Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Wednesday, August 26, 2020

Not just fires: Hamas sending floating bombs to Israel

Yesterday, Anna Ahronheim of the Jerusalem Post tweeted, “An explosive balloon landed on a basketball court in the southern #Israeli city of Netivot earlier tonight and exploded near children. There were no injuries but damage to the court.”

The photos are chilling.

The bomb caused a crater on the concrete, and as you can see if you expand the photo, when it exploded it shot out at least a hundred potentially lethal projectiles over at a ten foot radius that also were powerful enough to penetrate the court.

Incendiary balloons are bad enough – forest and brush fires can kill and have destroyed thousands of acres of land. But these are bombs, deliberately sent by Hamas and Islamic Jihad to kill Israeli civilians. The damage looks to be not much less than what a mortar would do.

No nation would tolerate being attacked from the air with bombs that could land anywhere – schools, homes, playgrounds. And Israeli residents don’t have sirens to protect them from these explosives.

UPDATE: Footage of the explosion.

Sometimes Iran’s propaganda gets positively humorous.

Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said on Monday that the United Arab Emirates cannot become more secure through buying security from Israel, according to a Press TV report.

…“Undoubtedly, the agreement will result in fortification of the resistance axis in the region,” the ministry said in a statement.

So Iran will get stronger. Isn’t that what Iran wants?

“History will reveal how this strategic mistake by the Zionist regime and this act of backstabbing by the Emirates against the Palestinians and, by extension, the entire Muslim community, will conversely result in fortifying the resistance axis,” the ministry added.

Shouldn’t he be celebrating Israel’s strategic mistake?

And isn’t it nice of him to care enough about Israel to warn her that it is making such a mistake? I mean, Israel would have to be stupid not to take his friendly advice, am I right?

08/25 Links Pt2: We need to talk about the ethnic cleansing of Middle Eastern Jews; The Mind-Bendingly Insane, Completely Craven, Utterly Unconscionable Redemption of Al Sharpton

From Ian:

We need to talk about the ethnic cleansing of Middle Eastern Jews

One million Jewish refugees were driven from nine Arab countries and Iran during the 20th Century. The governments and peoples which pushed them out did not just aim to destroy their lives. They aimed to destroy the brilliant history of Jews in the region. Jews had lived in Iraq ever since Nebuchadnezzar’s Babylonians exiled them from their homeland in the 6th Century BCE. There, the Farhud, a bloody Nazi-influenced pogrom in 1941, was an early episode in an ever-mounting persecution. The Farhud slew nearly 300 Jews and injured more than 2000. Sporadic violence made it impossible for Iraqi Jews to stay and initiated their flight to Israel.

When, in 1948, Iraq went to war with the new State of Israel, Zionism was criminalized, leading to further state-sponsored persecution. Yet more Jews fled to Israel in great numbers, until, in 1952, Iraq banned emigration. In 1969, nine men were hanged as an alleged “spy ring”. Today, there are fewer than ten Jews in Iraq. That is the story of just one community. Similar stories unfolded in communities across the region, ruining lives and desecrating a unique culture. These were stories of thorough dispossession, usually sponsored and promoted by antisemitic states, hellbent on ridding themselves of the Jews.

This is the story of Yemen too, a story of a once vibrant Jewish community, smashed to pieces in the 20th Century. For millennia, perhaps as early as the time of King Solomon, Jews flourished in Yemen, despite prejudice and oppression. They developed a rich culture of their own. The 17th Century’s Rabbi Shalom Shabazi, for example, wrote a celebrated canon of 850 poems. He was revered by Jew and non-Jew alike.

As early as 1922, the flames of hatred were being fanned in Yemen: an old law was invoked, forcing all Jewish orphans under 12 to be converted to Islam. When the UN partition plan for a Jewish and Arab state in the British Mandate of Palestine was announced in 1947, a pogrom swept through the port of Aden. It killed an estimated 82 Jews, destroyed nearly all the Jewish shops and four synagogues.

From 1949-50, Israel airlifted the vast majority of the Yemeni community to safety. There, the Yemeni community remain a cultural powerhouse. Now, in the 21st Century, the minuscule remaining fragment of Yemen’s Jews is being crushed, using the same excuses as seventy years ago. Yet again, the same “anti-Zionist” antisemitism is fulfilling its evil role.

Yet again, Jews are being put to flight by hateful zealots and murderers in one of the cradles of Jewish civilization and history.

There is a vile irony to the Houthis’ actions, and those of their predecessors in the 40s and 50s: the same hatred which says that a Jew cannot be a loyal citizen in the countries of the Diaspora, and does not deserve to be an equal citizen, also claims that Jews have no place in Israel, the land of our indigenous roots and the birthplace of our nation. The handful of Jews who, if these terrifying reports are to be believed, are being hounded out of Yemen, are the latest victims of this murderous catch-22. They are the victims of the pernicious hatred which says that there can be no refuge, no rest, no human kindness for a Jew.

When the brothers and sisters of these Yemeni Jews were being expelled all those decades ago, the world did not care. This time, as the latest chapter in the persecution of Mizrahim is written in plain sight, it is time to end the erasure which says that Jewish suffering began and ended in Europe and forgets the Jews of the Middle East.

The Mind-Bendingly Insane, Completely Craven, Utterly Unconscionable Redemption of Al Sharpton

This past weekend, the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, an umbrella group uniting 125 local Jewish communities and 17 national Jewish organizations, sent an email to its followers proudly announcing that it has signed on as a partner in the Virtual March on Washington this week, an event organized by Al Sharpton.

Because last week also marked the 29th anniversary of the Crown Heights riots, it’s worth it to stop and recall that among his many distinctions—MSNBC pundit, and an adviser who reportedly regularly speaks to Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden, collector of innumerable sateen suits—Al Sharpton is also currently America’s only living pogrom leader.

After a car driven by a Hasidic Jew accidentally swerved and struck a young African American boy, killing him, hundreds of the neighborhood’s Black residents rioted in the streets, chanting “death to the Jews!” as well as looting stores, attacking anyone who was visibly Jewish, and ripping mezuzot off of door posts. Sharpton was quick to arrive on the scene, leading a march in which participants burned an Israeli flag and called to kill all Jews. At the young boy’s funeral a few days later, Sharpton delivered a eulogy that borrowed heavily from The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, saying that the Jewish residents of the neighborhood practiced “apartheid” and were there only to further the Jewish global grip on money and power. He ended by ominously shouting: “pay for your deeds.”

At least one Jew had already paid the ultimate price for Sharpton’s incitement: A few days earlier, 20 Black men surrounded Yankel Rosenbaum, a 29-year-old student, stabbing him in the back and beating him so badly they smashed in his skull. Rosenbaum succumbed to his wounds later that night. Sharpton showed up on the scene soon after, ensuring that the rioting continued for days.

As the years went by, Sharpton was given ample opportunity to apologize for his prominent role in this modern day anti-Semitic bloodletting. He never did.

Why, then, is this unrepentant hater being supported by a major Jewish organization? Why, barely a year after a spree in which visibly observant Jews were violently attacked in record numbers, are Jewish organizations sidling up to kiss Sharpton's ring?

What is Europe funding?

According to a report by the research institute NGO Monitor, the EU and other European governments gave the Refugee Council, and through it to the local organizations, more than $20 million between 2016-2020. An official document of the British government claims that between 2013-2016 the British have transferred £1.4 million "directly for legal cases against house demolitions or evacuations. 2,541 evacuations or demolitions were delayed as a result."

European intervention is not limited to the funding of legal procedures. Official documents of various countries show an attempt to change Israeli policy and create facts on the ground in strategic areas, using the legal system. The program's goals include "litigation of cases that are of public interest and challenge Israeli policy, through Israeli courts and international bodies"; "change of policy and practices", and "a lobby in the EU and UN." The program is executed in coordination and tight cooperation with the Palestinian Authority, which directs the cases of illegal building to the organization and its partners.

The discussions in the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee on the European-funded battle for land in Area C are the first and important attempt to deal with the issue, but it's only one example of many. Europe has for years funded radical groups disguised as humanitarian NGOs, involved in campaigns against Israel such as BDS and the campaign against it at the Hague.

The Europeans even fund organizations that are connected to the Popular Front terror group. Just recently it was revealed that a few senior officials from Palestinian "human rights" groups funded by Europe were charged with the murder of Rina Shnerb. The person accused of her murder and his commander in the terror cell acted as financial managers in the Union of Agricultural Work Committees (UAWC), which is largely funded by Europe, under the title of humanitarian aid, to execute agricultural takeovers in Area C.

No country in the world would be willing to accept the fact that against any diplomatic norms, friendly governments would transfer millions of dollars to organizations trying to hurt it under the guise of aid and humanitarian groups. It's time the government and lawmakers act directly against these funding governments and parliaments, in order to bring a fundamental change in the policy of how groups are funded by European governments.

Who’s afraid of Christian Zionism? Only the anti-Zionists.

The Jewish socialist Left has been spending time today tweeting against Mike Pompeo ahead of his RNC speech from Jerusalem. They point out that he is a Christian Zionist, or as they say an “extremist zealot,” and they claim that all Christian Zionists want to see the Rapture and the Jews are only pawns in this plan where they supposedly want to see more Middle East wars.

It is very amusing that people who are dead-set against Israel making peace with Arab countries pretend to care so much about peace.

But beyond that, their complaints about the Christian Zionists are based on an anti-Christian and antisemitic assumption: that fundamentalist Christians want to see widespread war and destruction to bring the Second Coming – and that militant, warmongering Israel shares their supposed desire to nuke the entire Middle East.

In reality, Israel decides what is best for Israel. No evangelist is going to convince Israel’s leadership to start a war that is not in Israel’s own interests. The Christian Zionists aren’t telling Israel what to do – they are trusting Israel to be smart enough to know what is best for its own people and its own future. And they support whatever Israeli leaders decide.

Which is how it should be. Only people who hate Israel – like these socialists – think that Israel shouldn’t do what is in its own self interest.

The real reason that these “woke” people hate Christian Zionists is because they are Zionists. The secondary reason is because they are religious and these socialists hate religion. The third reason is because they are Christians and they want to smear all religious Christians as antisemites, which is slanderous and absurd.

The fourth reason is because Christian Zionists vote.

Pakistan newspaper has two articles saying the UAE has every right to open relations with Israel

Pakistan’s English language The News International has two sepratae op-eds that say that the UAE has every right to establish diplomatic relations with whomever it wants, including Israel.

Saleem Safi writes:

Though very painful for Muslims, it is a glaring reality that 162 countries of the world, including the US, China, France, Germany and Russia, have recognized Israel and have established close diplomatic relations with her. The US – the world superpower – has become Israel’s patron-in-chief. However, Muslim countries like Pakistan, Algeria, Bahrain, Cambridge, Djibouti, Iraq, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, Yemen, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Brunei, Iran, Malaysia, Indonesia, Mali, Niger do not accept Israel as a legitimate state and thus do not recognize it. Three non-Muslim countries – Bhutan, Cuba and North Korea – also do not recognize Israel.

…Besides Turkey and Iran, Egypt, an Arab country, established diplomatic relations with Israel in 1980 after the Camp David Accords. Though Oman – a member of the Arab League – has no formal diplomatic relations with Israel, close cooperation and trade links have been established between the two. Moreover, the Central Asian Muslim states such as Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Azerbaijan have also established friendly diplomatic relations with Israel. With the mediation of President Bill Clinton, Jordon signed an agreement with Israel in 1994, paving the way to close trade ties and opening of several crossing points at border for tourists.

…

It is also a reality that national interests are the guiding force of every state’s foreign policy, relations and engagement. So one could question why some, especially some religious parties, in Pakistan are putting the country in an unenviable position of being seen as hostile by the UAE, by blasting the latter country’s decision to establish diplomatic relations with Israel?

Pakistan itself should never give up its principal stance on Palestine and should never recognize Israel as per the wishes of most Pakistanis. That is our sovereign decision and right. But what is the justification of our anger at the independent decision of other sovereign states? Will we also protest against Turkey and China tomorrow because these two countries also have diplomatic relations with Israel? Will we now also protest against Iran for its close relations with India?

Dr. Naazir Mahmood:

Turkey has termed the deal as a betrayal to the Palestinian cause. Here, we may raise a question or two about Turkey’s trade relations with Israel which apparently do now sound a ‘betrayal’. Moreover, every year over half a million Israeli tourists travel to Turkey and visit cities and historical places. Does this also not fall into the category of ‘betrayal’ with the Palestinian cause? All this shows a blatant duplicity that the president of Turkey, Erdogan, has been displaying over the years. There is also annual trade of over two billion dollars between Israel and Turkey.

Turkey keeps its embassy In Israel, which shouldn’t be a problem as in the modern world we must keep all diplomatic channels open for negotiations, despite having myriad differences. India and Pakistan do not enjoy good relations but have diplomatic ties, which is how it should be.

After the unilateral announcement of annexation of Kashmir into India, had Pakistan snapped diplomatic ties with India, it would have been a wrong move. Similarly, if Pakistan can maintain such relations at the diplomatic level, all Arab and other Muslim countries do have a right to establish diplomatic relations with Israel. They may keep chattering about the rights of Palestine as Pakistan does about the Kashmiris.

I can’t say I’ve been following Pakistan’s media closely but this seems surprising, although it fits in well with Pakistan’s mild reaction to the news of the agreement.

08/25 Links Pt1: Nikki Haley: Obama, Biden led UN to denounce our friend Israel; United Nations not thrilled about Middle Eastern nations uniting

From Ian:

Nikki Haley: Obama, Biden led UN to denounce our friend Israel

Former US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley spoke of President Donald Trump's foreign policy accomplishments during his tenure thus far on the first night of the Republican National Convention on Monday, including mentioning the president's policies regarding the Middle East and Israel.

During the virtual convention, Haley first quoted the late Jeane Kirkpatrick, an ardent supporter of Israel in the administration of former US president Ronald Reagan, saying in an overt criticism of Democratic Party foreign policies that they "always blame America first."

Noting her role as the former US ambassador, Haley remarked on the nature of the UN and international human rights, saying "it was an honor of a lifetime to serve as the United States ambassador to the United Nations. Now, the UN is not for the faint of heart. It's a place where dictators, murderers & thieves denounce America... and then put their hands out and demand that we pay their bills."

Similarly, Haley harshly criticized former US president Barack Obama's foreign policy in relation to US-Israel ties and votes in the UN on apparently anti-Israel resolutions, in addition to talking about the decision to transfer the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

"Obama and Biden led the United Nations to denounce our friend and ally, Israel. President Trump moved our embassy to Jerusalem... and when the UN tried to condemn us, I was proud to cast the American veto."

New Israel-UAE Pact Shatters Peace Myths

For decades, international decision makers and opinion shapers have theorized that Israel will not be accepted in the region until it makes peace with the Palestinians, and that all wars and conflicts in the Middle East are somehow connected to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Former President Jimmy Carter once stated that “without doubt, the path to peace in the Middle East goes through Jerusalem.” Another enthusiast of what has become known as “linkage” is the late US National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski, who said, “The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the single most combustible and galvanizing issue in the Arab world.”

The Israel-United Arab Emirates (UAE) peace agreement, or “Abraham Accord” — in addition to credible talk of other Arab nations joining — has exploded the belief that the Jewish state is isolated in the region. It also sent a clear signal that the Palestinians, following their decades of rejectionism, can no longer place a veto on Arab nations making peace and establishing official relations with Israel.

But of course, the idea that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was the focal point of the region’s unrest and the most challenging to solve has never been consistent with the facts or statistics.

Many conflicts have been far more deadly and are far more entrenched, based on grievances stretching back hundreds of years. The Sunni-Shiite conflict, for example, predates the modern era, and the internal wars that have devastated Middle East nations like Syria, Libya, Lebanon, and Iraq are a result of historical and even ancient disputes. If one looks at the number of Muslim fatalities from armed conflicts since the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, well over 12 million have been killed in conflicts around the wider region in wars such as the Syrian and Lebanese civil wars and the Iran-Iraq conflict.

Fewer than 100,000 Arabs have died in the Israeli-Arab or Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and the majority of those died in Israel’s defensive wars against its neighbors. That means fewer than one percent of all deaths in conflicts in the region were in the context of the Israeli-Arab/Palestinian conflict. This statistic alone demonstrates that the conflict with Israel is one of the least bloody or central in the region.

The warm peace between Israel and the UAE is a victory for us all

Many prominent people in the UAE have praised and congratulated this agreement and greatly appreciate this strategic change. We must let the past be the past and look forward to the opportunities of tomorrow, full of sincere cooperation and synergy.

Peace is born in people’s hearts and minds. Real and lasting victories are the victories of peace, not the victories of war.

The atmosphere in support of peace and the interaction we are witnessing through social media platforms in the UAE and Israel, and increasingly in more Arab countries, give us a great sense of hope that such lasting peace is indeed possible.

Although we also have empathy for the Palestinian people, it is regrettable that instead of grasping this opportunity to advance their own situation, their leadership has yet again dismissed an outstretched hand for real and meaningful change.

The peace agreement between Israel and the UAE is intended to put an end to conflicts in the region and to spread the values of peace among the peoples.

This historic step will contribute to the strengthening of stability, justice and peace in the world, based on universal human values that everyone believes in, such dialogue, coexistence and tolerance between different religions and cultures.

After the historic peace agreement last week, we feel a real mutual sense of excitement and hope for a better future. It is our dream that others, especially in the Arab world, will see it also and join us!

The writer is a senior executive specializing in digital transformation at the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company, and an activist for peace and regional reconciliation.

More #Pallywood lies

A tweet I came across from Lana Adham who lives in Gaza:

The first picture came from an article about a kid without legs in New England.

The second seems to be either from Afghanistan or Kashmir, but it isn’t Gaza.

Adham seems to make a career of relabeling photos as being from Gaza:

The kid is a Syrian refugee.

Syria 2013.

Pallywood seems to be a full time job for some people. they have to lie because the truth isn’t on their side.

UAE official slams Palestinian refusal to attend Middle East peace summit

From Israel Hayom:

The United States is working to convene a Middle East peace summit in the next few weeks, a senior Emirati diplomat told Israel Hayom Monday.

The Emirati official said that US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo's five-day visit to the Middle East and Africa, which began in Jerusalem, is part of Washington's effort to lay the groundwork for the peace summit.

Sources familiar with the issue said that the summit is to take place in one of the Persian Gulf sheikdoms, adding that the US is trying to secure the participation of Bahrain, Oman, Morocco, Sudan, and Chad, alongside Israel and the UAE.

Other states, including Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Jordan – the latter two already having peace treaties with Israel – have yet to confirm their participation in the summit.

[Hebrew edition: “According to the senior Emirate diplomat, lSaudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan have not yet responded if they will send delegations to the regional summit, if it does take place in light of the Palestinian refusal." However, the senior Arab diplomat noted that there was tacit agreement between Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Jordan to hold the conference and that they would be content to send representatives at the bureaucratic level and not representatives at senior ministerial levels. “]

The diplomat added that prior to and during Pompeo's visit to Israel, Palestinian officials were invited to the summit. The message was also conveyed to the PA that Pompeo is willing to visit PA President Mahmoud Abbas in Ramallah to personally invite him to the summit.

Abbas and other PA officials dismissed the offer, snubbing the top American diplomat "and even sent the message that Pompeo is not wanted in Ramallah," the UAE official said.

"The Palestinian position is very saddening. They were given an opportunity to deescalate the situation with a respectful invitation to take part in a regional peace conference, and they rejected it out of hand with no reasonable explanation," he noted.

"The Palestinians have to come to grips with the fact that the wheels of peace have started to turn, and peace and normalization will come with or without the Palestinians even if they continue to be defiant."

Every time the Palestinians say no, they alienate themselves more from moderate Arab states – and they push themselves more into a de facto alliance with Iran, Syria, and Yemen, which makes them even more toxic to most Arab states.

As with everything else in the region, the Palestinian leaders are being driven more by “honor” than by what is best for their own people. This is a self-destructive mindset that the Gulf nations are slowly climbing out of, as they realize that oil reserves are not a long term solution to their survival and that they need to become part of the West and invest in the future if they want to thrive.

At this point one may wonder if the entire point of inviting the Palestinians to a peace summit is to embarrass them when they refuse and to accelerate the split between them and the rest of the Sunni Arab world. Pompeo knows very well that they will always refuse.

Meanwhile, the new Middle East continues to change at dizzying pace:

PCHR tries to counter “Terrorists in Suits”–and can’t

Last year Israeli’s Ministry of Strategic Affairs released “Terrorists in Suits,” which showed how many top members of anti-Israel NGOs were linked to terror groups, most often the PFLP but also Hamas.

Now, PCHR – one of the organizations targeted – has written a rebuttal report.

However, it doesn’t point out any inaccuracies!

For example, PCHR writes:

On February 2019, the Israeli Ministry of Strategic Affairs released a report titled “Terrorists in Suits”, accusing several Palestinian NGO’s, especially the human rights organizations, that attempting to eradicate the State of Israel. And they also posted about the directors of these institutions as they have relations with Palestinian organizations as “terrorists”, so they published Photoshopped pictures for some of them such as the Lawyer Raji al-Sourani, the director of PCHR, and Sha’wan Jabarin, general director of al-Haq.

The report alleges that it exhibits the connections between dozens of the human rights organizations and the so-called “terrorists” groups. It also attempted to create a connection between human rights organizations, BDS, Hamas Movement, and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP). The report is based on fake information in a misrepresented context regarding the former and decades old activities of human rights activists with Palestinian political parties. The report also claims that BDS and human rights organizations are attempting to deceive the world and hide behind a humanitarian and human rights facade to destroy the State of Israel, as it alleges that those organizations do not recognize “Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state”, and they aim to eradicate the State of Israel. The report used the membership of the Palestinian National and Islamic Forces, a political coalition of 15 Palestinian factions, in the BDS National Committee (BNC), which includes the Palestinian NGO Network (PNGO) , to paint its allegations as truths.

Note that PCHR doesn’t say that the report isn’t true. Because they can’t. Here is the Terrorists in Suits page they are referring to:

The “Photoshopped pictures” are simply two different edits of the same picture – they are clearly of the correct person and don’t misrepresent them.

The Israeli report freely admits that Wisha’s prison sentence was many years ago, but when such a high percentage of PFLP terrorists become members of NGOs, it is clear that the NGOs exist to do the same job that the PFLP does. In fact, the leader of the cell that killed 17-year old Rina Shnerb last year was at the same time working for the European-funded Addameer NGO.

PCHR’s response is meant to give the impression that “Terrorists in Suits” is filled with inaccuracies, but in the end they cannot find anything specific that was incorrect! The entire purpose of the PCHR report is to make it look like they have a substantive response, knowing that most people will not actually read it and hoping that EU funders of these NGOs – who often look for any excuse to continue to fund these organizations to pretend they care about human rights - -will feel better about funding terrorist-infested organizations since they seemingly responded.

Much of the rest of the report attacks NGO Monitor, accusing it of falsehoods, again without rebutting a single example. It’s almost humorous.

Erdogan’s video shows he wants to control Jerusalem

This video from the President of Turkey’s Communications Directorate shows how Recep Tayyip Erdoğan views Turkey.

It is a very militaristic video, going from Turkish soldiers on horses onto showing them in fighter jets.

But the very last frames of the video feature the Temple Mount showing the Al Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock.

Is it Erdogan’s goal? Is he wishing for a return to the Ottoman Empire and control of Jerusalem?

Whatever it is, it is a huge insult to Israel.

(One might think that it is an insult to Palestinians as well, but they never cared about Al Aqsa being under the control of others before 1967. As long as Jews don’t control it, they seem to be fine with it.)

(h/t Diana Muir Appelbaum)

08/24 Links Pt2: Black September Remembered: How The PLO Forged The Modern Middle East; NYTs Floats Plan To Hire 100 Orthodox Jewish Journalists

From Ian:

Black September Remembered: How The PLO Forged The Modern Middle East

It is a common, albeit false, assumption that the United States and Israel closely cooperated since the Jewish state’s recreation in 1948. Washington had supported the U.N. Partition Plan that would have created both an Arab and a Jewish state out of British-ruled Mandate Palestine, but then-President Harry Truman did so over the objections of top advisers. Indeed, the U.S. State Department and the Pentagon had argued that U.S. support for Israel would be a strategic liability.

America, in turn, often kept Israel at arm’s length, both forcing the Jewish state to give up territory won in the 1956 Suez War against Nasser and prohibiting weapon sales until 1962. While relations were cordial, and even friendly, the United States tended to view Israel less as a strategic partner and more as a burden.

With Syrian forces moving into Jordan, King Hussein asked for U.S. aerial reconnaissance. Washington turned to the Israelis.

On September 20, Kissinger told Israel’s Ambassador to the United States, the future Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, that King Hussein had asked to have Israel’s air force attack the Syrian invaders. A stunned Rabin asked, “Are you recommending that we respond to the Jordanian request?” Kissinger declined to give an answer, telling Rabin that he would get a response from Nixon within half an hour.

After speaking with Nixon, Kissinger told Israeli Premier Golda Meir, that the United States “would look favorably upon an Israeli air attack.”

Meir ordered the reconnaissance flights and Israel sent troops to its border with Syria. Israeli jets, meanwhile, flew low over Syrian tanks in Jordan—sending an unmistakable signal that Israel would intervene. “With that support,” Meir biographer Francine Klagsbrun wrote, “the king used his own air and ground forces to drive the Syrians back to their own country.” By July 1971 the PLO was crushed in Jordan, and Arafat fled to Lebanon.

Subsequently, Kissinger told Rabin that America was “fortunate in having an ally like Israel in the Middle East.”

Security cooperation would continue to improve between the two countries with Israel having demonstrated that it was more of an asset than a liability. Today, the nations enjoy unprecedented cooperation and Israel is considered a major non-NATO ally.

The event had other fateful consequences as well. The failed Syrian intervention led to the rise of Hafez al-Assad who, as defense minister, had opposed it. The PLO, meanwhile, would memorialize it as “Black September” and would go on to create another “state within a state” in Lebanon—igniting years more of warfare. Today another anti-Israel terror group, Hezbollah, has taken the PLO’s place in Lebanon. Elsewhere, Hezbollah has intervened in Syria to prop up Bashar Assad, Hafez’s genocidal son.

“History is not was,” the American novelist William Faulkner famously wrote, “it is.” (h/t Zvi)

This West Bank Land Is Not ‘Palestinian’

“Who can challenge the rights of the Jews in Palestine?” Yusuf al-Khalidi wrote to the chief rabbi of France on March 1, 1899. “Good Lord, historically it really is your country.” Yet, more than a century after Khalidi’s admission, the Jewish people’s connection to their ancestral homeland is often forgotten. Indeed, many news outlets and analysts not only ignore it — but often attempt to erase it.

Take, for example, The Washington Post. The newspaper’s August 13, 2020 report, “Trump announces historic peace agreement between Israel and the United Arab Emirates,” asserted that “Arab leaders had privately warned Trump that they could not agree to future economic or diplomatic ties with Israel if Israel took over land now considered Palestinian.” But the article, by reporter Anne Gearan and Jerusalem bureau chief Steve Hendrix, doesn’t say why the land is “now considered Palestinian.”

In fact, a sovereign Palestinian Arab state has never existed. Rather, the status of the territory is, at best, disputed. Its status is to be resolved by negotiations anticipated by UN Security Council Resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973), the 1995 Israeli-Palestinian interim accords, the 2003 international “road map,” and related diplomatic efforts. Indeed, the co-authors of Resolution 242, US Under Secretary of State Eugene Rostow, US Ambassador to the United Nations Arthur Goldberg, and British ambassador Lord Caradon made clear, both then and later, that Jews and Arabs both had claims in the territories, and that no national sovereignty over them had been recognized since the end of Ottoman rule.

The Washington Post itself, in a September 4, 2014 correction prompted by CAMERA, noted that “the Israeli-occupied territories are disputed lands that Palestinians want for a future state.” In another recent CAMERA-prompted correction, The Wall Street Journal acknowledged on May 16, 2020, that “under the Oslo accords, sovereignty over the West Bank is disputed, pending a final settlement.”

Further, there is a legal basis for Jewish claims to the land. As CAMERA has documented (see, for example, “The West Bank—Jewish Territory Under International Law”), Israel has a foundation for asserting sovereignty over the area. Additionally, the League of Nations Palestine Mandate, adopted later by the United Nations, calls for “close Jewish settlement on the land” west of the Jordan River in Article 6. The UN Charter, Chapter XII, Article 80, upholds the Mandate’s provisions. The 1920 San Remo Treaty and the 1924 Anglo-American Convention also enshrined Jewish territorial claims in international law.

FDD: Boykott

With overwhelming support, the German parliament, or Bundestag, passed a resolution last year declaring, “[T]he arguments and methods of the BDS [Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions] Movement are anti-Semitic.” The resolution explained that the tactics of the BDS campaign “inevitably arouse associations with the Nazi slogan ‘Kauft nicht bei Juden!’” (emphasis added)1 – “Don’t buy from Jews!”

The Bundestag resolution had few tangible effects, since it was not legally binding. Yet it challenged the BDS campaign’s portrayal of itself as an advocate for human rights and an opponent of prejudice. While the resolution made points similar to those offered by the campaign’s other critics, it endowed such arguments with the moral weight of Germany’s efforts to grapple with its own history of anti-Semitism.

The German parliament also brought a new sense of democratic legitimacy to the effort to counter BDS initiatives, since the parliament spoke on behalf of more than 80 million inhabitants of the most populous country in the European Union. There had been no comparable vote in any other country, not even the United States. Six months later, Paris would follow Berlin’s precedent.2 Then, in February 2020, the Austrian Parliament unanimously passed an anti-BDS resolution, declaring the campaign to be anti-Semitic.3

While the Holocaust informs much of the German debate about BDS, it does not explain why the Bundestag rejected a common defense of BDS – namely, that objecting to the actions of the Israeli government is in no way anti-Semitic. Indeed, the Bundestag condemned statements “that are formulated as alleged criticism of the policies of the State of Israel, but are actually expressions of hatred of the Jewish people.”4

To understand how and why German lawmakers arrived at this position in 2019, one must view BDS in the context of Germany’s evolving relationship with the State of Israel. The governments of both West Germany and the post-Cold War reunified German state interpreted their responsibility for the Holocaust as including an obligation to fight anti-Semitism and protect Jews. A sticking point has been whether Germany has an obligation to serve as protector of the Jewish state.

At the conclusion of the Cold War, it was no longer a question. Germany began to embrace the notion of a special relationship with Israel. This relationship still requires give and take, rather than a mandate for deference to Israeli wishes. For example, Germany and Israel have had sharp differences regarding how to address the threat posed by the Iranian nuclear program. Germany had also, until recently, refused to designate the entirety of Lebanese Hezbollah as a terrorist organization. That ended in April 2020, when Berlin outlawed all Hezbollah activity within its borders.5 But this step was taken in line with Germany’s own interest, even if it was prodded by the United States.

The BDS campaign is an issue that goes beyond traditional foreign policy. It is an ideological issue that touches a raw nerve connected to Germany’s troubled past. It should come as no surprise, then, that Germany took a leadership role in countering the campaign.

Ramallah News quotes the Emirati news agency WAM:

On Monday, the head of the UAE General Authority for Islamic Affairs and Endowments, Muhammad Al-Kaabi, described the agreement to normalize Emirati-Israeli relations under American auspices as a "courageous and historic" decision, despite strong Palestinian opposition to it.

According to the official Emirates News Agency, WAM, Al-Kaabi stressed that this agreement stems from the values of the Islamic religion, which calls for building bridges of cooperation and establishing relations with everyone regardless of their positions and religions.

Al-Kaabi claimed that his country is continuing its efforts to find a peaceful solution that protects people, achieves development for this region, and preserves its stability, indicating that this is an affirmation of the firm leadership approach.

He added, "This is evidence of the wise leadership's belief in the necessity of honoring the human being, the sanctity of protecting the sacred things, its sincere desire to instill the values of hope in the region's youth, and to reinforce their peace values."

It sounds like the UAE leadership is not affected in the least by the strenuous Palestinian objections to the agreement.