The demographic threat- to the survival of the Jewish State – is real. However, it has been frequently accorded mythical dimensions, in an attempt to scare the Israeli public and policy-makers into sweeping and reckless concessions, back to the 1949 lines.
In 1900 the Demographic Genie was harnessed by the leading Jewish historian, Shimon Doubnov. He attempted to undermine Theodore Herzel’s vision of a sovereign Jewish State in Zion, rather promoting the notion of a Jewish autonomy in Europe. The renowned Doubnov presented a series of documented statistics, suggesting that Jewish and Arab birth rates, immigration and emigration determined that the number of Jews between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean would grow from 50,000 in 1900 to 500,000 in the year 2000: a negligible minority! Complex reality – producing a 5.5 million Jewish majority in Israel in 2000 – has demolished Doubnov’s seemingly authoritative assessments.
In 1948 the Demographic Threat was employed by Prof. Roberto Bacchi of the Hebrew University, one of the leading statisticians and demographers in the world. Bacchi attempted to persuade David Ben-Gurion to postpone the establishment of the Jewish State. According to Prof. Bacchi, demographic calculations, supposedly, determined that the 650,000 Jewish majority residing in the Jewish State in 1948 would become a minority by 1968. However, by 1968 there were 2.4 million Jews and 406,000 Arabs in Israel.
In 1967 Israel’s powerful Finance Minister, Pinchas Sapir, a relentless Dove, deployed Israel’s leading statisticians and demographers, in order to convince then Prime Minister Levy Eshkol to evacuate Gaza, Judea&Samaria. Sapir stated that by 1987 there would be an Arab majority between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean. Sapir’s projection was crashed against the rocks of reality: By 1987 Jewish majority shrunk by a mere 1%, declining from 63.35% in 1967 to 62.4% in 1987, before the arrival to Israel of one million Jews from the former Soviet Union.
In contrast to doomsday predictions, and in accordance with Israel’s Central Bureau of Statistics, the Jewish population (between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean) has grown 164 times between 1882 and 1990 (from 24,000 to 3,947,000), while the Arab population has grown 5.8 times (from 425,000 to 2,450,000). Indeed, in 1967, Prof. Bacchi admitted that birth rate was not equal (as popularly assumed) to population growth rate, which has been affected by many unpredictable variables.
Immigration (Aliya), emigration, war, terrorism, urbanization, employment opportunities in Israel and in other Middle Eastern countries, education and health services have had a critical impact on demography, as presented in the exhaustive research done by Yakov Feitelson and Avraham Shvout. For example, Arab emigration away from Judea&Samaria almost offset the high Arab birth rate between 1948 and 1967, with the Arab population in Judea&Samaria growing only by 30,000 during those 20 years! Arab emigration accelerated during the 1976-1980 economic petro-driven boom in the Persian Gulf. However, emigration slowed-down in the aftermath of the 1993 Oslo Accord, but has accelerated again since the eruption of the Palestinian War Of Terrorism in September 2000. Moreover, the drastic reduction of illiteracy in Gaza, Judea&Samaria has sharply reduced Arab birth rate there from 8 kids per family in 1970 to 7 in 1985 and 5.6 in 2002. The higher the education level of mothers, the lower the birth rate!
If the lethal demographic predictions and applications (withdrawal to the 1949 lines), concerning Gaza, Judea & Samaria, would have been realistic, one would have to apply them to the Galilee, the Negev and Jerusalem as well. Contrary to contemporary defeatists, the Founding Fathers of the Jewish State were not motivated by demography, nor were they deterred by demography. They were determined to control, rather than be controlled/constrained, by demography!
The Demographic Threat has been real since the advent of Zionism. But, one should not attempt to fend off the demographic threat by giving away geography and topography, which have been irreplaceable for Israel’s long-term security in the most violent and unpredictable region of the globe. While demography has been shifty and constantly defying conventions, Israel’s geography and topography have been fixed. One cannot lower the mountain ridges of Judea&Samaria, which overpower the coastal plane of Israel (just as the Golan Heights overpower the Upper Galilee), nor can one stretch Israel’s pre-1967 waistline beyond its 8-20 miles. However, Jewish demography can be expanded beyond doomsday expectations, securing a long-term significant Jewish majority through a systematic economic and education policy, while dealing a traumatic blow to the infrastructure of PLO/PA/Hamas terrorism.
CIA Director, George Tenet, has arrived to the region, in order to resuscitate the Oslo Process, by resurrecting the legitimacy of Arafat and by rebuilding the PLO/PA’s terror apparatus (otherwise called “security and police forces”). Tenet has been the intelligent, pleasant, and professional ally of Secretary Powell in the ideological battle with the Cheney-Rumsfeld school of thoughts. While Secretary Powell has considered Arafat and the Oslo Process as viable ingredients for peace, Cheney and Rumsfeld have concluded that the Oslo Process has undermined regional stability and US interests. They have considered Arafat and the PLO as the key to the problem rather than the solution. Tenet was drafted (1993) into the National Security Council, and then promoted to the post of Deputy CIA Director, by Sandy Berger, President Clinton’s National Security Advisor. It was Berger who was mostly responsible for Arafat becoming the most frequent foreign visitor to the White House during Clinton’s presidency. Prior to joining the Clinton Administration, Tenet was a most effective and a most respected Staff Director of the Senate Intelligence Committee, serving under Chairman David Boren (OK-D), a powerful legislator, who displayed a cold-indifferent attitude toward Israel. George Tenet, a loyal leader to his bureaucracy, is heading the CIA, which has been (since 1990) second only to the Dep’t of State in its appeasing policy toward Saddam, its hostility toward the Iraqi opposition and its criticism (since 1948) of Israel. In 1990, the CIA instilled fear in the Administration, wildly exaggerating the strength of Saddam’s military and the scope of expected US losses. In 1967, the CIA exerted a brutal pressure on Israel to refrain from the pre-emptive Six Day War. In 1948, the CIA joined the Dep’t of State in the opposition to the establishment of the Jewish State.
Never have the CIA and the Department of State encountered such an effective congressional/public opposition in their attempts to reinvent the PLO/PA and to coerce Israel into reckless sweeping concessions. However, Congressional leaders wonder whether recent Israeli military actions have revitalized the Israeli spirit, which led to the Six Days War, Jonathan (Entebbe) Operation and the 1981 bombing of Iraq’s nuclear reactor? Or, does the indecisive, incomplete and inconsistent manner of the current military actions demonstrate the re-entrenchment of the Oslo Process in the mind of Israel’s policy-makers? Congressional leaders wonder whether Israel comprehends the nature of the drastic changes in the US state of mind, which have occurred since 9/11, and their positive impact on US attitudes (especially on Capitol Hill) toward Israel?
An April 2002 Gallup Poll indicates that the degree of support for Israel among President Bush voters has reached an all time high. The level of support enjoyed by President Bush among registered Republicans, conservatives, the intellectual Right and Church circles is similar to the level of support enjoyed by Israel among the same groups. Such a unique phenomenon in US history has not escaped the attention of the President’s political advisors, who have been preoccupied with the November 2002 election, highlighting the 435 races for the House of Representatives, 34 Senate races and the 36 gubernatorial races in California, Texas, New York and (that of Jeb Bush) in Florida, etc. The poll suggests that 70% of the US public view Palestinian tactics as terrorism. An April poll conducted by CBS shows that 59% of the public has established symmetry between the US war on Islamic terrorism and Israel’s war on Palestinian terrorism.
VP Cheney stated on “Face the Nationa” (May 19, 2002) that suicidal bombers should not be allowed to set the agenda in the Mideast, lest they transfer that mode of operation into the US! Majority Whip, Tom DeLay, determined on May 22, 2002 that Arafat/PLO/PA constitute a threat to US interests, and that the US and Israel are fighting a common battle against terrorism – a battle over values and strategic interests. Majority Leader, Dick Armey, is currently leading an appeal to extradite Palestinian terrorists and the Syria Accountability Act. Both Armey and DeLay support 5-10 Congressional initiatives, which enhance war on Palestinian and Syrian terrorism, supporting Israel, exerting more pressure on the PLO/PA and limiting the maneuverability of the Dep’t of State on Capitol Hill. They lead the most hawkish Congress on US-Israel relations since 1948.
The current Congress has demonstrated suspicion, criticism and indifference toward the Oslo Process, PLO, Syria, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and other Arab regimes, the UN and toward peacekeeping and other multi-lateral initiatives. Congress has never regarded the Jewish State as a classic issue of foreign policy. Rather, it has considered Israel an external/domestic issue, representing SHARED interests, threats and values. A large marble plaque of the face of Moses is featured in the House of Representatives, and the official US and Congressional Seals include a Star of David, composed of thirteen stars. The Founding Fathers derived much of their inspiration from the Old Testament. Unlike the Knesset, the US Congress (Senate and House) is equal, in clout, to the Administration. The US Legislature is independent of the Executive, and dependent on constituents. Separation of Powers and the system of Checks and Balances have made Congress the most powerful legislature in the world. Congress, rather than the Administration, possesses the Power of the Purse, and could transform a popular president into a Lame Duck president, as evidenced by Bush #41.
The editors of the leading conservative weeklies in the USA, William Kristol and Rich Lowry of the Weekly Standard and The National Review, the editor of The New Republci, Martin Peretz (a supporter of Al Gore), along with former CIA Director and Secretary of Educaction, James Coolsey and William Bennett, 24 additional personalities of the US Center and Right sent a public letter to President Bush (April 3, 2002): “It can no longer be the policy of the US to urge, much less to pressure, Israel to continue negotiating with Arafat, any more than we would be willing to be pressured to negotiate with Osama Bin Laden or Mullah Omar. Nor should the US provide financial support to a Palestinian Authority that acts as a cog in the machine of Middle East terrorism, any more than we would approve of others providing assistance to Al-Qaeda…Israel’s fight against terrorism is our fight. Israel’s victory is an important part of our victory. For reasons both moral and strategic, we need to stand with Israel in its fight against terrorism… The US and Israel share a common enemy. We are both targets of what you have correctly called an ‘Axis of Evil.’ Israel is targeted in part because it is our friend, and in part because it is an island of liberal, democratic principles – American principles – in a sea of tyranny, intolerance and hatred… The terrorist network consists of Arafat and the leadership of the Palestinian Authority… In the war on terrorism, we cannot condemn some terrorists while claiming that other terrorists are potential partners for peace. We cannot help some allies under siege, while urging others to compromise their fundamental security… The present crisis stems not from the absence of a political way forward, but from terrorism…”
Never have the US public, Congress and critical elements in the Administration shared such deep empathy with Israel’s battle against Palestinian terrorism. Never has the terrorist threat, shared by the US and Israel, been as clear to Americans as it has been since 9/11. Never has the Dep’t of State faced such high hurdles in its attempts to force Israel into sweeping and unwarranted concessions. Never has the public image of Muslims, Arabs and Palestinians been so low in the US. Never has the US attitude toward the threat of terrorism been as lucid as it has been since 9/11: “In the battle between Right and Wrong, one should not be neutral, avoid preoccupation with the Gray area (which plays into the hands of terrorists), and focus on the destruction of the entire infrastructure which feeds terrorism.”
A senior US official told me a few weeks ago that “The lack of moral clarity in the battle against terrorist regimes has undermined Western battle against terrorism. The Bush Administration believes that one should deny terrorist regimes any legitimacy, as has been the case with regimes promoting genocide, slavery or piracy. Western democracies should not allow terrorists to change Western mode of living. Rather, Western democracies should devastate the terrorists’ mode of operations. One should not negotiate with terrorists. One should obliterate them.”
Would Israel leverage the post-9/11 mood in the USA, expanding mutually-beneficial strategic cooperation, bolstering its steadfastness in face of pressure, and strengthening Israel’s control of historic and strategic sacrosanct, which is fundamental to the long-term survival of any nation? Would Israel overcome temptations and pressure to concede areas, which constitute the cradle of its history and are indispensable for its long-term national security, in return for a short-term diplomatic and financial gratification?
The Oslo Architects, Department of State officials, the U.N., the New York Times, the Washington Post and human rights activists have heralded Dr. Sari Nusseibeh, a key PLO operative and the President of Al-Quds University, as a man of peace. Really?!
IN A JANUARY 21, 2001 LETTER TO SADDAM HUSSEIN, NUSSEIBEH WROTE: “In the name of Al-Quds University… allow me to express the admiration of the Palestinians for your honorable positions… You represent the vanguard of steadfastness…We, in Jerusalem, are inspired by you… We are proud to belong to a nation, which considers you a symbol of resistance and a symbol of its greatness… We are certain of your support…” Ten years earlier, DURING THE 1991 GULF WAR, NUSSEIBEH WAS ARRESTED BY ISRAEL’S POLICE FOR COLLABORATING WITH SADDAM, in an attempt to improve the accuracy of Saddam’s Squad missiles fired at Israel. According to the February 8, 1991 issue of Ha’aretz (dovish) daily, Yossi Sarid, a leader of Israel’s Left, told supporters that he would not attend any rally on behalf of Nusseibeh, “since the arrest was not politically-motivated.” Roni Milo, another dovish politician, then the Minister of Police, stated on February 7, 1991 (Ha’aretz) that “Nusseibeh performed severe acts of treachery and collaboration with the enemy.” Judge Vardi Zeiler, President of the Jerusalem County Court, confirmed (Ha’aretz, February 4, 1991) that “Nusseibeh’s arrest was on national and personal security grounds.” On January 31, 1991 Ha’aretz reported that Nusseibeh transferred hundreds of thousand dollars to Palestinian terrorist cells during the Gulf War. But, Sari Nusseibeh is a man of peace…
NUSSEIBEH’S PHILOSOPHY ON THE DISMANTLING OF ISRAEL was detailed in his own September 15, 2000 document, written in Arabic. He concluded that the “Algeria Model”, which calls for the military destruction of Israel, has portrayed Arabs as aggressors. Therefore, suggested Nusseibeh, it has to be replaced by the “South African Model”, featuring integration as a means of the eventual dismantling of the Jewish State. According to Nusseibeh, the “South African Model” – bolstered by a more positive balance of power – would then transform Israel from a Jewish State, dominated by “a Zionist racist regime,” to a Palestinian democratic secular state. That state would stretch from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean. He emphasized that the South African Model – which would facilitate the eventual return of the 1948 refugees to “their homes” – does NOT entail a ceasefire.
But, Sari Nusseibeh is a man of peace…
NUSSEIBEH’S AUTHENTIC POSITION ON THE “RIGHT OF RETURN” OF THE 1948 REFUGEES (A EUPHEMISM FOR THE ANNIHILATION OF ISRAEL) WAS EXPRESSED IN A MARCH 6, 2002 NEWS RELEASE to the Arab media: “Israel has to assume responsibility for the plight of the Palestinian refugees, and to recognize their natural right to return… The implementation of U.N. resolution 194 (December 11, 1948) mandates Israel to pay full compensation to the Palestinian refugees, and to discuss the return of those wishing to do so.” But, Sari Nusseibeh is a man of peace…
NUSSEIBEH’S ACCURATE POSITION ON HOMICIDE BOMBERS was exposed during a June 29, 2002 (“Al Jazirah”) TV discussion, in Arabic, with Khalid Mashal, a Hamas leader, and Umm Nidal, a proud mother of a homicide bomber, seated next to him. Following up on Mashal’s and Umm Nidal’s praising of terrorism, Nusseibeh contended: “Hats off to Umm Nidal, and to any warrior of Palestinian Jihad [Holy War]… Listening to Umm Nidal, I recall the Koranic verse stating that Paradise is at the feet of mothers… I do not wish to mix politics with the respect felt by each Palestinian toward Jihad warriors…” On June 21, 2002 Nusseibeh sponsored a full-page advertisement, published by PLO dailies (and grossly misrepresented by Western media), calling “to reconsider military action against civilians within the Green Line… since it does not advance the political goals of the Palestinian People…” He did NOT call for the end of homicide bombing; he limited the call for reconsideration to a certain geographic area; he did NOT urge reconsideration due to normative-moral reasons, but due to “pragmatic” reasons. But, Sari Nusseibeh is a man of peace…
IT WAS ARAFAT WHO APPOINTED NUSSEIBEH TO THE POST OF PRESIDENCY AT AL-QUDS UNIVERSITY IN JERUSALEM. Arafat has appointed each of the members of the board of the University, has supervised the activities of the university, has controlled and approved the budget of the Jerusalem-based university, which has been registered at the registry of the Palestinian Authority, in clear and striking violation of the Israeli law. An August 2001 document submitted to Arafat, by Nusseibeh, confirms that Al-Quds University has become – under the leadership of Sari Nusseibeh – the Jerusalem headquarters for the PLO/PA (Palestinian Authority), preoccupying itself with the organization of anti-Israel rallies, anti-Israel propaganda, illegal construction in order to “stop the Judaization of Jerusalem,” support of families of Palestinian terrorists, the repartitioning of Jerusalem and other illegal activities. But, Sari Nusseibeh is a man of peace…
NUSSEIBEH HAS BECOME A POLISHED EDITION OF THE LATE FEISAL HUSSEINI, who has been exposed by the Orient House Archive as a corrupt leader, a supporter of terrorism, instigator of violence, agitator of Israeli Arabs, violator of the law, who considered the Oslo Accord to be the Palestinian Trojan Horse, hauled by Israel into Jerusalem, thus causing the demise of the Jewish State. But, Sari Nusseibeh is supposedly a man of peace…
Israeli and Western supporters of Sari Nusseibeh applauded the Oslo Accords in 1993, heralded Arafat as a worthy Nobel Laureate in 1994, and fiercely opposed the closure of Feisal Husseini’s Orient House in 2001. Rather than learning from their own devastating errors of judgment, they have systematically repeated their mistakes, thus exacerbating an explosive reality, boosting the maneuverability of Palestinian terrorists and undermining the prospects for peace. Their continued support of Sari Nusseibeh and other leaders of the terrorist PLO/PA, who pose as men of peace, precludes the emergence of an alternative peaceful Palestinian leadership.
The demographic threat- to the survival of the Jewish State – is real. However, it has been frequently accorded mythical dimensions, in an attempt to scare the Israeli public and policy-makers into sweeping and reckless concessions, back to the 1949 lines.
In 1900 the Demographic Genie was harnessed by the leading Jewish historian, Shimon Doubnov. He attempted to undermine Theodore Herzel’s vision of a sovereign Jewish State in Zion, rather promoting the notion of a Jewish autonomy in Europe. The renowned Doubnov presented a series of documented statistics, suggesting that Jewish and Arab birth rates, immigration and emigration determined that the number of Jews between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean would grow from 50,000 in 1900 to 500,000 in the year 2000: a negligible minority! Complex reality – producing a 5.5 million Jewish majority in Israel in 2000 – has demolished Doubnov’s seemingly authoritative assessments.
In 1948 the Demographic Threat was employed by Prof. Roberto Bacchi of the Hebrew University, one of the leading statisticians and demographers in the world. Bacchi attempted to persuade David Ben-Gurion to postpone the establishment of the Jewish State. According to Prof. Bacchi, demographic calculations, supposedly, determined that the 650,000 Jewish majority residing in the Jewish State in 1948 would become a minority by 1968. However, by 1968 there were 2.4 million Jews and 406,000 Arabs in Israel.
In 1967 Israel’s powerful Finance Minister, Pinchas Sapir, a relentless Dove, deployed Israel’s leading statisticians and demographers, in order to convince then Prime Minister Levy Eshkol to evacuate Gaza, Judea&Samaria. Sapir stated that by 1987 there would be an Arab majority between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean. Sapir’s projection was crashed against the rocks of reality: By 1987 Jewish majority shrunk by a mere 1%, declining from 63.35% in 1967 to 62.4% in 1987, before the arrival to Israel of one million Jews from the former Soviet Union.
In contrast to doomsday predictions, and in accordance with Israel’s Central Bureau of Statistics, the Jewish population (between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean) has grown 164 times between 1882 and 1990 (from 24,000 to 3,947,000), while the Arab population has grown 5.8 times (from 425,000 to 2,450,000). Indeed, in 1967, Prof. Bacchi admitted that birth rate was not equal (as popularly assumed) to population growth rate, which has been affected by many unpredictable variables.
Immigration (Aliya), emigration, war, terrorism, urbanization, employment opportunities in Israel and in other Middle Eastern countries, education and health services have had a critical impact on demography, as presented in the exhaustive research done by Yakov Feitelson and Avraham Shvout. For example, Arab emigration away from Judea&Samaria almost offset the high Arab birth rate between 1948 and 1967, with the Arab population in Judea&Samaria growing only by 30,000 during those 20 years! Arab emigration accelerated during the 1976-1980 economic petro-driven boom in the Persian Gulf. However, emigration slowed-down in the aftermath of the 1993 Oslo Accord, but has accelerated again since the eruption of the Palestinian War Of Terrorism in September 2000. Moreover, the drastic reduction of illiteracy in Gaza, Judea&Samaria has sharply reduced Arab birth rate there from 8 kids per family in 1970 to 7 in 1985 and 5.6 in 2002. The higher the education level of mothers, the lower the birth rate!
If the lethal demographic predictions and applications (withdrawal to the 1949 lines), concerning Gaza, Judea & Samaria, would have been realistic, one would have to apply them to the Galilee, the Negev and Jerusalem as well. Contrary to contemporary defeatists, the Founding Fathers of the Jewish State were not motivated by demography, nor were they deterred by demography. They were determined to control, rather than be controlled/constrained, by demography!
The Demographic Threat has been real since the advent of Zionism. But, one should not attempt to fend off the demographic threat by giving away geography and topography, which have been irreplaceable for Israel’s long-term security in the most violent and unpredictable region of the globe. While demography has been shifty and constantly defying conventions, Israel’s geography and topography have been fixed. One cannot lower the mountain ridges of Judea&Samaria, which overpower the coastal plane of Israel (just as the Golan Heights overpower the Upper Galilee), nor can one stretch Israel’s pre-1967 waistline beyond its 8-20 miles. However, Jewish demography can be expanded beyond doomsday expectations, securing a long-term significant Jewish majority through a systematic economic and education policy, while dealing a traumatic blow to the infrastructure of PLO/PA/Hamas terrorism.
CIA Director, George Tenet, has arrived to the region, in order to resuscitate the Oslo Process, by resurrecting the legitimacy of Arafat and by rebuilding the PLO/PA’s terror apparatus (otherwise called “security and police forces”). Tenet has been the intelligent, pleasant, and professional ally of Secretary Powell in the ideological battle with the Cheney-Rumsfeld school of thoughts. While Secretary Powell has considered Arafat and the Oslo Process as viable ingredients for peace, Cheney and Rumsfeld have concluded that the Oslo Process has undermined regional stability and US interests. They have considered Arafat and the PLO as the key to the problem rather than the solution. Tenet was drafted (1993) into the National Security Council, and then promoted to the post of Deputy CIA Director, by Sandy Berger, President Clinton’s National Security Advisor. It was Berger who was mostly responsible for Arafat becoming the most frequent foreign visitor to the White House during Clinton’s presidency. Prior to joining the Clinton Administration, Tenet was a most effective and a most respected Staff Director of the Senate Intelligence Committee, serving under Chairman David Boren (OK-D), a powerful legislator, who displayed a cold-indifferent attitude toward Israel. George Tenet, a loyal leader to his bureaucracy, is heading the CIA, which has been (since 1990) second only to the Dep’t of State in its appeasing policy toward Saddam, its hostility toward the Iraqi opposition and its criticism (since 1948) of Israel. In 1990, the CIA instilled fear in the Administration, wildly exaggerating the strength of Saddam’s military and the scope of expected US losses. In 1967, the CIA exerted a brutal pressure on Israel to refrain from the pre-emptive Six Day War. In 1948, the CIA joined the Dep’t of State in the opposition to the establishment of the Jewish State.
Never have the CIA and the Department of State encountered such an effective congressional/public opposition in their attempts to reinvent the PLO/PA and to coerce Israel into reckless sweeping concessions. However, Congressional leaders wonder whether recent Israeli military actions have revitalized the Israeli spirit, which led to the Six Days War, Jonathan (Entebbe) Operation and the 1981 bombing of Iraq’s nuclear reactor? Or, does the indecisive, incomplete and inconsistent manner of the current military actions demonstrate the re-entrenchment of the Oslo Process in the mind of Israel’s policy-makers? Congressional leaders wonder whether Israel comprehends the nature of the drastic changes in the US state of mind, which have occurred since 9/11, and their positive impact on US attitudes (especially on Capitol Hill) toward Israel?
An April 2002 Gallup Poll indicates that the degree of support for Israel among President Bush voters has reached an all time high. The level of support enjoyed by President Bush among registered Republicans, conservatives, the intellectual Right and Church circles is similar to the level of support enjoyed by Israel among the same groups. Such a unique phenomenon in US history has not escaped the attention of the President’s political advisors, who have been preoccupied with the November 2002 election, highlighting the 435 races for the House of Representatives, 34 Senate races and the 36 gubernatorial races in California, Texas, New York and (that of Jeb Bush) in Florida, etc. The poll suggests that 70% of the US public view Palestinian tactics as terrorism. An April poll conducted by CBS shows that 59% of the public has established symmetry between the US war on Islamic terrorism and Israel’s war on Palestinian terrorism.
VP Cheney stated on “Face the Nationa” (May 19, 2002) that suicidal bombers should not be allowed to set the agenda in the Mideast, lest they transfer that mode of operation into the US! Majority Whip, Tom DeLay, determined on May 22, 2002 that Arafat/PLO/PA constitute a threat to US interests, and that the US and Israel are fighting a common battle against terrorism – a battle over values and strategic interests. Majority Leader, Dick Armey, is currently leading an appeal to extradite Palestinian terrorists and the Syria Accountability Act. Both Armey and DeLay support 5-10 Congressional initiatives, which enhance war on Palestinian and Syrian terrorism, supporting Israel, exerting more pressure on the PLO/PA and limiting the maneuverability of the Dep’t of State on Capitol Hill. They lead the most hawkish Congress on US-Israel relations since 1948.
The current Congress has demonstrated suspicion, criticism and indifference toward the Oslo Process, PLO, Syria, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and other Arab regimes, the UN and toward peacekeeping and other multi-lateral initiatives. Congress has never regarded the Jewish State as a classic issue of foreign policy. Rather, it has considered Israel an external/domestic issue, representing SHARED interests, threats and values. A large marble plaque of the face of Moses is featured in the House of Representatives, and the official US and Congressional Seals include a Star of David, composed of thirteen stars. The Founding Fathers derived much of their inspiration from the Old Testament. Unlike the Knesset, the US Congress (Senate and House) is equal, in clout, to the Administration. The US Legislature is independent of the Executive, and dependent on constituents. Separation of Powers and the system of Checks and Balances have made Congress the most powerful legislature in the world. Congress, rather than the Administration, possesses the Power of the Purse, and could transform a popular president into a Lame Duck president, as evidenced by Bush #41.
The editors of the leading conservative weeklies in the USA, William Kristol and Rich Lowry of the Weekly Standard and The National Review, the editor of The New Republci, Martin Peretz (a supporter of Al Gore), along with former CIA Director and Secretary of Educaction, James Coolsey and William Bennett, 24 additional personalities of the US Center and Right sent a public letter to President Bush (April 3, 2002): “It can no longer be the policy of the US to urge, much less to pressure, Israel to continue negotiating with Arafat, any more than we would be willing to be pressured to negotiate with Osama Bin Laden or Mullah Omar. Nor should the US provide financial support to a Palestinian Authority that acts as a cog in the machine of Middle East terrorism, any more than we would approve of others providing assistance to Al-Qaeda…Israel’s fight against terrorism is our fight. Israel’s victory is an important part of our victory. For reasons both moral and strategic, we need to stand with Israel in its fight against terrorism… The US and Israel share a common enemy. We are both targets of what you have correctly called an ‘Axis of Evil.’ Israel is targeted in part because it is our friend, and in part because it is an island of liberal, democratic principles – American principles – in a sea of tyranny, intolerance and hatred… The terrorist network consists of Arafat and the leadership of the Palestinian Authority… In the war on terrorism, we cannot condemn some terrorists while claiming that other terrorists are potential partners for peace. We cannot help some allies under siege, while urging others to compromise their fundamental security… The present crisis stems not from the absence of a political way forward, but from terrorism…”
Never have the US public, Congress and critical elements in the Administration shared such deep empathy with Israel’s battle against Palestinian terrorism. Never has the terrorist threat, shared by the US and Israel, been as clear to Americans as it has been since 9/11. Never has the Dep’t of State faced such high hurdles in its attempts to force Israel into sweeping and unwarranted concessions. Never has the public image of Muslims, Arabs and Palestinians been so low in the US. Never has the US attitude toward the threat of terrorism been as lucid as it has been since 9/11: “In the battle between Right and Wrong, one should not be neutral, avoid preoccupation with the Gray area (which plays into the hands of terrorists), and focus on the destruction of the entire infrastructure which feeds terrorism.”
A senior US official told me a few weeks ago that “The lack of moral clarity in the battle against terrorist regimes has undermined Western battle against terrorism. The Bush Administration believes that one should deny terrorist regimes any legitimacy, as has been the case with regimes promoting genocide, slavery or piracy. Western democracies should not allow terrorists to change Western mode of living. Rather, Western democracies should devastate the terrorists’ mode of operations. One should not negotiate with terrorists. One should obliterate them.”
Would Israel leverage the post-9/11 mood in the USA, expanding mutually-beneficial strategic cooperation, bolstering its steadfastness in face of pressure, and strengthening Israel’s control of historic and strategic sacrosanct, which is fundamental to the long-term survival of any nation? Would Israel overcome temptations and pressure to concede areas, which constitute the cradle of its history and are indispensable for its long-term national security, in return for a short-term diplomatic and financial gratification?
The Ettinger Report 2023 © All Rights Reserved
Official Palestinian demographic numbers are highly-inflated, as documented by a study, which has audited the Palestinian data since 2004:
*500,000 overseas residents, who have been away for over a year, are included in the Palestinian census, contrary to international regulations. 325,000 were included in the 1997 census, according to the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics, and 400,000 in 2005, according to the Palestinian Election Commission. The number grows steadily due to births.
*350,000 East Jerusalem Arabs are doubly-counted – by Israel and by the Palestinian Authority. The number grows daily due to births.
*Over 150,000 Arabs, who married Israeli Arabs are similarly doubly-counted. The number expands daily due to births.
*A 390,000 Arab net-emigration from Judea & Samaria is excluded from the Palestinian census, notwithstanding the annual net-emigration since 1950. For example, 15,466 in 2022, 26,357 – 2019, 15,173 – 2017 and 24,244 – 2014, as documented by Israel’s Population and Migration Authority (exits and entries) in all the land, air and sea international passages.
*A 32% artificial inflation of Palestinian births was documented by the World Bank (page 8, item 6) in a 2006 audit.
*The Judea & Samaria Arab fertility rate has been westernized: from 9 births per woman in the 1960s to 3.02 births in 2021, as documented by the CIA World Factbook. It reflects the sweeping urbanization, growing enrollment of women in higher education, rising marriage age and the use of contraceptives.
*The number of Arab deaths in Judea & Samaria has been under-reported (since the days of the British Mandate) for political and financial reasons.
*The aforementioned data documents 1.4 million Arabs in Judea and Samaria, when deducting the aforementioned documented-data from the official Palestinian number (3 million).
In 2023: a 69% Jewish majority in the combined area of Judea, Samaria and pre-1967 Israel. In 1947 and 1897: a 39% and 9% Jewish minority. In 2023, a 69% Jewish majority benefiting from fertility tailwind and net-immigration. Arab fertility is Westernized, and Arab net-emigration from Judea and Samaria. No Arab demographic time bomb. A Jewish demographic momentum.
More data in this article and this short video.
Support Appreciated
(more information available here by)
Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, “Second Thought: a US-Israel Initiative”
July 26, 2023
The British “Cambridge Middle East and North Africa Forum” reported that “On January 11, 2023, Iran’s naval commander announced that before the end of 2023, Iran would station warships in the Panama Canal [which facilitates 5% of the global maritime trade].”
According to the December 1823 Monroe Doctrine, any intervention by a foreign power in the political affairs of the American continent could be viewed as a potentially hostile act against the US. However, in November 2013, then Secretary of State John Kerry told the Organization of the American States that “the era of the Monroe Doctrine is over.”
Is Iran’s dramatic and rogue re-entrenchment in Latin America underscoring the relevance/irrelevance of the Monroe Doctrine? Does it vindicate John Kerry’s assessment?
Latin America and the Ayatollahs’ anti-US strategy
*Since the February 1979 eruption of the Islamic Revolution in Iran, the Ayatollahs have leveraged the US diplomatic option (toward Iran’s Ayatollahs) and the accompanying mega-billion dollar benefit (to Iran’s Ayatollahs) as a major engine, bolstering their anti-US rogue policy, regionally and globally.
*The threat posed to the US by Iran’s Ayatollahs is not limited to the survival of the pro-US Arab regimes in the Middle East and the stability of Central Asia, Europe and North and West Africa. The threat extends to Latin America up to the US-Mexico border. The Ayatollahs poke the US in the eye in a most vulnerable geo-strategic area, which directly impacts the US homeland.
*Iran’s penetration of Latin America – the backyard of the US and its soft belly – has been a top national security priority of the Ayatollahs since assuming power in February 1979. The Ayatollahs’ re-entrenchment in Latin America has been assisted by their Hezbollah proxy, driven by their 1,400-year-old mega imperialistic goal (toppling all “apostate” Sunni regimes and bringing the “infidel” West to submission), which requires overcoming the mega hurdle (“the Great American Satan”), the development of mega military capabilities (conventional, ballistic and nuclear) and the adoption of an apocalyptic state of mind.
*Iran’s penetration of Latin America has been based on the anti-U.S. agenda of most Latin American governments, which has transcended the striking ideological and religious differences between the anti-US, socialist, secular Latin American governments and the fanatic Shiite Ayatollahs. The overriding joint aim has been to erode the strategic stature of the US in its own backyard, and subsequently (as far as the Ayatollahs are concerned) in the US homeland, through a network of sleeper cells.
*Iran’s penetration of Latin America has been a hydra-like multi-faceted structure, focusing on the lawless tri-border-areas of Argentina-Paraguay-Brazil and Chile-Peru-Bolivia, as well as Venezuela, Cuba and Nicaragua and all other anti-US governments. It involves a growing collaboration with all regional terror organizations, the leading drug cartels of Mexico, Columbia, Brazil and Bolivia, global money launderers and every anti-US government in Latin America. Moreover, the Ayatollahs have established terror-training camps in Latin America, as well as sophisticated media facilities and cultural/proselytizing centers. They have exported to the region ballistic technologies, predator unmanned aerial vehicles and tunnel construction equipment.
Latin America and the Ayatollahs’ anti-US tactics
*According to the Cambridge MENAF (ibid), the Brazilian navy reported that two Iranian warships have been granted permission to dock in Brazil. Experts speculate that the vessels could reach the Panama Canal as early as mid-February 2024. The presence of Iranian warships in the Panama Canal threatens not only Western security, but the safety and reliability of one of the world’s key trade routes.
“The gradual permeation of Iranian influence across Latin America over the past 40 years is a significant phenomenon, which has paved the way for this recent strategic move by Teheran. Attention is concentrated toward Iran’s criminal and terrorist network [in Latin America] via Hezbollah operations….”
*Wikileaks cables claim that Secret US diplomatic reports alleged that Iranian engineers have visited Venezuela searching for uranium deposits…. in exchange for assistance in their own nuclear programs. The Chile-based bnAmericas reported that “Iranian experts with knowledge of the most uranium-rich areas in Venezuela are allegedly extracting the mineral under the guise of mining and tractor assembly companies…. Planes are prohibited from flying over the location of the plant…. The Iranian state-owned Impasco, which has a gold mining concession in Venezuela, is linked to Iran’s nuclear program. Its Venezuela mine is located in one of the most uranium-rich areas, which has no-fly restrictions….”
*According to the June 2022 Iran-Venezuela 20-year-agreement (military, oil, economy), Iran received the title over one million hectares of Venezuelan land, which could be employed for the testing of advanced Iranian ballistic systems. Similar agreements were signed by Iran with Cuba, Nicaragua and Bolivia.
*Venezuela has issued fraudulent passports, national IDs and birth certificates to Iranian officials and terrorists, avoiding international sanctions and blunting counter-terrorism measures. The Iran-Venezuela air traffic has grown significantly, although tourism activity has been marginal….
*Since the early 1980s, Iran’s Ayatollahs have leveraged the networking of Hezbollah terrorists in the very large and successful Lebanese communities in Latin America (and West Africa). Hezbollah’s narcotrafficking, money laundering, crime and terror infrastructure have yielded billions of dollars to both Hezbollah and Iran. The US Department of Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) estimates that Hezbollah earns about $2bn annually through illegal drug trafficking and weapon proliferation in the Tri Border Area of Argentina, Paraguay and Brazil, expanding ties with the most violent drug cartels in Latin America, including Mexico’s Los Zetas, Colombia’s FARC and Brazil’s PCC, impacting drug trafficking, crime and terror in Europe, Africa and the Middle East. Iran has intensified its Hezbollah-assisted intelligence missions against US and Israeli targets in Latin America and beyond. Hezbollah has leveraged its stronghold, the Bekaa Valley, in Lebanon, which is one of the largest opium and hashish producing areas in the world.
The bottom line
The track record of the Ayatollahs, including the surge of their rogue presence in Latin America, documents the self-destructive nature of the diplomatic option toward Iran – which has served as a most effective tailwind of the Ayatollahs’ anti US agenda – and the self-defeating assumptions that the Ayatollahs are amenable to good-faith negotiation, peaceful-coexistence with their Sunni Arab neighbors and the abandonment of their 1,400-year-old fanatical imperialistic vision.
Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, “Second Thought: a US-Israel Initiative”
September 15, 2023, https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/377022
*The platform of an Israel-Saudi accord is the volcanic, violent and unpredictably tenuous Middle East, not Western Europe or No. America;
*Saudi Arabia is driven by Saudi – not Palestinian – interests;
*Unlike the State Department, Saudi Arabia accords much weight to the rogue Palestinian track record in the intra-Arab arena, and therefore limits its support of the proposed Palestinian state to (mostly) talk, not to walk; *An accord with Saudi Arabia – in the shifty, tenuous Middle East – is not a major component of Israel’s national security. On the other hand, Israel’s control of the mountain ridges of Judea & Samaria is a prerequisite for Israel’s survival in the inherently turbulent, intolerantly violent Middle East, which features tenuous regimes, and therefore tenuous policies and accords.
US departure from the recognition of a United Jerusalem as the exclusive capital of the Jewish State, and the site of the US Embassy to Israel, would be consistent with the track record of the State Department, which has been systematically wrong on Middle East issues, such as its opposition to the establishment of the Jewish State; stabbing the back of the pro-US Shah of Iran and Mubarak of Egypt, and pressuring the pro-US Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, while courting the anti-US Ayatollahs of Iran, Saddam Hussein, Arafat, the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, the Palestinian Authority and the Houthis of Yemen; transforming Libya into a platform of global Islamic terrorism and civil wars; etc..
However, such departure would violate US law, defy a 3,000 year old reality – documented by a litany of archeological sites and a multitude of documents from Biblical time until today – spurn US history and geography, and undermine US national and homeland security.
United Jerusalem and the US law
Establishing a US Consulate General in Jerusalem – which would be a de facto US Embassy to the Palestinian Authority – would violate the Jerusalem Embassy Act, which became US law on November 8, 1995 with substantially more than a veto-override majority on Capitol Hill.
According to the Jerusalem Embassy Act, which enjoys massive support among the US population and, therefore, in both chambers of Congress:
“Jerusalem should remain an undivided city in which the rights of every ethnic and religious group are protected….
“Jerusalem should be recognized as the capital of the state of Israel; and the United States Embassy in Israel should be established in Jerusalem….
“In 1990, Congress unanimously adopted Senate Concurrent Resolution 106, which declares that Congress ‘strongly believes that Jerusalem must remain an undivided city in which the rights of every ethnic and religious group are protected….’
“In 1992, the United States Senate and House of Representatives unanimously adopted Senate Concurrent Resolution 113… to commemorate the 25th anniversary of the reunification of Jerusalem, and reaffirming Congressional sentiment that Jerusalem must remain an undivided city….
“In 1996, the state of Israel will celebrate the 3,000th anniversary of the Jewish presence in Jerusalem since King David’s entry….
“The term ‘United States Embassy’ means the offices of the United States diplomatic mission and the residence of the United States chief of mission.”
United Jerusalem and the legacy of the Founding Fathers
The US Early Pilgrims and Founding Fathers were inspired – in their unification of the 13 colonies – by King David’s unification of the 12 Jewish tribes into a united political entity, and establishing Jerusalem as the capital city, which did not belong to any of the tribes (hence, Washington, DC does not belong to any state). King David entered Jerusalem 3,000 years before modern day US presidents entered the White House and 2,755 years before the US gained its independence.
The impact of Jerusalem on the US founders of the Federalist Papers, the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the Federalist system and overall civic life is reflected by the existence, in the US, of 18 Jerusalems (4 in Maryland; 2 in Vermont, Georgia and New York; and 1 in Ohio, Michigan, Arkansas, North Carolina, Alabama, Utah, Rhode Island and Tennessee), 32 Salems (the original Biblical name of Jerusalem) and many Zions (a Biblical synonym for Jerusalem and the Land of Israel). Moreover, in the US there are thousands of cities, towns, mountains, cliffs, deserts, national parks and streets bearing Biblical names.
The Jerusalem reality and US interests
Recognizing the Jerusalem reality and adherence to the 1995 Jerusalem Embassy Act – and the subsequent recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, the site of the US Embassy to Israel – bolstered the US posture of deterrence in defiance of Arab/Islamic pressure and threats.
Contrary to the doomsday assessments by the State Department and the “elite” US media – which have been wrong on most Middle East issues – the May 2018 implementation of the 1995 law did not intensify Palestinian, Arab and Islamic terrorism. State Department “wise men” were equally wrong when they warned that Israel’s 1967 reunification of Jerusalem would ignite a worldwide anti-Israel and anti-US Islamic volcanic eruption.
Adherence to the 1995 law distinguishes the US President, Congress and most Americans from the state of mind of rogue regimes and terror organizations, the anti-US UN, the vacillating Europe, and the cosmopolitan worldview of the State Department, which has systematically played-down the US’ unilateral, independent and (sometimes) defiant national security action.
On the other hand, US procrastination on the implementation of the 1995 law – by Presidents Clinton, Bush and Obama – eroded the US posture of deterrence, since it was rightly perceived by the world as appeasement in the face of pressure and threats from Arab/Muslim regimes and terrorists. As expected, it radicalized Arab expectations and demands, failed to advance the cause of Israel-Arab peace, fueled Islamic terrorism, and severely undermined US national and homeland security. For example, blowing up the US Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania and murdering 224 persons in August 1998; blowing up the USS Cole destroyer in the port of Aden and murdering 17 US sailors in October 2000; the 9/11 Twin Towers massacre, etc.
Jerusalem and Israel’s defiance of US pressure
In 1949, President Truman followed Secretary of State Marshall’s policy, pressuring Israel to refrain from annexing West Jerusalem and to accept the internationalization of the ancient capital of the Jewish people.
in 1950, in defiance of brutal US and global pressure to internationalize Jerusalem, Prime Minister David Ben Gurion reacted constructively by proclaiming Jerusalem the capital of the Jewish State, relocating government agencies from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, and settling tens of thousands of Olim (Jewish immigrants to Israel) in Jerusalem. He upgraded the transportation infrastructure to Jerusalem, erected new Jewish neighborhoods along the 1949 cease fire lines in Jerusalem, and provided the city land reserves for long-term growth.
In 1953, Ben Gurion rebuffed President Eisenhower’s pressure – inspired by Secretary of State Dulles – to refrain from relocating Israel’s Foreign Ministry from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.
In 1967, President Johnson followed the advice of Secretary of State Rusk – who opposed Israel’s 1948 Declaration of Independence – highlighting the international status of Jerusalem, and warned Israel against the reunification of Jerusalem and construction in its eastern section. Prime Minister Levi Eshkol adopted Ben Gurion’s statesmanship, fended off the US pressure, reunited Jerusalem, built the first Jerusalem neighborhood beyond the 1949 ceasefire lines, Ramat Eshkol, in addition to the first wave of Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria (West Bank), the Jordan Valley and the Golan Heights.
In 1970, President Nixon collaborated with Secretary of State Rogers, attempting to repartition Jerusalem, pressuring Israel to relinquish control of Jerusalem’s Holy Basin, and to stop Israel’s plans to construct additional neighborhoods in eastern Jerusalem. However, Prime Minister Golda Meir refused to rescind the reunification of Jerusalem, and proceeded to lay the foundation for additional Jerusalem neighborhoods beyond the 1949 ceasefire lines: Gilo, Ramot Alon, French Hill and Neve’ Yaakov, currently home to 150,000 people.
In 1977-1992, Prime Ministers Menachem Begin and Yitzhak Shamir defied US and global pressure, expanding construction in Jerusalem, sending a clear message: “Jerusalem is the exclusive and non-negotiable capital of Israel!”
“[In 1978], at the very end of [Prime Minister Begin’s] successful Camp David talks with President Jimmy Carter and President Anwar Sadat, literally minutes before the signing ceremony, the American president had approached [Begin] with ‘Just one final formal item.’ Sadat, said the president, was asking that Begin put his signature to a simple letter committing him to place Jerusalem on the negotiating table of the final peace accord. ‘I refused to accept the letter, let alone sign it,’ rumbled Begin. ‘If I forgot thee O Jerusalem, let my right hand forget its cunning,’ said [Begin] to the president of the United States of America, ‘and may my tongue cleave to my mouth’ (The Prime Ministers – An Intimate Portrait of Leaders of Israel, 2010)”
In 2021, Prime Minister Bennett should follow in the footsteps of Israel’s Founding Father, Ben Gurion, who stated: “Jerusalem is equal to the whole of the Land of Israel. Jerusalem is not just a central Jewish settlement. Jerusalem is an invaluable global historical symbol. The Jewish People and the entire world shall judge us in accordance with our steadfastness on Jerusalem (“We and Our Neighbors,” p. 175. 1929).”
Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, “Second Thought: a US-Israel initiative”
Based on ancient Jewish sages, September 26, 2023
More on Jewish holidays: Smashwords, Amazon
1. Sukkot, the Feast of Tabernacles (September 30 – October 7, 2023) derives its name from the first stop of the Exodus – the town of Sukkot – as documented in Exodus 13:20-22 and Numbers 33:3-5. Sukkot was also the name of Jacob’s first stop west of the Jordan River, upon returning to the Land of Israel from his 20 years of work for Laban in Aram (Genesis 33:17).
2. Sukkot is a Jewish national liberation holiday, commemorating the Biblical Exodus, and the transition of the Jewish people from bondage in Egypt to liberty, the ongoing Jewish ingathering to the Land of Israel, and sovereignty in the Land of Israel, which inspired the US Founding Fathers and the Abolitionist Movement.
The construction of the Holy Tabernacle, during the Exodus, was launched on the first day of Sukkot (full moon).
3. Sukkot is the 3rd 3,300-year-old Jewish pilgrimage holiday (following Passover and Shavou’ot/Pentecost), highlighting faith, reality-based-optimism, can-do mentality and the defiance of odds. It is also the 3rd major Jewish holiday – following Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur – in the month of Tishrei, the holiest Jewish month. According to Judaism, 3 represents divine wisdom, stability and peace. In addition, the 3rd day of the Creation was blessed twice; God appeared on Mt. Sinai 3 days after Moses’ ascension of the mountain; there are 3 parts to the Bible (the Torah, Prophets and Writings); the 3 Jewish Patriarchs; the 3 annual pilgrimages to Jerusalem, etc. 3 is the total sum of the basic odd (1) and even (2) numbers, symbolizing strength: “a three-strand cord is not quickly broken (Ecclesiastes 4:12).
4. Sukkot underscores the gradual transition from the spiritual state-of-mind during Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur to the mundane of the rest of the year, and from religious tenets of Judaism to the formation of the national, historic and geographical Jewish identity.
5. The 7 days of Sukkot – which is celebrated in the 7th Jewish month, Tishrei – are dedicated to 7 supreme guests-in-spirit and notable care-takers (Ushpizin in Aramaic and Hebrew): Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, Aaron and David. They were endowed with faith, reality-based-optimism, humility, magnanimity, principle-driven leadership, compassion, tenacity in the face of daunting odds and peace-through-strength.
6. Sukkot features the following four species (Leviticus 23:39-41): 1 citron (representing King David, the author of Psalms), 1 palm branch (representing Joseph), 3 myrtle branches (representing the three Patriarchs) and 2 willow branches (representing Moses and Aharon, the role models of humility), which are bonded together, representing the unity-through-diversity and strength-through-unity.
They embody four leadership prerequisites: a solid backbone (palm branch), humility (willow), a compassionate heart (citron) and penetrating eyes (myrtle).
These species also represent the agricultural regions of the Land of Israel: the southern Negev and Arava (palm); the slopes of the northern Golan Heights, Upper Galilee and Mt. Carmel (myrtle); the streams of the central mountains of Judea and Samaria, including Jerusalem (willow); and the western coastal plain (citron).
7. Traditionally, Sukkot is dedicated to the study of the Biblical Scroll of Ecclesiastes (Kohelet, קהלת in Hebrew, which was one of King Solomon’s names), written by King Solomon, which highlights humility, morality, patience, learning from past mistakes, commemoration and historical perspective, family, friendship, long-term thinking, proper timing, realism and knowledge.
The late Senator Robert Byrd (D-WV), the longest serving US Senator, often quoted Biblical verses, in general, and Ecclesiastes, in particular. For example, on November 7, 2008, upon retirement from the chairmanship of the Senate Appropriations Committee, he stated: “’To everything there is a season and a time for every purpose under heaven.’ Those Biblical words from Ecclesiastes 3:1 express my feelings about this particular time in my life.” On September 9, 1998, Senator Byrd made the following Senate floor remarks on the Lewinsky affair: “As the book of Ecclesiastes plainly tells us, ‘There is no new thing under the sun.’ Time seems to be turning backwards in its flight. And, many of the mistakes that President Nixon made are being made all over again.”
8. During the holiday of Sukkot, it is customary to highlight humility by experiencing a seven-day-relocation from one’s permanent dwelling to the temporary, humble, wooden booth (Sukkah in Hebrew) – which sheltered the people of Israel during the Exodus.
A new 8-minute-video: YouTube, Facebook
Synopsis:
*Israel’s control of the topographically-dominant mountain ridges of the Golan Heights, Judea and Samaria has enhanced Israel’s posture of deterrence, constraining regional violence, transforming Israel into a unique force-multiplier for the US.
*Top Jordanian military officers warned that a Palestinian state west of the Jordan River would doom the pro-US Hashemite regime east of the River, transforming Jordan into a non-controllable terrorist heaven, generating an anti-US domino scenario in the Arabian Peninsula.
*Israel’s control of Judea and Samaria has eliminated much of the threat (to Jordan) of Judea and Samaria-based Palestinian terrorism.
*Israel’s posture of deterrence emboldens Jordan in the face of domestic and regional threats, sparing the US the need to deploy its own troops, in order to avoid an economic and national security setback.
*The proposed Palestinian state would become the Palestinian straw that would break the pro-US Hashemite back.
*The Palestinian track record of the last 100 years suggests that the proposed Palestinian state would be a rogue entity, adding fuel to the Middle East fire, undermining US interests.
