Most Popular

Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, “Second Thought: a US-Israel Initiative”
October 16, 2023

Hamas’ anti-Western strategy

*Hamas was established in 1988, as a spin-off of the Muslim Brotherhood, as were ISIS, Al Qaeda, the Islamic Jihad, Boko Haram and scores of additional terror entities. The Muslim Brotherhood is the largest Sunni terror organization, haunting all pro-US Arab regimes, India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Thailand, Africa, Europe and the USA. Its strategic goal is to topple all national Muslim regimes, bring the Western “infidel” to submission, and establish a universal Muslim society.  

*Hamas, just like the Muslim Brotherhood, considers Israel as “an infidel” entity in “the abode of Islam,” a US beachhead in the Middle East and a deterring ally of all pro-US Arab regimes.

*The 1988 Hamas charter highlights the Quran as its constitution, Jihad as its path, and martyrdom as its loftiest tactic.  It urges the “believers” to kill Jews, as specified in Article 7 of the charter, quoting one of the Prophet Muhammad’s Hadiths (verbal teachings): “When the Jew will hide behind stones and trees, the stones and trees will say: O Muslims, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him….”

*Hamas is assisted, militarily and financially, by Iran’s Ayatollahs (as well as by Qatar and Turkey), who – just like the Muslim Brotherhood – perceive the war against the “illegitimate” Jewish State as a preview of their war on “the apostate” pro-US Arab regimes and “the infidel” West, with a focus on “the Great American Satan.”

*Hamas and other Islamic and Palestinian terrorist organizations have collaborated with enemies and rivals of the US and the West, such as Nazi Germany, the Soviet Bloc, Iran’s Ayatollahs, North Korea, Venezuela, Cuba and terror organizations in Asia, Africa, Europe and Latin America.

Western attitude toward Hamas

*The more constrained is Israel’s posture of deterrence and war on Hamas, the more emboldened is anti-Western terrorism. On the other hand, the more robust is Israel’s posture of deterrence and its war on Hamas terrorism, the more deterred are Islamic terrorism to assault the West.

*Furthermore, it was Israel’s sturdy posture of deterrence, which induced six Arab countries to conclude peace accords with Jerusalem and enticed Saudi Arabia to substantially expand defense and commercial cooperation with Israel.

*While the rogue, anti-US conduct of Iran’s Ayatollahs has intensified dramatically since their ascension to power in February 1979, and the posture of Muslim Brotherhood-related organizations has been dramatically enhanced in Europe and the USA, government in the West have taken lightly the fanatic vision and the apocalyptic nature of Islamic terrorism, deluding itself that these terrorists are driven by despair, not by deeply-entrenched ideology.

*Notwithstanding the systematically anti-Western rogue track record of Hamas and Iran’s Ayatollahs since 1988 and 1979, the West has gone through suspension of disbelief. The West has assumed that grand financial and diplomatic gestures could induce these rogue entities to abandon their 1,400-year-old violently intolerant Islamic vision and embrace good-faith negotiation and peaceful-coexistence. However, there is ample documentation that terrorist Muslim regimes do not sacrifice their fanatical vision on the altar of their own enrichment and improved standard of living of their population.

*Western policy makers and public opinion molders brush off the well-documented fact that Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran’s Ayatollahs and other Islamic terrorists consider the following precepts of Islam as their own pillar of fire:

<Islam is the only legitimate religion, divinely ordained to rule;
<The abode of the “infidel” must submit itself to the abode of the “believers” unconditionally, peacefully, or militarily;
<Jihad must be conducted on behalf of Allah, guaranteeing each warrior 72 virgins in paradise;
<Terrorism aims to terrify the “infidel,” causing submission to Islam;
<Accords with “infidels” are non-binding and constitute a temporary ceasefire (Hudna), to be abrogated once the “believers” regain sufficient fire power;
<Double-speak and dissimulation (Taqiyyah) are legitimate tactics aimed at misleading and overcoming the “infidel.”

*Anti-US and anti-Israel Islamic terrorism is not driven by US or Israeli policy. In fact, Islamic terrorism has been an intrinsic feature of the Middle East since the 7th century, murdering many more Muslims than non-Muslims. Islamic terrorism has been driven by the existence of the “infidel” US and Israel, irrespective of their policy. For example, anti-US Islamic terrorism afflicted the US during the Administrations of President Obama (e.g., the November 9, 2009 Ft. Hood massacre and the December 2, 2015 San Bernardino massacre) and President Trump (e.g., the October 31, 2017 NYC massacre and the December 6, 2019 Pensacola massacre).

*Western policy makers have been in denial of the fact that terrorists bite the hand that feeds them, interpreting Western gestures as weakness.  This was demonstrated by the “9/11” terrorism (irrespective of the US’ assisting the Mujahideen’s war against Soviet occupation of Afghanistan), as well as by the November 1979 takeover of the US Embassy in Tehran and the 50 Americans who were held hostage for 444 days (irrespective of the US’ game-changing tailwind to the Ayatollahs rise to power). It was also evidenced by the 258 US fatalities in the 1983 car-bombing of the US Embassy and Marines Headquarters in Beirut (irrespective of the rough US pressure on Israel during its war on the PLO) and the 1998 car-bombing of the US Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania (irrespective of President Clinton’s brutal pressure of Israel and warm embrace of Arafat), etc.

*Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran’s Ayatollahs derive much energy by the fact that some Western policy makers and media outlets have applied the immoral moral equivalence to Hamas terrorists – who systematically and deliberately hit civilians, sometime killing soldiers – and Israeli soldiers, who systematically and deliberately target only Hamas terrorists, sometimes unintentionally killing Gaza civilians, who are held hostage by Hamas terrorists and abused as human shields.

*Constraining Israel’s war on Hamas amounts to ignoring the aforementioned facts. It would amount to repeating, rather than avoiding past costly mistakes, which would add fuel to the Middle East fire at the expense of Israel, pro-US Arab regimes, the US and other Western democracies.

Support Appreciated

Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, “Second Thought: a US-Israel Initiative”
October 12, 2023

No common-sense-observer of the volcanic Middle East and Islamic terrorism, in general, and Hamas/Palestinian terrorism, in particular, should be shocked by the October 2023 Hamas’ atrocities, which are not driven by the size of Israel and its policy, but by the aim to uproot the “infidel” Jewish State from the “abode of Islam.”

Ignoring the nature of Hamas

*Significant elements in Israeli, the US and Western policy-making and national security and the intelligence establishment have been in denial of the nature of Palestinian terrorism, as the Western establishment has been in denial of the megalomaniacally rogue nature of Iran’s Ayatollahs regime since its ascension to power in February, 1979.

*They have eagerly attempted to pacify Hamas. However, they failed to realize the pivotal role of the 1,400-year-old fanatic, anti-Western ideology of Hamas, which views Israel as the beachhead of the “infidel” Western culture in the Middle East.  

*Their eagerness to advance the cause of peace has led them to sacrifice the frustratingly complex Middle East reality on the altar of a convenient, virtual reality, as was the case in the Israeli-initiated (and Western embraced) 1993 Oslo Accord and the 2005 Gaza Disengagement, which catapulted Palestinian terrorism to unprecedented intensity, paving the road to the 2023 atrocities of Hamas.

*They have based their approach to Hamas – as the Western policy has approached Iran’s Ayatollahs – on the assumption that generous financial benefits would induce Hamas to alter its order of priorities, and prefer standard of living considerations over its core, zealot ideology. They believed that dramatic economic gestures could lead Hamas to eventually comply with agreements, accept a reality of a manageable low-intensity conflict, or even peaceful-coexistence with Israel.

The centrality of the Hamas covenant

*The apocalyptic, Iran-supported Hamas terror entity, was established in 1988 by the anti-Western Muslim Brotherhood, which is the largest Sunni terror organization, committed – since 1928 – to the toppling of all national Muslim regimes; and the establishment of a universal Muslim society, while bringing the West – and especially “the great American Satan” to submission.

*Hamas is one of many political, religious, educational and terroristic Muslim Brotherhood spin-offs, such as Islamic Jihad, ISIS, Al Qaeda and Boko Haram. These were established throughout the Middle East, Africa, India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Thailand, Europe and the USA.

*The 1988 Hamas covenant, which was posted by the Yale University Law School, presents the vision and nature of Hamas, as highlighted by  Hamas’ K-12 education system, Hamas’ Friday sermons and official events and monuments:

“…. The slogan of the Islamic resistance movement: Allah is its target, the Prophet [Muhammad] is its model, the Koran its constitution…. Jihad is its path, and death for the sake of Allah is the loftiest of its wishes….

“The Islamic Resistance Movement [Hamas] is one of the wings of the Muslim Brotherhood in Palestine. The Muslim Brotherhood Movement is a universal organization – the largest Islamic movement in modern times….

“Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it….

“The Day of Judgement will not come about until Muslims fight [kill] the Jews. When the Jew will hide behind stones and trees, the stones and trees will say: O Muslims, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him….

“There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad…. The Jihad for the liberation of Palestine is an individual duty…. the Palestinian problem is a religious problem…. I swear by the holder of Mohammed’s soul that I would like to invade and be killed for the sake of Allah, then invade and be killed, and then invade again and be killed….

“Freemasons, Rotary Clubs and others are nothing more than cells of saboteurs…. The day Islam is in control of guiding the affairs of life, these organizations, hostile to humanity and Islam, will be obliterated…. Peace and quiet would not be possible except under the wing of Islam….” 

The strategic blunder

*Key elements in Israeli, US and Western policy-making and national security and intelligence establishment have ignored the following decisive feature of the Middle East.  The uprooting of the Jewish State is not a prerequisite for the attainment of the vision of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Morocco and South Sudan; hence, their peace accords with Israel, and the unprecedented Israel-Saudi defense and commercial cooperation. On the other hand, the uprooting of the Jewish State is a prerequisite for the attainment of the Palestinian vision, as documented by the Palestinian (PA and Hamas) school curriculum – which has become the most effective production line of terrorists – the 1959, 1964 and 1988 covenants of Fatah, the PLO and Hamas, the public idolization of terrorists, monthly allowances to families of terrorists and the 100-year-Palestinian track record of terrorism against Arab countries and Israel.

*These key Israeli and Western personalities approached Hamas as a potential partner to negotiation, rather than a ruthless, fanatic, non-compromising terror entity, and therefore a target for liquidation. They would not accept the fact that gestures toward Hamas were construed – by Hamas – as weakness, hence, intensifying terrorism.

*They underestimated the apocalyptic nature of Hamas (just like Hezbollah and Iran’s Ayatollahs), which has enabled Hamas to absorb severe military blows, and leverages the numerus cease fires, concluded with Israel, in order to upgrade terror capabilities, which are not driven by despair, but by the hope/aspiration to uproot the “infidel” Jewish State.

*They have been influenced by the “Oslo school of thought,” as articulated by Shimon Peres, the chief architect of the 1993 Oslo Accord in his book, The New Middle East, which promotes virtual Middle East over Middle East reality.  For example:

“The international political setting is no longer conducive to wars (page 80) ….

“We must focus on this new Middle East reality… and not wander among memories of victories in long-gone wars – wars that will never be fought again (p. 85) …

“All things-considered, any war entered into now will be unnecessary one (p. 52) ….

“We must strive for fewer weapons and more faith.  Soft, open political boundaries will make it easier to reach an agreement and help withstand stormy times (p. 173) ….”

*The “Oslo school of thought” has severely eroded Israel’s posture of deterrence – which has played the key role in forging the six peace accords – while ushering in an unprecedented wave of terrorism, culminating with the current 2023 Hamas atrocities. It has led Israel to prefer defense and reaction to – rather than offense and preemption of – terrorism, and to chasing “mosquitos,” rather than draining the “swamp.”

The bottom line

*The failure to read the crystal-clear writing on the wall led to the 2023 failure to avert the Hamas atrocities.

*Will the Israeli, US and Western policy makers and national security and intelligence establishment conclude the common-sense lesson of the Gaza-based Palestinian terrorism, and read the 60-font-writing on the wall of the proposed Palestinian state on the mountain ridges of Judea and Samaria, which would dominate Jerusalem and the 8-15-mile waistline of Tel Aviv, Ben Gurion Airport and 80% of Israel’s population and infrastructure?

*Moreover, will US policy makers and congressional leaders read the 60-font-writing on the wall of the proposed Palestinian state west of the Jordan River, which would topple the pro-US Hashemite regime east of the Jordan River, transforming Jordan into another epicenter of anti-US Islamic terrorism, with its domino scenario into all pro-US Arab oil-producing countries, which would yield a strategic bonanza to Iran’s Ayatollahs, Russia and China, while dealing a blow to the US’ economy and national and homeland security?  

Support Appreciated

recent posts

Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, “Second Thought: a US-Israel Initiative”
December 28, 2023

*The Western attempt to distinguish between Hamas terrorists and the majority of Gaza Arabs defies Middle East reality, which documents that Hamas terrorists and most Gaza Arabs are interwoven with each other, socially, educationally, culturally, ideologically, and religiously.

*Moreover, Middle East reality highlights Hamas as a terror state (Gaza and potentially the West Bank), not as merely a terror organization.

*Therefore, most of the Arabs in Gaza enthusiastically celebrated the October 7, 2023 Hamas ISIS-like slaughter, rape, torture and mutilation of (mostly) civilians, heralding it as role model of sacrifice and heroism in the service of a Holy Islamic War and a demonstration of national liberation fortitude.

*The fact that the Arab population of Gaza lends itself to terrorism was underscored by a June 29, 1967 memorandum, submitted to the US Secretary of Defense, Robert McNamara by General Earle G. Wheeler, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs-of-Staff. The memorandum presented a map of Israel’s minimal security requirements, including Gaza, which “serves as a salient for introduction of Arab subversion and terrorism, and its retention would be to Israel’s military advantage…. It has served as a training area for [Palestinian terrorists]…. Occupation of the Gaza Strip by Israel would reduce the hostile border by a factor of five and eliminate a source for raids and training of [terrorists]….”   

*The terroristic potential of the population of Gaza has been leveraged since 1947 by the Muslim Brotherhood – the largest Sunni terror organization, which established Hamas in 1988 – when it established Gaza as one of its five centers in British Mandate Palestine (Haifa, Jaffa, Nablus, Jerusalem and Gaza). The Gaza branch collaborated closely with the Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt, the birth place of the Muslim Brotherhood. Initially, Hamas’ popularity was limited to the Gaza middle class, such as the religious establishment, lawyers and businessmen. However, since the 1990s, Hamas has increasingly evolved into a focal point of social, ideological and religious cohesion with the Gaza population at-large.

*The appeal of the Muslim Brotherhood and its Gaza branch, Hamas, has surged dramatically since 1993, through the K-12 hate-education system, Friday incitement in the mosques and the official and public idolization of terrorism, which were instituted by Mahmoud Abbas through the Oslo Accord. Initially, it benefitted the Palestinian Authority – headed by Arafat and Mahmoud Abbas – but rapidly catapulted Hamas into unprecedented popularity, as an integral element of the Gaza culture, a role model for the Gaza youth.

*Realizing the high-level identification of Gaza Arabs with Hamas – and the evolution of Hamas from a terror organization into a terror state – the Palestinian Authority has refrained from holding election since 2005, in order to avoid a Hamas landslide victory. Furthermore, after the October 7 massacre Hamas has surged to its highest popularity among Arabs in Judea and Samaria (West Bank).

*The Western attempt to subordinate the complex, frustrating, costly and inconvenient Middle East reality to its own alternative and convenient Middle East, has led to the assumption that Hamas terrorists and the majority of Gaza Arabs are disjointed culturally and ideologically.

*However, Middle East reality features Hamas as an entity, which is consistent with the worldview, values, education and ideology of most Gazan parents, who send their children to Hamas run schools, participate in Friday services in Hamas run mosques, and enthusiastically cheer Hamas’ ISIS-like terroristic operations.

*Contrary to Western conventional wisdom, Hamas is not a terror organization in the mold of Peru’s Shining Path, Italy’s Red Brigade, France’s Action Direct and multitude of other terror organizations, which represent a fringe of their societies, terrorizing the government and its educational, cultural and religious institutions.  Hamas is the terrorist state of Gaza, representing Gaza’s educational, cultural and religious institutions, enjoying the moral support of most Gazans.  In many respects, Hamas benefits from more popular support than enjoyed by Iraq’s Saddam Hussein, Syria’s Bashar Assad and Iran’s Ayatollahs.

*Western policy based on the erroneous assumption that Hamas and Gaza Arabs are disjointed from one another, inadvertently plays into the hands of Hamas, yielding a robust tailwind to terrorism and a powerful headwind to counter-terrorism. 

Support Appreciated

Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, “Second Thought: a US-Israel Initiative”
October 16, 2023

Hamas’ anti-Western strategy

*Hamas was established in 1988, as a spin-off of the Muslim Brotherhood, as were ISIS, Al Qaeda, the Islamic Jihad, Boko Haram and scores of additional terror entities. The Muslim Brotherhood is the largest Sunni terror organization, haunting all pro-US Arab regimes, India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Thailand, Africa, Europe and the USA. Its strategic goal is to topple all national Muslim regimes, bring the Western “infidel” to submission, and establish a universal Muslim society.  

*Hamas, just like the Muslim Brotherhood, considers Israel as “an infidel” entity in “the abode of Islam,” a US beachhead in the Middle East and a deterring ally of all pro-US Arab regimes.

*The 1988 Hamas charter highlights the Quran as its constitution, Jihad as its path, and martyrdom as its loftiest tactic.  It urges the “believers” to kill Jews, as specified in Article 7 of the charter, quoting one of the Prophet Muhammad’s Hadiths (verbal teachings): “When the Jew will hide behind stones and trees, the stones and trees will say: O Muslims, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him….”

*Hamas is assisted, militarily and financially, by Iran’s Ayatollahs (as well as by Qatar and Turkey), who – just like the Muslim Brotherhood – perceive the war against the “illegitimate” Jewish State as a preview of their war on “the apostate” pro-US Arab regimes and “the infidel” West, with a focus on “the Great American Satan.”

*Hamas and other Islamic and Palestinian terrorist organizations have collaborated with enemies and rivals of the US and the West, such as Nazi Germany, the Soviet Bloc, Iran’s Ayatollahs, North Korea, Venezuela, Cuba and terror organizations in Asia, Africa, Europe and Latin America.

Western attitude toward Hamas

*The more constrained is Israel’s posture of deterrence and war on Hamas, the more emboldened is anti-Western terrorism. On the other hand, the more robust is Israel’s posture of deterrence and its war on Hamas terrorism, the more deterred are Islamic terrorism to assault the West.

*Furthermore, it was Israel’s sturdy posture of deterrence, which induced six Arab countries to conclude peace accords with Jerusalem and enticed Saudi Arabia to substantially expand defense and commercial cooperation with Israel.

*While the rogue, anti-US conduct of Iran’s Ayatollahs has intensified dramatically since their ascension to power in February 1979, and the posture of Muslim Brotherhood-related organizations has been dramatically enhanced in Europe and the USA, government in the West have taken lightly the fanatic vision and the apocalyptic nature of Islamic terrorism, deluding itself that these terrorists are driven by despair, not by deeply-entrenched ideology.

*Notwithstanding the systematically anti-Western rogue track record of Hamas and Iran’s Ayatollahs since 1988 and 1979, the West has gone through suspension of disbelief. The West has assumed that grand financial and diplomatic gestures could induce these rogue entities to abandon their 1,400-year-old violently intolerant Islamic vision and embrace good-faith negotiation and peaceful-coexistence. However, there is ample documentation that terrorist Muslim regimes do not sacrifice their fanatical vision on the altar of their own enrichment and improved standard of living of their population.

*Western policy makers and public opinion molders brush off the well-documented fact that Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran’s Ayatollahs and other Islamic terrorists consider the following precepts of Islam as their own pillar of fire:

<Islam is the only legitimate religion, divinely ordained to rule;
<The abode of the “infidel” must submit itself to the abode of the “believers” unconditionally, peacefully, or militarily;
<Jihad must be conducted on behalf of Allah, guaranteeing each warrior 72 virgins in paradise;
<Terrorism aims to terrify the “infidel,” causing submission to Islam;
<Accords with “infidels” are non-binding and constitute a temporary ceasefire (Hudna), to be abrogated once the “believers” regain sufficient fire power;
<Double-speak and dissimulation (Taqiyyah) are legitimate tactics aimed at misleading and overcoming the “infidel.”

*Anti-US and anti-Israel Islamic terrorism is not driven by US or Israeli policy. In fact, Islamic terrorism has been an intrinsic feature of the Middle East since the 7th century, murdering many more Muslims than non-Muslims. Islamic terrorism has been driven by the existence of the “infidel” US and Israel, irrespective of their policy. For example, anti-US Islamic terrorism afflicted the US during the Administrations of President Obama (e.g., the November 9, 2009 Ft. Hood massacre and the December 2, 2015 San Bernardino massacre) and President Trump (e.g., the October 31, 2017 NYC massacre and the December 6, 2019 Pensacola massacre).

*Western policy makers have been in denial of the fact that terrorists bite the hand that feeds them, interpreting Western gestures as weakness.  This was demonstrated by the “9/11” terrorism (irrespective of the US’ assisting the Mujahideen’s war against Soviet occupation of Afghanistan), as well as by the November 1979 takeover of the US Embassy in Tehran and the 50 Americans who were held hostage for 444 days (irrespective of the US’ game-changing tailwind to the Ayatollahs rise to power). It was also evidenced by the 258 US fatalities in the 1983 car-bombing of the US Embassy and Marines Headquarters in Beirut (irrespective of the rough US pressure on Israel during its war on the PLO) and the 1998 car-bombing of the US Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania (irrespective of President Clinton’s brutal pressure of Israel and warm embrace of Arafat), etc.

*Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran’s Ayatollahs derive much energy by the fact that some Western policy makers and media outlets have applied the immoral moral equivalence to Hamas terrorists – who systematically and deliberately hit civilians, sometime killing soldiers – and Israeli soldiers, who systematically and deliberately target only Hamas terrorists, sometimes unintentionally killing Gaza civilians, who are held hostage by Hamas terrorists and abused as human shields.

*Constraining Israel’s war on Hamas amounts to ignoring the aforementioned facts. It would amount to repeating, rather than avoiding past costly mistakes, which would add fuel to the Middle East fire at the expense of Israel, pro-US Arab regimes, the US and other Western democracies.

Support Appreciated

Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, “Second Thought: a US-Israel Initiative”
October 12, 2023

No common-sense-observer of the volcanic Middle East and Islamic terrorism, in general, and Hamas/Palestinian terrorism, in particular, should be shocked by the October 2023 Hamas’ atrocities, which are not driven by the size of Israel and its policy, but by the aim to uproot the “infidel” Jewish State from the “abode of Islam.”

Ignoring the nature of Hamas

*Significant elements in Israeli, the US and Western policy-making and national security and the intelligence establishment have been in denial of the nature of Palestinian terrorism, as the Western establishment has been in denial of the megalomaniacally rogue nature of Iran’s Ayatollahs regime since its ascension to power in February, 1979.

*They have eagerly attempted to pacify Hamas. However, they failed to realize the pivotal role of the 1,400-year-old fanatic, anti-Western ideology of Hamas, which views Israel as the beachhead of the “infidel” Western culture in the Middle East.  

*Their eagerness to advance the cause of peace has led them to sacrifice the frustratingly complex Middle East reality on the altar of a convenient, virtual reality, as was the case in the Israeli-initiated (and Western embraced) 1993 Oslo Accord and the 2005 Gaza Disengagement, which catapulted Palestinian terrorism to unprecedented intensity, paving the road to the 2023 atrocities of Hamas.

*They have based their approach to Hamas – as the Western policy has approached Iran’s Ayatollahs – on the assumption that generous financial benefits would induce Hamas to alter its order of priorities, and prefer standard of living considerations over its core, zealot ideology. They believed that dramatic economic gestures could lead Hamas to eventually comply with agreements, accept a reality of a manageable low-intensity conflict, or even peaceful-coexistence with Israel.

The centrality of the Hamas covenant

*The apocalyptic, Iran-supported Hamas terror entity, was established in 1988 by the anti-Western Muslim Brotherhood, which is the largest Sunni terror organization, committed – since 1928 – to the toppling of all national Muslim regimes; and the establishment of a universal Muslim society, while bringing the West – and especially “the great American Satan” to submission.

*Hamas is one of many political, religious, educational and terroristic Muslim Brotherhood spin-offs, such as Islamic Jihad, ISIS, Al Qaeda and Boko Haram. These were established throughout the Middle East, Africa, India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Thailand, Europe and the USA.

*The 1988 Hamas covenant, which was posted by the Yale University Law School, presents the vision and nature of Hamas, as highlighted by  Hamas’ K-12 education system, Hamas’ Friday sermons and official events and monuments:

“…. The slogan of the Islamic resistance movement: Allah is its target, the Prophet [Muhammad] is its model, the Koran its constitution…. Jihad is its path, and death for the sake of Allah is the loftiest of its wishes….

“The Islamic Resistance Movement [Hamas] is one of the wings of the Muslim Brotherhood in Palestine. The Muslim Brotherhood Movement is a universal organization – the largest Islamic movement in modern times….

“Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it….

“The Day of Judgement will not come about until Muslims fight [kill] the Jews. When the Jew will hide behind stones and trees, the stones and trees will say: O Muslims, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him….

“There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad…. The Jihad for the liberation of Palestine is an individual duty…. the Palestinian problem is a religious problem…. I swear by the holder of Mohammed’s soul that I would like to invade and be killed for the sake of Allah, then invade and be killed, and then invade again and be killed….

“Freemasons, Rotary Clubs and others are nothing more than cells of saboteurs…. The day Islam is in control of guiding the affairs of life, these organizations, hostile to humanity and Islam, will be obliterated…. Peace and quiet would not be possible except under the wing of Islam….” 

The strategic blunder

*Key elements in Israeli, US and Western policy-making and national security and intelligence establishment have ignored the following decisive feature of the Middle East.  The uprooting of the Jewish State is not a prerequisite for the attainment of the vision of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Morocco and South Sudan; hence, their peace accords with Israel, and the unprecedented Israel-Saudi defense and commercial cooperation. On the other hand, the uprooting of the Jewish State is a prerequisite for the attainment of the Palestinian vision, as documented by the Palestinian (PA and Hamas) school curriculum – which has become the most effective production line of terrorists – the 1959, 1964 and 1988 covenants of Fatah, the PLO and Hamas, the public idolization of terrorists, monthly allowances to families of terrorists and the 100-year-Palestinian track record of terrorism against Arab countries and Israel.

*These key Israeli and Western personalities approached Hamas as a potential partner to negotiation, rather than a ruthless, fanatic, non-compromising terror entity, and therefore a target for liquidation. They would not accept the fact that gestures toward Hamas were construed – by Hamas – as weakness, hence, intensifying terrorism.

*They underestimated the apocalyptic nature of Hamas (just like Hezbollah and Iran’s Ayatollahs), which has enabled Hamas to absorb severe military blows, and leverages the numerus cease fires, concluded with Israel, in order to upgrade terror capabilities, which are not driven by despair, but by the hope/aspiration to uproot the “infidel” Jewish State.

*They have been influenced by the “Oslo school of thought,” as articulated by Shimon Peres, the chief architect of the 1993 Oslo Accord in his book, The New Middle East, which promotes virtual Middle East over Middle East reality.  For example:

“The international political setting is no longer conducive to wars (page 80) ….

“We must focus on this new Middle East reality… and not wander among memories of victories in long-gone wars – wars that will never be fought again (p. 85) …

“All things-considered, any war entered into now will be unnecessary one (p. 52) ….

“We must strive for fewer weapons and more faith.  Soft, open political boundaries will make it easier to reach an agreement and help withstand stormy times (p. 173) ….”

*The “Oslo school of thought” has severely eroded Israel’s posture of deterrence – which has played the key role in forging the six peace accords – while ushering in an unprecedented wave of terrorism, culminating with the current 2023 Hamas atrocities. It has led Israel to prefer defense and reaction to – rather than offense and preemption of – terrorism, and to chasing “mosquitos,” rather than draining the “swamp.”

The bottom line

*The failure to read the crystal-clear writing on the wall led to the 2023 failure to avert the Hamas atrocities.

*Will the Israeli, US and Western policy makers and national security and intelligence establishment conclude the common-sense lesson of the Gaza-based Palestinian terrorism, and read the 60-font-writing on the wall of the proposed Palestinian state on the mountain ridges of Judea and Samaria, which would dominate Jerusalem and the 8-15-mile waistline of Tel Aviv, Ben Gurion Airport and 80% of Israel’s population and infrastructure?

*Moreover, will US policy makers and congressional leaders read the 60-font-writing on the wall of the proposed Palestinian state west of the Jordan River, which would topple the pro-US Hashemite regime east of the Jordan River, transforming Jordan into another epicenter of anti-US Islamic terrorism, with its domino scenario into all pro-US Arab oil-producing countries, which would yield a strategic bonanza to Iran’s Ayatollahs, Russia and China, while dealing a blow to the US’ economy and national and homeland security?  

Support Appreciated

A new 8-minute-video: YouTube, Facebook

Synopsis:

*Israel’s control of the topographically-dominant mountain ridges of the Golan Heights, Judea and Samaria has enhanced Israel’s posture of deterrence, constraining regional violence, transforming Israel into a unique force-multiplier for the US.

*Top Jordanian military officers warned that a Palestinian state west of the Jordan River would doom the pro-US Hashemite regime east of the River, transforming Jordan into a non-controllable terrorist heaven, generating an anti-US domino scenario in the Arabian Peninsula.

*Israel’s control of Judea and Samaria has eliminated much of the threat (to Jordan) of Judea and Samaria-based Palestinian terrorism.

*Israel’s posture of deterrence emboldens Jordan in the face of domestic and regional threats, sparing the US the need to deploy its own troops, in order to avoid an economic and national security setback.

*The proposed Palestinian state would become the Palestinian straw that would break the pro-US Hashemite back.

*The Palestinian track record of the last 100 years suggests that the proposed Palestinian state would be a rogue entity, adding fuel to the Middle East fire, undermining US interests.

Support Appreciated

 

 

 

 

Western red carpet vs. Arab shabby rug…

The two-state solution

President Biden underscored his strong commitment to a negotiated two-state solution as the best path to reach a just and lasting resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.”

“US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said that Washington backed a two-state solution to resolve the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians.”

Would a Palestinian state resolve or exacerbate the Israel-Palestinian conflict?

Would a Palestinian state enhance or erode Middle East stability?

Would a focus on the Palestinian issue bolster or cripple the expansion of the Israel-Arab peace process?

Would a Palestinian state advance or undermine US interests?

The “two-state solution” policy is based on the following assumptions:

*The unresolved Palestinian issue is crucial for the Arab countries and the crux of the Arab-Israeli conflict;

*The proposed Palestinian state would adhere to peaceful-coexistence with the Jewish State, and would not join the ranks of rogue regimes;

*Land-for-peace is a prerequisite for the resolution of the Palestinian issue, requiring an Israeli retreat from land (the mountain ridges of Judea and Samaria), which is the cradle of Jewish history and pivotal to Israel’s national security;

*A dramatic Israeli territorial concession, buttressed by a game-changing international financial package, would entice the Palestinians to abandon the goal to eliminate the Jewish State;

*The Palestinians are amenable to a permanent (not tactical) peaceful-coexistence with the Jewish State;

Are such assumptions consistent, or inconsistent, with the Palestinian track record?

Western red carpet vs. Arab shabby rug

Western governments are preoccupied with contemporary Palestinian diplomacy, according Palestinians red-carpet receptions. They prefer to speculate on future positive Palestinian behavior, rather than be preoccupied with the rogue intra-Arab Palestinian track record. They court the Palestinians, while pressuring Israel.

On the other hand, the history-driven Arabs – who neither forget nor forgive – are mindful of the Palestinian track record, and therefore accord Palestinians shabby rug receptions.  The Arabs have concluded that a Palestinian state would add fuel to the Middle East fire, while valuing Israel as a potent force against rogue entities such as Iran’s Ayatollahs and the Muslim Brotherhood. Thus, they have expanded commercial and security cooperation with Israel, and refrain from flexing military or substantial financial muscles on behalf of the Palestinians.

In fact, no Arab-Israeli war erupted due to – or on behalf of – the Palestinians, and no Arab countries intervened militarily in Israel’s wars against Palestinian terrorism in Lebanon, Judea and Samaria and Gaza.

The intra-Arab Palestinian track record has been a role-model of subversion, terrorism and ingratitude. In the mid-1950s and mid-1960s, they were involved in terrorism in Egypt and Syria; in 1970, they triggered a civil war in Jordan, attempting to topple the pro-US Hashemite regime; and in the 1970s, they were involved in terrorism and a series of civil wars in Lebanon.  In 1990, they collaborated with – and publicly praised – Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait, which was the most generous Arab host of 400,000 Palestinians, including Mahmoud Abbas and Arafat and their families. Hence, the expulsion of most Palestinians from Kuwait in the aftermath of the First Gulf War.

Notwithstanding Jordan’s Hashemite regime talk on behalf of Palestinians, Jordan’s military and security forces are aware that a Palestinian state west of the Jordan River would doom the Hashemite regime east of the River, triggering ripple effects which could topple all pro-US regimes in the Arabian Peninsula, adversely impacting the global oil market and US national security.

In addition, the Palestinian track record features systematic close ties with enemies and adversaries of the US, such as Nazi Germany, the Soviet Bloc, international terrorist organizations, Iran’s Ayatollahs, North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela, China and Russia.

Land-for-peace or land-for-terror?

The 1993 Oslo Accord showered the Palestinians with unprecedented authority, which was not accorded to them by Jordan or Egypt, when the two countries occupied Judea, Samaria and Gaza. It established a five-year-venue to a Palestinian state. However, instead of land-for-peace, the relocation of the PLO headquarters from Tunisia, Lebanon, Sudan and Yemen to Judea, Samaria, Gaza and East Jerusalem introduced the concept of land-for-terror and land-for-hate-education.

Moreover, the 2005 Israeli uprooting of its civilian and military presence from Gaza has triggered four Hamas wars and a systematic wave of unprecedented Hamas terrorism.

Furthermore, in November 1947, the UN recommended the partitioning of the area west of the Jordan River between Jewish and Arab states, in violation of Article 80 of the 1945 UN Charter and the September 1922 League of Nations, which were committed to establishing a Jewish National Home in the entire area. The local Arabs and the surrounding Arab states rejected the 1947 Partition Plan and launched a war to annihilate the Jewish State.

In July 1937, the British Peel Commission recommended the establishment of a Jewish state over 18% – and an Arab state over 75% – of the area west of the Jordan River. The plan was rejected by the Arabs, who escalated terrorism.

Palestinian vision documented by education curriculum

Notwithstanding Palestinian diplomatic and public relations statements, the most authentic reflection of the Palestinian worldview, vision and territorial goal has been Mahmoud Abbas’ K-12 education curriculum, which has become (since 1993) a most effective multiplier of terrorism, suicide bombing and anti-Jewish, anti-Israel and anti-peace fanaticism.

The 2020-2021 school textbooks of the Palestinian Authority highlight antisemitism, repudiation of Jewish history, dehumanization of Jews and the Jewish State, rejection of peaceful-coexistence with Israel, inciting to martyrdom and Jihad (“holy war”) “in the service of Allah,” heralding suicide bombers and terrorism in general, glorification of women-terrorists as role models, and promoting geographic maps with Israel replaced by an Arab Palestine from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea.

Peaceful-coexistence with Israel?

On the eve of the September 13, 1993 signing of the Oslo Accord on the White House lawn, Arafat told the Jordanian TV that the accord was an interim agreement, consistent with the PLO’s June 1974 Phased Plan. The latter legitimized the establishment of a Palestinian beachhead on any part of British Mandate Palestine, as a step to eliminate the Jewish State and takeover the whole of Palestine.

Mahmoud Abbas and Arafat reiterated the Palestinian Phased Plan on August 14, 2009November 16, 1998January 30, 1996 and May 10, 1994, drawing inspiration from Mohammed’s Hudaybiyya Treaty – a major precept of traditional and contemporary Islam and Arab policy-making.

The Hudaybiyya Treaty was concluded between Mohammed and his Mecca enemies in 628 AD.  However, while the treaty was perceived by Mecca as a permanent peace, Mohammed considered it as a truce (not a final peace) and a means (not a goal) to achieve the Islamic imperialistic goal. Thus, Mohammed was able to regroup, breach the treaty and overwhelm the misled and tricked enemy. It has become a tactical role model for Muslim leaders, especially when confronting the “infidel.”

Contemporarily, the Palestinian vision was codified by the charters of Mahmoud Abbas’ Fatah and PLO in 1959 and 1964 – before Israel regained control of Judea and Samaria (the West Bank), East Jerusalem and Gaza – highlighting the goal “to liberate the whole of Palestine.” In other words, the core issue has always been the annihilation – not the size – of the Jewish State, which is deemed illegitimate in “the abode of Islam.”

The Palestinian vision is not driven by despair, but by a pre-1967 commitment “to liberate Palestine from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea.”

The Palestinian issue and expanding the Israel-Arab peace process

The “Palestine Firsters” – who believe in the centrality of the Palestinian issue in the Middle East – introduced a litany of peace initiatives, which were crashed against the rocks of Middle East reality.

At the same time, Israel concluded a series of peace accords with Egypt, Jordan, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Morocco and the Sudan, which bypassed the Palestinian issue, avoided the trap of a Palestinian veto and focused on Arab – not Palestinian – interests.

In conclusion

A wide gap exists between the Palestinian track record, on the one hand, and Washington’s well-intentioned two-state-policy, on the other hand.

Contrary to the expectations of Washington’s policy-makers, Middle East reality documents that a Palestinian state would add a rogue regime to the stormy region, intensify terrorism and war, inflame regional instability, exacerbate the Israel-Palestinian conflict, undermine the expansion of the Israel-Arab peace process, generate tailwind to rogue entities and cripple US interests.

An Israeli retreat to the pre-1967 8-15-mile sliver along the Mediterranean, dominated by the mountain ridges of Judea and Samaria, would obliterate Israel’s posture of deterrence, and would transform Israel from a unique force-multiplier – to a strategic liability – for the US, depriving the US of “the largest US aircraft carrier, which does not require a single American on board.”

Support Appreciated

 

 

 

 

 

Hamas and war on terrorism

  1. All pro-US Arab regimes – such as Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Oman, Morocco and Sudan – have refrained from tangible support of Hamas, which is a branch of the Muslim Brotherhood. The latter constitutes an existential threat to each pro-US Arab regime, aiming to topple every Muslim/Arab regime, in order to establish a universal Islamic society through political, social and terroristic means. Eventually, it aspires to bring non-Muslims, and especially Western democracies, to submission.
  2. The pro-US Arab regimes are aware that Hamas is a proxy of Iran’s Shiite terrorism, even though it is a branch of the Muslim Brotherhood Sunni terrorism, heavily assisted by Turkey’s Erdogan, who aspires to reestablish the Ottoman Empire throughout the Middle East and beyond.
  3. Hamas’ patrons – Iran’s Ayatollahs and the Muslim Brotherhood – are epicenters of regional and global Islamic terrorism, drug trafficking and proliferation of ballistic and nuclear technologies. They pose a major threat to the production and supply of oil and orderly global trade (e.g., Asia-Europe naval trade), and fuel instability in the Persian Gulf, the Middle East, Central Asia, North Africa, the Horn of Africa and Europe. They threaten the national security, homeland security and economy of the US and other Western democracies.
  4. Israel’s systematic war against Hamas terrorism – as well as against Hezbollah – constrains the maneuverability of Iran’s Ayatollahs, the Muslim Brotherhood and Turkey’s Erdogan. Pressuring Israel to limit/stop its offensive against Hamas terrorists energizes Hamas and other anti-Western terrorists, undermining the Free World’s war on Islamic terrorism.

Arabs stance on Palestinian terrorism

  1. Notwithstanding the pro-Palestinian Arab talk, no Arab regime has flexed military or financial muscle on behalf of Hamas, consistent with the Arab conduct during the 2008/9, 2012 and 2014 Israel-Hamas wars, the 1987-1992 and 2000-2003 Palestinian Intifadas and the 1982-83 Israel-PLO war in Lebanon.

Since 1948, the Arabs have emanated pro-Palestinian talk – which has captured the attention of Western media and policy makers – while avoiding the pro-Palestinian walk. Thus, no Arab war against Israel was ever launched on behalf of the Palestinians.

  1. The absence of tangible Arab support of the current Hamas war on Israel reflects the consistent Arab view of the Palestinian Authority (PLO) and Hamas as role models of intra-Arab terrorism, subversion and ingratitude. This Arab view has been in response to Palestinian terrorism in Egypt (1950s), Syria (1960s), Jordan (1968-70 and 1980s), Lebanon (1970s and 1980s) and Kuwait (assisting Saddam Hussein’s 1990 invasion).

In the history-driven Middle East, memory is long: Palestinian intra-Arab treachery is not forgotten, nor forgiven.

Root cause of Palestinian terrorism

  1. While Westerners observe the Gaza War through political and diplomatic lenses, and attribute terrorism to political and economic despair and deprivation, Hamas is driven by a fanatical, deeply-rooted religious vision. Thus, the current wave of Palestinian terrorism has been accompanied by calls to resurrect the 7th century Muhammed’s massacre of the Jewish tribes in the Arabian Peninsula, and to free Jaffa, Lydda, Ramleh and Acre (in pre-1967 Israel!). On May 15, Palestinians commemorated the “Nakba” – the catastrophe of Israel’s establishment.

Moreover, Mahmoud Abbas’ Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) and Fatah were established in 1964 and 1959, in order to “liberate” pre-1967 Israel, not “the West Bank” and East Jerusalem, as documented by Mahmoud Abbas’ hate-education curriculum.

Islam divides the world into the “abode of Islam” and those who have yet to accept – or be subordinated to – Islam as the sole legitimate religion, or be eliminated. Thus, Hamas defines Israel as an illegitimate “infidel” sovereignty in the “abode of Islam,” which must be uprooted or brought to submission.

  1. As documented by anti-Jewish Palestinian terrorism since the 19th century, anti-Israel Palestinian terrorism preceded the establishment of Israel and the Six Days War.

The root cause of Palestinian terrorism is not the size – but the existence – of the Jewish State. Palestinian terrorism is driven by Israel’s existence, irrespective of Israel’s policies. For example, in 1993 (Oslo) and 2005 (disengagement from Gaza), in a self-destruct attempt to create a “new Middle East,” Israel provided the Palestinians with unprecedented self-rule and a venue to independence.  However, as expected in the real Middle East, and based on the Arab experience with Palestinians, these critical Israeli policies yielded unprecedented waves of Palestinian hate education, incitement and terrorism.

  1. Palestinian terrorism is part and parcel of Arab/Islamic terrorism, which has dominated Middle East reality since the 7th century, when three of the first four caliphs, who succeeded Muhammed, were murdered. Palestinian terrorism and Arab/Islamic terrorism have mostly targeted Arabs/Muslims. Is it logical to assume that the “infidel” Jew or Christian will be treated more moderately?!
  2. There is no moral equivalence between Western-style democracies, which combat terrorism, and inadvertently hit civilians, on the one hand, and terrorists who systematically and deliberately target civilians, while abusing their own civilians as human shield, in order to increase civilian casualties, on the other hand.
  3. The prerequisites for a successful battle against Arab/Islamic terrorism are the bolstering of one’s power-of-deterrence – in one of the most violently unpredictable and terror-driven regions of the world – accompanied by a realism-based policy, while avoiding appeasement and the delusion that Middle East rogue entities welcome Western norms, such as peaceful-coexistence, compliance with agreements, human rights and democracy.

Support Appreciated

 

 

 

Conventional wisdom assumes that the Palestinian Authority is amenable to peaceful-coexistence with Israel; that peaceful-coexistence is advanced by financial support of the Palestinian Authority; that a core concern for the Palestinian Authority is the land acquired by Israel in the 1967 War; and that land-for-peace (Israel’s retreat to the pre-1967 lines) is a prerequisite for Israel-Palestinian peaceful-coexistence.

Are these assumptions consistent with the Palestinian reality?

While the Palestinian ethos features religious, political, ideological, demographic and legal components, its core ingredient is a specific parcel of land, which pulls the rug out from under the “land-for-peace” assumption.

The centrality of the “1948 land” in the Palestinian ethos is underscored by the late Dr. Yuval Arnon-Ohanna, who was the head of the Mossad’s Palestinian research division and a ground-breaking researcher of the Palestinian issue (Line of Furrow and Fire). This is documented by pivotal Palestinian books, such as the six-volume Al Nakbah (“The 1948 Catastrophe”), as well as the 1959 and 1964 Fatah and PLO covenants – which are the ideological and strategic core of the Palestinian Authority – and the Palestinian educational curriculum.

These foundational documents have served as a most effective generator of Palestinian terrorism since 1948, and especially since the signing of the 1993 Oslo Accords.  They focus on the outcome of the failed 1948 Arab military invasion – by five Arab countries and the local Arabs – of the Jewish State.

This Arab offensive was expected by the CIA, which assessed that it would be successful, yielding the destruction of the Jewish State and a second Jewish Holocaust in less than ten years!

According to Dr. Arnon-Ohanna, the aforementioned Palestinian documents shed light on the fragmentation of the Arab society west of the Jordan River.  Thus, the mountain Arabs in Judea, Samaria (West Bank) and the Galilee have demonstrated a relative cohesion, socially, ethnically, culturally, politically and historically.  On the other hand, the coastal plains Arabs have exhibited a relatively feeble social structure, recently immigrating from Muslim areas, as evidenced by the names of major clans.

For example, the al Mughrabi clan immigrated from North Africa (Algeria), al Turki from Turkey, al Ajami from Iran, al Kurdi from Kurdistan, al Iraqi from Iraq, al Hindi from India, al Masri from Egypt, Masrawi from Egypt, Abu Kishk from Egypt, Haurani from Syria, Bushnak from Bosnia, Habash from Ethiopia, Yamani from Yemen, Turkmen from Turkmenistan and the Caucasus, Hawari from north Sudan, etc.

While most of the mountain Arabs remained in their homes during the 1948/49 war, most coastal plains Arabs – the lion share of whom migrated to the area during the 19th and early 20th centuries – left their homes. In fact, many of the coastal Arabs left their homes before the eruption of the war and during its initial stage, when the invading Arab military forces and the local Arabs had the upper hand.

The (mostly coastal plains) Arabs who left their homes are referred to as al-Kharj (“Outside”) and the (mostly mountain) Arabs who stayed intact are referred to as al-Dakhil (“Inside”).

The coastal/outside 1948 Arabs constitute the leadership and most of the rank and file of the PLO, Hamas and the Palestinian Authority. They claim “the right of return” to the 1948 territory, which is the pre-1967 area of Israel.  “Cleansing the 1948 land of the Zionist presence” is the focal point of the Palestinian ethos, as highlighted by the Palestinian school curriculum, media, religious sermons and the 1959 and 1964 Fatah and PLO covenants (eight years and three years before the 1967 war).

Contrary to conventional wisdom, the core concern of the Palestinians is not the 1967 – but the 1948 – “occupation;” not peaceful coexistence with – but without – Israel; not the size – but the elimination – of Israel.

Support Appreciated

 

 

 

The Palestinian conflict did not erupt in 1967, nor in 1948.

In November 1917, the Balfour Declaration called for the establishment of “a national home for the Jewish People” in Palestine, which was the accepted international name of the Land of Israel since the 5th century BCE. The declaration, by the British Foreign Minister, stated that “nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities [Arabs] in Palestine.” The declaration acknowledged the ancient national Jewish roots in the Land of Israel (Palestine), and that Jews were indigenous in Palestine, returning to – not colonizing – their homeland.

In April 1920, the post-World War I San Remo Conference reaffirmed the Balfour Declaration and laid the legal foundation for the creation of 22 Arab states and one Jewish state. It was signed  in the August 1920 Treaty of Sevres between the Allied Powers and the Ottoman Empire.

Arab terrorism erupted in Jerusalem, Jaffa and the Galilee in response to the emerging reestablishment of Jewish sovereignty in the Middle East, which is considered by Muslims as the abode of Islam, “divinely-ordained to believers” and off limits to “infidel” sovereignty.

In July 1922, the League of Nations entrusted Britain with the Mandate for Palestine, which was authored by the San Remo Conference and signed by all 51 members of the League of Nations. The Mandate highlighted “the historical connection of the Jewish people to Palestine, and the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country.” The sole purpose of the Mandate was to establish a Jewish national home in Palestine, referring to the Land of Israel. The Mandate for Palestine has been included, since 1945, in Article 80 of the UN Charter, which preserves the inherent Jewish national rights in the Land of Israel.

In September 1922, the League of Nations and Britain transferred 3/4 of Palestine to the Hashemite Emirate of Transjordan, which gained independence in 1946.

In July 1937, intimidated by an unprecedented wave of intra-Arab and anti-Jewish Arab terrorism, the Peel (British) Commission recommended the partition of Palestine. The Commission proposed to reduce the area of the Jewish state to 18% of Palestine west of the Jordan River (parts of the coastal plane, the Galilee, Jezreel Valley and Beit She’an Valley), while establishing an Arab state over 75% of the area, in addition to an international zone between Jerusalem and Jaffa.

The plan was vehemently rejected by the Arabs, who intensified anti-Jewish terrorism.

In November 1947, the UN Special Committee on Palestine recommended the establishment of Jewish and Arab states, joined by economic union, with the Jerusalem-Bethlehem region as an international enclave.  Once again, the Jewish side accepted the UN plan, but the Arabs rejected it and launched a campaign of terror, bolstered by the military forces of five Arab countries (Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Iraq and Lebanon). The Palestinian leadership – which collaborated with Nazi Germany and later on with the Soviet Bloc, Ayatollah Khomeini, Saddam Hussein and North Korea – threatened to transform Palestine into a land soaked in blood and scorched by fire.

In 2020, the Western foreign policy establishment tends to accord much weight to peaceful Palestinian diplomatic talk, overlooking the centrality of the Palestinian walk.

In 2020, Western political-correctness observes the Palestinian issue through an oversimplified prism of human rights, ignoring history and the well-documented Palestinian vision, as highlighted by the (pre-1967!) 1959 and 1964 Fatah and PLO annihilationist charters,  Palestinian hate-education and well-documented Palestinian track record of intra-Arab and anti-Jewish terrorism (prior to 1967!), as well as their methodical rejection of all peace initiatives since the first part of the 20th century.

Will the Western foreign policy establishment overcome the temptation to persist in sacrificing complex, unpredictable, intolerant and frustrating Middle East reality on the altar of a make-believe Middle East coupled with well-intentioned eagerness to achieve peace now and in a convenient manner?

Support Appreciated

 

 

According to a November 12, 2020 OpEd by Nabil Amr, a confidant of Mahmoud Abbas, published by the leading Saudi daily Asharq Al-Awsat : “Ballots with Biden’s name would have filled the boxes if placed in Ramallah…. [The Palestinian Authority] bets are that Biden’s victory [will] resume ties with the US Administration, pumping money into the Palestinian Authority’s virtually empty coffers, reopening the PLO’s Washington Office and the US Consulate in Jerusalem, tasked with dealing with Palestinian affairs…. The new Administration will also go back to talking about the two-state solution and repudiate unilateral actions like annexation…. Trump’s Administration took a totally different path….”

However, the “Palestine Firsters” among the future policy makers in Washington, DC, are infatuated with the Palestinian cause, assuming that the Palestinian issue is central to the Arab-Israeli conflict and the overall Arab agenda.  They have ignored the fact that Arabs viewed Palestinians as the role model for intra-Arab terrorism, subversion and ingratitude, a low level (and negative) priority on their agenda.

The “Palestine Firsters” should study the two hour October 5, 2020 TV interview by Prince Bandar bin Sultan, a senior member of the Saudi royal family and a former head of the Saudi intelligence services and national security council:

“It is not surprising to see how quick are Palestinian leaders [criticizing the Israel-UAE peace accord] to use terms like ‘treason,’ betrayal’ and ‘backstabbing.’  These are their ways in dealing with each other…. They always bet on the losing side.  In the 1930s, [the top Palestinian leader] Amin al-Husseini was betting on the Nazis in Germany…. [Following WW2, the Palestinians embraced the USSR]…. [In 1970], Arafat’s headquarters were in Jordan, and he decided that it was time to liberate not Palestine, but Jordan [through a bloody civil war]…. They had only been in Lebanon a few years when they began to behave as they did in Jordan, and Lebanon became the new target.  It led to a [1975-1982] civil war…. No one can forget the image of Arafat as he visited Saddam Hussein in 1990, after the occupation of Kuwait [which was the most generous Arab host of the Palestinians]…. We saw Arafat in Baghdad, embracing Saddam, and laughing and joking with him…. We saw [Palestinian] youth in Nablus dancing joyfully in celebration of [Saddam’s] missile attack on Riyadh, holding pictures of Saddam…. We are at a stage in which rather than…serve the Palestinian cause, we have to pay attention to our national security and interests…. We are surrounded by a stormy sea [Iran’s Ayatollahs, the Muslim Brotherhood, Al Qaeda and Turkey’s Erdogan]…. We do not allow [Palestinian] liars and those who are disloyal to impose their tradition on us…. The Palestinian leaders have come to regard Tehran and Ankara higher than they regard Riyadh, Kuwait, Abu Dhabi, Dubai, Bahrain, Oman and Egypt….”

Contrary to the “Palestine Firsters'” state of mind, Saudi cooperation with Israel – commercially, militarily and diplomatically – has expanded unprecedentedly, notwithstanding Palestinian condemnations, pressure and threats.  Moreover, Saudi Arabia has been a chief engine behind the UAE’s, Bahrain’s and Sudan’s peace accords with Israel, which have bypassed the Palestinian issue, focusing on “what’s in it for the Arabs” in their cooperation with Israel.

The “Palestine Firsters'” litany of peace initiatives were crashed against the rocks of Middle East reality, due to their erroneous assumptions that the Palestinian issue was a core cause of Middle East turbulence, the crux of the Arab-Israeli conflict, and that the Arabs favored the establishment of a Palestinian state.

They sacrificed Middle East reality on the altar of a supposed Palestinian centrality. On the other hand, overcoming the temptation of such an overly simplistic assessment of the Palestinian issue yielded the successful conclusion of Israel’s peace treaties with Arab countries (Egypt, Jordan, the UAE, Bahrain and Sudan).

Thus, the farther are peace initiatives from the trap (veto) of the Palestinian issue, the closer they are to expanding the number of Israel-Arab peace treaties.

Moreover, the more relevant is the peace initiative to the particular Arab interest – where the threats of Iran, the Muslim Brotherhood, Al Qaeda and Turkey, and the need to diversify the oil-based economy, dwarf the Palestinian issue – the stronger the incentive for the Arabs to conclude peace treaties with Israel.

The Palestinian track record has led all pro-US, moderate Arab regimes to conclude that the proposed Palestinian state would add fuel to the Middle East fire, while Israel’s track record has played a key role in minimizing Middle East turbulence.

On October 2, 2020, Ambassador Dennis Ross – a veteran “Palestine Firster” – was asked by an i24News interviewer: “For years you were working on the assumption that peace between Israel and the Palestinians was the key, the only key, to peace between Israel and Arab countries.  A few weeks ago, this assumption was shattered by the signing of peace treaties between Israel and the UAE and Israeli and Bahrain.  Have you been wrong all these years?!”

Most “Palestine Firsters” would agree that Israel’s posture of deterrence is a bulwark against Iran’s Ayatollahs and Sunni Islamic terrorism, bolstering the stability of the highly vulnerable and relatively-moderate pro-Western Arab regimes, and therefore, incentivizing Arabs to conclude peace treaties with Israel.

However, such an assessment, on the one hand, and the urging of Israel to retreat to a 9-15-mile waistline between the Mediterranean and the over-powering mountains of Judea and Samaria – which would obliterate Israel’s posture of deterrence – on the other hand, constitutes a classic oxymoron.

Donation Appreciated

 

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

FBI Director Chris Wray: Iranian terrorism on US soil

Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, “Second Thought: a US-Israel Initiative”
April 10, 2024

The State Department has adhered to the diplomatic option toward Iran, rewarding the Ayatollahs with a financial and diplomatic bonanza, waiving and softening economic sanctions. However, FBI Director Chris Wray has concluded that Iran and its Islamic terrorist proxies are set to hit the US mainland. Iran is leveraging its cooperation with US criminal organizations and with Latin American drug cartels in the areas of terrorism, drug trafficking, human trafficking and money laundering.

Addressing cadets at the West Point US Military Academy, Wray stated: “The ongoing war in the Middle East has raised the threat of an attack against Americans inside the US to a whole another level…. Although we cannot discount the possibility of another coordinated 9/11-style attack by a foreign terrorist organization, our most immediate concern has been that individuals or small groups will draw twisted inspiration from the events in the Middle East to carry out attacks here at home….”

In his testimony at the House Committee on Homeland Security, Director Wray stated: “As the world’s largest state sponsor of terrorism, the Iranians [who collaborate with all Latin American drug cartels] have directly, or by hiring criminals, mounted assassination attempts against dissidents and high ranking current and former US officials, including right here on American soil…. Hezbollah, Iran’s primary strategic partner, has tried to seed operatives, establish infrastructure and engage in spying here domestically… planning future operations in the US….

“In a year when the terrorism threat was already elevated, the ongoing [Israel-Hamas] war has raised the threat of an attack against Americans in the US to a whole other level…. Since October 7, we’ve seen a rogue gallery of foreign terrorist organizations call for attacks against Americans and our allies. Hezbollah [which trains Latin American drug traffickers in the areas of car bombing and IEDs] threatened to attack US interests in the Middle East. Al-Qaeda issued its most specific call to attack the US….

“Our most immediate concern is that individuals or small groups will draw twisted inspiration from the events in the Middle East to carry out attacks here at home. That includes homegrown violent extremists inspired by a foreign terrorist organization…. We cannot discount the possibility that Hamas or another foreign terrorist organization may exploit the current conflict to conduct attacks here, on our own soil….”

In his testimony at the Senate Committee on Homeland Security, Wray highlighted the central role of Iran’s Ayatollahs in the intensified anti-US Islamic terrorism: “Nations such as the PRC, Russia and Iran are becoming more aggressive and more capable than ever before. These nations seek to undermine our core democratic, economic and scientific institutions….[They] conduct sophisticated intelligence operations using coercion, subversion, malign influence, cyber and economic espionage, traditional spying and non-traditional human intelligence collection.  They pose a continuous threat to US national security and our economy by targeting strategic technologies, industries, sectors and critical infrastructure…. [Iran’s collaboration with US criminal organizations] should come as no surprise to anyone familiar with both the scope of Iran’s penetration of the Western hemisphere and its association with TCOs (Transnational Criminal Organizations) at every level.  Understanding both the nature of this new combination requires some knowledge of TCOs, the security apparatus of the Iranian state and their links….”

Col. (ret.) Robert Killebrew of the Center for a New American Security sheds light on the connection between Iran’s Ayatollahs, Hezbollah and Latin American anti-US terrorism and drug trafficking: “That Iran has relationships with TCOs [e.g., MS-13] with deep ties inside the US is a fact…. Hostility toward the US is fundamental to the ideological outlook of Iran’s ruling theocracy, which considers itself at war with the US…. The Bolivarian Alliance for the Americas [aimed to undermine the US posture in Latin America], which includes states like Cuba, Ecuador, Bolivia and Nicaragua, has forged close military ties with Iran…. Along with senior members of the Venezuelan government, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard is involved in the illicit narcotics trade… training of local forces and in illicit drug trade that weakens the US at home….

“Reports of Iranian activity in South and Central America continue to roll in, along with Hezbollah’s hefty fund-raising and training activities in South America…. The coordinated US response to the growing presence of Iranian agents in Central and South America has been tepid at best…. Despite the presence of the armed forces of a hostile state (Iran) to our south, and clear evidence that those forces will use TCOs to attack targets inside the US, the possibility of converted action against the cartels and, by implication, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard, remains elusive….”

The bottom line:

*There is a direct connection between the US homeland security, on the one hand, and Iran’s Ayatollahs’ anti-US fanatic and imperialistic ideology, their oppression of women and ethnic and religious minorities in Iran, and their role as the leading regional and global epicenter of anti-US terrorism, drug trafficking, money laundering and proliferation of advance weaponry, on the other hand.

*As documented since their February 1979 rise to power, Iran’s Ayatollahs’ fanatic, religious and imperialistic vision – which aims to bring “The Great American Satan” to submission – transcends any financial and diplomatic bonanza extended by the US.

*While Hamas and Hezbollah constitute a threat to all pro-US Arab regimes, intensify the volcanic nature of the Middle East, and undermine the national and homeland security of the US, it is Iran which is the generator of these terror organizations. Disabling the Iranian generator is a prerequisite for minimizing the wrath of Islamic terrorism.

*The 45-year-old track record of the US diplomatic option toward Iran’s Ayatollahs – which has bolstered the anti-US capabilities of the Ayatollahs, while undermining US interests – requires a reassessment and a shift to the regime-change option.

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

Passover Guide for the Perplexed 2024

Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, “Second Thought: a US-Israel Initiative”
April 18, 2024

More in Amazon, Smashwords

1. Passover (April 22-30, 2024) is a Jewish national liberation holiday, highlighting the Exodus, the Parting of the Sea, the Ten Commandments, the 40-year-wandering in the desert, and the reentry to the Land of Israel 3,600 years ago.

2. The Abolitionist and human rights movements were spurred by the Passover Exodus. For example,  in 1850, Harriet Tubman, who was one of the leaders of the “Underground Railroad” – an Exodus of Afro-American slaves to freedom – was known as “Mama Moses.” Moreover, on December 11, 1964, upon accepting the Nobel Prize, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. said: “The Bible tells the thrilling story of how Moses stood in Pharaoh’s court centuries ago and cried, ‘Let my people go!’” Furthermore, Paul Robeson and Louis Armstrong leveraged the liberty theme of Passover through the lyrics: “When Israel was in Egypt’s land, let my people go! Oppressed so hard they could not stand, let my people go! Go down Moses, way down in Egypt’s land; tell old Pharaoh to let my people go….!” 

3. The US Founding Fathers were inspired by the Exodus, in particular, and the Mosaic legacy, in general, shaping the Federalist system, including the concepts of (anti-monarchy) limited government, separation of powers among three co-equal branches of government, featuring Congress, as the most powerful legislature in the world. Thomas Paine’s Common Sense – “the cement of the 1776 Revolution” – referred to King George III as “the hardened, sullen-tempered Pharaoh of England.” And, the Early Pilgrims considered their 10-week-sail in the Atlantic ocean as “the modern day Parting of the Sea,” and their destination as “the modern day Promised Land” and “the New Israel.”  

4. The US Founding Fathers deemed it appropriate to engrave the essence of the Biblical role model of liberty (the Passover-related Jubilee) on the Liberty Bell: “Proclaim liberty throughout all the land, unto all the inhabitants thereof (Leviticus, 25:10).”    The Jubilee is commemorated every 50 years, and the Liberty Bell was installed in 1751 upon the 50th anniversary of William Penn’s Charter of Privileges.  

  • Moreover, there are 50 States in the United States, whose Hebrew name is “The States of the Covenant” (Artzot Habreet -ארצות הברית ). Also, the Exodus is mentioned 50 times in the Five Books of Moses; Moses received (on Mount Sinai) the Torah – which includes 50 gates of wisdom – 50 days following the Exodus, as celebrated by the Shavou’ot/Pentecost Holiday, 50 days following Passover.
  • 5. According to Heinrich Heine, the 19th century German poet, “Since the Exodus, freedom has always spoken with a Hebrew accent.”  
  • 6. According to the late Prof. Yehudah Elitzur, one of Israel’s pioneers of Biblical research, the Exodus took place in the second half of the 15th century BCE, during the reign of Egypt’s Amenhotep II. Accordingly, the 40-year-national coalescing of the Jewish people – while wandering in the desert – took place when Egypt was ruled by Thutmose IV. Then, Joshua conquered Canaan when Egypt was ruled by Amenhotep III and Amenhotep IV, who were preoccupied with domestic affairs to the extent that they refrained from expansionist ventures. Moreover, as documented by letters which were discovered in Tel el Amarna, the capital city of ancient Egypt, the 14th century BCE Pharaoh, Amenhotep IV, was informed by the rulers of Jerusalem, Samaria and other parts of Canaan, about a military offensive launched by the “Habirus” (Hebrews and other Semitic tribes), which corresponded to the timing of Joshua’s offensive against the same rulers. Amenhotep IV was a determined reformer, who introduced monotheism, possibly influenced by the ground-breaking and game-changing legacy of Moses and the Exodus.  

7. Passover aims at coalescing the fabrics of the Jewish family and the Jewish people, commemorating and strengthening Jewish roots, and enhancing core values such as faith, humility, education, defiance of odds, can-do mentality, optimism, and patriotism, which are prerequisites to a free and vibrant society.

8. Passover highlights the unique resilience, which has surged the Jewish people to new heights (for the benefit of all of humanity) following a multitude of crises such as: the 722 BCE destruction and exile of the Kingdom of Israel by Assyria, the 586 BCE destruction of the First Temple by Babylon, the 70 AD destruction of the Second Temple by Rome, the 135 crushing of the Bar Kochba’ rebellion against Rome, the 484, 1736 and 1865 pogroms of the Jews in Persia, the 627 massacre of the Jewish tribe of Quraysh by Muhammed, the 873 pogroms by Byzantine, the 1096 First Crusade’s pogroms, the 1141 pogroms in Moslem-ruled Andalusia, the 1147 Second Crusade’s pogroms, the 1189  Third Crusade, the 1198 forced Islamization of Jews in Yemen, the 1248 pogroms in Baghdad, the 1290 expulsion of England’s Jews, the 1306 expulsion of France’s Jews, the 1492 expulsion of Spain’s Jews, the 1496 expulsion of Portugal’s Jews, the 1648 pogroms of Ukraine’s Jews, the 1881 pogroms of Russia’s and Ukraine’s Jews, the 1903 pogroms in Russia, the 1919 pogroms in Ukraine, the 1929 Arab terror in Hebron, the 1938 Kristallnacht pogroms in Germany and Austria, the January 20, 1942 Wannsee Nazi Conference which presented “the Final Solution of the Jewish Question.”     

9. Passover highlights the central role of women in Jewish history.  For instance, Yocheved, Moses’ mother, hid Moses and then breastfed him at the palace of Pharaoh, posing as a nursemaid.  Miriam, Moses’ older sister, was her brother’s keeper.  Batyah, the daughter of Pharaoh, saved and adopted Moses (Numbers 2:1-10).  Shifrah and Pou’ah, two Jewish midwives, risked their lives, sparing the lives of Jewish male babies, in violation of Pharaoh’s command (Numbers 1:15-19).  Tziporah, a daughter of Jethro and Moses’ wife, saved the life of Moses and set him back on the Jewish course (Numbers, 4:24-27). They followed in the footsteps of Sarah, Rebecca, Leah and Rachel, the Matriarchs (who engineered, in many respects, the roadmap of the Patriarchs), and inspired future leaders such as Deborah (the Prophetess, Judge and military commander), Hannah (Samuel’s mother), Yael (who killed Sisera, the Canaanite General) and Queen Esther, the heroine of Purim and one of the seven Biblical Jewish Prophetesses (Sarah, Miriam, Deborah, Hannah, Abigail, Huldah and Esther).

  1. 10. Passover is the first of the three Jewish pilgrimages to Jerusalem, followed by Shavou’ot (Pentecost), which commemorates the receipt of the Ten Commandments, and Sukkot (Feast of Tabernacles), which was named after Sukkota – the first stop in the Exodus.
  2. 11. Jerusalem is mentioned three times in the annual story of Passover (Haggadah), which is concluded by the vow: “Next Year in the reconstructed Jerusalem!”
  3. United Jerusalem has been the exclusive capital of the Jewish people since King David established it as his capital, 3,000 years ago.

More: Jewish Holidays Guide for the Perplexed – Amazon, Smashwords

Support Appreciated

Golan

Secretary Blinken on settlements – vindicated by facts?

Islamic Terrorism

FBI Director Chris Wray: Iranian terrorism on US soil