Israel on the Golan Heights benefits the USA

Israel Hayom

In 1993, 1995 and 2005, Israel retreated from 40% of the Judea and Samaria mountain ridges (West Bank) and the entire Gaza Strip. It transformed these regions into platforms of unprecedented Palestinian terrorism and missile launches, supported by Iran, Turkey and North Korea. Moreover, it has intensified lethal threats to all pro-US Arab regimes, bolstering their security ties with Israel, which they perceived to be the most credible “life insurance agent” in the region. As expected, gestures to rogue regimes and terrorists fuel further violence.

According to Prof. Itamar Rabinovich, former Israeli Ambassador to the US and Chief Negotiator with Syria (The Brink of Peace, 1999, pp. 164-167): “In November 1994, the peace process had seemed to be in full swing…. [But], an organized campaign began in the US against the idea of stationing US troops on the Golan Heights as ‘peace keepers’, in the event of an Israel-Syria [peace] agreement. The campaign was orchestrated by right-wing organizations and individuals in the Jewish community, with occasional participation of visitors from Israel… [such as] the former Minister for Congressional Affairs in our Washington Embassy, Yoram Ettinger…. The organizers conveyed the message that sending US troops as peacekeepers to the Golan was bad for the US [and that the Syrian armored mechanized divisions stationed between the Golan Heights and Damascus would be deployed to the border with Jordan, aiming to topple the pro-US Hashemite regime]…. The US could lose the lives of its soldiers and become entangled in a dangerous foreign arena…. That would no doubt lead to a rise in anti-Semitism in the US…. Senator Jesse Helms, the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations [a friend of Bobby Jacobs] was openly critical of the Assad regime…. The Chairman of the House Committee on International Relations, Benjamin Gilman, was under pressure from voters in his own constituency…. This Congressional opposition had at least some negative impact on Assad’s motivation to move forward in his peacemaking with Israel….”

Since 1967, Israel’s control of the strategically-commanding Golan Heights – over-towering northern Israel – has constrained and monitored the Russian, Iranian, North Korean, ISIS and Turkish strategic profile in Syria.  Furthermore, the Israeli posture of deterrence has bolstered the national security of Jordan’s Hashemite regime and all other pro-US Arab regimes (hence the unprecedented cooperation between Israel and these regimes). For instance, the September 1970 pro-Soviet Syrian invasion of the pro-US Jordan was rolled back, primarily, due to Israel’s deployment of troops to the Golan Heights, 37 miles from Damascus. The Syrian invasion aimed at toppling the Hashemite regime and producing a pro-Soviet domino scenario into the Arabian Peninsula, at a time when the US was heavily dependent upon Persian Gulf oil.  Thus, Israel’s control of the Golan Heights spared the US the need to deploy its own troops, in order to save its Jordanian ally, while preventing a potential super-power confrontation, and denying the USSR a geo-strategic bonanza.

The significance of Israel’s control of the Golan Heights for the national security of the US has been intensified due to the following phenomena:

*The raging civil war in Syria which erupted in 2011;
*The escalation of Iran’s involvement in Syria and Lebanon, aspiring to extend its dominance to the Mediterranean and Europe;
*The entrenchment of ISIS cells in Syria, irrespective of their recent setbacks;
*The growing involvement in Syria by Turkey’s Erdogan, who aims to resurrect the Ottoman Empire;
*The inherent Russia-Syria alliance, with Russia expanding its presence in the Mediterranean and throughout the Middle East.
*Since the 1960s, North Korea has been a leading ally of Syria, engaged in illicit military and technology cooperation, including ballistic missiles and chemical warfare. Pyongyang facilitated the construction of a Syrian nuclear reactor that was destroyed, by Israel, in 2007.

In November 2019, the explosive potential of Syria transcends the boundaries of the Middle East, triggering ripple effects throughout the globe. Since 2010, it has been exacerbated by the Arab Tsunami, which has further destabilized the inherently unpredictable and violent Syria and the Middle East. Thus, the pro-Russia, pro-Iran, pro-North Korea and anti-US Damascus – which provided safe haven to Nazi war criminals – has become a global epicenter of proliferation of anti-US global terrorism and drug trafficking.

The endemically turbulent reality of Syria, in particular, and the Middle East, in general, highlight the self-destructive nature of the attempts to get Israel off the Golan Heights, the potential damage to US interests, and the prospective setback to the survival of the pro-US Arab regimes.

An agreement concluded with Damascus can be no less tenuous than the policies of the transient, rogue regime which signs them (would you buy a used car from Assad?!).

The politically-correct assumptions that “a state of peace was the best security arrangement…. the end of occupation would eliminate the motivation to wage wars, and Syria’s record of keeping its commitments was excellent…. (ibid. page 169)” clash with reality, ignoring the rogue and non-compliant nature of Syria as demonstrated by its systematic violation of agreements, domestically and regionally.

For example, since 1953, Syria has violated all water supply agreements with Jordan (from the Yarmouk River).  Notwithstanding the official state of peace with Jordan, Syria invaded Jordan in 1970, threatened to invade again in 1980 and 1989, and periodically supports anti-Hashemite subversion and terrorism.

For 30 years (1976-2006), Syria has violated a series of international and intra-Arab commitments to evacuate Lebanon, until it was forced to withdraw by domestic and international factors.

In 1973, Syria violated the 1967 armistice agreement with Israel, as well as the 1974 Disengagement Agreement with Israel, terrorizing Israel through Palestinian and Shiite terrorists in Jordan and Lebanon.

Israel’s control of the Golan Heights, just like its control of the mountain ridges of Judea and Samaria, has bolstered Israel’s posture of deterrence, extending the strategic hand of the US, with no need for additional US soldiers.  Israel’s retreat from the Golan Heights would erode its posture of deterrence, relegating the Jewish State from a national security producer/asset to a national security consumer/liability, to the detriment of the US.




Islam-Driven Terrorism - An Overview

אשליית המחבלים הבודדים

The Misperceived Jewish Settlements

האם ההתנחלויות הן מכשול לשלום?

Roots of anti-US Islamic terrorism

The roots of the December 6, 2019 murder of three US soldiers on the Pensacola Naval Air Station, by an Islamic Saudi terrorist, are independent of US policy in the Middle East and beyond, as are all previous cases of anti-US and anti-Western Islamic terrorism.

For instance, the launching of the anti-US terror stampede by Iran’s Ayatollahs was initiated in 1979, while the US supported the Ayatollahs ascension to power in Teheran and betrayed the Shah of Iran. Moreover, Erdogan’s intense support of Muslim Brotherhood terrorism, which has targeted the US and all pro-US Arab regimes, is aimed at advancing Erdogan’s vision to reestablish the Ottoman Empire and undermine US interests, in spite of Turkey’s NATO membership and the multi-year, mega-billion dollar US investment in Turkey’s national security since 1947.

Islamic rage and anti-Western terrorism are not driven by economic, social, or educational goals.  The roots of the Islamic rage against Western culture, in general, and the US – the leader of Western democracies – in particular, are nurtured by a worldview, which precedes the 1776 independence of the USA and the 1620 landing of the Early Pilgrims in New England.

According to Prof. Bernard Lewis, a world-leading expert on Islam and the Middle East, the anti-Western Islamic rage represents current edition of a clash of civilizations: “If the fighters in the war for Islam, the holy war ‘in the path of God,’ are fighting for God, it follows that their opponents are fighting against God…. The army is God’s army and the enemy is God’s enemy…. In the classical Islamic view, to which many Muslims are beginning to return, the world and all mankind are divided into two: the House of Islam… and the House of Unbelief, or the House of War, which it is the duty of Muslims ultimately to bring to Islam…. Muslims from an early date recognized a genuine rival – a competing world religion…. This was Christendom…. The struggle between these rival systems has now lasted for some 14 centuries.  It began with the advent of Islam, in the 7th century…. It has consisted of a long series of attacks and counterattacks, Jihads and crusades, conquests and re-conquests…. America had become the archenemy, the incarnation of evil, the diabolic opponent of all that is good, and specifically, for Muslims, of Islam….”

The roots of the religious, cultural, political, legal and military Islamic treatment of the “infidel,” especially the Dhimmi (the “infidel” under Islamic rule) derive from the Koran-based Pact of Umar, the second Caliph (following Muhammad), who has been a role model of Islamic leadership.  The Pact of Umar was extended to “infidels” in areas conquered by Muslims. It ensured the “protected” – inferior – status of “infidels,” who paid a special tax (Jizya – “safety tax”) and submitted themselves to the rule of Islam, which is, supposedly, the only legitimate religion, divinely-ordained to rule humanity.

Among the Pact’s list of restrictions on – and privileges of – the “protected” Dhimmi:

*Dhimmi structures (homes or churches) may not overtop Muslim structures;

*No erection of new monasteries, churches, convents or monks’ cells, and no repair of such houses of worships in Muslim quarters;

*No public display of crosses and Dhimmi books (Bibles) and symbols;

*No public manifestation of the Dhimmi religion;

*Only low-volume clappers may be used in churches;

*Showing respect toward Muslims, rising from seats when Muslims wish to sit;

*No possession of weapons;

*No Arabic inscriptions on Dhimmi seals;

*No imitation of Muslim garments and manner of speaking;

*Wearing the zunar (a wide belt or girdle), which distinguishes Dhimmis from Muslims. Christians – blue belts or turbans, Jews – yellow belts or turbans (the origin of the “yellow badge”);

*Striking a Muslim removes “protection”;

*A violation of these restrictions and privileges forfeits the status of “protected” Dhimmi, making one liable to penalties of sedition and contumacy.

The Pact of Umar serves as a major guideline for contemporary Islamic authorities, as documented by Egypt’s Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi, the spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood (the largest Islamic terror organization with political subsidiaries in the Middle East, Europe and the USA), who is considered the most influential Islamic scholar alive, whose sermons are broadcast live throughout the globe. Sheikh Qaradawi referred to the Pact of Umar as a cardinal Islamic legacy in his 2012 book “Jerusalem: the concern of every Muslim.”

In an October 2000 Cairo Arab Summit speech, Yasser Arafat stated that “the Palestinian struggle is in accordance with the Pact of Umar,” which was violated by Israel’s claim of sovereignty over Islamic holy sites in Jerusalem.

The text of the Pact of Umar is featured on a marble plate in the courtyard of the Umar Mosque in Jerusalem’s Christian Quarter, and is displayed in many Arab shops and during demonstrations in Judea and Samaria.

While the vast majority of Muslims are not terrorists, most Middle Eastern Muslim societies are non-democratic, ruled by rogue regimes, which suppress the voice of the majority, employing terrorism as a tool to advance their worldview.

Islamic terrorism has been a systematic feature of intra-Arab and intra-Muslim politics – domestically and regionally – since the 7th century. Its toll has dramatically exceeded the toll of anti-Western Islamic terrorism.

Western democracies cannot expect Islamic terrorism to be kinder toward the “infidel” than it has been toward fellow “believers.”



Islam-Driven Terrorism - An Overview

אשליית המחבלים הבודדים

The Misperceived Jewish Settlements

האם ההתנחלויות הן מכשול לשלום?