Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Saturday, January 16, 2021

New member of Congress says Democrats would have done Abraham Accords sooner

New Congressional Representative Mondaire Jones, who replaced Rep. Nita Lowey, has some bizarre ideas about the Abraham Accords, in this interview with JNS:

Q: Are there any of U.S. President Donald Trump’s pro-Israel policies that you’ve agreed with—for example, the Abraham Accords?

A: I support the normalization of relations between Israel and its surrounding Arab nations. I think that we could’ve gotten to this point much sooner under a different president, such as Hillary Clinton or [U.S. President-elect] Joe Biden, and I think it is despite Trump’s efforts that we’ve been able to make progress in that regard.

Q: So you do not give the president credit for brokering the Abraham Accords?

A: Absolutely not. I think he has done more to harm the State of Israel than any president in modern history. His political approach to the region has been to inflame tensions between Arabs and Israelis.

Q: Who do you give credit for brokering the accords?

A: Oh, goodness. The diplomats who have been working in the State Department on a career basis, and, of course, both the Israeli government and leaders in the Arab world for finally coming together and making strides towards the peaceful environment that so many people have been hurting for many decades.

Jones is a staunch supporter of restoring the Iran deal and he also said, "I’ve been really distraught to see the assassination of Iran’s leading nuclear scientist [Mohsen Fakhrizadeh], and I’m hopeful that has not destroyed the conditions that will allow for us to seamlessly re-enter that agreement."

This guy does not sound too knowledgeable.

In this interview and others he positions himself as a friend to Israel but it sounds like his "friendship" is the kind that J-Street claims to have - which is not friendship at all except in name.

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.

01/16 Links: Memo to President Biden: Please Don’t Mess Up the Abraham Accords; Regional ramifications as Trump seeks to include Israel in CENTCOM

From Ian:

Bret Stephens: Memo to President Biden: Please Don’t Mess Up the Abraham Accords

Where does the creation of a Palestinian state rank on this list of American priorities? Not high, in the final analysis. There’s a shopworn argument that the failure to “solve” the Israeli–Palestinian conflict is a major reason for ideological extremism and jihadist terrorism. Yet to the extent that extremists and jihadis care about, and act upon, their Palestinian grievance, it’s to destroy Israel in its entirety, not to create a Palestinian state alongside a Jewish one. There is also an argument that a Palestinian state of some kind will be necessary to preserve Israel’s Jewish and democratic character. But even if one concedes the point, it’s an argument about Israeli interests, not American ones.

The upshot is that the infatuation so many U.S. policymakers have with Palestinian statehood has disserved American interests in myriad ways.

- It confuses a vital national interest with a political wish—in this case, the wish of American presidents like Bill Clinton and secretaries of state like John Kerry to be lauded as peacemakers.
- It wastes the White House’s political capital and diplomatic time.
- It perpetuates the damaging myth that the plight of the Palestinians is the gravest in the region—to the detriment of other Middle Eastern people, such as the Kurds, who have fared far worse at the hands of Turks, Iraqis, and Syrians alike.
- It perpetuates the false notion that a solution to the Palestinian issue would somehow solve everything else.
- It allows the Arab world to go on asking “Who did this to us?” rather than “What did we do wrong?”—thereby fostering a mindset of blame-avoidance, conspiracy thinking, and political prevarication.
- It plays into the propaganda of America’s radical enemies, led by Iran, that Israel’s behavior, rather than their own, is the chief source of turmoil and injustice in the region.
- It asks that this same ally, Israel, weaken its defenses and take the proverbial “risks for peace,” when what America most needs from Israel is a strong country that can defend itself, come to the aid of its neighbors, provide the U.S. with critical intelligence and tactical know-how, and serve as a bulwark against the region’s radicals.
- It puffs the vanity of Palestinian leaders and encourages them to pursue maximalist demands and reject every compromise, since it is only through the perpetuation of conflict that they remain relevant actors on the world stage. The paradox of the Palestinian issue is that the greater the public and diplomatic attention paid it, the harder it is to solve.
- It stands in the way of full normalization of ties between Israel and Arab states by tying normalization to demands that Israel cannot safely meet, such as relinquishing the Jordan River Valley or allowing the descendants of Arab refugees from 1948 to return to Israel.
- It feeds anti-Semitic stereotypes. As one French ambassador put it not long after 9/11, “All the current troubles in the world are because of that shitty little country, Israel. Why should the world be in danger of World War III because of those people?”

In sum, not only did the Obama administration harm U.S. interests and values by overworking the Israeli-Palestinian issue, it harmed Israeli, Arab, and even Palestinian interests as well. Could the Trump administration do better?

To its credit—and to the pleasant surprise of some of its critics, including me—it did, in spades.

Biden Doesn’t Need a New Middle East Policy

As with the past eight U.S. presidents, much of President Donald Trump’s foreign policy was dominated by the broader Middle East. Despite talk of ending “forever wars” and pivoting to Asia, core national interests have repeatedly drawn the United States back to the region.

In many ways, Trump’s priorities in the Middle East differed little from those of his two predecessors: eliminating weapons of mass destruction, supporting U.S. partners, fighting terror, and facilitating the export of hydrocarbons. In other ways, however, his administration—in which I served as envoy for both Syria and the coalition to counter the Islamic State (also known as ISIS)—oversaw a notable paradigm shift in the U.S. approach to the region. Both U.S. Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama pursued transformational campaigns in the Middle East based on the erroneous belief that by burrowing politically and militarily into states there, the United States could address the underlying causes of Islamist terror and perpetual regional instability.

Although Trump’s real policy views were often difficult to divine, his administration took a different tack, with clear results. By keeping American aims limited, responding to imminent regional threats but otherwise working primarily through partners on the ground, Trump avoided the pitfalls encountered by his predecessors while still advancing American interests. For all the partisan rancor in debates about foreign policy today, this new paradigm should—and likely will—continue to define U.S. policy. It offers the best option for containing challenges in the Middle East and prioritizing geopolitical challenges elsewhere.

A NEW STRATEGY
Most new administrations issue a National Security Strategy and then quickly shelve it. But the 2017 document drafted by the White House offered a novel blueprint for U.S. policy in the Middle East and one that the Trump administration generally followed. Overall, the strategy called for shifting focus from so-called endless wars to great-power competition, primarily with China and Russia. For the Middle East, that first principle meant avoiding entanglement in local issues while still pushing back on near-peer and regional dangers. In practice, this amounted to containing Iran and Russia while smashing serious terrorist threats.

Biden Administration Tells Israel It Will Continue to Pursue Normalization With Arab Countries: Report

The incoming Biden administration has told Israel that it plans to continue pursuing normalization agreements with Arab countries, according to a report from journalist Barak Ravid in Walla News.

“I do not think it is possible to reverse the relations that have been established between Israel and the Arab states in recent months,” Israeli Foreign Ministry official Eliav Benjamin told Ravid. “We’re in touch with Biden’s staff and what we have heard is that they are in favor of the normalization process, and that they are willing to continue it and we will work with them on that.”

Brokered by the Trump administration, the Abraham Accords saw normalized relations between Israel and Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, Morocco, and Sudan — the first such deals since the Jewish state’s peace accord with Jordan in 1994.

“Some are more prepared and some less prepared,” Benjamin also said. “I expect more countries to join — I do not know if it will be in weeks or months, but there will be more”

President-elect Joe Biden praised the agreements in a Sep. 2020 statement, as a candidate, saying, “I welcome the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain taking steps to normalize ties with Israel … It is good to see others in the Middle East recognizing Israel and even welcoming it as a partner.”

Report: Biden team already holding talks with Iran on US return to nuclear deal

Officials in the incoming Biden administration have already begun holding quiet talks with Iran on a return to the 2015 nuclear deal, and have updated Israel on those conversations, Channel 12 News reported Saturday.

The network gave no sourcing for the report, and no details on what was allegedly discussed.

US President-elect Joe Biden has indicated his desire to return to the accord, while Israel is pushing for any return to the deal to include fresh limitations on Iran’s ballistic missile program and support for terror and destabilization around the world.

On Wednesday, Walla News reported that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is assembling a team to strategize for the first talks with the Biden administration on Iran’s nuclear program.

The team will include officials representing national security elements, the Foreign Ministry, the Defense Ministry, the military, the Mossad spy agency, and the Atomic Energy Commission, the report said, citing unnamed sources in the Prime Minister’s Office.

Netanyahu is considering appointing a senior official to head the team and to serve as an envoy in talks with the US on the Iranian nuclear program, the report said.

From Kitabat.com, an Iraqi news site that is also popular in Algeria:

The Noble Qur’an has shown that the Jews have many characteristics associated with them, and it is considered part of their deceitful methods and their intrigue in distorting the facts and their dealings with every prophet and messenger. ...And they kill the prophets, espionage, blocking the path of God, breaking promises and cruelty of hearts...Most of their events wreak havoc on humanity and their history is stained with blood and treachery.

The Jews say that cats on the island of Ozil when they feel near the end of time rush to a specific cemetery to die in it quietly, and other dogs on distant islands also swim The ocean to this cemetery without prior knowledge of it and it dies there just as it liked to die in the same way as cats, and this was published by the Egyptian newspaper Akhbar Al-Youm on 10/21/1971.

... The bitterness in the modern era is not different from what the Jews did in Palestine in 1948, of the extermination, displacement and slaughter of dozens of pregnant women and the slaughter of sheikhs in the Deir Yassin region. As for the series of their assassinations of nuclear scientists, their record of these criminal behavior continues, the last of which is the assassination of the Iranian nuclear scientist Fakhri Zadeh.

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.

01/15 Links Pt2: Caroline Glick: Israel goes back to the future; In the Guardian, Antisemites are Authorities on Antisemitism; Melanie Phillips: Inoculation, incompetence and intolerable exceptionalism

From Ian:

Caroline Glick: Israel goes back to the future

Then there are the Palestinians. In September 2000, the Palestinians launched a massive terror onslaught against Israel which lasted for four years. Every day, Israelis were subjected to acts of murderous terrorism that ranged from roadside stonings, shootings and bombings to mass shootings to suicide bombings, to mortar and missile assaults.

The Palestinians launched their terror war after rejecting Israel's offer of peace and statehood at the Camp David Peace Summit in July 2000. Yet in 2001, Burns was instrumental in convincing then-president Bush to become the first president to support Palestinian statehood.

Burns' support for the Palestinians is widely shared among members of Biden's incoming team. On Wednesday, Biden announced he is appointing Obama's former UN ambassador Samantha Power to serve as administrator of USAID.

Power played a central role in conceiving and passing UN Security Council Resolution 2334 in December 2016 which referred to Israeli communities and installations beyond the 1949 armistice lines in Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria as "a flagrant violation of international law." As USAID administrator, Power will be responsible for providing US financial support to the endemically corrupt and terror-supporting Palestinian Authority and to international organizations that facilitate Hamas's terror regime in Gaza.

According to sources in contact with Biden's transition team, Biden intends to appoint Obama's ambassador to Israel Dan Shapiro to oversee the Abraham Accords. The sources raised the concern that Biden's goal in making the appointment is to restore the Palestinian veto over the normalization of relations between Israel and Arab states. Shapiro, who took the unprecedented step of remaining in Israel and active in public affairs after he left office, is expected to remain in Israel to take on this function.

In anticipation of the incoming administration's restoration of Obama's policies towards Israel and the Palestinians, on Tuesday, the foreign ministers of Germany, France Britain, Egypt, and Jordan called on the Biden and his team to lead negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians towards the so-called "two-state solution," replete with an Israeli withdrawal to the 1949 armistice lines. The foreign ministers also called on Israel "to completely end all settlement activities including in East Jerusalem."

The leftist political group J Street issued a call for Biden to officially abandon the Trump administration's peace plan. It also asked the new administration to end scientific cooperation with Israeli institutions located beyond the 1949 armistice lines, to open a diplomatic legation in Jerusalem to serve the Palestinians, and to pledge to open a US embassy to "Palestine" in Israel's capital upon the conclusion of a peace deal.

Efforts by Biden's supporters to blot out the actions and achievements of the outgoing administration extend to the fight against anti-Semitism. One of the most significant achievements that Israel and Diaspora Jewry have accomplished in recent years in the fight against anti-Semitism has been the adoption by governments throughout the world of the definition of anti-Semitism conceived by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance.

The IHRA: A Reply to the Guardian Letter signed by Sir Stephen Sedley et al.

On 7 January 2021 The Guardian published a letter from eight lawyers who claimed that the IHRA definition of antisemitism, which the UK government has instructed UK universities to adopt, undermines free expression. The signatories also claimed that examples included in the IHRA definition have been ‘widely used to suppress or avoid criticism of the state of Israel.’ Dave Rich, Director of Policy at the Community Security Trust and a leading expert on left-wing antisemitism, argues that the letter rests on a ‘misrepresentation of what the definition says and does, ‘unevidenced claims’ about its impact, and confusions about its legal status and power. The IHRA definition, he contends, offers universities ‘a modest, sensible and practical guide to antisemitism that would help Jewish students to play a full part in campus life’.

The campaign against the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism has been running for long enough that it is now possible to identify its common themes. These include repeated misrepresentation of what the definition does, and does not, say about Israel and antisemitism; unevidenced claims about the definition’s alleged impact on free speech; confusion of its legal status and power; and an appeal to authority by quoting others from within this same campaign.

A letter in last week’s Guardian (where else?), signed by eight experienced lawyers, is a helpful example of how this works. It opens with the claim that, ‘The legally entrenched right to free expression is being undermined by an internally incoherent “non-legally binding working definition” of antisemitism.’ The letter then cites the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Human Rights Act 1998 and the Education Act 1986 before noting that the IHRA definition ‘has no legislative or other authority in international or domestic law.’

Given that this is the case, it is hard to see how a non-legal definition with no legal authority could undermine legally-guaranteed rights to free expression and academic freedom. Most universities understand this, even if these eight lawyers don’t: the University of Oxford, in announcing its recent adoption of the IHRA definition, stated that, ‘The IHRA definition does not affect the legal definition of racial discrimination, so does not change our approach to meeting our legal duties and responsibilities.’

There are other legal restrictions on free expression which these lawyers did not mention in their letter, including the Public Order Act, the Equality Act, the Protection from Harassment Act, the Malicious Communications Act and so on. These all limit free speech, including at universities, but the letter’s signatories do not seem troubled by this. Instead, a definition that even they concede is ‘non-legally binding’ is, apparently, such a grave threat to free expression that it is worth a letter to the Guardian. Why is this the case?

In the Guardian, Antisemites are Authorities on Antisemitism

Signers of the Guardian letter had previously accused Jews of dual loyalty; of using their control over the media and banks to manipulate others; of “whining” about the Holocaust and pedaling “fairy tales” about the Final Solution; and of being part of a “pampered religion.” They had celebrated terrorists who targeted and murdered innocent Jewish civilians. And they had excused those responsible for vile antisemitism, including the claim that Jews use Christian blood in their rituals, Holocaust denial, and calls to “kill the Jews.”

ANTISEMITISM
Subhi Hadidi: Jews forever disloyal to home countries
One co-signer, Subhi Hadidi, justified the persecution of Jews living in the Arab world by insisting their expulsion underscored a “higher truth”: that Jews are disloyal and insular.

In the London-based newspaper al-Quds al-Arabi, Hadidi took issue with historian Geoffrey Alderman’s criticism of the ethnic cleansing of Jews from Arab lands. It seems Alderman placed blame on the wrong side. The expulsions, Hadidi wrote, were “a textbook case of a greater truth: the failure of most Jewish communities to assimilate into any national culture, their unwillingness to meet a high or sufficient standard of citizenship sense and participation in society, and raising [their] loyalty to Israel, even before it was born, above all loyalties.”

The charge of dual loyalties is something of a habit for Hadidi. After the US ambassador to Israel criticized Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas for saying the Holocaust was provoked by the Jewish role in society — “usury and banking and such” —Hadidi insisted the real reason for the ambassador’s criticism was that the he was “a Jew before he is an American.”

He has also cast Judaism in general as being pampered — “a very spoiled [religion] on a global scale.”

Despite this history of flagrant antisemitism, the Guardian felt it was appropriate for him to instruct readers on what is and isn’t appropriate language about Jews.

Mohamed Alyahyai: “Jewish media machine” abuses Holocaust
Hadidi is hardly the only hen-house guard that looks suspiciously foxy.

Mohamed Alyahyai, another co-signer of the letter, has blamed the “Jewish media machine” for planting guilt in European minds about the Holocaust.

Ali Fakhrou: Jewish “whining” about Holocaust includes lies, fairy tales, exaggerations
Ali Fakhrou, a 9/11 conspiracy theorist, has taken such arguments even farther. If his co-signer Hadidi insisted the persecution of Jews in the Arab world is the fault of the Jews themselves, Fakhrou flatly denied any such mistreatment occurred, writing in al-Quds al-Arabi of a “false Zionist claim that the Arab Jews were persecuted.”

And just as co-signer Alyahyai charged the Jews with running the media and misusing the Holocaust, so too did Fakhrou, who expanded on the argument by raising doubts about Holocaust historiography.

Cartoon of the Day: The "Get Out of Jail Free" card for antisemites

Continuing my series of recaptioning cartoons....

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.

01/15 Links Pt1: Prof. Kontorovich: Refuting Btselem’s Israel-Apartheid Accusation; UNRWA Admits Educational Materials Rife With Anti-Israel Racism and Incitement

From Ian:

Prof. Eugene Kontorovich: Refuting Btselem’s Israel-Apartheid Accusation

The Apartheid accusation in Btselem’s recent report is not just totally false, it is anti-Semitic. Apartheid is not just a term for policies one dislikes – it is an international crime defined as “inhumane acts committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups, and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime.” These “acts” include such things as “widespread” murder and enslavement. The legal standard for labeling a government an “apartheid regime” is set quite high—indeed, so high that no country since the end of South African apartheid has ever received the distinction. Despite massive systematic oppression of racial and ethnic minorities in countries from China to Sri Lanka to Sudan, the apartheid label has never been applied to those countries or any other country by the U.S. or anyone else.

Invoking the heinous crime of Apartheid to criticize Israeli policy is a classic anti-Semitic rhetoric: it accuses Jews, uniquely among the peoples of the world, of one of the most heinous crimes, while also judging the Jewish state by a metric not applied to any other country. And the clear agenda is to entirely delegitimize Israel: the remedy for apartheid is not reform, it is the abolition of the regime itself and a total reshaping of the government.

The very essence of apartheid was the physical separation – apartness – of people based on a legislated racial hierarchy. There is no racial or ethnic distinctions in Israeli law. Under the Reservation of Separate Amenities Act of 1953, municipal grounds could be reserved for a particular race, creating, among other things, separate beaches, buses, hospitals, schools and universities. Inside of Israel there are no separation of this sort. In Judea and Samaria Israelis and Palestinians buy at the same stores, work together and etc.In South-Africa Public beaches, swimming pools, some pedestrian bridges, drive-in cinema parking spaces, parks, and public toilets were segregated. Restaurants and hotels were required to bar blacks. In Israel and all territories under its jurisdiction, Palestinians patronize the same shops and restaurants as Jews do. It is true that Jews are de facto excluded from Palestinian-controlled territory, but that is not the Apartheid Btselem has in mind.

Though funded by EU countries, @btselem's is working to convince Israelis NOT to make territorial concessions to Palestinians. By claiming Israel commits "Apartheid" in Gaza, it says to Israelis: Instead of "land for peace," you get "land for accusations of Apartheid."
— Eugene Kontorovich (@EVKontorovich) January 15, 2021

US House reintroduces bill to sanction fiscal supporters of Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad

A bill that would impose American sanctions on supporters of Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) or their affiliates has been reintroduced in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Reps. Josh Gottheimer (D-N.J.) and Brian Mast (R-Fla.) reintroduced the Palestinian International Terrorism Support Prevention Act on Thursday. Hamas and PIJ are U.S.-designated terrorist groups.

The bill passed the House in 2019 but died in the U.S. Senate.

If enacted, the bill would require the president to submit to Congress an annual report for the next three years identifying foreign persons, agencies or instrumentalities of a foreign state who knowingly and materially assist Hamas, the PIJ or an affiliate or successor of one of those organizations.

It would also require the president to report to Congress on each government that provides support for acts of terrorism and provides material support to Hamas, PIJ or any affiliate or successor organization.

Additionally, the president would need to prohibit that government’s transactions in foreign exchanges that are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and prevent that government’s transfers of credits or payments between financial institutions subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.

After Watchdog Report, UNRWA Admits Educational Materials Rife With Anti-Israel Racism and Incitement

The United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), which serves Palestinian refugees, admitted on Thursday that its educational materials contain exhortations to violence, hate speech, and terrorism that violate UN regulations.

In a statement by UNRWA Commissioner-General Philippe Lazzarini one day after the release of a report by the group IMPACT-se examining the materials, UNRWA asserted that its educational curriculum — which is used to teach over 500,000 children — “emphasizes the UN values of neutrality, human rights, tolerance, equality, and non-discrimination with regard to race, gender, language and religion.”

The agency claimed that the inclusion of the offensive material was due to bureaucratic problems prompted by the shift to remote learning during the coronavirus pandemic.

“Unfortunately, in the rush to continue students’ education uninterrupted, some material the Agency had previously identified as not in line with UN values was mistakenly included,” the statement said. “As soon as the issue was identified, the Agency conducted a thorough review of the entirety of the self-learning material that UNRWA developed and took steps to address it.”

“UNRWA has a zero-tolerance policy for discrimination and for incitement to hatred and violence in its schools and in all of its operations,” it claimed. “Any breach reported is dealt with firmly. The Agency adheres, in its education program, to the highest standards of neutrality, humanity, and tolerance.”

Marcus Sheff, the CEO of IMPACT-se, commented, “After years of hearing UNRWA’s claims that it does not teach hate and has safeguards in place, we have for the first time taken a [peek] behind the curtain and what we see is shocking.”

We suspended funding to UNRWA, which is riddled with waste, fraud & concerns of support to terrorism. UNRWA is not a refugee agency; it’s estimated <200,000 Arabs displaced in 1948 are still alive and most others are not refugees by any rational criteria. https://t.co/SdyigJPHiH
— Secretary Pompeo (@SecPompeo) January 14, 2021

The two faces of Palestinian leadership on COVID-19 (ElderToon)

Khaled Abu Toameh tweeted:

PLO official: We did not ask Israel for vaccines.
Palestinian Authority official: We asked Israel for vaccines.
— Khaled Abu Toameh (@KhaledAbuToameh) January 15, 2021

Which brings up another cartoon I made this week that captures the head of both the PLO and the Palestinian Authority perfectly.

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.

Christiane Amanpour adds to the vaccine libel

Yesterday, Christiane Amanpour of CNN interviewed Gideon Saar, new political rival to Benjamin Netanyahu, and asked him about Israel's response to the pandemic.

She then went right to the libel that Israel is responsible under international law to provide vaccines for Palestinians.

And as you know the United Nations and many human rights groups not to mention the Palestinians themselves have complained bitterly that they are not getting a fair shake when it comes to vaccinations as well. And the Palestinian political leader, also a physician, wrote this in the New York Times.
"The Israeli government's decision to make the vaccine available only to Israeli citizens is not just a moral injustice, it is self-defeating. Herd immunity will not be achieved for Israelis without vaccinating Palestinians."

The Palestinians themselves have not "complained bitterly" - for weeks while the libel spread, they were silent, and only when they saw that there was great propaganda benefit to blasting Israel for not doing what they never asked for did they jump on the bandwagon.

I wonder if you were prime minister you would make sure Palestinians on the occupied west bank and in Gaza did actually get fairly treated in these vaccinations as well. It is part of the Oslo accords. It is part of the Geneva Conventions for an occupying power to take care of the medical needs of those citizens.

The Oslo Accords says the exact opposite of what Amanpour claims, stating: "Powers and responsibilities in the sphere of Health in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip will be transferred to the Palestinian side, including the health insurance system."

The Geneva Conventions says that the occupying power must assist the local authorities, and the Palestinians for the most part have not asked for help. When they did - Israel gave them vaccines.

For months last year, the Palestinian Authority refused any cooperation with Israel. Palestinian doctors were forbidden to work with their Israeli colleagues because that was called "normalization." . Does anyone seriously think Israel should have forcibly vaccinated the Palestinians if they had the vaccine during that time?

Saar answered accurately:

Christiane, as you know after the Oslo accords and after our withdrawal from the Gaza Strip the vast majority of Palestinians are under Palestinian control. It is the responsibility of the Palestinian authority and the Hamas regime to take care of their residents.We would like to help but we will be able to help only after taking care of our own citizens.

CA: Well, I guess that's a pretty severe message to the Palestinians. Do you not think that actually, you know, you are also -- it is a pandemic.

GS: I think it is a good message. I think it's a good message. Because I said we are ready to help. We are ready to help. But we will be able to help after taking care for our own citizens. I think that the Palestinian Authority has enough money in order to pay salaries, to terrorists, to murderers, to those who are getting according to the crimes against Israel. They are getting more money.

CA: These are different issues.

GS: If they have money for that they can take care of their residents.

CA: Mr. Saar, these are two different issues These are two very different issues This is a global pandemic.

GS: No.

They aren't different issues, because the Palestinian Authority has the cash and the means to get its own vaccines. As such, Israel's responsibility is to make sure that there are no impediments to that happening (which is what Amnesty and other NGOs are actually against!)

Amanpour is lying, explicitly, and flustered when Saar makes his points.

I made this cartoon before this show, not knowing how prescient it was.

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.

The battle over Biden and the IHRA Working Definition of Antisemitism

Jewish Insider published a letter that was sent from the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations to President-Elect Biden:

January 12, 2021

Dear President Elect Biden,

We are writing on behalf of, and as members of, the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, which is the umbrella organization of fifty-three national Jewish organizations that span the political and religious spectrum of American Jewry. We again congratulate you upon your victory, and look forward to working closely and productively with you and your Administration over the corning years.

One area of great concern among our constituents and throughout our community is the significant rise of antisemitism across the United States. The FBI's recently released annual report on hate crimes documented that in 2019, the number of antisemitic hate crimes increased 14 percent, and made up over 60 percent of hate crimes based on religion. We know that you share this concern, as you have many times identified the appalling display of antisemitism in Charlottesville as an essential factor in your decision to run for president

Three consecutive administrations, representing both political parties, going back to that of President George W. Bush recognized that antisemitism on college campuses is a serious problem. Each has taken the position that Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act applies to such biases in the college setting. Each of these Administrations has taken the position that some anti-Israel activity is simply a modern form of antisemitism. That is a position the US State Department has recognized since 2005, in its endorsement of what is now called the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition at antisemitism, and has urged other countries to adopt as well. Many have, such that the IHRA definition is now the standard used by governments around the world to identify antisemitism as they combat it.

We note too that the IHRA definition has enjoyed widespread bipartisan Congressional support as evidenced by legislative sponsorship of the Anti-Semitism Awareness Act in both the Senate and the House of Representatives over the last two Congresses.

The IHRA definition is now the most comprehensive and authoritative definition of antisemitism and as such ought to intones the enforcement of Title VI throughout the government. The Executive Order on Combating Anti-Semitism, which was Issued on December 11.2019, was an important and impactful step forward in protecting the rights of Jewish students and identifying antisemitic acts as a form of discrimination through the application of Title VI.

We believe that all federal departments and agencies should, in their work, corolder the IHRA working definition of antisemitism (with examples), which states, "Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews. which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities..

Them are essential tools for the federal government to combat the scourge that is aptly called the world's oldest hatred." We urge your Administration to maintain and build upon these policies of the last three Presidents, and we welcome the opportunity to collaborate on potential ways to implement this definition that responsibly safeguard freedom of speech.

We request an opportunity for representatives of our community to meet with members of your transition team and incoming Administration in order to discuss ways in which the Jewish community can work with you on these pressing issues.

Sincerely yours,

The socialist Jewish Left is going crazy with anger that the mainstream Jewish organizations are concentrating on the IHRA definition as the standard for defining antisemitism. They are trying to tie the mainstream Jews who promote that definition with white supremacists.

"Progressive" Jews, not quite as crazy as the socialists, have been embarking on their own campaign against using that definition.

All sides are gearing up. But in the end, the haters don't have a case. No one seriously disagrees that neo-Nazis are antisemitic, but the Left tries to deny that anyone BUT neo-Nazis are antisemitic - and ultimately, that is a losing argument, as well as being obviously self-serving.

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.

Petra Marquardt Bigman, of blessed memory

I'm very sorry to say that Petra Marquardt-Bigman, a long time columnist for this site, has passed away.

Petra was a fearless scholar and a passionate writer. She had written for publications on the Left and the Right, from The Guardian to The Jerusalem Post, from Haaretz to Tablet. She wrote articles for The Forward that challenged that site's liberal audience.

Her Times of Israel bio probably captured her own self image best: "Petra Marquardt-Bigman is a politically homeless lapsed leftist who can’t get used to living in a time when the Nazi slogan “The Jews are our misfortune” is considered quite acceptable in its 21st century version “The Jewish state is our misfortune.” She therefore writes mostly about antisemitism, anti-Israel activism and BDS, i.e. Bigoted Double Standards. She grew up in Germany and has a Ph.D. in contemporary history."

I don't have her entire biography so I cannot write as much about her life as I would like. She wasn't Jewish but married an Israeli, and she was a proud Israeli citizen. Her husband David fought for Jerusalem in the Six Day War but he was injured, and those injuries led to his death.

As a native German, Petra understood antisemitism and was an expert on the topic. Her articles are smart, well-argued, filled with references and effective. It was truly an honor to host her writings here.

Petra loved Israel and she loved the Jewish people.

Mrs. Elder and I visited Petra a couple of times at her beautiful Bat Yam apartment with a stunning view of the Mediterranean. She was a gracious host and one of my fondest memories of Israel is sitting on her balcony, drinking tea and shmoozing while looking at the beach and the sea in the moonlight.

I learned she had cancer in October when I noticed that she hadn't tweeted in a while and contacted her. Even though she was obviously in pain, she remained gracious and appreciative of the good in her life. She wrote to me, "I have to say that with all I’ve ever had to say about he horrors of Israel’s medical system and the hospitals, the oncology department in Tel Hashomer is amazing. What’s also amazing when you spend a lot of time in a place like Tel Hashomer is what a huge contribution American donors make. Absolutely awesome."

Petra was a wonderful author and a treasured friend. Israel has lost a peerless advocate.

I will miss her terribly.

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.

01/14 Links Pt2: False Claims in the Campaign Against the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) Definition of Anti-Semitism; Israel hits 2 million vaccinated with 1st dose

From Ian:

False Claims in the Campaign Against the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) Definition of Anti-Semitism

A Jan. 7 letter in the Guardian, signed by eight experienced lawyers, misrepresents what the IHRA definition says about Israel and anti-Semitism. They claim that "the majority" of the IHRA definition's "illustrative examples" of potentially anti-Semitic speech "do not refer to Jews as such, but to Israel." This is simply not true. Of the 11 "illustrative examples" of potentially anti-Semitic speech listed in the IHRA definition, 9 explicitly mention Jews or the Jewish people (7 mention Israel, of which 5 mention both Jews and Israel).

The examples that mention both Jews and Israel include "Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust"; "Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel"; or "Using the symbols and images associated with classic anti-Semitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis." Do the signatories of this letter really intend to claim that these examples suppress legitimate, non-anti-Semitic criticism of the State of Israel?

They further claim that the examples in the definition "have been widely used to suppress or avoid criticism of the state of Israel." Widely used? Treating the suggestion that criticism of Israel is widely suppressed, either in our universities or elsewhere, is a laughable fantasy. Anti-Israel events still take place at British universities on a regular basis. Meanwhile, anti-Semitic incidents at British universities are at record levels.

JPost Editorial: IHRA definition is useful - antisemitism must be fought on all forms

The Jewish groups’ reasoning is a concern that the IHRA definition would be used to “suppress legitimate free speech, criticism of Israeli government actions, and advocacy for Palestinian rights.” They cite as “a harmful overreach” US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s declaration that “anti-Zionism is antisemitism” and that the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaign against Israel and Israelis is a form of antisemitism that the State Department will make sure not to support.

The groups also claimed that this use of the IHRA definition is “primarily aimed at shielding the present Israeli government and its occupation from all criticism.”

An examination of the above definition and of the examples provided by IHRA – which are too many to present here, but are accessible online – finds that it in no way calls to limit criticism of Israel’s government or any others.

Unless, that is, these organizations mean to say comparing Israelis to Nazis is legitimate criticism of government policies – comparisons which are a way of denying the abject horrors of the Holocaust; or, in their zeal to advocate for Palestinian self-determination, they’ve decided that Jews are uniquely unworthy of the same rights.

As journalists, we share in these organizations’ vigilance about free speech and believe open debate is important.

Yet, the full IHRA text states that it is not a legally binding document, which means that it is not codifying limits to free expression. The US Constitution has broad protections for free speech, perhaps the broadest in the world. Hate speech is not illegal in the US, for example. But even in America, one cannot discriminate based on race, color, national origin, religion, gender, disability, age, or citizenship status in hiring practices.

BDS is, by definition, discriminating against Israelis due to their national origin, and antisemitism is discrimination based on religion. For Pompeo to ensure funds do not go to BDS-supporting groups is a reflection of existing protected categories in US law.

No one is taking away these Jewish groups’ or their Palestinian allies’ right to criticize Israel as sharply or as harshly as they wish. What governments around the world have sought to do is to combat antisemitic speech, discrimination and other behaviors by identifying them.

Albania Academy of Sciences Adopts IHRA’s Definition of Anti-Semitism

The Academy of Sciences confirmed the decision in a letter addressed to Robert Singer, Senior Advisor to the Combat Anti-Semitism Movement and Chairman of the Center for Jewish Impact, and Noah Gal Gendler, Israel’s Ambassador to Albania. In the letter, the Academy said it “reconfirms its attitude on the historical crimes committed against Jews during the Shoah (Holocaust)” and stated that “the inhumane acts they suffered during World War II, due to racism are not phenomena belonging to history, but it appears in a form of a danger reviving collective crimes and racism, ethnic, religious and cultural hatred.”

The Academy said that as an institution that has historically promoted the study of the Holocaust and its lessons, adopting the IHRA working definition is “a completely natural step and in coherence with its own past, as well as its legal and civil mission.” The Academy of Science will issue its own statement on the adoption of the IHRA working definition on January 26.

The Academy’s decision follows October’s landmark unanimous vote by the Albanian parliament to adopt the IHRA working definition, making Albania – well-known for its interfaith coexistence – the first Muslim-majority country to do so.

Israel hits 2 million vaccinated with 1st dose; police to up closure enforcement

Israel on Thursday marked the milestone of having inoculated 2 million people with the first dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech coronavirus vaccine, as the country pushed forward with the national vaccination drive amid record daily infections.

The person declared as the two-millionth Israeli to get the first dose was a kindergarten teacher from the central city of Ramle. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Health Minister Yuli Edelstein, both of whom have received the second dose, were on hand at the Maccabi Healthcare Services clinic in the city.

“It’s already become routine… It’s something we’re happy to grow accustomed to, but mostly we want to finish this,” Netanyahu said. “We’ll continue — to the next million.”

The prime minister said the government was working on rolling out the “green passports,” which will grant those vaccinated or who have recovered from COVID-19 access to certain gatherings and events that are currently banned.

Netanyahu urged Israelis to adhere to government-mandated virus restrictions and said no decision had yet been made on extending the third nationwide lockdown, which health officials have signaled will last beyond the original January 21 end date.

Israel kicked off its vaccine drive last month and on Sunday began administering second doses. It is currently first in the world in the number of people vaccinated per capita, according to the Oxford University-based Our World In Data.

According to television reports Thursday, Israel could begin vaccinating all citizens in their 40s next week, after opening up the vaccine drive this week to all Israelis over 50.

Coinciding with the launch of the vaccination campaign has been a surge in coronavirus cases, with over 9,000 daily new infections diagnosed in recent days.

ElderToons: When vandalizing a synagogue is OK

Not my usual type of Cartoon of the Day.

By the way, the image is from a 1915 newspaper drawing of a new synagogue in Wyoming.

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.

Jerusalem Bakery So Far Resisting Urge To Weigh In On Trump Removal (PreOccupied Territory)

Our weekly column from the humor site PreOccupied Territory.

Check out their Facebook page.

braided loaf Jerusalem, January 14 - Proprietors of a neighborhood establishment specializing in pastries, breads, and various confections has to date not voiced opinions on behalf of the enterprise regarding the ongoing political turmoil in the US, thus defying a recent trend that has seen business after business jump onto the political stability concern bandwagon.

Political observers noted with surprise today that the Mahane Yehuda franchise of the English Cake chain has placed no signs or placards in its windows denouncing or expressing worry over the developments in Washington over the last week, nor has its social media presence devoted even a single tweet or Facebook post to the violence in and around the US capitol building, the president's apparent encouragement of that violence, mutual right-left recriminations over treatment of the violence versus the various social justice confrontations over the last several years, the mass purging of conservative voices from said social media, or other burning issues of tremendous political or societal import.

"It's just business as usual," noted a shocked Haaretz journalist. "The folks running this place don't seem to feel the visceral, dare I say universal, or at least it should be universal, drive to filter everything through political biases and interpret every development in a way that confirms those biases. I confess I don't know how they do it without fear of being totally crushed on Twitter, or at least left behind when everyone *I* know can tell what political basket they should put their eggs in."

Others noted that the establishment's previous political behavior aligns with its current silence on Trump. "This isn't anything new for this branch of English Cake," observed Israel Democracy Institute fellow Dunning Kruger. "They remained mum during the first Trump impeachment brouhaha as well. And I can find in their social media history not a single mention of Black Lives Matter, the Proud Boys, the wall with Mexico, the Muslim ban, or any other pivotal issue of our time. Not even the Iran nuclear deal. One wonders how a business can even function if it focuses only on production, quality control, marketing, management, and accounting, and totally ignores its relationship with the Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone in Seattle."

Perusal of the franchise's Instagram account bore out that claim; it also revealed a troubling lack of diversity among the few staff members whose photos feature there, none of whom appear to be transqueer Muslim immigrant women of color.

01/14 Links Pt1: B’Tselem's Israel 'apartheid' accusation masks its own sinister agenda; Hamas bars patients from US charity hospital in Gaza

From Ian:

Seth Frantzman: B’Tselem's Israel 'apartheid' accusation masks its own sinister agenda

The real story here is that this is all part of a broader agenda. The notion that Israel exists as one state, encompassing Gaza and the West Bank, is increasingly being used by anti-Israel activists in the West in an effort to promote it as a solution. Their goal is to force Israelis and Palestinians into a single country that both sides have already rejected.

Dr. Sara Yael Hirschhorn, author of City on a Hilltop, recently noted that “B'Tselem needs to be honest about the fact that its endgame here is a one-state solution between the river and the sea, and the erasure of the Jewish character of the State of Israel.”

When the Left-wing writer Peter Beinart argued last year in favour of a “one-state solution”, he didn’t seem to have consulted with Palestinians. In July 2020 Beinart, together with other prominent progressives, debated the “viability of a binational state of ‘Israel-Palestine’ as an alternate path forward.”

No Palestinians took part in this all-Jewish panel. In an irony of the “apartheid” discussion, there is often an apartheid on left-wing panels discussing the matter: Palestinians are systematically excluded from expressing their needs by the Israel-bashing radical left.

The evidence shows that Palestinians don’t want to vote in Israeli elections, no matter how many times activists claim that Israel excludes them from voting. They want to vote for their own representatives. Only two percent of Palestinians in East Jerusalem make their voices heard in Jerusalem municipal elections. And there is no evidence that people in Gaza want to governed by Israel and vote for members of the Knesset.

The fact is that despite B’Tselem’s claim, one government does not rule everything between the river and the sea and Israelis and Palestinians don’t want to live in one state. They may have trouble divorcing from each other – and Israel’s military rule in the West Bank may be imperfect – but Israelis and Palestinians will link arms to resist an attempt to impose a single state upon them.

In essence, the Left’s support for one state is a throwback to the colonial era of the British mandate, which ruled the entire area. The discussions about it are paternalistic, rarely including Hebrew-speaking Israelis or Arabic-speaking Palestinians. Almost no one from Gaza to Ramallah, from Haifa to Ashdod, actually wants to be forced to live together after years of working to be separate. Especially by Western liberals.

Hi @CNN, @Independent, @guardian! It's me again...

Since you guys all had trouble separating fact from fiction in @btselem's propaganda, I, as an Israeli Arab myself, decided to help you out and show you the Israeli "apartheid" that exists here on the ground. https://t.co/375AV6Zg4V
— יוסף חדאד - Yoseph Haddad (@YosephHaddad) January 14, 2021

B’Tselem and the Israel ‘Apartheid’ Myth

Previously, B’Tselem for the most part limited its criticism to Israeli policies that apply to Palestinians living beyond the pre-1967 borders (i.e. the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and the eastern part of Jerusalem). Now, the organization appears to have ventured into new territory: claiming that Zionism — namely, the right of Jewish people to self-determination — has produced an apartheid regime, even within what is regarded as Israel proper:
Israel is not a democracy that has a temporary occupation attached to it; it is one regime from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, and we must look at the full picture and see it for what it is: apartheid.

Yet, facts are stubborn things, and in Israel, unlike the past situation in South Africa, national law guarantees equal rights for all.

And while the situation in the West Bank is more complex, Israel has on multiple occasions offered the Palestinians generous peace deals to end the prevailing status quo. Indeed, every Israeli prime minister since Yitzhak Rabin over a quarter century ago has publicly accepted in principle the eventual creation of a Palestinian state, only to be rebuffed by Ramallah.

Whereas the ultimate fate of the West Bank is a matter of robust debate even amongst Israelis, what is certain is that the media has spread an outright falsehood by suggesting that Israel is an apartheid state. Arab-Israeli citizens have the same freedom of movement and speech as their Jewish counterparts; receive an education and health care; are able to vote; and can work in whatever professions they choose. They also serve throughout the government, in the Knesset, and on the Supreme Court.

But the news coverage of B’Tselem and its latest report paints a distorted picture. As a result, opponents of the Jewish state can more readily discharge a loaded word that is not only totally inaccurate, but also used as ammunition by those who want to see Israel eradicated.

And the media is seemingly all-too-eager to jump on the bandwagon.

When It Comes To Media Attacks On Israel, Timing Is Everything (Daled Amos)

In 2010, Jackson Diehl -- the deputy editorial page editor for The Washington Post -- suggested

How Obama sabotaged Middle East peace talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. The conventional wisdom at the time was that Netanyahu was responsible for the impasse.

Diehl disagreed:

For 15 years and more, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas conducted peace talks with Israel in the absence of a freeze on Jewish settlement construction in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. Now, it appears as likely as not that his newborn negotiations with Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu -- and their goal of agreement on a Palestinian state within a year -- will die because of Abbas's refusal to continue without such a freeze.

...So why does Abbas stubbornly persist in his self-defeating position? In an interview with Israeli television Sunday night, he offered a remarkably candid explanation: "When Obama came to power, he is the one who announced that settlement activity must be stopped," he said. "If America says it and Europe says it and the whole world says it, you want me not to say it?"

The statement confirmed something that many Mideast watchers have suspected for a long time: that the settlement impasse originated not with Netanyahu or Abbas, but with Obama -- who by insisting on an Israeli freeze has created a near-insuperable obstacle to the peace process he is trying to promote. [emphasis added]

Whether Obama deliberately pressed for the freezing of settlements in the hope of pressuring Israel into a concession or blundered into creating a deadlock -- either way, Obama's interference changed the Palestinian story, turning a freeze of settlements into a new demand.

Now we see something similar happening with the coronavirus.

One of those leading the way, on January 3rd, in accusing Israel of deliberately withholding the vaccine from the Palestinian Arabs was The Guardian:

This was followed by the usual gang, such as Haaretz on January 10th

And Al Jazeera on January 13th:

Among many other media outlets.

But that was not what the Palestinians themselves were saying.

Palestinian Media Watch reports that at first, the PA consistently said they were determined to acquire the vaccine on their own without any help from Israel:

Nov. 21, 2020:‎
PA meets with WHO, UNICEF, UNRWA “to ensure that Palestine is provided ‎with adequate Coronavirus vaccines” (Israel not invited)‎

Dec. 12, 2020:‎
PA orders “four million doses of the Russian vaccine… expected in Palestine by ‎the end of this year” (Israel's help not requested)‎

Jan. 9, 2021:‎
PA announces: “Four vaccine producer companies [will deliver for] 70% of the ‎Palestinian people… the WHO will provide for 20%” (Israel's help not needed)‎

Jan. 9, 2021:
PA announces: “Two million doses were ordered [from AstraZeneca]… we ‎received an official response from the company… [Also] the Russian company ‎Sputnik, and a vaccine was ordered… We are not just waiting… we are ‎working…” (Israel's help not needed)‎

But with the media helpfully getting the story wrong and ganging up on Israel, the PA just couldn't resist:

Jan. 10, 2021:‎
PA Foreign Ministry demands that Israel “supply the Palestinian people with ‎Coronavirus vaccines… [Israel is] racially discriminating against the ‎Palestinian people, and negating its right to health [services]… an apartheid ‎against the Palestinian people in the field of health”

You can almost hear Abbas now, "If American media says it and European media says it and the whole world says it, you want me not to say it?"

Going a step further, the vaccine accusation is beginning to get traction in Congress too:

According to the article, the new Congresswoman, a member of the "progressive" wing of the Democrats 'shared' her copy of the Guardian article.

And now with this story still making the rounds, the "human rights" organization B'Tselem has come out with their report accusing Israel of apartheid.

B'tselem and their friends are posting and reposting this all over the internet to get maximum exposure, tossing around the claim that Israel is guilty of "Jewish supremacy."

Of course, the Palestinian Authority is already accusing Israel of apartheid, so this report won't have any effect on Palestinian propaganda.

Instead, the timing of the report and the massive distribution over social media may indicate a campaign to influence more than a Congressperson or two.

This could be one component of an orchestrated campaign to influence the incoming Biden administration. The lingering accusation of Israel withholding the vaccine could be part of this too.

If so, it is going to be a long 4 years.