Most Popular

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?  

 

recent posts

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?  

 

latest videos

Play Video

The Abolitionist Movement inspired by Passover

Passover, in general, and the Biblical Exodus, in particular inspired the Abolitionist anti-slavery movement.
Play Video

Welcome to the rebranded EttingerReport website

Play Video

The US diplomatic option toward Iran is self-destructive

The US diplomatic option induced the transformation of Iran from “the American policeman of the Gulf” to “the largest anti-American venomous octopus in the world.”
Play Video

Palestinian state – is it consistent with US interests?

A Palestinian state west of the Jordan River would cause the demise of the pro-US Hashemite regime east of the River, transforming Jordan into a platform of anti-US Islamic terrorism with ripple effects into the Arabian Peninsula, threatening all pro-US, oil producing Arab regimes, a bonanza to US enemies and rivals and a setback to the US.

Newsletter

SCHEDULE LECTURES & INTERVIEWS

Demography

2024 artificially inflated Palestinian demography

Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, “Second Thought: a US-Israel Initiative”
March 25, 2024

Palestinian demographic numbers are highly-inflated, as documented by a study, which has audited the Palestinian data since 2004.  For example:

*500,000 Arabs, who have been away for over a year, are included in the 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 steadily due to births.

*Over 150,000 Arabs, who married Israeli Arabs are similarly doubly counted. The number expands steadily due to births.   

*A 413,000 net-emigration (since the 1997 first Palestinian census) is ignored by the Palestinian census, overlooking the annual net-emigration since 1950. A 23,445 net-emigration in 2022 and a 20,000 annual average in recent years have been documented by Israel’s Population and Migration Authority in all 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 2.9 births in 2022 (In Jordan – similar to Judea & Samaria), reflecting the sweeping urbanization, a growing female enrollment in higher education, rising marriage age and the rising use of contraceptives.

*The number of deaths is under-reported for political and financial reasons.

*The aforementioned artificial inflation of 1.7 million documents a population of 1.55 million Arabs in Judea and Samaria, not the official 3.25 million. In 2024: a 69% Jewish majority in the combined area of Judea, Samaria and pre-1967 Israel, benefitting from a tailwind of fertility and net-immigration, while Arab demography is westernized. In 1947 and 1897: a 39% and 9% Jewish minority.
No Arab demographic time bomb; but, a Jewish demographic momentum. More data in these articles and this short video.

Support Appreciated

Iran

Can Israel afford NOT to defy State Department pressure?

Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, “Second Thought: a US-Israel Initiative”
July 2, 2024

The current pressure on Israel

*Since Israel’s establishment in 1948 – which was ferociously opposed by the State Department, and tenaciously realized by Israel’s defiant Founding Father, David Ben Gurion – The State Department has systematically pressured Israel to act against its own assessment of its own national security requirements.  In fact, in most cases, Israel’s compliance with State Department pressure undermined the US’ own interests, while a defiant Israel spared a major setback to the US’ own interests.

*Since the horrific Hamas terrorism of October 7, 2023, the State Department – which subscribes to a worldview, contending that terrorism is driven by despair, and therefore should be confronted diplomatically and financially, not militarily – has intensified the pressure on Israel to refrain from militarily preempting Hezbollah, the chief proxy of Iran’s Ayatollahs.

*In addition, the State Department has pressured Israel to switch from fighting – to negotiating with – Hamas, a proxy of Iran’s Ayatollahs and a branch of the Moslem Brotherhood, which is the largest Sunni terror organization in the world.  The pressure has been exerted, notwithstanding Hezbollah’s and Hamas’ commitment to fanatic, Islamic anti-US ideologies – which transcend financial and diplomatic benefits – mandating the toppling of all pro-US Arab regimes, bringing the “infidel” West, and especially “the great American Satan” to submission. Moreover, Hezbollah’s and Hamas’ ideologies are committed to the uprooting of the “infidel” Jewish state – which is deemed by them as the Middle East beachhead of the US – as evidenced in Hezbollah’s and Hamas’ school curriculum, mosque sermons and systematic regional and global terrorism, which extends to Latin America and the US homeland.

*The State Department pressures Israel into another round of negotiation with Iran-controlled Hezbollah and Hamas, despite the fact that all previous agreements were violated, intensifying terrorism, transforming these two terror entities into the most fortified above-ground and under-ground terror states in the world, and paving the road to the October 7 massacre and the current Iran-orchestrated Hamas and Hezbollah wars on Israel.

More examples of State Department ill-advised pressure on Israel:

*In 2006, Israel bowed to State Department pressure, allowing the participation of Hamas in the Palestinian Authority election, which catapulted Hamas to unprecedented political stature in Gaza, Judea and Samaria. 

*In 2006, Israel complied with State Department pressure (assisted by Israeli clones of Foggy Bottom), ending its war against Hezbollah through UN Security Council Resolution 1701, rather than through the obliteration of Hezbollah’s military infrastructure. It solidified Hezbollah’s dominance in Lebanon and bolstered its role as a regional and global epicenter of terrorism and drug trafficking in the service of Iran’s Ayatollahs, as demonstrated by Hezbollah’s expanded foothold on US soil, and growing terror collaboration with the drug cartels of Mexico, Columbia, Bolivia, Ecuador and Brazil.

*In 2000, the State Department offered an $800 MN inducement (which was never realized) for Israel’s intent to evacuate South Lebanon, which elevated Hezbollah into a dominant stature in Lebanon, and ushered in a 150,000 missile strong Hezbollah terror machine, fortified by a most advanced underground tunnel network, which may exceed Hamas’ tunnel complex.

*Since the 1993 establishment of the PLO-controlled Palestinian Authority, the State Department has promoted annual foreign aid to the Palestinian Authority, while pressuring Israel to facilitate the establishment of a Palestinian state. This policy has been pursued irrespective of the core Palestinian ideology and its rogue daily conduct – which mandate the annihilation of Israel – as evidenced by the 1964 PLO charter, Palestinian hate education, mosque sermons, monthly allowances to families of terrorists and the Palestinian intra-Arab terrorism. Foggy Bottom ignores the potential impact of a Palestinian state west of the Jordan river: toppling the pro-US Hashemite regime east of the river, transforming Jordan into an epicenter of anti-US Islamic terrorism and destabilizing the pro-US Arabian Peninsula regimes – a setback to Western economy and national and homeland security.

*In 1981, the State Department pressured (and punished) Israel against bombing Iraq’s nuclear reactor.  Israel defied the pressure, which spared the US a potential nuclear confrontation in 1991, and snatched the pro-US Arab oil-producing regimes from the jaws of the anti-US Saddam Hussein.

*In 1973, the State Department pressured Israel, successfully, against preempting Egypt and Syria. Israel’s defiance of this pressure would have spared the region the costly war of October 1973.

*In 1967, the State Department pressured Israel against preempting Egypt and Syria.  Israel defied the pressure, devastated Egypt’s military force, which was involved in an attempt to topple all pro-US Arab oil-producing regimes, at a time when the US was heavily dependent upon Persian Gulf oil. Israel’s defiance spared the US a dramatic national security and economic blow.

Israel’s survival requires defiance of State Department pressure   

*Israeli compliance with State Department pressure would snatch Hamas from the jaws of obliteration and would be perceived – in the Middle East – as a dramatic victory for Islamic terrorism. It would escalate the lethal threat (from the Moslem Brotherhood and Iran’s Ayatollahs) to every pro-US Arab regime, such as Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Egypt and Jordan, and to US homeland security (as recently stated by the FBI Director).

*Israeli capitulation to State Department pressure would devastate Israel’s posture of deterrence – in the volcanic Middle East, where one’s posture of deterrence is a prerequisite for one’s survival – which could induce an Iranian ballistic missile offensive against Israel and an Iran-supported terror offensive by Hamas, Hezbollah, the Palestinian Authority and radical Israeli Arabs. 

*Israel’s succumbing to State Department pressure would reduce/eliminate the inducement of moderate-Arab regimes to expand normalization/peace with Israel, which was initiated by their high respect for Israel’s posture of deterrence, in the face of the mutual threats by Iran’s Ayatollahs and the Moslem Brotherhood, and against the backdrop of the slackened US and Western posture of deterrence.  

*Refraining from the obliteration of Hamas’ military infrastructure and Hezbollah’s terrorist presence in South Lebanon would preclude the return of most Israeli evacuees (150,000 – equal to 5 million evacuees in the US) to their homes in the areas adjacent to Gaza and Lebanon.

*Both the US’ and Israel’s national security benefit from Israel’s defiance of State Department pressure, which highlights Israeli preference of long term national security over short term diplomatic convenience.

Support Appreciated

Judea & Samaria

Secretary Blinken on settlements – vindicated by facts?

Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, “Second Thought: a US-Israel Initiative”
February 27, 2024

Secretary of State Antony Blinken represents conventional wisdom when claiming that “It’s been longstanding US policy… that new settlements are… inconsistent with international law.”

However, conventional wisdom is frequently demolished by the march of facts

For instance:

*According to Prof. Eugene Rostow, who was the co-author of the November 22, 1967 UN Security Council Resolution 242, served as Undersecretary of State and was the Dean of Yale University Law School: “Jews have the same right to settle in the West Bank as they have in Haifa.”

*According to UN Resolution 242, Israel is required to withdraw from territories, not the territories, nor from all the territories, but some of the territories, which included Judea and Samaria (the West Bank), East Jerusalem, the Gaza Strip, the Sinai Peninsula and the Golan Heights.  Moreover, according to Prof. Rostow, “resolutions calling for withdrawal from all the territories were defeated in the Security Council and the General Assembly…. Israel was not to be forced back to the fragile and vulnerable [9-15 mile-wide] lines… but to secure and recognized boundaries, agreed to by the parties…. In making peace with Egypt in 1979, Israel withdrew from the entire Sinai… [which amounts to] more than 90% of the territories occupied in 1967….”

*Former President of the International Court of Justice, Judge Stephen M. Schwebel, stated: “Between Israel, acting defensively in 1948 and 1967 (according to Article 52 of the UN Charter), on the one hand, and her Arab neighbors, acting aggressively in 1948 and 1967, on the other, Israel has better title in the territory of what was [British Mandate] Palestine…. It follows that modifications of the 1949 armistice lines among those States within former Palestinian territory are lawful…. [The 1967] Israeli conquest of territory was defensive rather than aggressive… [as] indicated by Egypt’s prior closure of the Straits of Tiran, blockade of the Israeli port of Eilat, and the amassing of [Egyptian] troops in Sinai, coupled with its ejection of the UN Emergency Force…[and] Jordan’s initiated hostilities against Israel…. The 1948 Arab invasion of the nascent State of Israel further demonstrated that Egypt’s seizure of the Gaza Strip, and Jordan’s seizure and subsequent annexation of the West Bank and the old city of Jerusalem, were unlawful….” 

*The legal status of Judea and Samaria is embedded in the following 4 authoritative, binding, internationally-ratified documents, which recognize the area for what it has been: the cradle of Jewish history, culture, language, aspirations and religion.

(I) The November 2, 1917 Balfour Declaration, issued by Britain, calling for “the establishment in Palestine (a synonym to the Land of Israel) of a national home for the Jewish people….”
(II) The April 24, 1920 resolution, by the post-First World War San Remo Peace Conference of the Allied Powers Supreme Council, entrusted both sides of the Jordan River to the British Mandate for Palestine, for the reestablishment of the Jewish Commonwealth: “the Mandatory will be responsible for putting into effect the [Balfour] declaration originally made on November 2, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.” It was one of over 20 Mandates (trusteeships) established following WW1, responsible for the boundaries of most Arab countries.
(III) The July 24, 1922 Mandate for Palestine was ratified by the Council of the League of Nations, entrusted Britain to establish a Jewish state in the entire area west of the Jordan River, as demonstrated by its 6th article: “[to] encourage… close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands….” The Mandate was dedicated exclusively to Jewish national rights, while guaranteeing the civic rights of all other religious and ethnic groups. On July 23, 1923, the Ottoman Empire signed the Treaty of Lausanne, which included the Mandate for Palestine.  
(IV) The October 24, 1945 Article 80 of the UN Charter incorporated the Mandate for Palestine into the UN Charter.  Accordingly, the UN or any other entity cannot transfer Jewish rights in Palestine – including immigration and settlement – to any other party. According to Article 80 of the UN Charter and the Mandate for Palestine, the 1967 war of self-defense returned Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria to its legal owner, the Jewish state.  Legally and geo-strategically the rules of “belligerent occupation” do not apply Israel’s presence in Judea and Samaria, since they are not “foreign territory,” and Jordan did not have a legitimate title over the West Bank.  Moreover, the rules of “belligerent occupation” do not apply in view of the 1994 Israel-Jordan Peace Treaty. The 1950-67 Jordanian occupation of Judea and Samaria violated international law and was recognized only by Britain and Pakistan.

*The 1949 4th Geneva Convention prohibits the forced transfer of populations to areas previously occupied by a legitimate sovereign power. However, Israel has not forced Jews to settle in Judea and Samaria, and Jordan’s sovereignty there was never legal.

*The November 29, 1947 UN General Assembly Partition Resolution 181 was a recommendation, lacking legal stature, superseded by the Mandate for Palestine. The 1949 Armistice (non-peace) Agreements between Israel and its neighbors delineated “non-territorial boundaries.”   

*The term “Palestine” was a Greek and then a Roman attempt (following the 135 CE Jewish rebellion) to eradicate Jews and Judaism from human memory. It substituted “Israel, Judea and Samaria” with “Palaestina,” a derivative of the Philistines, an arch enemy of the Jewish people, whose origin was not in Arabia, but in the Greek Aegian islands.    

*The aforementioned march of facts demonstrates that Secretary Blinken’s conventional wisdom on the Jewish settlements in Judea and Samaria is based on gross misperceptions and misrepresentations, which fuels infidelity to law, undermining the pursuit of peace.

*More on the legality of Jewish settlements in Judea and Samaria in this article by George Mason University Law School Prof. Eugene Kontrovich.

Support Appreciated

Jerusalem

United Jerusalem – a shared US-Israel legacy and interest

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).”

Support Appreciated

 

 

 

 

 

Jewish Holidays

Shavou’ot (Pentecost) guide for the perplexed, 2024

Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, “Second Thought: a US-Israel Initiative”
June 9, 2024

More on Jewish holidays: Smashwords, Amazon

1. Shavou’ot (June 11-12, 2024) and the Land of Israel

*Shavou’ot commemorates the receipt of the Torah (the Five Books of Moses). It is one of the three liberty-driven Jewish pilgrimages to Jerusalem:  Passover, Shavou’ot (Pentecost) and Sukkot (Tabernacles). It documents the critical linkage between Judaism, the Land of Israel and the Jewish people. These pilgrimages constitute central milestones in the formation of Jewish history and the 4,000-year-old Jewish roots in the Land of Israel.

*Shavou’ot is an historical, national, agricultural and a spiritual extension of Passover. Passover highlights the physical liberty from slavery in Egypt; Shavou’ot highlights spiritual liberty, embracing the values of the Five Books of Moses, the Ten Commandments and The Ethics of our Fathers (Pirkey Avot). Therefore, the eve of Shavou’ot is dedicated to an all-night study of Jewish values.

*Shavou’ot is also called the Holiday of the Harvest (Bikoorim in Hebrew), since it concludes the harvesting season, which starts during Passover.

*Shavou’ot commemorates the 40 years of the Exodus, which entailed tough challenges on the road to the Land of Israel, forging the state-of-mind of the Jewish people and the Jewish State. 

*Shavou’ot means “weeks” in Hebrew and its root is identical to the root of the Hebrew word for “vows” (שבע), which is the same word for “seven.” It documents the seven weeks between Passover (the Exodus) and Shavou’ot.

*Shavou’ot highlights the prerequisites for a secure Land of Israel: the willingness to sustain blood, sweat and tears; faith and principle-driven tenacity in the face of severe odds; the steeper the hurdle, the more critical is the mission; crises are opportunities in disguise.

2. Shavou’ot’s impact on the formation of the US

*The holiday of Shavou’ot commemorates the legacy of Moses, which had a significant impact on the Early Pilgrims and the Founding Fathers, and the formation of the US culture, civic life, the federal system (e.g., the Separation of Powers), the US Revolution, The Federalist Papers, the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights. 

  • *The Liberty Bell and the Abolitionist Movement were inspired by the Biblical concept of Jubilee – the role model of Biblical liberty – which is a cardinal component of the Mosaic legacy. The essence of the Jubilee is engraved on the Liberty Bell: “Proclaim liberty throughout all the land and unto all the inhabitants thereof (Leviticus 25:10).”
  • *The Liberty Bell was installed in Philadelphia in 1752, 50years following William Penn’s Charter of Privileges, and eventually inspiring the 50 States in the union. According to the Biblical Jubilee, all slaves must be released, and land must be returned to the original proprietors every 50 years. Shavou’ot is celebrated 50 days following Passover, and Pentecost – a derivative of the Greek word for 50 – is celebrated 50 days following Easter.  According to Judaism, there are 50 gates of wisdom, studied during the 50 days between Passover and Shavou’ot.
  • 3. The Scroll of Ruth (Honor thy mother in-law…)
  • Shavou’ot spotlights the Scroll of Ruth, the first of the five Biblical scrolls, which are studied during five Jewish holidays: Ruth (Shavou’ot), Song of Songs (Passover), Ecclesiastes (Sukkot/Tabernacles), Book of Lamentations (the Ninth day of Av), Esther (Purim).
  • *Ruth was a Moabite Princess, who joined the Jewish people, and became the great grandmother of King David. She was a role model of loyalty to her Jewish mother in-law. Ruth is exemplary of humility, gratitude, responsibility, reliability, faith, optimism and respect of fellow human beings. Ruth stuck by her mother-in-law, Naomi, during Naomi’s roughest time, when she lost her husband, Elimelech (a President of the Tribe of Judah), two sons and property.
  • *The stature of Ruth reflects the centrality of Biblical women: the four Matriarchs: Sarah, Rebecca, Leah and Rachel; Yocheved, Miriam and Tziporah, the mother, older sister and the wife of Moses; Deborah the Prophetess, Judge and military leader; Hannah, the mother of Samuel the Prophet; Queen Esther and Yael, who delivered the Jewish people from potential oblivion; etc.  
  • The Scroll of Ruth took place in the Judean Desert (in Judea and Samaria), the cradle of Jewish history, religion, culture, language and ethnicity.

4. The Ethics of the Fathers  (Pirkey Avot in Hebrew)

It is customary to study – from Passover through Shavou’ot – the six brief chapters of The Ethics of the Fathers, one of the 63 tractates of the Mishnah (the Oral Torah) – a compilation of common-sense values, ethical and moral teachings, which underline key inter-personal relationships. For example:

“Who is respected? He who respects other persons!”
“Who is a wise person? He who learns from all other persons!”
“Who is wealthy? He who is satisfied with his own share!”
“Who is a hero? He who controls his urge!”
“Talk sparsely and walk plenty;”
“If I am not for myself, who will be for me? If I am only for myself, what am I? If not now, when?”
“Don’t be consumed with the flask, but with its content.”
“Conditional love is tenuous; unconditional love is eternal.”
“Treat every person politely.”
“Jealousy, lust and the obsession with fame warp one’s mind.”

5. Jubilee/Constitution. Shavou’ot has seven names: The holiday of the Jubilee; the holiday of the harvest; the holiday of the giving of the Torah; Shavou’ot; the holiday of offerings; the Rally and the Assembly (Constitution).

More on Shavou’ot and additional Jewish holidays: Smashwords, Amazon

Support Appreciated

Golan

Secretary Blinken on settlements – vindicated by facts?

Islamic Terrorism

Can Israel afford NOT to defy State Department pressure?