of thousands of Jews from death

From the JTA Archives, August 1, 1950:

Saly Mayer, Swiss Jewish leader whose skilled negotiations during World War II saved the lives of 200,000 Hungarian Jews about to be deported by the Nazis to extermination camps in occupied Poland, died today at St. Moritz of a heart attack. He was 67 years old.

In addition to being one of the most prominent Jewish leaders in Switzerland, Mr. Mayer was also director of Joint Distribution Committee operations in Switzerland for a period of 10 years, which included the war years. His activities in rescuing Jews from Nazi Germany were praised in a report issued by the U.S. War Refugee Board in 1945.

(Edward M.M. Warburg, chairman of the J.D.C., in learning of Mr. Mayer’s death, said today in New York: “Jews everywhere have lost arare and inspiring figure with the death of Saly Mayer. He gave his fullest devotion to the cause and welfare of his fellow Jews, and was responsible for helping to save literally hundreds of thousands. He believed implicitly in the tenet that it was the duty of all to be their ‘brother’s keeper,’ and he fulfilled that belief in a manner equalled by few men in his time.”)

The War Refugee Board report told how the Nazis in the spring and summer of 1944, striving to shave off defeat, sought to negotiate a vast ransom of 10,000 trucks and supplies in return for sparing the lives of the 200,000 remaining Jews of Hungary. Mr. Mayer, as J.D.C. representative, was approached in the matter by a Gestapo representative for Hungary. There followed a protracted series of meetings between Saly Mayer and the German representatives, with the full knowledge of the U.S. Government. Through the ingenuity and perseverance of Mr. Mayer, every imaginable dilatory tactic was employed and the talks continued for month after month.

When the war ended, the 200,000 Jews of Hungary were still alive, thanks to Mr. Mayer’s efforts and to the efforts of Raoul Wallenberg, a Swedish non-Jew who, working inside Budapest, fed the Jews, using funds provided by the J.D.C. through the War Refugee Board.

The New York Times echoes this story of Mayer delaying the negotiations with the Nazis until the war ended, saving 200,000 Hungarian Jews:

For some reason, though, Mayer is no longer credited with saving that many Hungarian Jews. His biography at the Jewish Virtual Library credits him with directly saving some 18,000 Jews, but doesn’t mention that his delay tactics may have saved the remainder of Hungarian Jewry:

With the knowledge of Himmler, Mayer negotiated with an S.S. delegation headed by Kurt Becher for the ransom of Jews from Hungary. His hands were tied by the American and Swiss governments, which would not permit the transfer of money and the Joint dissociated itself from these negotiations. Still Mayer arranged for a meeting between Becher and the representative of the *War Refugee Board, the arm of the American government committed to rescue and the only arm of the American government with the freedom to negotiate with the enemy. He could not provide substantive funds and he provided some equipment to buy some time. He was able to achieve a significant – albeit meager – result. Two transports numbering 1,391 – mostly Hungarian Jews – arrived in Switzerland from Bergen-Belsen, while 17,000 others were brought to Vienna.

Yad Vashem is also equivocal:

In 1944 Rezso Kasztner, the Hungarian Jewish negotiator, asked Mayer to join his negotiations with the SS regarding the rescue of Hungarian Jews. Despite the JDC's refusal to participate, Mayer went ahead as the supposed representative of the US and Swiss authorities. From August 1944 to February 1945 Mayer conducted deft negotiations with SS-Obersturmbannfuehrer Kurt Becher, during which Heinrich Himmler apparently agreed to stop the deportation of the Jews of Budapest. However, many accused Mayer of not demanding enough for the Jews during these negotiations or involving other Jewish organizations in the talks.

It sounds like the critics of Mayer have blunted his history and even today it is unclear how successful he really was. Mayer also seems to have been tarred by association with the Kastner Affair, where Rudolf Kastner was accused of withholding information about the fate of Hungarian Jewry from them.

Holocaust historian Yehuda Bauer wrote about Mayer, and while he doesn’t say that Mayer saved 200,000 Jews, he does talk about Mayer’s delaying tactics and his probably being instrumental in saving 16,000.

There was apparently some jealousy and accusations against Mayer by other negotiators and Jewish organizations. However, a January 17, 1945 State Department memo discusses Mayers’ negotiations with the Nazis since August 1944 in detail, and it supports Bauer’s sympathetic view of Mayer. Note how it emphasizes how the intent of the negotiations from the start was to buy time for the Jews of Hungary, since he had little actual leverage to negotiate with:

Even if Mayer “only” saved 16,000 or 18,000 Jews, that is far more than Schindler.

It is curious how Mayer’s efforts, that by all accounts were quixotic and yet managed to save so many, are downplayed by history and people judging him that he should have done more.

Based on this memo, Mayer was wildly successful in buying time for Hungarian Jews until the war was over. If that is true, perhaps he can indeed be credited with saving an astounding 200,000 Jews.

08/11 Links Pt2: Ignorance on Zionism leads to antisemitism; Spreading the truth about the Palestinian Arab death ethos; What about the 17 million slaves in the Islamic world?

From Ian:

The IHRA Definition Explained

The adoption of the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism and its implementation as a legal tool, are critical steps in the fight against anti-Semitism. While more and more governments, institutions and organizations have begun to adopt the IHRA definition globally, the definition also serves as an important and powerful educational tool for teaching about, and ultimately preventing the hatred of Jewish people.

Speaking on the merits of the IHRA definition, the Federal Republic of Germany’s Anti-Semitism Commissioner Felix Klein said, “In order to address the problem of anti-Semitism, it is very important to define it first, and this working definition can provide guidance on how anti-Semitism can manifest itself.”

The adoption of the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism is an important first step in defining, recognizing and ultimately combating anti-Semitism. Comprehensive adoption of the IHRA definition in local, national, international jurisdictions, as well as in public and private institutions and settings will enable the world to more effectively confront anti-Semitic behavior wherever it may be found. Ultimately, for the IHRA definition to succeed as a tool in combating anti-Semitism, the definition must be formally incorporated into policy initiatives and legislative proposals as a mechanism to prosecute against and deter future anti-Semitic acts.

A full list of entities that has adopted the IHRA definition can be found here.

Ignorance on Zionism leads to antisemitism

Campuses have long been a breeding ground for radical, even completely illogical, anti-Israel bigotry. But as an alumna of the University of Southern California (USC), I always took solace in the fact that my alma mater had my back as a Jewish student and as a leader in the pro-Israel activities on campus. Unlike the University of California schools, USC was a stalwart for Jewish students. Not so anymore. The dramatic change in campuses like USC that were previously beacons of hope for Jewish students demonstrates how severe the situation is with rise in antisemitism. The toxic campus culture has become so radical it is targeting even people who are fighting for equality and social justice.

Last week, Rose Ritch, the (former) vice president of the university’s undergraduate student government, resigned from her position in a poignant letter after enduring a months-long online bullying and harassment campaign against her to “impeach” her. Ritch’s crime was nothing more that being a Jew and a Zionist – two things that have apparently become unsafe to be on USC’s campus today.

At the core of this harassment campaign was none other than the campus hate group Students for Justice in Palestine, which demanded Ritch resign for being a Zionist. While it’s unsurprising the bigots in SJP made such absurd demands, it is appalling that others listened, and unacceptable that the administration did nothing during this smear campaign. Even during my time as USC, SJP was problematic, but the university had a zero tolerance approach to their harassment. I distinctly remember that when they protested our Independence Day celebration on campus, the head of student affairs left his office and demanded they leave the premises so as not to harass Jewish students with their hateful propaganda. Where is the accountability from the administration on this issue? Where is the education and promotion of tolerance for different ideas?

In Ritch’s letter, she explained, “I’ve been told that my support of Israel has made me complicit in racism and that, by association, I’m racist... Students launched an aggressive social media campaign to ‘impeach my Zionist a**...’ My Jewish and Zionist identity has helped shape every part of who I am, and they cannot be separated.” The targeted harassment of Ritch is nothing more than pure unadulterated antisemitism, and here is why: no other student would be canceled, harassed, bullied and pushed out of office for supporting any other country in the world. Even horrendous human rights abusing regimes like Syria, Iran, or China. There are no campus groups focused solely on combating human rights violations in Iran, on boycotting China or on holding Syria accountable. Only the Jewish state.

“Israel has a plot to destroy humanity”

I saw at least four Arabic news sites with the headline “Israel has a plot to destroy humanity” over the past few days.

The theme of the articles is that the Muslim Brotherhood was behind the birth of Israel.

Obviously, the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood Hassan al Banna was Jewish. We’ve seen that accusation many times before. But the logic that comes afterwards is new.

You seem the Muslim Brotherhood – supposedly Jewish – started an antisemitic campaign in Egypt and other Arab countries to kick the Jews out – so they could move to Israel and build a state there!

Later on in the article we are told that further proof of Muslim Brotherhood love of Jews comes from Egypt’s MB leader Essam al-Arian, who said in 2012, “I call on the Egyptian Jews to return to their homeland, and they must refuse to continue living under a repressive and racist regime tainted with crimes against humanity.”

So when the Ikhwan kicks Jews out it is proof they love Jews, and when they invite them back it is also proof that they love Jews.

Interestingly, the articles are mostly illustrated with this photo, apparently of Israeli medical teams doing COVID-19 testing. One can only imagine how that illustrates “Israel has a plot to destroy humanity.”

The ADL has changed quite a bit over the years, but it has consistently called out antisemitism without regard to who it comes from. In recent decades it has become a more general civil rights organization, fighting racism and other forms of bigotry.

So naturally the people who want to define antisemitism as a purely right-wing phenomenon are putting the ADL in their crosshairs.

A new website, DropTheADL.org, attempts to gather a large group of antisemitic and anti-Israel groups together to target the ADL in the name of “progressivism.”

Even though the ADL is integrated into community work on a range of issues, it has a history and ongoing pattern of attacking social justice movements led by communities of color, queer people, immigrants, Muslims, Arabs, and other marginalized groups, while aligning itself with police, right-wing leaders, and perpetrators of state violence. More disturbing, it has often conducted those attacks under the banner of “civil rights.” This largely unpublicized history has come increasingly to light as activists work to make sense of the ADL’s role in condemning the Movement for Black Lives, Palestinian rights organizing, and Congressional Representative Ilhan Omar, among others.

We are deeply concerned that the ADL’s credibility in some social justice movements and communities is precisely what allows it to undermine the rights of marginalized communities, shielding it from criticism and accountability while boosting its legitimacy and resources. Even when it may seem that our work is benefiting from access to some resources or participation from the ADL, given the destructive role that it too often plays in undermining struggles for justice, we believe that we cannot collaborate with the ADL without betraying our movements.

In English, this means that these groups want to be able to be blatantly antisemitic or to demonize Israel without a civil rights group calling them out for it.

The signatories are a Who’s Who of rabidly anti-Zionist groups:

American Friends Service Committee

American Muslims for Palestine

Arab Resource & Organizing Center

Asian American Advocacy Fund

Black Alliance for Just Immigration

Black and Pink, Inc.

Causa Justa: Just Cause

Center for Constitutional Rights

Center for Political Education

Christian Peacemaker Teams

Coalición de Derechos Humanos

Council on American-Islamic Relations

Critical Resistance

Democratic Socialists of America

Detention Watch Network

Dream Defenders

DRUM – Desis Rising Up & Moving

Ella Baker Center for Human Rights

Highlander Research and Education Center

International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network

Jewish Voice for Peace

Jews Against Anti-Muslim Racism

Jews for Racial & Economic Justice

MADRE

MediaJustice

Methodist Federation for Social Action

Mijente

Movement for Black Lives

Movement Law Lab

Muslim American Society

National Alliance Against Racist & Political Repression

National Lawyers Guild

New York Collective of Radical Educators

No Dakota Access Pipeline Global Solidarity Campaign

Palestine Legal

Palestinian Youth Movement

Project South

Queers Against Israeli Apartheid

Rising Tide North America

School of the Americas Watch

South Asian Americans Leading Together

Southerners on New Ground

Stop LAPD Spying Coalition

Teachers 4 Social Justice

The Red Nation

United We Dream

US Campaign for Palestinian Rights

US Palestinian Community Network

Veterans for Peace

War Resisters League

Adalah Justice Project

Al-Awda, the Palestine Right to Return Coalition

allgo, a queer people of color organization

All-African People’s Revolutionary Party (GC)

Alliance for Global Justice

American Association of University Professors (NYU Chapter)

Arab American Action Network

Arab Jewish Partnership for Peace and Justice

Arizona Palestine Solidarity Alliance

Berkeley Copwatch

Catalyst Project

CODEPINK

Committee for a Just Peace in Israel and Palestine

Episcopal Peace Fellowship-Palestine Israel Network

Equality for Flatbush

Faculty & Staff for Justice in Palestine at UMass Boston

Freedom to Thrive

Friends of Sabeel – North America

Grassroots International

Interfaith Action Group for Peace and Justice in Israel and Palestine

International Action Center

Islamic Circle of North America Council for Social Justice

Islamophobia Studies Center

Israel/Palestine Mission Network of the Presbyterian Church (USA)

Jewish Voice for Peace Rabbinical Council

Jews Say No!

Labor for Palestine

LAGAI – Queer Insurrection

Los Angeles Muslim Professionals

Middle East Children’s Alliance

Muslim Justice League

National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild

National Students for Justice in Palestine

Nevadans for Palestinian Human Rights

O’odham Anti Border Collective

Pan-African Roots

Participatory Action Research Center

Peace Action

Progressive Jews of St. Louis

QUIT! Queers Undermining Israeli Terrorism

Researching the American-Israeli Alliance

Samidoun Palestinian Prisoner Solidarity Network

San Francisco Rising

Southsiders For Peace

St Louis Palestine Solidarity Committee

Trans Liberation Collective

United Church of Christ Palestine Israel Network

US Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel

Vigilant Love

Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom US

Women Watch Afrika, Inc.

This has nothing to do wit “justice” and everything to do with Israel and supporting Leftist, Arab and Black antisemitism.

08/11 Links Pt1: Jonathan Tobin: Lebanon proves President Trump right on the Middle East; Inside the Struggle Between Israel and Hezbollah; The Palestinian War on History

From Ian:

Jonathan S. Tobin: Lebanon proves President Trump right on the Middle East

Lebanese demonstrators are now calling for throwing out all of their leaders. But there is no formula for governing this country that would satisfy any of these warring tribes.

The world wants to help the Lebanese recover from the port disaster. But the question we should be asking is whether there is anything the West can do to change these countries. The answer is no.

Over the last few decades, both the United States and Israel have been dragged into Lebanon’s civil wars in ways that didn’t benefit anyone. The same is true in Syria, where Washington has fought ISIS and Jerusalem seeks to fend off incursions by Iran and Hezbollah.

Some outsiders might be tempted to try to “fix” Lebanon by helping impose a state modeled on modern and democratic norms, rather than its current tribal and sectarian format. As the United States proved in Iraq, anyone who takes on such a task is ignoring history and common sense and will pay for the hubris in blood and treasure.

Also unfortunately, Lebanon, like Syria and Iraq, is a breeding ground for terrorism. We will have to deter those baddies by other means, never again by entangling ourselves in these nations’ broken political lives. We can wish young, aspirational democrats well as they try to fix their countries — but they should do it on their own.

Anyone who criticizes Trump’s refusal, backed by most Americans, to contemplate more military involvement isn’t being realistic.

Pure isolationism isn’t the answer, of course. The United States should support Israel’s efforts to ensure that violence in Lebanon and Syria doesn’t spread. And the West should, as Trump has done, continue sanctioning and isolating Iran, to prevent it from creating more mischief. Sensible people should also worry about creating a Palestinian state that would be just as much of a disaster as Lebanon or Syria.

Americans have long labored under the delusion that we can heal the Middle East. But the internecine slaughter in Syria and Iraq and the catastrophe that is Lebanon should remind us that the only sensible approach is to stop letting ourselves get dragged into the region’s bloodstained sands.

Richard Goldberg: How the Middle East Can Hedge Against a Biden Presidency

Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) are in for a rude awakening if former Vice President Joe Biden defeats President Donald Trump in November and Democrats take control of the U.S. Senate in addition to the House. The only thing that might save them: normalizing relations with Israel.

For now, Riyadh and Abu Dhabi seem preoccupied with whether Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will declare sovereignty over roughly 30 percent of the West Bank, consistent with the Trump peace plan proposal. The UAE ambassador to Washington, Yousef al Otaiba, even penned a column for a leading Israeli newspaper warning that a sovereignty declaration would be a setback for Israeli-Gulf ties. Somehow, while President Trump's decisions to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, move the American embassy there and defund the UN agency for Palestinian refugees merited little more than pro forma foreign ministry press releases, the Emiratis are waging a full (royal) court press to stop Israel from asserting sovereignty over a slice of the West Bank.

With only a few months left until the November presidential election, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) and Emirati Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed (MBZ) might need to readjust their priorities. Without peace treaties with Israel, their support in Washington could soon collapse. Wasting time and energy fighting an Israeli sovereignty declaration in the West Bank—which may not even happen—will not insulate them from a Democratic takeover next January.

A Biden administration will be tempted to re-enter the Iran nuclear deal, returning to the Obama-era strategy of seeking a balance of power between the Islamic Republic and its Sunni Arab neighbors. The revival of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (i.e., Iran nuclear deal) would be compounded by congressional efforts to cut off arms sales to the Gulf—or condition them on Saudi Arabia and the UAE ending all operations in Yemen and ending their embargo on Qatar. A renewed push for sanctions on Saudi leaders in response to the killing of Jamal Khashoggi is also likely. Biden and his advisors would face enormous political pressure to acquiesce from the more radically pro-Iran, anti-Gulf faction of the Democratic Party.

Meanwhile, with Iran once again flush with cash from U.S. sanctions relief and importing advanced conventional arms from Russia and China, MBS and MBZ will have only one true ally in the Middle East: the State of Israel. Sovereignty questions in a strip of land more than 1,000 miles away will seem irrelevant when compared to an existential struggle for survival in a region where the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism seeks hegemony.

The Palestinian War on History

"Every person, irrespective of whether or not they are disabled, should have the opportunity to visit the tomb, which is an important Jewish heritage site... The tomb belongs to us after Abraham bought it with his own money 3,800 years ago." — Former Israeli Defense Minister Naftali Bennett.

These Palestinian leaders continue to deny any Jewish connection to the holy site on the pretext that it belongs exclusively to Muslims. Palestinian Authority Foreign Minister Riad Malki has condemned the elevator plan as an Israeli "war crime" and a "violation of international law."

The winners? The Iran-backed Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad, who dream of extending their control from the Gaza Strip to the West Bank. This dream, thanks to the lawless and lethal regime of the Palestinian Authority -- funded by the West -- appears closer than ever.