Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Wednesday, January 05, 2022

"The Axis" vs. the Jews of Judea and Samaria (Vic Rosenthal)

Weekly column by Vic Rosenthal

Psychological warfare is not all that different in organization from the kinetic kind. There are campaigns and objectives. Recently the objective of our enemies – the Arab-European axis of antisemitism – has been to destroy the legitimacy of the Jewish presence in Judea and Samaria. The attacks have come from several directions, but the objective is the same: to establish in the minds of target populations, which include Israelis, Europeans, and Americans, the idea that Jews living in the territories is illegal, immoral, and detrimental to the prospect of peace in the region; and to force their expulsion.

The operations include the EU’s requirement for special labeling of products produced by Jews in Judea and Samaria. The decision was made in 2015, but the difficulty of implementing it without appearing to be overtly antisemitic seems to have deterred many countries from following it. In 2019, the European Court of Justice affirmed the ruling, but some countries still show pangs of conscience.

A more recent operation has been the “settler violence” campaign of recent weeks, waged by various European-funded NGOs (e.g., B’Tselem and others), that claim to report violent harassment of Arab residents by Jewish “settlers” with the connivance of the IDF. Leaving aside the huge imbalance between the number and severity of incidents that can be attributed to Jews and the daily attempts by Arabs to murder them, “settler violence” is often self-defense which is provoked by Arab attacks, and then “documented” by NGO activists, Israeli and European, who just happen to be in the area with their video cameras. Even so, actual data indicates that anti-Arab activity by Jews has actually decreased recently:

…the data made available by the Israel Police point to something remarkable - the number of incidents of Jewish violence is decreasing. From 2019 to 2021, there has been a 61.1% drop in so-called price-tag attacks. Moreover, the number of indictments of Jewish extremists has doubled from 16 to 32 over the past year. That is not the picture the pro-Palestinian groups wish you to see.

“Occupation,” “settlements” and “settlers” also figure prominently in the NGO-initiated campaign to declare Israel an “apartheid” state. The imposition of apartheid is considered a serious crime, based on the prominent example of the former South African regime, which almost everyone agrees, viciously violated the human rights of its subjects. However, since there is no resemblance between Israel and apartheid South Africa, Israel’s accusers (e.g., Human Rights Watch (HRW)) had to gin up their own definition of “apartheid” to apply to Israel. The Rome Statute, which established the International Criminal Court, defines “apartheid” as a crime against humanity, including

… inhumane acts of a character similar to [murder, enslavement, extermination, deportation, torture, rape, etc., etc.] 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;

Needless to say, this does not characterize the regime in Judea and Samaria. The HRW report cites a “two tiered-citizenship structure and bifurcation of nationality and citizenship,” but the fact that the laws in effect in Judea/Samaria differentiate between citizens and non-citizens is common practice and does not constitute apartheid. Other accusations are the usual exaggerations and inventions characteristic of NGO discourse about Israel. And of course the terrorism that requires security-related responses is never discussed, except to deny its relevance to Israeli countermeasures.

As always, history illuminates what politics obscures. The British Mandate for Palestine, which charged Britain with implementing the Balfour Declaration to provide a Jewish homeland, included all the area between the river and the sea (until 1921, it also included what ultimately became the Kingdom of Jordan). The Mandate itself called for “close settlement” of Jews on the land. In 1947, the UN recommended partition of the land into a Jewish and Arab state, and when the Mandate terminated in May 1948 (in the midst of war precipitated by Palestinian Arabs), the State of Israel was declared, “on the strength of the resolution of the United Nations General Assembly.”

Immediately thereafter the area of the former Mandate and the new state was invaded by five Arab nations, in contravention of the UN charter. When the dust settled in 1949, Jordan was illegally occupying the eastern part of the territory, which it murderously ethnically cleansed of its Jewish population. The next year, Jordan officially annexed the area – again in violation of international law – and invented the appellation “West Bank” to refer to what had historically been called Judea and Samaria.

Jordan controlled this area for 19 years, during which time only Britain and (possibly) Pakistan recognized its sovereignty. During this period, in contravention of the Armistice Agreement that it had signed, which called for “free access to the Holy Places and cultural institutions and use of the cemetery on The Mount of Olives,” Jews were not permitted to visit their holy sites in Jordanian-controlled areas, such as the Western Wall. Regarding the Mount of Olives, which has been in use as a Jewish cemetery for 3,000 years,

At the end of 1949, Israeli lookouts posted on Mount Zion reported that Arab residents began uprooting the tombstones and plowing the land in the cemeteries. The destruction of the cemeteries continued over the course of the 19 years that the Jordanians ruled eastern Jerusalem. Four roads were paved through the cemeteries, in the process destroying graves including those of famous persons. Skeletons and bones were strewn about and scattered. Tombstones were used as paving stones for roads in the Jordanian Army camp in Azariya, east of Jerusalem. In Azariya, a telephone booth was found built out of tombstones, and Jewish tombstones were also used as flooring for latrines. Uprooted tombstones were also used in Jordanian military positions surrounding the city. Both the newer sections and ancient graves were destroyed, some a thousand years old.

After the liberation of Judea and Samaria in 1967, Jews returned to areas in which they had been displaced by Jordanian ethnic cleansing, such as Gush Etzion and eastern Jerusalem, as well as other places from which they had been driven by Arab pogroms and terrorism, such as Hevron. They also established some new communities that were on the other side of the lines that had been drawn in the 1949 Armistice Agreement. It should be noted that the agreement made it clear that the armistice lines have no political significance and are drawn “without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines or to claims of either Party relating thereto.”

In an unintended irony, the EU insists that Israeli control of the area amounts to “belligerent occupation” although the area being “occupied” by Israel was previously illegally occupied by Jordan (which illegitimately transferred its stolen property to the PLO in 1988). So in effect the liberation of the territories put Israel in control of all the land that had been originally earmarked by the Mandate for a Jewish homeland.

The EU then misinterprets Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which was originally intended to prohibit acts like the deportation of German Jews to occupied Poland for the purposes of forced labor and murder, as rendering the unforced movement of Jews across the Green Line (which has no political significance) a violation of international law.

In this day when college professors can be fired for using language that is deemed inappropriate and offensive, it should be noted that the terms “West Bank,” “settler,” and “settlement” are precisely those things. But their employment is supremely important for the psychological and diplomatic/legal war against the Jewish state. The abandonment of Judea and Samaria would be blow to the security of the Jewish state that might be fatal, because they are necessary to maintain defensible borders, and to prevent the establishment of a Gaza-like terrorist enclave next to Israel’s population center. The loss of the holy sites in Hevron, eastern Jerusalem, and other places that would fall under Arab control, and the loss of the optimism for the future created by the victory of 1967, would be a spiritual and psychological defeat, a great victory for the Arab-European axis that wishes to see the Jewish state undone.

And we mustn’t fool ourselves into thinking that a retreat from Judea and Samaria would be the end of it. The PLO has never abandoned Arafat’s “Grand Strategy” to bring about an Arab Palestine from the river to the sea, which depends on first reversing Israel’s gains in the 1967 war. The plan got a great boost with the Oslo Accords, that gave legitimacy to a PLO-ruled entity (and later gave birth to one ruled by Hamas). It’s certain that an Israeli withdrawal would immediately be followed by demands for the Arab “refugees” to realize their “right of return.”

Unfortunately, many Israeli politicians seem to have internalized the mindset that is promoted by the psywar campaign; otherwise, they wouldn’t be so quick to bend when pressure is applied from Europe or the US on questions of Jewish and (illegal) Arab building in Judea and Samaria.

Judea and Samaria are the spiritual heartland of the Jewish state in Eretz Yisrael and are essential to her security. There is no other single goal that is more critical to Israel’s long-term survival than establishing a strong Jewish majority there and fully incorporating them into the state – and rejecting the antisemitic lies of our enemies.

The Emma Watson debacle

As everyone knows by now, actress Emma Watson's Instagram account sent out this message to her 64 million followers:

It is not clear if Watson herself, known best for her role in the Harry Potter movies, posted this or some group that she outsourced her account to. Either way, she is responsible.

There was the expected backlash and support from the usual players. And it should have stayed there. But Israel's former ambassador to the UN, Danny Danon, responded: “10 points from Gryffindor for being an antisemite.”

I always liked Danny but this was a very stupid thing to tweet.

Now the conversation is no longer about the merits of supporting Palestinians at the exact time they were shooting rockets towards Israel. Now it is about whether supporters of Israel reflexively call all critics of Israel - or even ostensible supporters of Palestinian nationalism - antisemites.

Pro-Israel activists have emphasized for years that we do not consider all criticism of Israel to be antisemitic. Most follow the IHRA working definition of antisemitism which says explicitly that "criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic."

Now the haters have this tweet as evidence that they were right all along.

Watson's tweet, on the face of it, was not antisemitic. You can argue that she is wrong, that she is misinformed, that she is clueless, that she is following trends, or that she is an idiot (as evidenced by the simple fact that solidarity is not a verb) - but the message isn't antisemitic without any further context. It doesn't fit any of the examples of antisemitism in the IHRA Working Definition. It doesn't fit in my definition of antisemitism:

It would have been bad enough if Danon called her tweet antisemitic. But he did something much worse. He called Watson herself an antisemite.

Certainly no one can conclude based on this tweet that Watson is an antisemite. Making that claim is irresponsible and wrong without a great deal of other evidence that has not been produced.

My corollary to Hanlon's Razor is, "Never attribute to antisemitism that which is adequately explained by stupidity."

Now the story is no longer about a debate on the merits of supporting Palestinian nationalism. Now it is about how Zionists try to shut down any pro-Palestinian sentiment. It is about how people who are pro-Israel try to shut down debate by instantly calling everyone an antisemite.

That's what the headlines are about.

The haters of Israel have been given a free gift, and defenders of Israel have been immeasurably hurt, as has Israel's just cause. A person who is in the public spotlight for defending Israel should have known better.

01/05 Links Pt1: Ruthie Blum: Mahmoud Abbas plays Benny Gantz for a fool; Eugene Kontorovich : The International Community Never Cared about the Arabs

From Ian:

Ruthie Blum: Mahmoud Abbas plays Benny Gantz for a fool

Israeli Defense Minister Benny Gantz must have known that hosting Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas at his home in Rosh Ha’ayin would arouse the ire of the right. Otherwise, he wouldn’t have cloaked the outcome of his tête-à-tête last Tuesday night with the octogenarian honcho in Ramallah in typically euphemistic language.

Following the meeting, Gantz tweeted that he and Abbas had “discussed the implementation of economic and civilian measures, and emphasized the importance of deepening security coordination and preventing terror and violence—for the well-being of both Israelis and Palestinians.”

His office subsequently released the details of a slew of so-called “confidence-building measures,” a phony term suggesting some kind of mutual arrangement that actually means Israeli concessions. These include: VAT, import-tax and excise-duty benefits; a NIS 100 million ($32.2 million) loan; more than 1,000 permits for Palestinian businessmen entering Israel by car; dozens of VIP permits for P.A. officials; and the legalization of the status of 9,500 undocumented Palestinians and foreign nationals living in Judea, Samaria and Gaza.

The above benefits are in addition to the 500-million-shekel ($160 million) “loan” that Gantz vowed to provide the P.A. after convening with Abbas in Ramallah at the end of August.

Despite the left’s fantasy of a return to the misnamed “peace process” that’s been on hold since 2010, the reason for Jerusalem’s unwarranted generosity towards Ramallah over the past few months is that it’s in “Israel’s interest” to keep the financially strapped P.A. from collapsing.

The tragic irony is that one cause of the P.A.’s dire straits is Israel’s deduction of hundreds of millions of shekels from the taxes on Palestinian imports and exports that it collects on behalf of Ramallah. Offering Abbas compensation for this move—aimed, like the Taylor Force Act passed by the U.S. Congress in 2018, to coerce the P.A. to cease its “pay-for-slay” policy—is a twisted, back-door reversal of sound Israeli legislation.

Did Biden Help Finance Hamas Rocket Attacks on Israel?

When the Biden administration colluded with the South Korean government to free up billions in Iranian assets early last year, the move may have had serious consequences in Israel.

Later in 2021, Hamas launched 4,300 rockets at targets across Israel, including Jerusalem and Tel Aviv, hitting a synagogue, and killing 13 people, including 2 children.

Now the Islamic terror group is at it again.

Hamas boss Ismail Haniyeh recently revealed to Al Jazeera that its terror campaign would not have been possible without the $70 million provided by Iran to fund its war machine.

The Hamas leader described the rocket attacks that took place in the spring of last year as a "rehearsal for the liberation of the Palestinian territories from the occupation".

That's code for the destruction of Israel.

As Hamas once again renews its rocket attacks, including two that landed near Tel Aviv, it’s impossible to understand the actions of the terrorist group without looking toward Tehran.

The Muslim Brotherhood’s weapons capabilities are almost entirely dependent on Iran.

Claims of Occupation and Illegal Settlements as Excuse for Call to Genocide

The sooner that those who despise Israel realize that by bashing Israel and the Jewish people they are supporting agendas of corrupt self-serving bad operatives, who stand for everything that they, personally, vigorously condemn, the better it will be for the free world. It is not difficult to see that these corrupt self-serving operatives support terror and do not care about human rights, equal rights, women’s freedom, or even their own innocent children. They do not hesitate to brainwash their own children and their oblivious supporters, only to exploit them later.

Unfortunately, many, if not most, of those who support these bad operatives, will end up becoming their victims, as we are seeing across the globe. Examples of this have been well-documented – some became human shields to protect dictators, others lost their personal freedom due to becoming accomplices to terrorists, and others undermined their own wellbeing by joining the wrong groups.

Once one knows and understands the ways in which many of these bad operatives think and act, it becomes obvious that they cannot be appeased, accommodated, or converted into peace-loving individuals. For the Radical Muslims, even if Israel made the most generous concessions, including committing national suicide and closing down the country, the Radical Muslims would continue to move toward conquering the entire Land of Israel and the rest of the free world, with the intended dream of imposing the rules of Radical Islam and Shariah law across the globe. For the Radical Left, it would not stop their desire to gain absolute power and totalitarian domination, such as we are seeing currently in China, Russia, Cuba, Venezuela and North Korea. For the Radical Right, their level of brainwashing would be very difficult to reverse easily. They would need a durable, extended, and wise program of proper education, that would address their wild conspiracy theories and irrational principles. The rehabilitation program would have to start at an early age and include the adults too.

Providing these groups with financial support and political recognition and connections will only make them better-financed and better-connected malicious operatives, and it will not make our world a better or more peaceful place.

This very important information must be shared with the oblivious anti-Israeli Jewish people, with the confused EU and USA leadership, and with so many others who irrationally support the terror-promoting Middle Eastern groups and countries.

To be able to have a better future for all good people, we must wake up and unite, we must educate as many people as possible with truthful facts and with honorable values, and we must expose and marginalize the bad operatives, as to give the free world the chance to thrive and ultimately excel.

Eugene Kontorovich : The International Community Never Cared about the Arabs

Legal scholar Eugene Kontorovich joins JNS editor-in-chief Jonathan Tobin to discuss the way international law is used to delegitimize Israel and Jewish rights in Jerusalem and the land of Israel.

The two talk about recent controversies over the Biden administration’s efforts to reopen a consulate to the Palestinians in Jerusalem, the legal status of settlements and why the international community is determined to invalidate Jewish property rights in Jerusalem.

German Jews at 1935 Zionist Congress voted against condemning German antisemitism

This headline from AP on September 3, 1935 is awful. Obviously the German Zionists weren't Nazis.

The resolution's text, translated from the German report of the Congress, was:

The 19th Zionist Congress raises its voice against the systematic disenfranchisement of the Jews in Germany, whose ever increasing vehemence undermines the moral and material existence of the German Jews. This results in a defamation of the entire Jewish people and their intellectual and ethical cultural achievements.... The Zionist Congress, which has always regarded the preservation of Jewish honor as one of its legitimate and most important tasks, resolutely rejects, on behalf of the Jewish people, the defamation of Jews because of their race as contradicting the elementary principles of morality and justice. The protest against this disenfranchisement is not only a matter for the Jewish people, but a task to defend the principle of equal rights for all peoples. The 19th Zionist Congress declares that the Jewish people, which in the course of several thousand years of history have preserved their honor and their character under endless sacrifices, will never, in any situation, surrender their honor. It will defend the claim to equal rights for Jewish citizens in all countries, as well as its right to exist as a people among the peoples of the world, with the same determination with which it is willing to build its national home in Palestine - as a solution to its existential question . The Jewish question, which today more than ever is an acute world question, and requires the cooperation and sympathy of the non-Jewish world for its solution. The 19th Zionist Congress appeals to the peoples to lend their assistance to the Jewish people in the struggle to preserve their honor and secure their existence.

The German Jewish delegation objected, saying that the Zionist Congress should only be dealing with Zionism and not other issues:

The delegation of Zionists from Germany came to this Congress in the conviction that the aggravation of the Jewish question has revealed more emphatically than ever before that Zionist work must be stepped up. For thousands of Jews, especially for the Jewish youth, and for large parts of the Jewish middle class, emigration to Palestine is the only solution to their existence and future problem today. We worked primarily at this Congress to help pave the way for large-scale Jewish immigration to Palestine through a renewed surge in Zionist work. ...We have always seen it as the central, specific task of Zionism to concentrate all our efforts on the constructive solution of the Jewish question through the building of the Jewish national home. We must reject the resolution that has just been read out because, in our opinion, it departs from this clear Zionist line. We will vote against the resolution.

This sounds a lot like how Iranian Jews are careful with their words today, concerned that saying the wrong thing could get them imprisoned.

The plight of Jews in Germany was the topic of many discussions at the Congress, with delegates looking for ways to save Jews.

James G. MacDonald, who was the League of Nations High Commissioner for Refugees Coming from Germany, spoke:

First and foremost, on behalf of the Council of the High Commission for Refugees from Germany and on my own behalf, I would like to express our great satisfaction with what they Zionist Organization and the other bodies united in the Jewish Agencv have done for the Jews from Germany who have gone to Palestine. I have said many times that our daily prayer after dinner should be: "Lord, God, we thank you for Palestine" (stormy, repeated applause). Without this homeland, the prospects for the Jews from Germany would be during the been far more gloomy in the last two and a half years.
At this time, when the gates of almost all countries, the largest as well as the smallest, are almost completely closed to all objections, it is a tremendous thing that Palestine was able to give a home to some thirty thousand Jews from Germany. And in my opinion it is an even bigger thing that Palestine today represents a hope for tens of thousands, yes for hundreds of thousands of Jews in Germany, Poland and elsewhere. It is only this hope, according to my firm feeling, that gives the Jewish people their resolve today and gives them the strength that lies in solidarity.

By 1939, some 60,000 German Jewish refugees made it to Palestine. While the British limitations on immigration doomed hundreds of thousands of Jews in Europe, if it wasn't for Zionism, those 60,000 would have perished as well.

MacDonald said he had spoken to British government officials to plead for allowing more Jews into Palestine, and at the time he was guardedly optimistic that they would. He was sad he hadn't had the chance to visit Palestine himself as of that time, but he spent most of his time trying to convince other countries to accept Jews.

MacDonald later became the first United States Ambassador to Israel.

From Morocco World News:

Morocco has officially ended the duties of its ambassadors assigned to Iran and Algeria.

In its most recent official gazette, Morocco’s government announced that the country’s Foreign Affairs ministry ended the duties of several of its ambassadors, most notably including Morocco’s envoy to Iran Hassan Hami and Moroccan ambassador to Algeria Lahcen Abdelkhalek.

Morocco severed relations with Iran in May 2018, with the country saying it had obtained hard evidence that the Iranian embassy in Algeria was facilitating logistic links between the separatist Polisario Front in Western Sahara and the Iran-backed Hezbollah militant group.

It looks like Iran's aggressive moves might have helped push Morocco into wanting relations with Israel's orbit - exactly the opposite of what Iran wanted.

Meanwhile, tensions between Morocco and Algeria reached a new low in August last year, when Algeria announced its decision to sever all ties with Morocco. Many observers saw in the official severance of relations the tipping point of the long-simmering Algerian-Moroccan tensions.

Long before the official rupture of diplomatic relations, however, the two neighbors' rift reached their highest point in years when the Algerian presidency accused the Moroccan government of being involved in a plot to “sabotage Algeria democracy” and undermine Algerian interests.

Beyond last summer’s tensions between the two countries, Algeria has long undermined Moroccan interests by challenging the country’s sovereignty over its southern provinces. The Algerian regime shelters, arms, finances, and backs the Front Polisario, the separatist group claiming “self-determination” in the Western Sahara region.

Israel is often a more reliable ally to Arab countries than other Arab and Muslim countries are.

Egyptian teacher under investigation for ..."scandalous dancing." (video - WARNING - it isn't scandalous)

There is a controversy in Egypt over a video showing a female teacher dancing with male teachers.

The teachers were taking a cruise down the Nile, a trip which was organized by the Teachers Union in West Mansoura.

The female teacher was honored as the "ideal teacher" for teaching Arabic.

The Undersecretary of the Ministry of Education in Dakahlia, Egypt, decided to refer five teachers in the West Mansoura Educational Administration to the Administrative Prosecution for investigation.

The women who is encouraging the dance is also under investigation, as are the male teachers.

The video is all over Arab websites as "scandalous."

At no time is the teacher not modestly covered. At no time does she touch any of her dance partners. I don't know why this is more scandalous than anyone going on a bus in Egypt.

Here's the video:

The female teacher is angry, claiming that she didn't know anyone was videoing her, and saying, "By God, I do not know that I can imagine why would they defame me and my reputation and destroy my future and the future of my three children."

01/04 Links Pt2: Anti-Zionist Jews are more in tune with the Palestinian Arabs than Jewish liberals; When They Start Talking About 'Anti-Zionism,' Natan Sharansky Knows What They Really Mean

From Ian:

When They Start Talking About 'Anti-Zionism,' Natan Sharansky Knows What They Really Mean

Listen to my interview with the former Soviet refusenik on how to spot antisemitism. Also, fixing the sometimes fraught relationship between Israel and the Diaspora.

About a month ago, I finally had the opportunity to talk to him in advance of something called the Z3 Project on Israel-Diaspora relations. The California-based group asked me to interview Sharansky to discuss his work in improving ties not between Jews and gentiles but between Jews and Jews—primarily between Israel and the Diaspora. Of course, I jumped at the chance to talk to my childhood hero. I was curious about many things, but I wanted to get his take on the current wave of antisemitism.

To say that Sharansky has experience with antisemitism disguised as anti-Zionism would be an extreme understatement. As a former Soviet “Prisoner of Zion,” he spent years under torturous conditions in the gulag. He knew that when Soviet leaders began to talk about Zionism, all Jews, Zionist or not, were in trouble. When he was finally released and immigrated to Israel, he was surprised to notice the same phenomenon. That’s when he came up with what he called his “3D test” of antisemitism. They are:

Delegitimization of Israel

Demonization of Israel

Double standards in judging Israel

Put them together, you can bet that what is billed as criticism of Israel is actually antisemitism. The 3Ds became the basis for widely accepted definitions of antisemitism. But the battle is still being fought, he says, not with other nations, but with Jews in America who are reluctant to be seen as equating criticism of Israel with antisemitism.

In this interview, we discussed this dilemma and other areas where Israel and the Diaspora meet.

Jonathan Tobin: Anti-Zionist Jews are more in tune with the Palestinian Arabs than Jewish liberals

Pro-Israel liberals took particular pleasure last month in mocking the latest evidence that Jews on the far left know no limits in their hatred for Israel.

The object of their derision was Jewish Currents, a far-left publication that issued a formal apology to its readers for accepting an advertisement from the Dorot Fellowship for a 10-month-long fellowship program for American Jews in Israel. But as much as it’s hard not to laugh at the contortions those on the far-left go through to maintain their standing as the “good Jews” in the eyes of their anti-Semitic ideological allies, mainstream Jewish groups that are still trying to promote a two-state solution with the Palestinian Arabs may be the ones who have lost touch with reality.

The fellowship was explicitly pitched as open to both Zionists and non-Zionists, and requires participants to return to the U.S. upon completion of their stay rather than remaining in Israel. Many of its past graduates have gone on to careers in progressive groups that are bitterly critical of the Jewish state, like J Street and the New Israel Fund, and are vocal Israel-bashers. But the mere fact that this program took place in Israel was enough to generate a backlash against the magazine. Within a day, its editor issued a public apology, claiming that it was “not in line with our values” and had somehow “not been vetted properly.” That seemed to imply that the “values” of Jewish Currents consist of support for boycotts of Israel.

Jewish Currents was founded in 1946 as an organ of Communist Party USA. It tottered along for decades as an organ of red diaper babies still trying to justify the Stalinism of their deluded parents, even as it retreated a bit from their ideological extremism. Eventually even that limited audience died out, and the publication merged for a few years with the socialists of the group formerly known as the Workmen’s Circle, before collapsing altogether. But it was revived in 2018 by a new generation of radicals and scored something of a coup in 2020 when author Peter Beinart, the former tribune of liberal Zionism-turned dedicated anti-Zionist, left The Forward and joined its ranks.

This publication ought to be one of the preferred outlets of members of anti-Zionist and anti-Semitic groups like Jewish Voice for Peace and Students for Justice in Palestine. But the audience of Jewish Currents remains small, perhaps because in its target demographic, the appetite may be limited for any title that includes the word “Jewish.”

Still, some of the mockery of Jewish Currents from liberal Zionists who still believe in Israel’s right to exist struck me as a bit hollow.

Emily Schrader: 2021 proves that antisemitism manifests as anti-Zionism

The year 2021 proved unquestionably that modern antisemitism is often manifested in anti-Zionism and anti-Israel hatred.

Last week was no different, with a violent attack on an American Jew wearing an IDF shirt in Brooklyn. Yet instead of acknowledging reality, far left Jews and anti-Israel activists try to excuse these antisemitic incidents, even when the incidents involve violence.

On December 26, Blake Zavadsky and Ilan Kaganovich were approached by two assailants in Brooklyn and asked if they support “those dirty Jews,” a reference to the IDF sweatshirt Zavadsky was wearing. When Zavadsky refused to remove the shirt, the assailants began violently attacking him and threw iced coffee on the shirt.

In response, a social media campaign in support of Zavadsky and Kaganovich has popped up, with Jews and supporters of Israel around the world sharing photos of themselves in IDF shirts, in solidarity. New York Councilwoman Inna Vernikov also helped organize a rally of support against antisemitic incidents, which have been on the rise there and elsewhere.

But not everyone is on board.

In the immediate aftermath of the attack, anti-Israel extremist Nerdeen Kiswani, founder of Within Our Lifetime, republished a video of her trying to set fire to a man’s IDF sweatshirt, calling it the “original IDF shirt challenge.” In her post she also encouraged further attacks, claiming that destroying Zionist property “isn’t illegal.” She deleted the post altogether several hours later.

Kiswani is a known extremist who was a leader of last year’s controversial anti-Israel rallies titled “Globalize the Intifada,” in which she was filmed protesting outside American Jewish institutions and stating “we don’t want two states, we want all of it.”

While most people who learned of the attack were able to recognize the inherent antisemitic nature of it, social media had no shortage of fools ready to broadcast their bigotry to the world.

'They called us dirty Jews,' says antisemitism victim Blake Zavadsky

In Peter Beinart's Substack, he writes:

In 1984, in an essay in The London Review of Books, Edward Said observed that while Palestinians were increasingly talked about, they still weren’t often listened to. “Never has so much been written and shown of the Palestinians, who were scarcely mentioned fifteen years ago,” he noted. “They are there all right, but the narrative of their present actuality – which stems directly from the story of their existence in and displacement from Palestine, later Israel – that narrative is not.” Said was the exception that proved his own rule. In the 1990s and early 2000s, he was a frequent guest on Charlie Rose. His columns graced The New York Times. But he was largely alone. A study by the University of Arizona’s Maha Nasser found that of the opinion columns in The New York Times that discussed Palestinians between 1970 and 2020, less than two percent were written by Palestinian authors. In The Washington Post, the figure was one percent.

They were absent because America’s public debate about Israel-Palestine largely pitted dovish Zionists against hawkish Zionists. Anthony Lewis versus William Safire. Arthur Hertzberg versus Elie Wiesel. Thomas Friedman versus Charles Krauthammer. Daniel Kurtzer versus Dennis Ross. Jeremy Ben-Ami versus Alan Dershowitz. Roger Cohen versus Bret Stephens. The participants changed but the terms of the debate remained largely the same: The doves said Israel could not afford to stay in the West Bank. The hawks said Israel could not afford to leave. Both sides shared a common belief that the Jewish state must survive.

During the fighting last spring, that began to change. While still underrepresented, Palestinian commentators gained more prominence. Noura Erekat appeared on CNN. Mohammed El-Kurd appeared on MSNBC. Refaat Alareer and Yousef Munayyer published in The New York Times. Rula Jebreal and Rashid Khalidi wrote for The Washington Post. Their presence shifted the terms of debate about Israel-Palestine...

Beinart made a similar claim in 2020, saying that "For decades, Palestinians have been largely excluded from the mainstream US media conversation about Israel-Palestine. That exclusion continues today, and represents one more form of Palestinian dispossession."

I then noted that the New York Times had published op-eds from the following Palestinians in the years since Oslo:

Marwan Barghouti

Saeb Erekat

Diana Buttu

Ahmed Abu Artema

Mahmoud Abbas

Hanan Ashrawi

Ali Abunimah

Ayman Odeh

Raja Shehadeh

Zena Agha

Daoud Kuttab

Yasir Arafat

Ali Jarbawi

Yousef Munayyer

Rashid Khalidi

Khalil Shikaki

Linda Sarsour

Zahi Khoury

Beinart says, "Of the opinion columns in The New York Times that discussed Palestinians between 1970 and 2020, less than two percent were written by Palestinian authors. In The Washington Post, the figure was one percent."

That study included editorial pieces by columnists and the editorial board, who are all Americans. That is really skewing the data. If you actually wanted to prove an anti-Palestinian bias in the media, you would compare the number of Palestinian-authored pieces with the number of Israeli-authored pieces. Probably there were more from Israelis - but if you further subdivide them into whether the pieces were pro-Israel or anti-Israel, I would bet that the number of pro-Israel pieces from Israelis were less than the number of anti-Israel pieces by Palestinians.

Under this methodology, Peter Beinart's own op-eds count as "pro-Israel."

If you want fairness, then include op-eds by Palestinians who are critical of Fatah and Hamas. Include op-eds by Khaled Abu Toameh or Bassem Eid. Only then can you claim that these statistics are based on a level playing field. Of course, the New York Times would never publish any op-ed by a Palestinian (or Muslim) who is critical of Palestinian national actions, and they eagerly publish op-eds by anti-Israel Israelis and Jews.

Beinart also shows, again, what a disgusting human being he is. When he says that the overwhelming number of op-eds agreed that " the Jewish state must survive," he is saying that this is a debatable issue.

How many op-eds in any newspaper say that the Italian state or the French state or the USA (or Yemen and Lebanon, for that matter) must be destroyed? The answer is zero. But Beinart, whose propaganda methods are second to none, is saying, as accepted fact, that Israel's existence should be debated - the only nation on Earth whose very existence is subject to debate.

That is antisemitism.

This is not an example of how the media should be fair. It is an example of antisemitism that Beinart slyly throws in as an assumption so that most people won't notice. Which makes Beinart possibly the most effective propagandist for antisemitism today.

01/04 Links Pt1: Eli Lake: What Biden Can Learn From Trump’s Iran Policy; Jordanian Former Minister: The Narrative About The 'Zionist Enemy' Is Defunct

From Ian:

Eli Lake: What Biden Can Learn From Trump’s Iran Policy

Faced with these escalations, the Biden administration has tried to walk a tightrope on Iran. On the one hand, it has continued to hold out hope for diplomacy even though Iran’s diplomats in Vienna will no longer meet with the U.S. envoy. The U.S. has also relaxed enforcement of some sanctions, leading to an increase in Iranian oil exports, but has not unilaterally lifted them. And early in his administration, Biden ordered a missile strike on Iranian-backed militia bases in response to an attack.

Most troubling, however, is that the U.S. has let it be known that it does not approve of Israeli intelligence operations against Iran’s nuclear infrastructure. Some administration officials doubt the efficacy of Israel’s sabotage and assassinations inside Iran, according to the New York Times, fearing that they provide an incentive for Iran to build back its nuclear program better.

This is the wrong message. Not only does it risk alienating America’s most important ally against Iran, as former Israeli ambassador to the U.S. Ron Dermer noted at a web conference this month. It also risks more provocations from Iran: If the regime’s leaders believe they face only economic consequences for their predations, then they will continue to test America’s resolve.

That’s why Biden, like the Iranian regime, should also mark the anniversary of Soleimani’s death. He should make clear that the U.S. is willing to use force against a regime that remains undeterred by sanctions alone.

PMW: Abbas and PA: “The colonialist world powers used the Jews” to create and “implement colonialist plots in the region”

Mahmoud Abbas: “the colonialist world powers used the Jews in order to execute the great colonialist plan – dismantling the Ottoman Empire and afterwards dismantling the Arab nation”

Mahmoud Abbas: Israel’s creation was not “efforts of the Jews themselves, but rather colonialist-theological plans and visions”

PA TV: Jewish immigration to Palestine was “a colonialist Zionist plan” … [the Jews] will return to where they came from”

PA daily: The US and GB created “the Zionist organization in their laboratories” and established “an entity that they termed ‘Israel’”

PA: US and GB created Israel to “implement colonialist plots in the region”

Fatah on its anniversary: “We were and still are the obstacle to completing the colonialist project of Palestine”

Fatah defines murder of Israelis: “A quality and unprecedented national struggle”

Palestinians: We Are Proud of Terrorists

Last year, Abbas paid the family of a Palestinian terrorist who murdered two Jews 30,000 Jordanian dinars ($42,000).

By rewarding the family of al-Halabi and other terrorists who carried out attacks or murdered Jews, Abbas is also stating that he, too, is proud of those who engage in terrorism.

Some Palestinian parents, however, are proud to see their children carry out terrorist attacks or murder Jews. For these parents, it is more "honorable" if their son or daughter murders a Jew than becomes a doctor, lawyer or engineer.

Abbas and his senior officials have repeatedly made it clear that they will continue to pay monthly stipends to families of Palestinian terrorists.

This is the same Abbas who recently has been telling the Biden administration that he wants to revive the stalled peace process with Israel.

This is also the same Abbas whose government continues to pay hundreds of millions of dollars to families of terrorists and the same Abbas whose media continues to glorify terrorists by describing them as "heroes" and "martyrs" of the Palestinians.

The next time a US official arrives in Ramallah to meet with Abbas or any of his senior aides, he or she should ask them about the wild incitement against Israel and Jews, especially in the Palestinian media. They need to ask the Palestinian leaders why the PA educates its youth to admire terrorist murderers and deny Jewish history. It does not matter what the Palestinian leaders say in response; they need to be told that the indoctrination and violence will not improve the living conditions or boost the economy of the Palestinians.

The top priority of the US officials should be to stop the latest wave of terrorism against Jews in the West Bank and Jerusalem. This can be achieved only if the Americans put pressure on the Palestinian leadership to stop the incitement and glorification of terrorists.

Mahmoud Abbas and his PA officials Palestinian say (in public, at least) that they want a better future for their people. Their actions and rhetoric, however, suggest otherwise. They pay salaries to families of terrorists and glorify murderers, thus encouraging more Palestinians to become terrorists. A Palestinian leader who wants to see children grow up to become doctors and engineers does not glorify terrorists and encourage young men and women to go on television and talk about their desire to murder Jews.

By Daled Amos

Mahmoud Abbas is getting ready to celebrate the 18th year of his 4-year term as president, while polls periodically list all the people who would beat him if and when the Palestinian Arabs ever do hold elections again.

Meanwhile, in Gaza, the Teflon terrorists of Hamas appear to escape responsibility for the mess they have made of Gaza. According to a poll by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research in 2018:

Almost all Palestinians view conditions in the Gaza Strip as dire, bad or very bad. Responsibility for this situation is placed first on Israel, then the PA, and finally Hamas. But for Gazans, the blame is placed first on the PA, with Israel and Hamas second and third respectively. [emphasis added]

According to the poll, things are so bad that 45% of Gazans surveyed indicated that they want to emigrate -- compared to only 19% of those Arabs living under the Palestinian Authority.

Close to half of Gazan Arabs wanted to leave, yet they did not hold Hamas responsible.
And it was not as if there was no public criticism of Hamas.

In October 2017, just 5 months before the PCPSR survey was done, MEMRI reported on Hamas Gaza Officials Internal Criticism, referring to

o Senior Hamas official Ghazi Hamad, who called for a reassessment of Hamas relations with Fatah, and for a national strategy offering a chance for progress in the peace process with Israel.
o Hamas member Ahmad Yousuf, who protested the Hamas suppression of dissent and free speech.
o Zaher Kuhail and Khadar Mahjaz, former Hamas members who left Hamas and are known for their criticism of it.

Based on the results of the 2018 poll, those criticisms did not sink in.
Or did Gazans just decide to share their criticisms among themselves?

If so, all that changed in 2019.
And even the media noticed.

The BBC reported Gaza economic protests expose cracks in Hamas's rule:

In Gaza, it is no surprise to hear complaints about the terrible living conditions - after all, the World Bank describes a local economy in "free fall" with 70% unemployment among young people.

However, what has been extraordinary in recent days is that large crowds of Palestinians have been turning out on the streets to voice their frustration and even criticise Hamas - the militant Islamist group which rules the strip with an iron fist. [emphasis added]

The BBC referred to this as "the 14th March Movement" and noted its slogan: "We want to Live." It quoted Moumen al-Natour, one of the organizers, who made clear they were not political and their goal was not to change political systems:

We just want to get our rights. We want jobs, we want to live. We want equality, dignity and freedom. [emphasis added]

Symbol of the "Want to Live" campaign
protesting the high cost of living, rising prices
and unemployment in the Gaza Strip
(Source: Facebook.com/416655539140185, March 16, 2019)

Some protestors were very explicit about whom they thought were responsible:

Palestinian woman criticizes Hamas:
"Hamas officials' children drive in luxurious cars, but I have 4 unemployed sons. All of Gaza are unemployed because of Ismail Haniyeh & Yahya Sinwar. These officials care nothing about the poor people's necessities. We have the right to live." pic.twitter.com/caE84QcQKm
— Heshmat Alavi (@HeshmatAlavi) March 17, 2019

The description of the demonstration by The Arab Weekly illustrates that the protestors did more than just voice their frustration:

Gaza has never seen such large-scale protests directed at Hamas’s decision to increase prices and taxes on goods. Protesters burned tyres in the streets, shouted anti-Hamas slogans and threw stones at security forces.

(Apparently, protests against Israel served as good practice.)

Hamas responded about the way you would expect:

Hamas security forces fired shots into the air and at protesters, which injured some demonstrators. Houses in numerous locations throughout the tiny strip were stormed by security forces carrying guns and batons.

Dozens of people have been arrested and many members of the same family were taken to unknown detention centres for interrogation. Among those attacked, detained and beaten were journalists and staff members of the Independent Commission for Human Rights.

And just as the media unexpectedly covered the situation, the UN actually reacted to Hamas. Nickolay Mladenov, then the UN Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process, condemned Hamas:

I condemn the Hamas violence in #Gaza against protesters, women, #children; journalists & human rights activists. #Palestinian factions must engage with Egypt on the basis of the the Cairo Agreement. #UN is working to avoid escalation, lift the closures, & support reconciliation
— Nickolay E. MLADENOV (@nmladenov) March 17, 2019

Even Amnesty International took notice:

The crackdown on freedom of expression and the use of torture in Gaza has reached alarming new levels. Over the past few days, we have seen shocking human rights violations carried out by Hamas security forces against peaceful protesters, journalists and rights workers,” said Saleh Higazi, deputy Middle East and North Africa director at Amnesty International.

All this was in 2019.
Has anything happened since?

2020 was quiet.
So was 2021.

Until the middle of November:

In the last few days, economic and social protests against the Hamas authorities in Gaza have erupted again, led by the "We Want to Live" movement and online campaign. The campaign was first launched in March 2019 to protest the high cost of living and the unemployment in Gaza, and included mass demonstrations that were brutally suppressed by Hamas' security apparatuses. So far, the renewed campaign is largely confined to social media, but some activists warn it may soon escalate into street protests against Hamas, like the ones in 2019.

This time, the protests were in reaction to 3 Gazans trying to emigrate because of the economic situation, but drowned when their boat capsized between Turkey and Greece. The protests were also a result of the outrage on social media to the extravagant lifestyles of Hamas officials and their families.

Addressing the ill-fated attempt to flee Gaza, Khaled Abu Toameh gives some numbers:

It is not clear how many Palestinians have fled the Gaza Strip in recent years. Some reports estimate that more than 40,000 Palestinians managed to leave between 2014 and 2020. Other reports put the figure at more than 70,000.

Palestinians in the poll expressed concern that many of the emigrants include university graduates and professionals, especially medical doctors who prefer to work and live in European countries, and not under Hamas.

Does all this point to a change in perception among Gazans that Hamas is responsible for their situation -- and not Israel? We know that the fact that Palestinian Arabs want to get rid of Abbas does not make them fans of Israel. After all, one of those suggested as a replacement is the terrorist mastermind Marwan Barghouti.

But the economic situation in Gaza is worse.
And unlike Abbas, Hamas deliberately pursues policies that periodically build up to terror attacks and rocket barrages that result in retaliation from Israel.

Gazans have more at stake.

That is the reason that more Gazans want to emigrate than do Palestinians under the PA.
It may lead Gazans to one day see to it that it is their leaders who emigrate instead.
These protests give reason to hope.

Hamada Faraaneh was born in Amman and was a member of the Jordanian parliament in 1997, but he is also a former member of the DFLP and a current member of the Palestinian National Council.

He writes in Ad Doustor that Palestinian violence pays. His example is interesting.

On Saturday, May 15, 2021, US President Joe Biden called Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, following the outbreak of the May 10 Ramadan Intifada, which Hamas called the “Sword of Jerusalem” intifada. The intifada, which spread to Palestinian Arab cities in the 48 areas, and the destructive Israeli bombing of the Gaza Strip, and the Palestinian bombing, however modest it seemed, of the 48 areas, pushed the Israelis to shelters and disrupted the economy.

President Biden’s call for the first time since he took power on January 20, 2021, with President Abbas, would not have taken place without the events of the May Ramadan uprising and its repercussions, in an atmosphere of sharp escalation between the Palestinians and Israelis. Biden literally told the Palestinian president over the phone: “The United States is making efforts with the concerned parties in order to achieve calm and reduce violence in the region.”

So the Palestinian presence in the confrontation is the impetus for the American action, including the visit of US Secretary of State Tony Blinken to the region in the wake of the May Intifada, and the meeting with the Palestinian President on May 22, 2021.

The lesson he learns is that no one pays attention to Palestinians unless they act violently. He mentions also that the Oslo Accords wouldn't have happened without the first intifada and Israel wouldn't have withdrawn from Gaza without the second intifada.

He isn't completely wrong. The Palestinians associate all their gains with violence. It has worked for them since the 1970s, when their international terrorism got them to be invited to the UN.

Part of this association is false, though. Israeli concessions at Oslo were ties to Palestinian pledges to end violence and other promises. It doesn't matter - the Palestinian media and "street" don't look at Oslo as being positive, even though it gave them autonomy that they never had in their history.

How can this mental linkage be changed? It's already built into Palestinian psychology that violence pays. Any Israeli offer to help Palestinians would be perceived as a reaction to some violent act, whether it is true or not. While Hamas and the PA understand in practical terms that they lose more from violence than from detente, that message does not get conveyed to the people who are told daily that violence is honorable.

Perhaps Israel should offer a schedule of moves that would help Palestinians - more work permits, less restrictions on travel, more imports and exports - that are tied to positive moves on their side like less official incitement. This should be communicated up front, and if the benchmarks are not met, then the concessions would be delayed.

The linkage in Palestinian minds between terror and political gains must be broken. It would not be easy but Israel needs to be more pro-active and less reactive - because being reactive itself solidifies the idea that only violence pays.

We know from recent surveys that Palestinians, for all they hate about Israel, they admire it as a strong democracy. 68% of Palestinians describe Israeli democracy as good or very good.

This sort of influence is indirect, but important. The Palestinians might not be implementing real democracy, but they know that they are falling short.

A similar effect was reported in Palestine in 1920, as the Arab women saw that the Jewish Assembly of Representatives held elections - the first free elections ever held in Palestine - and Jewish women could not only vote, but they could run for office as well. And this caused the Arab women to think about equality.

I found this article in a number of newspapers; this specific one is from the Dodge City Journal for July 8, 1920.

It is bigoted against Arabs, but it points to something that is rarely studied: the psychological effects of a liberal Jewish population on the Arabs in Palestine.

ARAB WOMEN DEMAND THEIR PLACE IN WORLD

Newspaper accounts some time ago prophesied the gradual disappearance from Palestine of the picturesque water vendor, for thousands of years a familiar characteristic of the landscape of the Holy Land. The reasons advanced for the elimination of this graceful Arab woman, who glides along-with an earthen jug balanced so carelessly on her veiled head, were that improvements made in the water supply systems in Palestine, particularly in Jerusalem by the Bristish army engineers and the Zionist Commission, together with future improvements planned in the Zionist reconstruction of the Holy Land would give the water vendor nothing to sell.

But something else has happened in the meantime, which has hastened the disappearance of this typical Eastern figure. For the water vendor has not waited for modern improvements to force her to seek other fields for earning a living. Together with other Arab women of a Palestine, she's beginning to object to carrying a heavy earthen jug of water around on hot streets, at the same time that others of her sex are refusing to serve as oxen in the fields or as other beasts of burden for their husbands, a role they have faithfully enacted for these many thousands of years.

For while furnishing the motive power for husband's plow or trudging to market with his sack of grain on her shoulders the Arab woman has learned something this spring, which caused her to stop and think, something the customs of the race haven't permitted her in some time.

She made the almost unbelievable discovery that Jewish women had been granted equal right in the government of Jewish Palestine, that not only were women given the right to vote for representatives to an elected assembly, which was to provide laws for the government of the Jewish communities of the land, but that these very same women could be candidates for representatives, and if elected, sit in the assembly chambers with the same power and rights as the men.

And then to impress this equality of sex further upon the minds of the long timorous and plodding Arab women, five Jewesses were chosen members of the first popular assembly in Palestine in the first popular elections ever held in the country. Whereupon, according to reports received in this country, Arab women, took stock of themselves and, breaking away from traditions and customs which have made them slaves of the basest sort, they proceeded to lay down the law to their husbands, much to the latter's surprise and discomfort. For wives being much cheaper for the Arabs of Palestine than horses and oxen, they looked at marriage purely from. the economic point of view.

Dr. Rosa Straus, long prominent in philanthropic work in New York, is in Palestine for over a year where she has been engaged in various communal enterprises for the uplift of women, reports that "many an Arab wife is refusing to put up with the treatment which for centuries the custom has decreed for the women of that race." They are courageously defying their husbands. and the custom behind which their husbands have lived a comparatively restful life, and are now striving to improve their conditions, according to Dr. Strauss.

Equality for all sexes, races and religions is one of the basic principles of the Zionist program in then National Homeland in Palestine. For a long while the extreme orthodox group held out flatly against granting women full suffrage, but the women Zionists finally prevailed and the first popular election ever held in the Holy Land found women voting and campaigning as spiritedly as the men and just as successfully for they elected five representatives.

Arabs who have been voicing opposition to Zionism, because the new Jewish National Homeland will bring enlightenment, progress and prosperty to all the peoples of the land, have another grievance against the Zionists now, because the equal suffrage movement in Palestine will lose them their absolute czardom over the home. and worse yet, according to their way of thinking, transportation power for their ploughs and crops.

An equal rights association in Palestine already has branches in Jerusalem„Jaffa, Haifa and Tiberias, although members so far include mostly Jewish women. Arab women will soon flock to them in great numbers, it is predicted, as the suffrage movement is progressing steadily throughout the land. Another chase of the Zionist work which will influence the gradual emancipation of Arab women is the fact that the Jewish women engaged in agricultural colonization and in other work toward the reclaiming of the lost industrial and commercial life of the Holy Land are practically all from well educated families in Eastern Europe. They engage actively in the pioneer work of restoring the ancient land on the same basis as the men, an example which which too has made a deep impression on the Arabs. Zionist schools, too, together with the University of Jerusalem, all of which will give Arabs their first real chance at an education, will help in raising the Arab women to the standards customs have kept from her for so many hundreds of years.