Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, “Second Thought: a US-Israel Initiative”
October 2, 2026

*The late King Hussein recognized Jordan’s susceptibility to a repeat of the deadly “Black September,” due to its intrinsic demographic vulnerabilities, such as the restive Palestinian majority time bomb, which traditionally collaborates with the subversive/terroristic Muslim Brotherhood, while the Bedouin tribal society is inherently fragmented. Therefore, the King warned Western and Israeli policy makers that a Palestinian state west of the Jordan River would doom the pro-Western Hashemite regime east of the river.  Moreover, a Palestinian state would deny Jordan the defensive benefits of the Israel’s full control of the mountain ridges of Judea and Samaria, that played a key role in aborting the “Black September” Palestinian assault.  In fact, a more volcanic “Black September” could reoccur due to the presence of 1-2 million Syrian refugees in northern Jordan (some of them terrorists and drug traffickers), Iran-inspired terrorist activities in Jordan and the neighboring Iraq, and the potent presence in Jordan of Hamas terrorists, who are inspired by the October 2023 horrific terror offensive against Israel, and Western appeasement of Hamas, in particular, and Palestinian terrorism, in general.  

*Western policy makers’ infatuation with the proposed Palestinian state has been driven by Western preoccupation with the moderate Palestinian talk, which is aimed at Western target audiences.  On the other hand, Arabs have been preoccupied with the rogue Palestinian intra-Arab walk, which has led the Arabs to display indifference-to-rejection toward the proposed Palestinian state.  

*Since 1948, Arab countries have never flexed military, financial or political muscles on behalf of the proposed Palestinian state. No Arab war against Israel was launched due to the Palestinian issue, and never did Arabs intervene militarily during Israel-Palestinian wars.  In fact, in November 2023, an Iranian-Algerian-Palestinian proposition to end all diplomatic-economic-defense-tourist ties with Israel was rejected by a joint summit of The Arab League and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation.

*While the Arab talk has been overwhelmingly supportive of the proposed Palestinian state, the Arab walk has systematically refrained from – and occasionally opposed – the establishment of a Palestinian state.

*Arabs do not sacrifice their interests on the altar of a proposed Palestinian state, which they consider as an existential threat.  They are fully aware of the 55-year-rogue Palestinian intra-Arab track record, terrorizing their host Arab governments in Egypt (1950s), Syria (1960s), Jordan (1970), Lebanon (1970-1982) and Kuwait (1990).  This track record has positioned Palestinians as the role-model of intra-Arab subversion, terrorism, treachery and ingratitude.  

*The Arabs are, also, aware of the Palestinians’ collaboration with – and training of – terrorist organizations in Asia, Africa, Europe and Latin America, as well as their relationship with radically ruthless anti-Western regimes, such as Nazi Germany, the Soviet Bloc (including ideological and operational links with the Soviet KGB and the East German Stasi), Ayatollah Khomeini, North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela, China and Russia.

*Western policy makers have contended that Palestinian terror has been driven by despair, and therefore should be dealt with diplomatically and financially – not militarily – and bolstered by appeasement and concessions. However, Middle East reality documents that Palestinian terror has been driven by a fanatical ideology (e.g., Fatah’s and PLO’s 1959 and 1964 Charters – before the 1967 War), which mandates the total uprooting – not size reduction – of the “illegal Zionist entity.”

*Western policy makers have been obsessed with speculations about a reformed Palestinian state. In contrast, Arab policy makers have been preoccupied with the well-documented Palestinian rogue track record.  They are convinced that assessments of the nature of the proposed Palestinian state – and its geo strategic impact – should be based on the well-documented track record rather than well-intentioned speculations.

*Therefore, Jordan and Egypt did their utmost to prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state, when they fully controlled Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) and Gaza in 1949-1967.  Moreover, in 1948, the Arab League established the “All Palestine Government,” downgrading it to a “Palestinian Desk” in 1950-52, and eliminating it in 1955.

*In 1970, Jordan’s Prime Minister Wasfi al-Tal and Commander of the Armed Forces Habis al-Majali stated that Palestinian ideology was fundamentally incompatible with Jordan’s national sovereignty.  In 1974, King Hussein warned Western policy makers that a Palestinian state in the West Bank would leverage Jordan’s demographic reality (e.g., a Palestinian majority) and constitute a real and clear existential threat to the Hashemite regime. In 1993, the King told the Head of Israel’s Mossad that the Oslo Accord could lead to a Palestinian state west of the Jordan River, an irredentist springboard, destabilizing Jordan – a death sentence to Jordan’s pro-Western Hashemite regime east of the Jordan River.  That warning was echoed by Jordan’s military Chief-of-Staff and Head of Military Intelligence during the October 1994 signing of the Israel-Jordan peace treaty.

*The toppling of Jordan’s Hashemite regime would transform Jordan into another platform of anti-Western Islamic terrorism, involving the Muslim Brotherhood, Palestinian terror organizations, proxies of the Ayatollah regime, ISIS, etc.  This terrorism would not be confined to the area of Jordan, but would spread southward, triggering existential threats to the pro-Western Arab regimes in Egypt (via the terror-ridden Sinai Peninsula), Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain and Kuwait, further destabilizing the Middle East – the epicenter of 9/11-like anti-Western Islamic terrorism, the location of 48% of global oil reserves and a critical intersection of trade sea lanes between the Far East and Western Europe.

*The toppling of the Hashemite regime would advance a key strategic aspiration of the Ayatollah regime to establish contiguous land access to Israel and to the Mediterranean (via Gaza), while encircling Saudi Arabia.

*A Palestinian statewould welcome cooperation with China and Russia, which would include intelligence stations and the funding of – and access to – an upgraded port in the Gaza Strip, bolstering their stature in the western Mediterranean, as Middle East powerbrokers at the expense of the US.

*Western policy makers, who accord much significance to moderate Palestinian talk, and therefore speculate on a reformed Palestinian state – which would abandon core ideology, depart from its rogue track record, and embrace peaceful coexistence – would benefit from the following country colloquialism: “You may put your boots in the oven, but that don’t make them biscuits!”

Support Appreciated

Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, “Second Thought: a US-Israel Initiative”
November 26, 2025

*Hamas compliance? Hamas’ compliance with the Gaza Ceasefire, in adherence to President Trump’s 20 points, would require Hamas to abandon its core vision/ideology, forfeit its military and political powerbase; thus, desisting from being Hamas. But, Hamas’ compliance with the Gaza Ceasefire, in adherence to its own core vision and ideology, which transcends financial considerations, is a déjà vu, as demonstrated by all previous Gaza ceasefires.

*Gaza ceasefire – déjà vu. The current Gaza ceasefire is the 6^th ceasefire concluded with Hamas since the 2007 Hamas’ takeover of the Gaza Strip (2008, 2012, 2014, 2019 and 2021). No ceasefire has induced Hamas – which is a branch ofthe Muslim Brotherhood – to embrace peaceful coexistence; neither to adopt good faith negotiation, nor to abandon its Muslim Brotherhood ideology/vision of toppling all national Muslim regimes (e.g., Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Kuwait, Bahrain, Oman, Morocco). Furthermore, they have not relinquished their goal of establishing a universal Muslim society with Islam as the only “divinely-ordained legitimate” religion, bringing the “infidel” West to submission, and eradicating the “illegitimate” vanguard of the USA in the Middle East – the Jewish State.

*Hamas negotiation? All previous Gaza ceasefires documented that Hamas’ perception of negotiation and ceasefire is not driven by Western concepts/values, but by a fanatical, apocalyptic vision.  They leverage the negotiation process as a step to avoid obliteration, stall for time to restore terror capabilities, and then launch another terror offensive in their determined pursuit of a fanatical vision (irrespective of the cost). In contrast, the US perception of negotiation and ceasefire is driven by a vision of conflict resolution and dramatically enhanced standard of living, aimed at reconciliation and eventual peaceful coexistence. Western negotiation is perceived by Hamas as weakness.  

*Hamas’ rehabilitation? A prerequisite forHamas’ rehabilitation – in addition to the obliteration of its military and political infrastructures – are sweeping structural and cultural changes, such as the uprooting of anti-Western and anti-Jewish hate education, hateful Friday sermons and hate-filled media, which have acted (since the 1993 establishment of the Palestinian Authority) as the most effective production line of Palestinian/Islamic terrorists.  

*Securing a boon, rather than a bane. The uprooting of Hamas’ educational, terroristic and political infrastructures would result in a boon, bolstering the US’ posture of deterrence, which would reduce anti-Western Islamic terrorism, minimize regional instability, and therefore, constrain the maneuverability of China and Russia. On the other hand, the survival of Hamas would afflict the US with a bane, by adrenalizing the veins of the epicenter of anti-US regional and global Islamic terrorism, destabilizing every pro-US Arab regime, undermining the safety of Middle Eastern oil exportation (which impacts the price at the pump), and threatening the shipping lanes between Asia and Europe.    

*The anti-US threat of the Ayatollah regime transcends Gaza! the Ayatollah regime is rapidly restoring and upgrading its conventional, ballistic and nuclear capabilities, leveraging the eagerness of China, Russia and North Korea to demonstrate the potency of their military systems and underground fortification capabilities, irrespective of their failure in June 2025. Furthermore, the Ayatollah regime – which played a lead role in the preparation for the October 2023 terror offensive – has intensified its involvement in the terror platform of the Sinai Peninsula (which is contiguous to Gaza!), and the attempts to topple Jordan’s pro-US Hashemite regime.  The Ayatollah’s success would trigger a volcanic ripple effect regionally (the Arabian Peninsula, Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Israel) and globally. Iran’s Ayatollah regime is the leading patron of Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis and other terrorists in the Middle East, Asia, Africa, Latin America and on US soil. Moreover, the Ayatollah regime is the chief epicenter of global anti-US Islamic terrorism, drug trafficking (in collaboration with Latin American drug cartels and anti-US governments), money laundering and the proliferation of advanced military systems. While the Ayatollah regime is the head of a venomous octopus, Gaza is only one of its global tentacles, including the US soil itself, as stated by the FBI, the Homeland Security Department and the Director of Intelligence.

*Iran and the US goal of ending wars! The US goal of minimizing, preventing and ending wars and terrorism requires an experience-based, rather than speculation-based, policy making. It mandates the uprooting of the chief epicenter of regional and global wars and terrorism: the Ayatollah regime, which aims to bring “The Great American Satan” to submission. Refraining from regime-change in Iran (which experienced regime-change in 1953 and 1978) – while adhering to the 47-year-old failed policy of negotiation and (reversible and bypassable) economic sanctions – would pave the road to the first ever apocalyptic nuclear power, which would be a global catastrophe, dwarfing the cost of regime-change.

*Would a Palestinian state advance or undermine US interests? US policy on the Palestinian issue should not be driven by honest brokerage, pro-Palestinian or anti-Palestinian sentiments. It should be driven by US interests, based on the reality of march-of-facts (that tends to be frustrating), not on alternate reality of conventional wisdom (that tends to be convenient).  

While Western policy makers have embraced the proposed Palestinian state, relying on moderate Palestinian talk and speculative, subjective future scenarios (e.g., a reformed and peaceful Palestinian government), Arab leaders rely on objective, well-documented Palestinian past track record. They are aware that in the Middle East: “on words one does not pay custom.”

Arabs are aware of the Palestinian rogue intra-Arab track record,which is replete with subversion, terrorism and treachery. Therefore, they have showered Palestinians with embracing talk, but indifferent-to-negative walk. Since 1948, they have refrained from tangible steps toward the establishment of a Palestinian state, which would add fuel, not water, to the Middle East fire, yielding a major bonanza to Iran’s Ayatollah regime, the Muslim Brotherhood, China and Russia, but dealing a major setback to regional stability, all pro-US Arab regimes and the US’ own interests.

Support Appreciated

Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, “Second Thought: a US-Israel Initiative”
July 3, 2025  

The US position on the proposed Palestinian state – just like on any other issue – should be driven by US interests, and not by pro-Israel or pro-Arab sentiments, nor by an honest broker state of mind.  

Would a Palestinian state advance, or undermine, US interests?

*The US State Department’s deeply rooted attachment to the proposed Palestinian state – just like Western conventional wisdom’s attachment – has been largely a derivative of the Palestinian Authority’s peaceful talk, when communicating with Westerners. However, the moderate talk is replaced by (anti-Jewish, anti-Israeli and anti-US) hateful talk when the Palestinian Authority communicates with its own school children and mosque worshippers as well as with audiences in Arab countries. While communications with Westerners represents a 1,400-year-old dissimulation (Taqiyyah) tactic aimed to mislead the West into advancing the Palestinian strategic position, the Palestinian school curriculum and official mosque sermons constitute the most authentic reflection of the Palestinian worldview.   

*The State Department and Western conventional wisdom have also forged their position on the proposed Palestinian state based upon speculative alternate reality – an ostensibly reformed Palestinian government.  This position has been systematically frustrated, since the 1993 Oslo Accord, by Middle East reality. This reformed Palestinian government would, supposedly, refrain from terrorism, hate education and incitement. It would, allegedly, embrace peaceful coexistence, adhere to democracy and human rights, abide by good-faith negotiation, and abandon its intrinsic ideology, which predates the 1948 and 1967 wars. This ideology has focused on terminating the existence – not the shrinking the size – of the Jewish State, mandating the elimination of “the infidel and illegitimate Zionist entity” from the (Jordan) River to the (Mediterranean) Sea.

*However, contrary to the State Department, Arab leaders take lightly the Palestinian talk. They are aware of the fact that in the Middle East one does not pay custom on words, and therefore, there has been an unbridgeable gap between Arab talk and Arab walk (especially on the Palestinian issue). Therefore, Arabs pay much attention to the Palestinian intra-Arab walk, which has become the role model of intra-Arab subversion, terrorism, ingratitude and treachery.

*Unlike most Westerners, who are driven by present and future policy planning, Arabs consider history (since the 7^th century)as the core of policy planning. For example, they remember the 1950s Palestinian betrayal of Egypt, when the Palestinian leadership collaborated with Muslim Brotherhood terrorists against their Egyptian host government, followed by the Palestinian leadership escape to Syria. Moreover, in the 1960s, the Palestinians betrayed Syria, by collaborating with Muslim Brotherhood terrorists against their host government, escaping to Jordan. Similarly, in 1970, the Palestinians betrayed Jordan, by launching a military operation against their host Hashemite regime, which triggered a bloody civil war, forcing their escape to Lebanon. During 1970-1982, they plundered Lebanon, igniting a series of civil wars and the invasion of Lebanon by the Syrian military, until they were expelled to Tunisia. In 1990, they betrayed Kuwait, which was their most generous Arab host, absorbing 400,000 (PLO) Palestinians, allowing them to rise to top administrative and business positions. Consistent with their rogue  intra-Arab conduct, the Palestinians joined Saddam Hussein’s August 1990 invasion of Kuwait, heralding him as a savior and a “Modern day Salah a-Din.” Therefore, once restored to power, the leader of Kuwait, Sheikh Sabah, expelled almost all 400,000 Palestinians, with hardly any intra-Arab backlash.  

*Arab leaders are, also, aware of the systematic Palestinian alignment with radical/violent anti-US global forces, such as Nazi Germany, the Soviet Bloc, Ayatollah Khomeini, global terrorism (Middle East, Asia, Africa, Europe and Latin America), the anti-Western Muslim Brotherhood (the largest Sunni terror organization), North Korea, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Cuba, Russia and China.

*Arab leaders don’t expect a Palestinian state to act differently than its 100-year-old rogue intra-Arab track record, which would add fuel to the Middle East fire, threatening every pro-US, relatively moderate Arab regime. Therefore, Arab leaders shower Palestinians with embracing talk; but, refrain from any tangible walk on behalf of a Palestinian state.  For instance, Arabs have never flexed a military – and barely a financial – muscle on behalf of the Palestinians. Furthermore, no Arab-Israeli war erupted due to the Palestinian issue, and none of the six Israel-Arab peace treaties was preconditioned upon the establishment of the Palestinian issue. Irrespective of their talk, Arabs have never sacrificed their own national interest on the altar of the proposed Palestinian state.

*Arabs are aware that a Palestinian state west of the Jordan River would doom the pro-US Hashemite regime east of the River. This was echoed by the late King Hussein’s reaction to the September 1993 Oslo Accord.  It was reiterated by him and his top military commanders during the October 1994 Israel-Jordan Peace Treaty ceremony.

*Arabs are aware that the toppling of the Hashemite regime would transform Jordan into a platform of anti-US Islamic terrorism.  It would also ignite a civil war between various Palestinian groups, the Muslim Brotherhood, Iran-controlled and ISIS-controlled anti-US terrorists. Such a chaotic state of affairs would generate a domino scenario into the terror-ridden Sinai Peninsula, intensifying attempts by the Muslim Brotherhood to topple the pro-US Egyptian regime of General Sisi. The destabilizing ripple effects would also head south of Jordan to the Arabian Peninsula, destabilizing Saudi Arabia and every other pro-US Arab oil-producing regime. Such an avalanche could transfer the control of 48% of global oil reserves – as well as the domination of critical Asia-Europe commercial sea lanes – to the anti-US Ayatollah regime, the anti-US Muslim Brotherhood, anti-US China or anti-US Russia, intensifying the epicenter of anti-US Islamic terrorism. Thus, causing a severe setback to the US/Western homeland security and economy, and providing a historic bonanza to rivals and enemies of the US.

*Contrary to the State Department’s attachment to alternate reality, Arab leaders are aware that the Palestinian leopard does not change spots (strategy), only tactics.

Support Appreciated

Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, “Second Thought: a US-Israel Initiative”
November 12, 2024

“I’m not going to start wars, I’m going to stop wars,” proclaimed President-elect Trump in his November 6 victory message.

*Bolstering the US’ posture of deterrence is the most critical prerequisite for stopping/minimizing wars and terrorism. The US’ posture of deterrence is reflected by the size and structure of the US’ defense budget, avoiding appeasement of rogue entities, and dwelling on reality (as frustrating as it is) rather than alternate reality.

*The US’ posture of deterrence has been undermined by the State Department, which was evicted from the center stage of foreign policy formulations during President Trump’s first term. Trump opposes Foggy Bottom’s multilateral/cosmopolitan state of mind, which prefers a coordinated policy with the UN, international organizations and Europe, rather than a unilateral, independent US national security and foreign policy. The State Department has also subordinated Middle East reality to its own alternate reality, which has led to its systematic failure in the Middle East (e.g., the 1978-9 stabbing the Shah in the back, and facilitating the Ayatollahs’ rise to power; the embrace of Saddam Hussein until his 1990 invasion of Kuwait; the 1993 cuddling of Arafat and ushering him to the Nobel Peace Prize; the 2009 betrayal of the pro-US Mubarak and the courting of the anti-US Moslem Brotherhood; the 2010 reference to the Arab Tsunami on the Arab Street, as if it were an Arab Spring and Facebook Revolution; the 2011 military offensive on Qadhafi, which transformed Libya into a major arena of anti-US Islamic terrorism; and pressuring Israel to conclude a series of accords with – and refrain from demolishing – Hamas, which bolstered Hamas’ terrorism and led to the October 7 atrocities). 

*The US’ posture of deterrence has been severely undermined by the State Department’s policy toward Iran’s Ayatollahs regime, which has been transformed – since the February 1979 toppling of the Shah – from “the American Policeman of the Gulf” to an arch anti-US venomous octopus, stretching its tentacles from the Persian Gulf through the Middle East and Africa into Latin America and the US soil. The Ayatollahs have become the major global epicenter of anti-US wars, terrorism and drug trafficking, threatening the US homeland and the survival of all pro-US Arab regimes, especially the Arab oil producers. The Ayatollahs aspire to control 48% of global oil reserves and key routes of global trade, which would deal a major blow to Western economy.

*The US’ posture of deterrence has been severely undermined by the delusion that the diplomatic option/negotiation, supplemented with mega-billion-dollar-gestures could induce the Ayatollahs to abandon their 1,400-year-old fanatical vision, conduct good faith negotiations and accept peaceful coexistence. The architects of the diplomatic option have ignored the fact that rogue regimes bite the hands that feed them, as documented by the Ayatollahs, who took over the US Embassy – a few months following the US support in toppling the Shah – held 50 American hostages for 444 days, and emerged as a leading threat to the US, globally and domestically.

*Thus, the 45-year-old diplomatic option has dramatically bolstered the capabilities of Iran’s Ayatollahs as the chief epicenter of global anti-US terrorism, drug trafficking, proliferation of advance military systems and mega-billion-dollars of money laundering.  Just like the Moslem Brotherhood, Hezbollah, Hamas and the PLO/PA, Iran’s Ayatollahs have been driven by a fanatical vision, which transcends monetary considerations. Moreover, this vision has been codified by their Constitution, education system and mosque sermons.

*The Ayatollahs’ fanatical vision mandates the elimination of enemies, such as the “apostate” Sunni regimes, the “infidel” West, the “Great American Satan,” and the “illegitimate” Zionist entity, which they view as the US’ vanguard in the Middle East.

*The Ayatollahs consider negotiation as a means to advance their anti-US vision, and not as a means to advance reconciliation with the US.

*Therefore, the Ayatollahs should not be partners to negotiation, but a target for regime-change. The potential cost of regime-change would be dwarfed by the cost of facing a nuclear Iran.

*At the same time, a series of peace accords ended the state of war between Israel and Egypt, Jordan, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Morocco and South Sudan, because – unlike the Ayatollahs, Hamas, the PLO/PA and Hezbollah – the national vision/aspiration of each Arab country does not mandate the elimination of Israel. In fact, the Saudi “Vision 2030” considers Israel as a partner, militarily, technologically and agriculturally.

*President Trump’s first term featured “maximum pressure” economic sanctions, which crippled the Ayatollahs’ economy, and constrained their capability to bolster terrorism and wars.  However, as demonstrated by the 2021 suspension and softening of the sanctions, economic sanctions are reversible by a succeeding President. They reduce/delay the wrath of war and terrorism, but do not eliminate the threat.

*On the other hand, regime-change is irreversible, eliminates the threat, and cannot be restored by a succeeding President.  Furthermore, it would significantly bolster the US’ strategic stature (including in Latin America, the US’ soft underbelly), by removing the Ayatollahs’ machete from the throats of all pro-US Arab regimes, eliminate the chief supporter of global Islamic terrorism, and induce Saudi Arabia and Oman (and possibly Kuwait, Indonesia and additional Moslem countries) to join the Abraham Accords.

*The Abraham Accords were conceived by ignoring the State Department’s preoccupation with the Palestinian issueand focussing on the national interests of the individual Arab country, as was done with Israel’s prior peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan. Contrary to the State Department’s conventional wisdom – which produced a litany of peace proposals that failed to produce peace – the Abraham Accords came to fruition, because they bypassed the Palestinian issue, denying the Palestinians a veto power over the peace process. The Abraham Accords validate that the State Department has been wrong to assume that the Palestinian issue is the crux of the Arab-Israeli conflict, the crown-jewel of the Arabs and a root cause of Middle East turmoil.

*While the State Department has been obsessed with a proposed Palestinian state, all pro-US Arab countries have limited their support of the proposed Palestinian state to talk, while their walk has been indifferent-to-negative. Arab leaders pay more attention to the Palestinian rogue walk than to the Palestinian moderate talk. Therefore, they consider the Palestinians as a role model of intra-Arab subversion, terrorism and treachery, due to Palestinian terrorism against their hosts in Egypt (1950s), Syria (1960s), Jordan (1968-70), Lebanon (1970-82) and Kuwait (1990).  In addition, they are aware of the Palestinian collaboration with Nazi Germany, the Soviet Bloc, Ayatollah Khomeini, international terror organizations, Moslem Brotherhood terrorists, North Korea, Venezuela, Cuba, Russia and China. Therefore, they have concluded that a Palestinian state west of the Jordan River would add fuel to the Middle East fire, toppling the pro-US Hashemite regime east of the River, transforming Jordan into an arena of anti-US Islamic terrorism, triggering rogue ripple effects in the Arabian Peninsula (as well as in the US), threatening every oil-producing Arab regime and Egypt. This would be a bonanza for the Ayatollahs, Russia and China and a blow to the US economy and homeland security.

*On the other hand, Israel has emerged as a unique force and dollar multiplier for the US, and a leading innovation center for the US commercial and defense high-tech sectors (e.g., 250 US high tech giants operate research and development centers in Israel). Israel is the “Triple-A-Store” of the US defense and aerospace industries (increasing US export), and the leading battle-tested laboratory of the US defense industries (saving many years of research and development), Armed Forces (enhancing battle tactics), the intelligence community, counter-terrorism agencies and the FBI. Israel has been the largest US aircraft carrier (as stated by General Alexander Haig, a former NATO Supreme Commander and Admiral Elmo Zumwalt, a former Chief of Naval Operations), which does not require Americans on board, deployed in a critical area between the Mediterranean, the Red Sea, the Arabian Sea, the Indian Ocean and the Persian Gulf, sparing the US the need to manufacture and deploy (to the Middle East) a few more real aircraft carriers along with a few ground divisions, which would cost the US taxpayer $15-$20BN annually.

Support Appreciated

Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, “Second Thought: a US-Israel Initiative”
October 7, 2024

Sympathizing with a screensaver mentality amounts to ceding reality to an imaginary, pleasant, sometimes hallucinating alternate reality. The October 7 horrific Islamic terrorism possesses the potential of moving the mouse, hitting a key and disparaging a screensaver-like self-defeating Western policy.

For example:

1. The October 7 massacre – which was guided and financed largely by Iran’s Ayatollahs, who have also guided Hezbollah’s and the Houthis’ offensive against Israel, the US and other Western countries – should have removed the screensaver mentality of the diplomatic option toward Iran’s Ayatollahs for the following reasons:

*The screensaver-led diplomatic option has beenboosted by skilled Iranian moderate talk coupled with speculative Western scenarios. The underlying assumption has been that a diplomatic and financial bonanza (hundreds of billions of dollars since 1979) could induce the Ayatollahs into peaceful coexistence with their Sunni Arab neighbors, accept good faith negotiation, and discard their 1,400-year-old religious, fanatic, imperialistic vision. 

*The diplomatic option screensaver has sacrificed the 45-year-old rogue track record, which highlights Iran’s Ayatollahs as the leading global epicenter of anti-US terrorism, drug trafficking, and mega-billion-dollar money laundering throughout the globe, with a focus on Latin America – “America’s soft underbelly” – including the US-Mexico border and on US soil.  The Ayatollahs have been preoccupied with subversion and terrorism against US installations and key individuals, as well as every pro-US regime in the Middle East and Africa. They are determined – as documented in their daily conduct, Constitution, school curriculum, mosque sermons and official media – to topple all “apostate” Sunni regimes and bring the Western “infidel,” and especially “The Great American Satan,” to submission.

*While the diplomatic option’s screensaver mentality considers Iran’s Ayatollahs as a target for negotiation, reality has documented Iran’s Ayatollahs – the head of a venomous octopus with its arms stretching from the Persian Gulf to the US homeland – as a target for regime-change.

2. The October 7, 2023 massacre should have disparaged the screensaver of the proposed Palestinian state, which has sacrificed the well-documented rogue Palestinian walk on the altar of speculative assumptions, cushioned by seductive Palestinian talk. This screensaver (alternate reality) mentality envisions a reformed Palestinian government, complying with agreements, abandoning its 100-year-old core vision (mandating the destruction of the “infidel” Jewish entity), uprooting hate education and mosque incitement, and peacefully coexisting with Jordan and Israel.

However:

*In proportion to the US population (345 million), the October 7, 2023 massacre, mutilation, beheading, rape, and the burning alive of 1,200 Israelis is the equivalent to 41,500 Americans murdered on one day by a neighboring terrorist state, or 14 “September 11s”!  How would the US react?!                   

*This horrific terrorism was heralded by most Palestinians in Gaza and Judea and Samaria (the West Bank), where Hitler’s Mein Kampf is a best seller. It was committed by graduates of the Palestinian education system, which was established by Mahmoud Abbas in 1993. Their families are already receiving the Palestinian Authority’s generous monthly “pay-for-slay” allowance. The October 7 massacre replicated the 1920s, 1930s and 1940s Palestinian pogroms against Jews. A more horrific massacre could erupt from Judea and Samaria if Israel would retreat to the pre-1967 lines.

*Moreover, October 7, 2023 was consistent with the Palestinians’ intra-Arab terrorism, as demonstrated in the 1950s (Egypt), 1960s (Syria), 1968-1970 (Jordan), 1970-1982 (Lebanon) and Kuwait (1990), transforming them into a role model of intra-Arab subversion, terrorism and treachery. Furthermore, Arab leaders are aware that the Palestinians have systematically sided with radical forces, such as Nazi German, the Soviet Bloc, Ayatollah Khomeini, international terror organizations, the Moslem Brotherhood, Cuba, Venezuela and North Korea.

*Therefore – contrary to the screen saver Western worldview – Arabs have showered Palestinians with an embracing talk, while refraining from an effective walk on behalf of a Palestinian state. For example, six Arab states concluded peace accords with Israel without preconditioning it upon the establishment of a Palestinian state. Also, Arabs have never flexed any military muscle – and barely any financial muscle – on behalf of the Palestinians.

*Arab leaders do not engage with screensaver policies. They are convinced that the Palestinian track record would determine the conduct of a Palestinian state, which would doom the highly vulnerable pro-US Hashemite regime, transforming Jordan into another epicenter of anti-US Islamic terrorism (and its sleeper cells in the US!), destabilizing every pro-US, oil-producing Arabian Peninsula regime (south of Jordan), bolstering the stature of Iran’s Ayatollahs, the Moslem Brotherhood, ISIS, Russia and China, while dealing a blow to the US’ economy and homeland security.

3. The October 7, 2023 massacre has exposed the wishful-thinking foundation of the screensaver-led Western policy in the Middle East.

For instance:

*The well-intentioned screensaver-led policy has sacrificed the 1,400-year-old frustrating and volcanic Middle East reality – featuring no intra-Moslem peaceful coexistence, the centrality of religion and vision, violent intolerance of the “infidel West,” hate education, ruthless despotism, tenuous regimes, policies and agreements – on the altar of a convenient and optimistic alternate Middle East.   

*Middle East reality has proven that the screensaver-led policy wrongfully assumes that rogue Middle East regimes would welcome Western values such as negotiation as a venue to resolve conflicts, peaceful coexistence, democracy, human rights, adherence to agreements, while preferring an enhanced standard of living over entrenched fanatic ideologies.

*For instance, the screensaver-led Middle East policy has professed negotiation with any enemy, failing to discern between entities, whose aspirations mandate the annihilation of their enemies (e.g., Iran’s Ayatollahs, Hezbollah, Hamas, the PLO and ISIS) and entities driven by aspirations, which do not mandate annihilation (e.g., Saudi Arabia, Oman, Kuwait, Egypt, Jordan, the UAE, Bahrain, Morocco and South Sudan). In fact, the screensaver-led Western pressure on Israel yielded numerous negotiations with terrorist entities, which paved the road to the October 7 massacre.

*Contrary to the screensaver-led policy, Middle East reality documents that terrorists do not shake – but bite – the hand that feeds them, as experienced by the pre-October 7, 2023 litany of Israeli gestures for Gaza Arabs (e.g., work and hospitalization permits in Israel, extension of humanitarian aid, facilitating international financial aid). It also afflicted the US following its 1978/79 critical support of Ayatollah Khomeini, the 1982/83 support of the PLO in Lebanon, the 1980s support of Saddam Hussein, the 1980s support of Afghanistan’s Mujahideen, the 2011 US-led toppling of Gadhafi, and the February 2021 delisting of the Houthis from the US terror list.

4. The October 7, 2023 massacre, in particular, and the violently volatile and intolerant Middle East reality, in general, should have dismantled the Western screensaver mentality, which maintains that a negotiated peace accord constitutes a critical element of national security in the Middle East. However, the 1,400-year-old Middle East reality determines that peace accords cannot be less tenuous than Middle East regimes, which rise to power via the bullet, not the ballot.  Therefore, the posture of deterrence is the most critical component of national security in the Middle East, especially for an “infidel” Jewish entity surrounded by “believers.” 

The October 7, 2023 debacle(!) demolished Israel’s posture of deterrence, which could be tantamount to a death sentence in the Middle East. Therefore, since October 7, 2023, Israel has been preoccupied with the restoration of its posture of deterrence, which requires the obliteration of the military infrastructure of Hamas and Hezbollah. Moreover, snatching Hamas and Hezbollah from the jaws of defeat – as attempted by Western policy makers – would be perceived, in the Middle East, as a dramatic victory for anti-US Islamic terrorism, inducing more terrorism and war against Israel, which is viewed, by Islamic terrorists, as the Middle East vanguard of the US and its first line of defense, as it is for Jordan and additional pro-US Arab regimes.

The restoration of Israel’s posture of deterrence does not require more diplomatic negotiation, but surging from defense to offense, from reaction to pre-emption, from containment – to obliteration – of terrorism, from “the right to defend itself” to ”the right to a total victory.”

The bottom line:

Has October 7, 2023 awakened Western policy makers to the realization that they are driven by a screensaver – rather than Middle East reality – which generates a robust tailwind to Islamic terrorists, who are determined to bring the “infidel” West, and especially “The Great American Satan,” to submission?!

Support Appreciated

Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, “Second Thought: a US-Israel initiative”
June 6, 2024

*Western conventional wisdom (WCW) embraced Iran’s Ayatollahs in 1979 – while stabbing of the Shah of Iran, “America’s policeman in the Gulf,” in the back – and helping them catapult from a regional rogue regime to the most effective global epicenter of anti-Western terrorism, drug trafficking, money laundering and proliferation of military systems in 2024, constituting a clear and present threat to US homeland security.

*WCW has also afflicted Israel’s policy toward Palestinian terrorism, catapulting Hamas from a mini-terror organization in 2005 – upon Israel’s uprooting its civilian and military presence in Gaza – to the most fortified terror-state in 2024, which perpetrated the October 7, 2023 massacre. The Westernization of Israel’s national security policy was initially reflected by the 1993 Oslo Accord, which was negotiated with PLO terrorists – who have been dedicated since 1964 to the destruction of the “infidel” Jewish entity – and by the importation of 100,000 Palestinian terrorists from Tunisia, the Sudan, Yemen and Lebanon to Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria and Gaza.

*Middle East policy should be a derivative of the unpredictably violent and despotic Middle East reality – which has never experienced intra-Arab or intra-Moslem peaceful coexistence – and not a predictable and convenient alternate reality. Itshould avoid – not repeat – past critical mistakes.

*WCW has underestimated the centrality of fanatic and religious ideology in the forging of aspirations, strategies and policies of Iran’s Ayatollahs, the Moslem Brotherhood, Hamas, Hezbollah, Yemen’s Houthis and the Palestinian Authority.  While the West believes in separation of state and church, Islam believes in the dominance of religion in policy-making, particularly peace and war.  WCW assumes that “money talks,” ignoring the supremacy of Islamic ideologies over financial inducements, and takes lightly the 1,400-year-old conviction that Islam is the only divinely-ordained legitimate religion, bringing “apostates” and Western “infidels” – especially the US – to submission.   In fact, Islamic terrorism has haunted the US since the Barbary pirates in the early 19^th century, irrespective of US policy, and independent of the identity of the US President.

*WCW (and especially Secretary Blinken and National Security Advisor Sullivan) assumes that terrorists are driven by despair, and therefore should not be approached militarily, but by mega diplomatic and financial gestures.  WCW deludes itself that such gestures would induce the Ayatollahs to embrace peaceful coexistence with their Sunni neighbors, become good-faith negotiators and abandon their 1,400-year-old ideology.

However, Middle East reality considers gestures, concessions and retreats as weakness, which whets the appetite of rogue entities.

*WCW pressures Israel to adopt such a policy toward Palestinian terrorism, shifting from the military – to the diplomatic – option. It belittles the clout of the Islamic precept that ceasefire and peace negotiations (especially with “infidels”) are temporary, until an opportunity arises to overcome the enemy.

*WCW maintains that Israel must negotiate with – not obliterate – Hamas, irrespective of Hamas’ anti-Western ideology/charter, school curriculum, mosque sermons, idolization of terrorists and systematic terrorism – which mandate the elimination of Israel and the submission of the Western “infidel.”  WCW dismisses the lessons of Israel’s 17-year-systematic negotiation with Hamas, which has dramatically bolstered Hamas’ terroristic capabilities, yielding the October 7, 2023 massacre. WCW ignores the fact that constructive negotiation may take place only between entities, whose visions do not require the elimination of one another. Thus, peace accords were successfully negotiated between Israel and Egypt, Jordan, the UAE, Bahrain, Morocco and South Sudan, and Israel-Saudi cooperation has been exceptionally productive.

*WCW is enthralled with the Palestinian Authority moderate talk, concluding that a Palestinian state would be reformed, adhering to peaceful coexistence. However, all pro-Western Arab leaders are preoccupied with the Palestinian walk, which has transformed the Palestinians into a role model of intra-Arab subversion, terrorism and treachery: terrorizing Egypt in the 1950s, Syria in the 1960s, Jordan in 1970, Lebanon from 1970-1982 and Kuwait in 1990, while always siding with enemies and rivals of the West, such as Nazi German, the Soviet Bloc, Iran’s Ayatollahs, the Moslem Brotherhood, international terrorist organizations, Venezuela, Cuba, North Korea, China and Russia. They have concluded that a Palestinian state would doom the pro-Western Hashemite regime, transforming Jordan into another epicenter of global, anti-Western Islamic terrorism. This would threaten all pro-Western Arab oil-producing regimes, thus rewarding the Ayatollahs, the Moslem Brotherhood, China and Russia, and deal a dramatic blow to Western economies, homeland and national security. Therefore, Arabs have refrained from an effective walk on behalf of a Palestinian state.

*WCW has attempted to hoodwink Israel into retreat from the strategically over-towering mountain ridges of Judea and Samaria – in the tectonic, intolerant and violent Middle East – to the pre-1967 9 to 15-mile-wide-sliver along the Mediterranean, in return for a peace accord, in the Middle East which features no intra-Moslem peaceful-coexistence, as well as tenuous non-democratic regimes, and therefore tenuous policies and accords. In this region, posture of deterrence (e.g., controlling the mountain ridges of Judea and Judea) – not the highly regarded peace accords – is the most crucial component of national security.  While mountain ridges are fixed components, Middle East peace accords are variables.

*WCW insistence to subordinate Middle East reality to its own alternate reality has been highlighted by the failure of all Western peace initiatives, which centered on the Palestinian issue, while the six successful Israel-Arab peace treaties centered on Arab – not Palestinian – interests.

*Additional highlights of the self-destructive nature of WCW are the critical tailwind it accorded the Ayatollahs’ 1979 toppling of the Shah of Iran; the embrace of Saddam Hussein as an ally until his 1990 invasion of Kuwait, and punishing Israel for destroying Iraq’s nuclear reactor in 1981; the 1994 awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to the chief Palestinian terrorist, Arafat, and defining Mahmoud Abbas – the founder of Palestinian hate education, incitement and monthly allowances to families of terrorists – as a moderate.  In addition, the 2000 welcoming of Bashar Assad as a potentially moderate leader; the welcoming of the 2011 Arab Tsunami (which still haunts the Arab Street) as if it were the Arab Spring, Facebook and Youth Revolution; the 2011 toppling of Gaddafi, which transformed Libya into a major platform of anti-Western Islamic terrorism and an arena of perpetual civil war; etc.    

 *Western conventional wisdom has persisted in the attempt to subordinate Middle East reality to its own alternate reality, thus, learning from history by repeating – not avoiding – past critical mistakes, severely undermining Western national and homeland security.

*Israel should be aware of the failed Western track record in the Middle East, when assessing – skeptically – Western policy recommendations, such as the establishment of a Palestinian state, and negotiation with – rather than obliteration of – Hamas.

Support Appreciated

Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, “Second Thought: a US-Israel Initiative”
May 22, 2024

*Secretary of State Antony Blinken is a true believer in the diplomatic option toward Iran’s Ayatollahs. He rules out regime-change and military options, irrespective of the Ayatollahs’ 45-year-old track record of anti-US terrorism, drug trafficking, money laundering and proliferation of advanced military systems.  

*Currently, Blinken is pressuring Israel to negotiate another ceasefire with Hamas, disregarding the litany of previous ceasefires, which bolstered Hamas’ terror capabilities. He leans on Israel to shift from the military option to the diplomatic option, snatching Hamas from the jaws of obliteration. Such a shift would be perceived by all Middle East entities as a dramatic victory for Hamas and a major defeat for Israel, fueling more terrorism and war against Israel and all pro-US Arab countries, which already have the machetes of Islamic terrorism at their throats. It will also reduce the Arab/Moslem interest to conclude additional peace treaties with Israel, and inspire Islamic terrorism on US soil, as stated by FBI Director, Chris Wray.

According to AP: “In a pair of TV interviews, Secretary Blinken underscored that the United States believes Israeli forces should ‘get out of Gaza…,’ reiterating the longstanding U.S. opposition to the growing Israeli offensive in Rafah.…”  According to PBS: “US Secretary of State Antony Blinken met with Israeli leaders in his push for a ceasefire deal between Israel and Hamas…. ‘We are determined to get a ceasefire…. There is a proposal on the table, and as we have said: no delays, no excuses, the time is now….’ The proposal would put a full Israeli withdrawal from Gaza up for discussion….”

*Secretary of State, Antony Blinken is genuinely determined to advance the cause of peace and stability in the Middle East, but he is driven by a speculative future scenario, which is a derivative of an alternate reality, detached from Middle East reality.

*Blinken underestimates the role of the larger context of Hamas’ and Hezbollah’s terrorism, which is critically financed, supplied and trained by Iran’s Ayatollahs, who support and collaborate with anti-US regimes in the Middle East, Africa and Latin America, including Latin American drug cartels in Mexico, Columbia, Bolivia, Ecuador and Brazil.

*Irrespective of the systematically rogue anti-US track record of the Ayatollahs – since toppling the Shah of Iran in February 1979 – Blinken sticks to the diplomatic/negotiation option, which has been a bonanza for Iran’s anti-US strategy.  He refuses to recognize that the Ayatollahs are not partners for peaceful coexistence and good-faith negotiation, but a target for regime-change, which would liberate the oppressed majority of Iran, eliminate the chief threat to the survival of every pro-US Arab regime, eradicate a major hurdle on the way of more Israel-Arab peace accords, and would deprive anti-US global Islamic terrorism of its leading epicenter. A regime change would generate a robust tailwind to regional and global stability and peaceful coexistence.

*Blinken takes lightly the 17-year-long track record of Israel-Hamas confrontations, which documents that ceasefire agreements are leveraged by Hamas to bolster its Moslem Brotherhood directed terror machine.

*Blinken underrates the fact that any policy toward the Israel-Hamas war should be a derivative of the 1,400-year-old intrinsic features of Middle East reality. For instance, the absence of intra-Moslem and intra-Arab peaceful coexistence; the violent intolerance towards “infidels,” “apostates” as well as “believers”; the absence of democracy, human rights and long term compliance with agreements; shifty and unpredictable policies and violence; the tenuous nature of all Arab regimes, which ascend to – and lose – power via the “bullet” (violence), and not via the ballot; the tenuous nature of  these regimes’ policies and accords; the centrality of fanatic ideology, which transcends the Western notion of “money talks;” etc.

*In this frustrating volcanic reality of the Middle East – unlike the much more convenient and predictable State Department’s alternate reality – the most critical component of national security is posture of deterrence, rather than negotiation and peace accords, which are as tenuous as the regimes that conduct them. 

*While a bolstered posture of deterrence minimizes war and terrorism, an eroded posture of deterrence whets the appetite of rogue entities; thus, intensifying war and terrorism, regionally and globally.

*Israel’s posture of deterrence was demolished by its own October 7 debacle(!), and its military strategy since then has aimed to restore it, in order to rebound and avoid eventual destruction.

*Secretary Blinken underrates the centrality of fanatical visions and ideologies in the Middle East, and therefore assumes that constructive negotiation may take place among all parties. He ignores the fact that constructive negotiation may take place between entities, whose vision does not require the elimination of one another. Thus, peace accords were successfully negotiated between Israel and Egypt, Jordan, the UAE, Bahrain, Morocco and South Sudan, and Israel-Saudi cooperation has been exceptionally productive.

*None of these agreements were preconditioned upon the establishment of a Palestinian state! Arabs consider the Palestinians as a role model of intra-Arab subversion, terrorism and treachery, and therefore shower the Palestinian with embracing talk, while the actual walk ranges from indifferent-to-negative.

*These Arab countries would prefer a Middle East devoid of “an infidel” Jewish sovereignty, but the fulfillment of their national visions is not predicated upon the elimination of Israel. In fact, they consider Israel as an effective national security ally in the face of Iran’s Ayatollahs and the Moslem Brotherhood.  

*On the other hand, constructive negotiation cannot take place between Israel and Hamas, since the fulfillment of Hamas’ fanatical vision – as stipulated in the 1988 Hamas charter, its hate-education and mosque-incitement and Hamas’ terrorism – is preconditioned upon the elimination of the “infidel” Jewish State. The same applies to the Palestinian Authority, whose annihilationist vision is stated by the 1964 and 1959 charters of the PLO and Fatah terror organizations – 3 and 8 years before the 1967 War – which are embedded in the PA’s hate education, mosque incitement, the idolization of terrorists and systematic terrorism – calling for the elimination of Israel.

*The US State Department is advised to pay more attention to the reality of the Middle East, and abandon its systematically failing alternate reality.

Support Appreciated

Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, “Second Thought: a US-Israel Initiative”
May 7, 2024

On April 29, 2024, Secretary of State, Blinken, expressed his hopeful vision: “We continue to work… on a plan to build a just and lasting peace, a pathway to a state of the Palestinians with guarantees for Israel’s security as part of a more integrated and a more secure region… greater stability in this region and to prevent conflict from spreading….”

*However, policy-making should not be based on hope, but on reality. It should be a derivative of Middle East reality, where Iranian, Hezbollah and Palestinian (PLO and Hamas) terrorists are driven by fanatic visions and by an unwavering commitment to bring their enemies to submission. They are not driven by despair, neither by peaceful coexistence with their enemies, nor by life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. In the Middle East, deeply-rooted zealot ideologies transcend “money talks.”

*Moreover, reality has documented that terrorists bite the hands that feed them, as demonstrated by Iran’s Ayatollahs (whose rise to power was critically assisted by the US), Afghanistan’s Mujahideen (whose victory over the USSR was enabled by the US), Libya’s Islamic terrorists (who gained power due to a US-led NATO military offensive against Qadhafi), the Palestinian Authority (which was imported by Israel into Judea and Samaria), Hamas (which owes much of its terrorist maneuverability to Israel’s disengagement from Gaza), etc.

*Hence, the failure of all State Department’s Israel-Arab peace proposals, which centered on Palestinian interests, contrary to the successful conclusion of six Israel-Arab peace accords, which centered on Arab national interests, denying Palestinians a veto power over the peace process.

*Secretary Blinken’s hope-based vision of a Palestinian state, which would peacefully-coexist with Israel and Jordan and contribute to regional stability, is detached from the 70-year-old Palestinian intra-Arab track record, the 85-year-old interaction with enemies and rivals of the US (Nazi Germany, the Soviet Bloc, Ayatollah Khomeini, Latin American and global terrorism, North Korea, Venezuela, Cuba, Russia, China, the Moslem Brotherhood, etc.), and the 100-year-old anti-Jewish Palestinian terrorism.

*Contrary to Secretary Blinken, who is preoccupied with positive, convenient and speculative future scenarios and with Palestinian talk (with Western movers and shakers), all pro-US Arab leaders are preoccupied with the well-documented Palestinian intra-Arab rogue track record, which has transformed Palestinians into the role model of intra-Arab subversion, terrorism, ingratitude and treachery.

*Arab leaders are aware that the Palestinian track record means that the proposed Palestinian state would add fuel – not water – to the Middle East fire. In fact, Egypt does not welcome Palestinian migration from Gaza to Sinai, due to many years of Palestinian collaboration with Islamic and global terrorism, as well as the precedent of the 1950s, when Egypt-hosted-Palestinians collaborated with the Moslem Brotherhood, terrorizing their host government.

*Arab leaders are aware that the combination of the Palestinian track record, Jordan’s domestic predicament, and the intensifying Iranian subversion in Jordan, would transform a Palestinian state west of the Jordan River into the terminator of the pro-US Hashemite regime east of the River.  This would mutate Jordan into a major platform of anti-US Islamic terrorism, yielding ripple effects into the Arabian Peninsula and the Sinai Desert, threatening the survival of every pro-US Arab oil producing regime, as well as Egypt. This would yield a strategic bonanza to Iran’s Ayatollahs, Moslem Brotherhood terrorists, Russia and China, while causing a critical setback to all pro-US Arab regimes, and the US’ economy, national and homeland security.  

*Contrary to Secretary Blinken, Arab policy-makers are driven by Palestinian walk, not talk. They know that, in the Middle East, on words one does not pay custom. Furthermore, Arab policy toward the proposed Palestinian state is not reflected by the Arab talk – which has warmly embraced the Palestinians since 1948 – but by the Arab walk, which has refrained – since 1948 – from any tangible initiative to advance the cause of a Palestinian state. For example, all six Israel-Arab peace accords (Egypt, Jordan, the UAE, Bahrain, Morocco and South Sudan), and Israel’s ground-breaking cooperation with Saudi Arabia, were not preconditioned upon the establishment of a Palestinian state. In addition, the November 2024 joint summit of the Arab League and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation rejected a proposed resolution – by Iran, Algeria and the Palestinian Authority – to suspend all diplomatic, economic, touristic and defense cooperation with Israel. Arabs do not subordinate their own national interests on the Palestinian altar.

*US national and homeland security require a US policy in the Middle East, which is a derivative of the frustrating, violent, intolerant and unpredictable Middle East reality, not a convenient, optimistic alternate reality; a policy which seeks long term security, not short term convenience; avoiding and not repeating past critical mistakes.

Support Appreciated

Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, “Second Thought: a US-Israel Initiative”
December 5, 2023

“Those who experience wake up calls usually discover, in hindsight, that they had received plenty of warning before the poop hit the propeller, but they chose to disregard it…. Whether a wake up call becomes a boon, or a bane, depends on what you’re willing to learn from it, and whether you’re willing to be moved by experience.” (Greg Levoy, a psychologist and an author).

The US-Israel mutual threat of Islamic terrorism

Israel’s war against Hezbollah and Hamas is a wakeup call, highlighting the shared US-Israel war against Islamic terrorism. The latter considers Israel a US geo-strategic beachhead in the Middle East, that should be uprooted as a critical step toward the defeat of the Western “infidel.”

For example:   

*Hezbollah and Hamas are critical proxies of Iran, which funds, trains and supplies advanced ballistic and engineering hardware, aiming to realize its 1,400-year-old vision of toppling all “apostate” (Sunni) regimes, export the Islamic Shiite Revolution globally, and bring “the Great American Satan” to submission.

*Hamas was established in 1988 by the Muslim Brotherhood, which has been dedicated since 1928 to the toppling of all national Islamic regimes, replacing them with a universal Islamic society, establishing Islam as the only, divinely-ordained, legitimate religion on earth, defeating the “infidel” Western culture and bringing down “the Great American Satan.”

*Securing a boon, rather than a bane, requires the uprooting of Hamas’ terroristic, political and educational infrastructure, which would deter anti-US Islamic terrorism. On the other hand, the survival of Hamas would adrenalize the veins of anti-US Islamic terrorists in the Middle East and beyond, afflicting the US with a bane.

Israel’s war highlights Iran’s terrorist nature  

*Heeding the October 7, 2023 wakeup call should trigger a US reassessment of its 44-year-old diplomatic option toward Iran, which has facilitated Iran’s lead role – operationally and financially – in the transformation of Hezbollah and Hamas (as well as a multitude of additional Islamic and non-Islamic terror organizations) into a most effective anti-US global terrorist network. The US diplomatic option has also bolstered the evolution of Iran into the leading regional and global epicenter of anti-US terrorism, drug trafficking, money laundering and proliferation of advanced military systems.

*An effective wake up call, requires experience-based rather than wishful thinking-based policy making, reassessing the impact of lifted sanctions – especially Iranian oil export – on the supply of advanced Iranian missiles and other military systems to Hezbollah and Hamas.  Thus, Iranian oil exports surged from 500,000 barrels per day (under the sanctions) to 2.5-3 million barrels per day, which has provided the Ayatollahs with some $100bn in additional income, that was dedicated, mostly, to anti-US rogue activities in the Persian Gulf, the Middle East, North, East and Central Africa and Latin America. 

*Heeding the wakeup call should alert the US to the 40-year-old collaboration of Iran’s Ayatollahs and Hezbollah with the drug cartels of Mexico, Columbia, Bolivia, Ecuador and Brazil, Latin American terror organizations, and every anti-US government in South and Central America (up to the US-Mexico border), which is the US’ geo-strategic soft underbelly. This collaboration includes the training of terrorists and the supply of predator unmanned aerial vehicles and tunnel construction equipment. 

The Palestinian wake up call

*The October 7 wake up call should lead to a reassessment of the US State Department policy on the Palestinian issue, subordinating conventional wisdom to the march of facts. Hence, while the State Department has been eager to establish a Palestinian state in Judea and Samaria (the West Bank), pro-US Arabs have showered the Palestinians with embracing talk, but indifferent-to-negative walk, refraining from tangible steps toward the establishment of a Palestinian state.

*While Foggy Bottom’s policy has been driven by a moderate Palestinian diplomatic talk and future, subjective and speculative State Department  scenarios of Palestinian compliance and peaceful coexistence, the policy of the pro-US Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Morocco, Egypt, Jordan and Oman has been driven by the rogue Palestinian track record in the intra-Arab and global context.

*For instance, the systematic Palestinian betrayal of – and violence against – their Arab hosts, such as Egypt (1950s), Syria (1960s), Jordan (1968-70), Lebanon (1970-1982) and Kuwait (1990). Also, Palestinian collaboration with rogue entities, such as Nazi Germany, the Soviet Bloc, Ayatollah Khomeini, Saddam Hussein, North Korea, Venezuela, Cuba and Palestinian training camps – in Lebanon, Sudan and Yemen – for terror organizations from Latin America, Europe, Africa and Asia.  

*Contrary to Foggy Bottom, the pro-US Arab regimes have concluded that the rogue Palestinian track record (in addition to the Palestinian hate education, mosque incitement and monthly allowances to families of terrorists) suggests that a rogue Palestinian state would add fuel to the Middle East fire, threatening to consume the Hashemite regime in Jordan and other all pro-US Arab regimes.

*The October 7 wakeup call should clarify to the State Department the reason that the pro-US Arabs extend a shabby-doormat-welcome to Palestinian leaders, contrary to the red-carpet-welcome extended by Foggy Bottom.

The bottom line

Whether the aforementioned October 7, 2023 wakeup call shall be a boon or a bane depends on the US State Department’s own decision. Will its policy remain driven by agreeable conventional wisdom, or will it shift to an experience-based policy, irrespective of the disagreeable, violent, shattering, and frustrating reality?

   Support Appreciated