Facebook Feed

5 days ago

Yoram Ettinger
2023 Jewish demographic momentum in Israel: bit.ly/40qV0aV ... See MoreSee Less
View on Facebook

4 weeks ago

Yoram Ettinger
Purim Guide for the Perplexed 2023: bit.ly/3ZdlxHY ... See MoreSee Less
View on Facebook

4 weeks ago

Yoram Ettinger
אתגר מרכזי לביטחון לאומי: bit.ly/3xkSwh1 ... See MoreSee Less
View on Facebook

Islamic terrorists are no “lone wolves”

Intra-Arab and Intra-Muslim terrorism – plaguing the Arab Street – has been a Middle East fixture since the 7th century emergence of Islam, driven by religious, political, tribal and ethnic megalomaniac aspirations and violent intolerance.

It dominated the Middle East long before, and irrespective of, the Arab-Israeli and Palestinian-Israeli conflicts, the reestablishment of Jewish communities in Judea & Samaria, the controversy over Jerusalem, and the reconstruction of the Jewish State.

Against the backdrop of ruthless and persistent terrorism, which has targeted fellow-Arabs and fellow-Muslims, one should expect, at least, as ferocious Arab/Muslim terrorism against the “infidel” Christian, Buddhist, Hindu or Jew in the Middle East, Asia, Europe, Africa, Canada, Australia and the USA. The latter is considered the chief threat to terrorist regimes, morally and militarily. Hence, the US is “the Chief Satan” and the lead target for Islamic terrorism.

The perpetrators of Arab/Muslim terrorism, in general, and Palestinian terrorism, in particular, are not “Lone Wolves.” They are the by-products of a centuries’ old intolerant ideology, supported by educational and religious infrastructures of indoctrination and incitement, operating systematically in kindergartens, schools, universities, mosques and regime-controlled media.

Arab/Muslim terrorists are not driven by social, economic and human rights grievances, but by an intense, fanatical worldview, which loathes civil liberties and considers freedom of religion, press, association and movement, including equal rights for women, an abomination. In fact, deprived groups in the non-Muslim world rarely resort to terrorism.

Arab/Muslim terrorists are adrenalized by the conviction that their actions bestow upon them the honorific title of Shaheed – a martyr on the altar of Islam – fulfilling a Muslim mission, and advancing the commandment of Jihad (Islamic struggle, resistance, war, expansion) against the “infidel” or the “apostate.” They expect to be rewarded by eternal glory, including the company of 72 pretty virgins in a sensual paradise, while women are, supposedly, rewarded by only one man.

The most effective production-line of Shaheed’s was established by Mahmoud Abbas in 1993, compliments of the Oslo Accord, through the Palestinian education system. For example, the 7th grade’s part 2 of “Our Beautiful Language,” pages 11-13 and pages 28-29 in part 1: “We shall sow Palestine with [martyrs’] skeletons and skulls; we shall paint the face of Palestine with blood…. We are returning home to the plains and mountains [of pre-1967 Israel], led by Jihad flags, by bloody struggles and by the willingness to sacrifice ourselves as martyrs….” Or, the 8th grade’s part 2 of “Islamic Studies,” pages 62-75: “Jihad reserves a key role for youngsters, just like those who sought martyrdom during the days of the Prophet Muhammad….” Many graduates of such an education system are potential terrorists – who unlike freedom fighters – target civilians deliberately and systematically, aiming to erode the confidence of Israelis in the homeland security capabilities of their government, frightening them into reckless concessions.

While Mahmoud Abbas does not emit the same message when speaking with Western, Israeli and Arab interlocutors, that which he teaches his children reflects his authentic worldview, reflected by the monthly allowances paid to relatives of suicide-bombers and the naming of streets, squares, summer camps and sport tournaments after terrorists. It has enticed Palestinian youth to idolize Shaheed’s, Jihad, bloodshed and families of suicide-bombers, while delegitimizing the Jewish State as an immoral entity deserving annihilation.

Palestinian terrorism has been driven not by the size – but by the existence – of the Jewish State, as evidenced by the waves of anti-Jewish Palestinian terrorism before Israel’s establishment (1920s, 1930s and 1940s), before the 1967 resumption of Jewish control of Judea & Samaria, and following a series of Israeli concessions, such as the 2005 uprooting of all Jewish communities from Gaza, the 2000 proposal by Prime Minister Barak to withdraw to the pre-1967 Lines, and the 1993 Israeli importation of the PLO from Tunisia to Ramallah and Israel’s withdrawal from 40% of Judea & Samaria, as well as all of Gaza.

The battle against Palestinian terrorism is undermined by the focus on the symptoms (individual terrorists) rather than the cause (hate-education). In other words, one should not concentrate on chasing individual mosquitos; one should drain the swamp.

Counter-terrorism is further undermined by the immoral moral-equivalence applied to Palestinian perpetrators and their Israeli victims; by the knee-jerk pressure of Israel urging sweeping concessions, containment and counter-terrorism restraint, which emboldens terrorists; ignoring the terrorist/subversive track record of Mahmoud Abbas in order to promote wishful-thinking; and extending counter-productive financial aid to the Palestinian Authority, which bankrolls hate-education.

For instance, the $400mn annual US foreign aid to Mahmoud Abbas – which is larger than the combined aid from the Arab oil-producers – has not reduced terrorism and non-compliance, has failed to shift Palestinians towards peaceful coexistence, and has not eliminated hate education.

The US Congress would not support hate education within the US, but supports hate-education in the Palestinian Authority, which undermines the civil liberties of most Palestinians, who abhor the corrupt, oppressive, terroristic “Tunisian Gang” of Mahmoud Abbas that was imposed on them by the Oslo Accord.

The suspension of foreign aid to – and all communications with – Mahmoud Abbas, a hate educator, would express the realization that hate education is the antithesis of core US values; that hate educators should not benefit from the largesse of the US taxpayer; and that hate educators on the one hand, and compliance with agreements and peaceful coexistence on the other hand, constitutes a scandalous oxymoron.




Videos

The post-1967 turning point of US-Israel cooperation

Israeli benefits to the US taxpayer exceed US foreign aid to Israel

Iran - A Clear And Present Danger To The USA

Exposing the myth of the Arab demographic time bomb

The Abraham Accords – the US, Arab interests and Israel

Secretary of State Antony Blinken and National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan believe that the expansion of the Abraham Accords, the enhancement of Israel-Saudi defense and commercial cooperation and the conclusion of an Israel-Saudi Arabia peace accord are preconditioned upon major Israeli concessions to the Palestinian Authority.

Is such a belief consistent with Middle East reality?

Arab interests

*The signing of the Abraham Accords, and the role played by Saudi Arabia as a critical engine of the accords, were driven by the national security, economic and diplomatic interests of Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Morocco and the Sudan.

*The Arab interest in peace accords with Israel was not triggered by the realization that the Jewish State was genuinely seeking peaceful-coexistence, nor by a departure from the fundamental tenets of Islam. It was motivated by the assessment that critical concerns of the respective Arab countries would be effectively-served by Israel’s advanced military (Qualitative Military Edge), technological and diplomatic capabilities in the face of mutual and lethal enemies, such as Iran’s Ayatollahs and Muslim Brotherhood terrorism.

*Saudi Arabia and the six Arab peace partners of Israel (including Egypt and Jordan) are aware that the Middle East resembles a volcano, which occasionally releases explosive lava – domestically and/or regionally – in an unpredictable manner, as evidenced by the 1,400-year-old stormy intra-Arab/Muslim relations, and recently demonstrated by the Arab Tsunami, which erupted in 2011 and still rages.

They wish to minimize the impact of rogue regimes, and therefore are apprehensive about the nature of the proposed Palestinian state, in view of the rogue Palestinian inter-Arab track record, which has transformed Palestinians into an intra-Arab role model of subversion, terrorism, treachery and ingratitude.

*They are anxious about the erosion of the US posture of deterrence, which is their most critical component of national security, and alarmed about the 43-year-old US diplomatic option toward Iran’s Ayatollahs, which has bolstered the Ayatollahs’ terroristic, drug trafficking and ballistic capabilities. They are also concerned about the US’ embrace of the Muslim Brotherhood, which is the largest Sunni terrorist entity with religious, educational, welfare and political branches. And, they are aware of the ineffectiveness of NATO (No Action Talk Only?), the European vacillation, and the vulnerability of all other Arab countries.

Israel’s role

*Saudi Arabia and the Arab partners to peace accords with Israel feel the machetes of the Ayatollahs and the Moslem Brotherhood at their throats. They consider Israel as the most reliable “life insurance agent” in the region.  They view Israel as the most effective US force-multiplier in the Middle East, and appreciate Israel’s proven posture of deterrence; flexing its military muscles against Iran’s Ayatollahs in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Iran itself and against Palestinian and Hezbollah terrorism. They respect Israel’s unique counter-terrorism intelligence and training capabilities, and its game-changing military and counter-terrorism battle tactics and technologies.

*The Arab view of Israel as a reliable partner on “a rainy day” has been bolstered by Israel’s willingness to defy US pressure, when it comes to Israel’s most critical national security and historic credos (e.g., Iran, Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria).  In addition, Saudi Arabia and Israel’s peace-partners aim to leverage Israel’s good-standing among most Americans – and therefore among most Senators and House Representatives – as a venue to enhance their military, commercial and diplomatic ties with the US.

*Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain are preoccupied with the challenge of economic diversification, realizing that they are overly-reliant on oil and natural gas, which are exposed to price-volatility, depletion and could be replaced by emerging cleaner and more cost-effective energy.

Thus, they consider Israel’s ground-breaking technologies as a most effective vehicle to diversify their economy, create more jobs in non-energy sectors, and establish a base for alternative sources of national income, while bolstering homeland and national security.

*The Abraham Accords – as well as Israel’s peace accords with Egypt and Jordan – and the unprecedented expansion of defense and commercial cooperation between Saudi Arabia and Israel, demonstrate that critical Arab national security interests may supersede fundamental tenets of Islam, such as the 1,400-year-old rejection of any “infidel” sovereignty in “the abode of Islam.”  Moreover, critical national security interests may lead to a dramatic moderation of the (Arab) education system, which is the most authentic reflection of one’s vision and policies.

Thus, contrary to the Palestinian Authority, the United Arab Emirates has uprooted hate-education curriculum, replacing it with pro-Israel/Jewish curriculum.

Abraham Accords’ durability

*The success of the Abraham Accords was a result of avoiding the systematic mistakes committed by the US State Department. The latter has produced a litany of failed peace proposals, centered on the Palestinian issue, while the Abraham accords bypassed the Palestinian issue, avoiding a Palestinian veto, and focusing on Arab interests. Therefore, the durability of the Abraham Accords depends on the interests of the respective Arab countries, and not on the Palestinian issue, which is not a top priority for any Arab country.

*The durability of the Abraham Accords depends on the stability of the individual Arab countries and the Middle East at-large.

*The Abraham Accord have yielded initial and unprecedented signs of moderation, modernity and peaceful coexistence, which requires the US to support the respective pro-US Arab regimes, rather than pressuring them (e.g., Saudi Arabia and the UAE).

*However, one should not ignore the grave threats to the durability of the accords, posed by the volcanic nature of the unstable, highly-fragmented, unpredictable, violently intolerant, non-democratic and tenuous Middle East (as related to intra-Arab relations!).  These inherent threats would be dramatically alleviated by a resolute US support.

*A major threat to the Abraham Accord is the tenuous nature of most Arab regimes in the Middle East, which yields tenuous policies and tenuous accords. For example, in addition to the Arab Tsunami of 2010 (which is still raging on the Arab Street), non-ballot regime-change occurred (with a dramatic change of policy) in Egypt (2013, 2012, 1952), Iran (1979, 1953), Iraq (2003, 1968, 1963-twice, 1958), Libya (2011, 1969), Yemen (a civil war since the ’90s, 1990, 1962), etc.

*Regional stability, the Abraham Accords and US interests would be undermined by the proposed Palestinian state west of the Jordan River (bearing in mind the intra-Arab Palestinian track record). It would topple the pro-US Hashemite regime east of the River; transforming Jordan into another platform of regional and global Islamic terrorism, similar to Libya, Syria, Iraq and Yemen; triggering a domino scenario, which would threaten every pro-US Arab oil-producing country in the Arabian Peninsula; yielding a robust tailwind to Iran’s Ayatollahs, Russia and China and a major headwind to the US.

*While Middle East reality defines policies and accords as variable components of national security, the topography and geography of Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) and the Golan Heights are fixed components of Israel’s minimal security requirements in the reality of the non-Western Middle East. Israel’s fixed components of national security have secured its survival, and have dramatically enhanced its posture of deterrence. They transformed the Jewish State into a unique force and dollar multiplier for the US.

*The more durable the Abraham Accords and the more robust Israel’s posture of deterrence, the more stable the pro-US Arab regimes and the Middle East at-large; the more deterred are anti-US rogue regimes; the less potent are Middle Eastern epicenters of anti-US terrorism and drug trafficking; the more bolstered is the US global posture and the weaker is the posture of the US’ enemies and adversaries.

*Would the Arab regimes of the Abraham Accords precondition their critical ties with Israel upon Israeli concessions to the Palestinians, which they view as a rogue element? Would they sacrifice their national security and economic interests on the altar of the Palestinian issue? Would they cut off their nose to spite their face?

The fact that these Arab regimes concluded the Abraham Accords without preconditioning it upon Israeli concessions to the Palestinians, and that they limit their support of the Palestinians to talk, rather than walk, provides an answer to these three questions.

Support Appreciated

 

 

 

 




Videos

The post-1967 turning point of US-Israel cooperation

Israeli benefits to the US taxpayer exceed US foreign aid to Israel

Iran - A Clear And Present Danger To The USA

Exposing the myth of the Arab demographic time bomb