The Problem is not Netanyahu, it is Israel's next generation of leaders like Bezalel Smotrich

The Problem is not Netanyahu, it is Israel's next generation of leaders like Bezalel Smotrich

    Monday, September 09, 2024   No comments

Hundreds of thousands protest weekly in Israel these days, wanting to bring down Netanyahu and his government, accusing the former of being an obstacle to making a deal that would end the war in Gaza, and saying that he is doing so for purely personal reasons--fear of being charged and convicted with crimes. If that is true, that would make him less dangerous to the region than other members of his government who are against any deals, not for personal reasons, but for ideological and religious reasons. And the future of Israel will be in the hands of people like Bezalel Smotrich, who hold the belief that Israel will be secure only when Palestinians are erased.

“I believe that the village of Hawara should be wiped out, and I believe that the State of Israel should do it, and not, God forbid, private individuals.” These words escaped the lips of Bezalel Smotrich, Minister of Finance and Minister of Civil Affairs in the Ministry of Defense in Benjamin Netanyahu’s government, during a conference organized in Tel Aviv in March 2023 by the Israeli economic newspaper The Marker. 

The minister, who heads the “Religious Zionism” party and is known to be a licensed lawyer and carefully calculates his words, did not expect, in the context of his comment on the settlers’ barbaric campaign against homes and property in the village of Hawara, south of Nablus, (in revenge for the killing of settlers by Palestinians), that this statement would bring upon him the wrath of the US State Department, whose officials called for a boycott of him. The US ambassador to Tel Aviv, Tom Nides, went on to call Smotrich “stupid,” prompting the latter to try to minimize the damage during a televised news program, saying, “Whoever can attribute to me the intention of wiping out the village, that is up to their obsessive mind. The intention is to be more proactive and aggressive in the war against terrorism, because people are being killed here… Perhaps this was said during a fit of emotion… I stumbled over my tongue.” 

But "the cat's out of the bag", and Smotrich’s words and actions, past and present, have come under scrutiny, given that he has been the third pillar of the ruling coalition in Israel since December 2022, after Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Galant, and the guardian of settlement expansion in the occupied West Bank, in its new form.

Smotrich is not an outlier who represents no one in Israel, he has been elected consistently for years. Smotrich entered the Israeli political arena after being elected to the Knesset in March 2015, and was re-elected for five subsequent terms. With the formation of Netanyahu’s sixth government at the end of 2022, Smotrich was given the Finance Minister portfolio, which was previously held by Avigdor Lieberman, controlling the budgets of ministries and state institutions, including the army, in addition to controlling the movement of funds received by the Palestinian Authority under the 1994 Paris Agreement, especially the tax funds that must be handed over to the Authority, known as the clearance revenue, which is considered the backbone of public revenues in Palestine. In addition to this important and sensitive portfolio, another portfolio was added, the Ministry of Civil Affairs within the Ministry of Defense. In addition to the two portfolios, the leader of the Religious Zionism Party, Orit Struck, was appointed Minister of Settlement.

Smotrich first ran for the 18th Knesset in 2009, coming in ninth place on the National Union list. According to the Knesset Elections Law, he was exempted from serving in the IDF for three months, after which he returned to complete his service. At first, Smotrich opposed entering politics, but he did so on the instructions of his elders - headed by Rabbi Haim Druckman - who decided that this was a necessary step.

On June 23, 2019, he was appointed Minister of Transportation and a member of the Political-Security Cabinet in the transitional government.

Ahead of the 24th Knesset elections, he split from the Yamina list, according to him, against the backdrop of Naftali Bennett's willingness to enter the government in cooperation with left-wing parties. Smotrich ran as head of the "Religious Zionism" list in the technical bloc of the National Union parties: "Takuma", "Otzma Yehudit" and "Noam". The list won 6 seats in the elections, 4 of which went to Smotrich's party.

Where did this settler, haunted by the doctrine of "religious Zionism", come from?

His biography published on social media platforms says that he was born in 1980 in the settlement of "Haspin", built on the ruins of the village of "Khasfin" in the southern occupied Syrian Golan, to a Ukrainian family of religious nationalist zealots. In the settlement of "Beit El" north of Ramallah, he grew up in schools that combine the Jewish religion and Zionist thought.

Smotrich is the son of a settlement rabbi. He was born in one settlement, raised in another, married and lived in a third, from the Golan Heights to Hebron in Kiryat Arba, and then to Kedumim near Nablus. When he was 28, Smotrich volunteered in the Israeli army, and served for a year and a half in the central square in the operations department of the General Staff, a special period of service for religious people.

A leader for the future who is putting roots settlements he is determined to expand

Although he holds a bachelor’s degree in law and is licensed to practice law, Smotrich does not believe in international law, peace agreements with neighboring countries, or any Israeli laws that contradict the “Greater Israel” doctrine that aims to impose sovereignty over all of the Palestinian territories and parts of Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon.

The man currently lives with his settler wife and seven children in the Kedumim settlement, built on Nablus land in the northern West Bank, after he seized private Palestinian land and built his home on it without a permit even from the occupation authorities.

The Israeli investigative website "Shomrim" revealed some features of the doctrine of "religious Zionism" and its impact on Smotrich's statements and speeches, in a report published by the Arabic version of the "Madar" website on September 4, 2023.

The report says: Regarding the conflict with the Palestinians, Smotrich often repeats phrases: There is no such thing as "two states for two peoples" and "The land of Israel is ours, and what is ours cannot be stolen," and another refrain that clearly reflects his quest for a single state or the implementation of a transfer. In 2015, he said in a speech he gave before the Knesset General Assembly: "There is only one state here, a Jewish state, and there will never be a Palestinian state alongside it. Whoever wants to live with us is welcome, but whoever does not want to either leave or we will see him in the crosshairs" (rifle aim). A year later, Smotrich wrote on Twitter (then X now): “All that remains now is to move from words to deeds: turn off the lights in the Palestinian Authority, impose sovereignty, and do everything that any self-respecting independent state would do.” As for the idea of ​​voluntary transfer, Smotrich calls it “encouraging immigration,” explaining that “those who do not want or cannot put aside their national aspirations will receive assistance from us to immigrate to an Arab country or to any other destination in the world.” This is not immigration on rickety boats, but rather the modern phenomenon of immigration on a plane to an organized future. 

Smotrich: My life’s mission is to thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state

Smotrich has declared just this week that his life mission is to prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state. Smotrich, leader of the Religious Zionism party, made these remarks via social media, further emphasizing his commitment to expanding Israeli control over the occupied West Bank.

Smotrich stated, “My life’s mission is to build the Land of Israel and thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state that would endanger the State of Israel.” He framed this goal as not merely political but “national and existential,” highlighting the deep ideological commitment that drives his agenda.

Smotrich also highlighted his policies to entrench Israeli control in the occupied West Bank. “This is why, in addition to my role as Finance Minister, I took on the responsibility for civilian affairs in Judea and Samaria (the Israeli biblical name for the West Bank),” he added, reinforcing his intent to expand and support illegal settlements.

Smotrich’s rhetoric, which explicitly rejects Palestinian statehood, further highlights the ongoing challenges Palestinians face under Israeli occupation. His pledge to protect the “half a million settlers on the frontline, under fire,” is seen as a direct message to Palestinians threatening of subjecting them to ethnic cleansing.

Recently, Israeli settlers in the West Bank have escalated their violent attacks on native Palestinians, emboldened by Israeli leaders like Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir.

Senior Israeli military officials have even accused Smotrich and Ben Gvir of fueling unrest and “provoking a regional war.” According to reports in Israeli media, their extreme policies are seen as the “direct cause” of what is described as an increase in Palestinian resistance across the West Bank.

Smotrich also said that while the Israeli political leadership aims to control the aid entering Gaza, the Israeli military refuses to take responsibility for managing it.

The minister’s insistence on Israeli control over aid comes at a time when the besieged Gaza Strip is suffering from an Israeli-made famine and humanitarian crisis.

 Smotrich's Messianic "Revolution"

“A few weeks ago, I met with one of the settler leaders in the West Bank, a Likudman. I asked him what grade he would give Smotrich and Ben-Gvir. The man said, ‘I’m disappointed with Ben-Gvir. He talks more than he does. I’m very satisfied with Smotrich,’” Yedioth Ahronoth political analyst Nahum Barnea wrote in his report on the radical changes that Finance Minister and Defense Minister Smotrich have brought about in the West Bank. Although the report did not provide anything new in this regard, it explained, in some detail, how the extremist minister, founder of the Regavim movement, was able to bring about a qualitative shift in the settlement project in the West Bank towards actually annexing the latter to Israel, which enabled him to obtain the “mark” he deserved. 

According to Israeli law, the army is the supreme authority or sovereign in the West Bank, “but in reality, Israel’s sovereignty in Judea and Samaria was handed over to a closed, extremist political sect, which obeys the command of one person and advances according to one messianic plan,” according to Barnea, who adds that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu “supports that sect or does not obstruct it. What it currently lacks is completed by the government revolution within the Green Line, with weak opposition from the army.” 

The writer explains that Smotrich took control of the West Bank using a pincer tactic, the first jaw of which is represented by his position as Minister of Finance, and the second by his powers derived from his position as Minister of Defense, adding that “the goal he set in the decisive plan he published in 2017 has not changed: to cause the collapse of the Palestinian Authority, prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state, and present the seven million Arabs living between the Jordan River and the sea with one of these options: death in battle, emigrate abroad, or remain second-class citizens forever.” In this context, Smotrich froze or delayed the transfer of clearance revenues that Israel collects on behalf of the Palestinian Authority from customs and taxes, in order to pay the salaries of its employees. 

Not only that, but he also activated “Article B of the Terror Victims Compensation Law,” which was approved last June at the behest of Justice Minister Yariv Levin and the chairman of the Constitution and Law Committee, Simcha Rothman. It stipulates that “any person injured in a terrorist act who sustains a permanent disability is entitled to compensation of up to five million shekels,” which is the money that Israel deducts from the clearance revenues, and is equivalent to the allocations that the Palestinian Authority pays to the families of Palestinian martyrs and prisoners. 

According to the new law, Israel can deduct it twice. Also, since October 7, the issuance of work permits within the Green Line has been suspended; Barnea points out here that “the Shin Bet, which feared the consequences of the economic crisis and its impact on the escalation of resistance operations, prepared a plan for the supervised entry of a portion of the workers into permanent workplaces,” while “the army supported this plan, but Smotrich and his colleagues exerted pressure that led to its rejection, and the Palestinian population was left with no choice but to rely on foreign aid, including money sent by Iran to the Hamas and Islamic Jihad movements.”

The second arm of the “Smotrich empire” is Hillel Rot from the Yitzhar settlement, who, after being appointed deputy head of the Civil Administration for Civil Affairs by Smotrich, became the de facto governor of the West Bank. In this context, Barnea quotes Professor Dan Turner, a settler in the Kfar Adumim settlement on the Jerusalem-Jericho road, as saying that “all the powers of the head of the Civil Administration were given to Rot, who is subordinate to the Settlement Administration, a political body in Smotrich’s ministry in the Ministry of Defense.” 

Among these powers is the appointment of department heads in the Civil Administration; Rot “appoints activists in the Religious Zionism Party to it, and thus an engineer from the Revava settlement was recently appointed director of the planning office in the Civil Administration, which is the highest authority in the field of planning and construction (in the West Bank).” The “Smotrich revolution” also affected the “legal advisor for Judea and Samaria,” who is subordinate to the military prosecution; He was fired and his department was closed, while “Smotrich appointed more than 20 lawyers whose mission is to quickly change the regulations to allow the development of the area for Jews only,” according to Turner, who explains that “everything is managed by civilian officials, politicians. Civilizing services is one of Smotrich’s means of freeing himself from the control of the army and implementing de facto annexation.” 

He explains that “over the past year and a half, there has been no planning for the 300,000 Palestinians living in Area C, and they have not been granted a single building permit, while demolitions, including the demolition of water wells and schools, have become routine.” In contrast, the declaration of lands as “state land” has quadrupled, as have building permits, and the establishment of unauthorized outposts has accelerated. According to Turner, “There are more than 100 small outposts and farms on Palestinian pastures. 

Unauthorized construction by Jews is not enforced, with Smotrich’s encouragement.” For its part, the “Judea and Samaria Police are acting in accordance with the policy of (National Security Minister Itamar) Ben-Gvir; they refrain from stopping Jewish violence and terrorism. If a settler is arrested, he is immediately released.” In fact, all of the above “will not help us in the court hearings against us in The Hague,” according to Turner, which intersects with what Barnea reported from Israeli security officials, who expressed their fear of “the impact of Kahanist measures (terrorism derived from the doctrine of Rav Meir Kahane, founder of the terrorist Kach movement) in the West Bank on the escalation of terrorism (resistance operations), and of a ruling that may be issued by the two international courts in The Hague.” 

According to Barnea, what is happening in the West Bank “seems to be a convenient pretext for issuing arrest warrants for government ministers, including its prime minister,” and “the American administration is concerned about the changes taking place in the West Bank, no less than it is concerned about the stagnation in Gaza. What happens in the West Bank does not stay in the West Bank.” Yesterday, Smotrich renewed his defense of what he is doing in the West Bank in a post on X, saying that “my life’s mission is to build the Land of Israel and thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state that would endanger the State of Israel. 

This is not political, but rather national and existential. That is why I have taken upon myself, in addition to my position as Minister of Finance, responsibility for civil affairs in Judea and Samaria.” He added, “(I) will continue to work with all my might so that the half a million settlers living on the front lines and under fire enjoy the rights of every citizen of Israel, and to establish facts that prevent the establishment of a Palestinian terrorist state, which will be (…) an Iranian forward base for the next massacre in Kfar Saba, Raanana and the entire center of the country.”

...

  These are not the views of an outlier, Israel's leaders are elected, and Bezalel Smotrich was not elected once or twice, he was elected many times and he, like leaders of other Zionist parties, represent a majority of the Israeli society, which means it represents the popular view of Israel. When Western governments, and Arab leaders address the place of Hamas and other religious groups in Palestinian societies, they often say, Hamas does not represent the Palestinians. The problem for Western leaders, is, what do you say about the Israeli Hamas-like, based on Western reasoning, like the groups that elect Bezalel Smotrich, who represent the majority of society, and are calling for genocide, forced population transfer, and ethnic cleansing? Does their being elected make them less subject to the principles of justice upon which the Palestinian claim to statehood is based?

  

Media review, compiled by Ali Hafez, B. Hamoud et al.

Media review of Netanyahu's visit to the US: He may have expedited US declining support Israel's War instead of increasing it

Media review of Netanyahu's visit to the US: He may have expedited US declining support Israel's War instead of increasing it

    Thursday, July 25, 2024   No comments

Israeli political leaders may not have wanted to see so many protesters in the street and in congress, but that is what Netanyahu have achived by his visit to the US: For the first time, American public displayed public displeasure with Israeli conduct. This is clear when even the most friendly TV channels, like Foxnews, give a fail review of his performance.

Fox News: Has Netanyahu Lost America?

“Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is back in Washington, and in his fourth address to a joint session of Congress on Wednesday night, he broke the record of former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill. For years, he has been a fixture in American and Israeli politics, but that seems to be changing,” Fox News wrote in a report. “Things seemed different today, not just because Netanyahu is a controversial figure who has drawn thousands of anti-Gaza protesters to the streets of Washington, but because he has become increasingly marginalized,” the website added in a report by its correspondent Joshua Keating.

Fox News confirmed that Netanyahu’s speech to Congress offered little indication of a plan to end the war in Gaza, and likely undermined ongoing diplomatic efforts to achieve this. Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi described Netanyahu’s speech as “the worst presentation by any foreign dignitary before Congress.”

According to the site, Netanyahu’s speech was remarkably defensive, devoting itself more to rebutting criticism of Israel than charting a path forward out of the quagmire it finds itself in.

He continued by recounting the horrors of Hamas’s attacks on October 7, and vowing that Israel would fight until it destroyed the movement’s military capabilities and rule in Gaza “and returned all the captives to their families.” However, these families are not inclined to believe him and are urging him to accept a ceasefire agreement to secure the release of their relatives.

Fox News was surprised by Netanyahu's attack on anti-Israel protesters in the United States, accusing them of being "useful idiots for Iran" and criticizing university presidents, and the site commented sarcastically, "This is likely to be the first speech on Middle East policy that includes a shout-out to the brothers at the University of North Carolina."

The report said, "Netanyahu may have gotten what he wanted today: a standing ovation, even if it was mostly from Republicans. But more than 70% of Israelis now say Netanyahu should resign."

He continued, "In the past, Washington was a safety valve for Netanyahu, a place where he could count on strong support. But today, the magic is gone and the era of the man who mastered verbal acrobatics is over," said Nimrod Novick, a member of the "Israel Policy Forum" and a senior foreign policy adviser to former Prime Minister Shimon Peres.

The Fox News correspondent concluded by saying, "Netanyahu has become accustomed to being a controversial figure in the more than 40 years since he came to Washington. Perhaps he should get used to being an insignificant figure."

Protesters greet Israeli leader inside and outside US Congress

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has harshly criticized pro-Palestinian protesters in the United States, saying, “Iran is funding the protesters… You have officially become useful idiots for Iran.”

Reacting to the Israeli leader's characteraization of Americans protesting what they see as a genocidal war, the Biden administration reacted with dismay. White House officials dismissed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s description of Americans protesting Israeli attacks on Gaza as “useful idiots for Iran,” calling it “a sad and wrong idea.” White House National Security Adviser John Kirby said they do not find it right that Netanyahu has described Americans protesting Israeli attacks on Gaza as “useful idiots for Iran.”

Kirby said that the long-running demonstrations in the United States, criticizing the policies of the Netanyahu administration, are a reflection of people's real concerns, adding that "democracy is exactly that."

For his part, US State Department spokesman Matthew Miller said, “We recognize that the vast majority of protesters in the United States are not taking their orders from Iran.”

Miller added that they strongly support the right of protesters in the United States to demonstrate, stressing that the vast majority of people who have demonstrated in the streets of Washington since Wednesday in protest of Netanyahu’s visit to Washington are patriotic Americans expressing their opinions, and we support their right to do so.

In response to Netanyahu’s use of the term “idiots” and “morons” to describe the American protesters, Miller said, “As always, I will adopt a rule of not responding to specific things that the Israeli prime minister says.”

Instead of joining thousands of anti-genocide protesters outside, Rashida Tlaib chose to confront Netanyahu in Congress with keffiyeh and 'war criminal' sign

Democratic Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib objected to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's speech to the US Congress on Wednesday, holding him responsible for the genocide in the Gaza Strip. During Netanyahu's speech, Tlaib wore a keffiyeh and a Palestinian flag, and held up a black-and-white sign with the words "War Criminal" on one side and "Guilty of Genocide" on the other.

Trump's hot potato characterization of the Gaza War: Do what you want but do it fast!

Even Trump does not want to handle this hot potato if he wins the election and take over the White House in 2025. He wants this war to end fast, so that he does not want to deal with it.

Former President Donald Trump – one day before meeting Benjamin Netanyahu – called for a swift end to Israel’s war on Gaza and the return of its captives, stating that the US ally is "getting decimated" by bad publicity.

"I want him to finish up and get it done quickly, he’s got to get it done quickly," Trump told Fox News.

"For whatever reason you have Jewish people out there wearing yarmulkes and they’re, you know, pro-Palestine. You’ve never seen anything like this… They’ve got to get this done fast because the world is not taking lightly to it, it’s really incredible."

Presidential candidate Trump did not attribute his demand for an end to Israel's genocide of Palestinians over the past nine months, which has killed over 40,000 Palestinians, mostly women and children, and injured more than 100,000. Instead, he attributed his demand to Israel's negative reputation.

Middle East Media Coverage

Media outlets in the Middle East, including those published historically West-friendly nation states in the Gulf (Alkhaleej Online), concluded that the visit caused more damage and achieved nothing. Other outlets, including the Lebanese paper Alakhbar, summarized the visit with this headline, "Half of Democrats Boycott Speech: Israel's 'Sanctity' Is Not Okay", and explained it further in editorials like these.

Amidst a broad boycott by members of the House of Representatives and the Senate, especially from the Democratic Party, the Prime Minister of the occupation, Benjamin Netanyahu, tried to send a message to American officials, stating that the “fate” of the United States is linked to the fate of Israel, and that the two parties are facing one hostile “axis” and are fighting the “same battle,” and therefore, the “victory” of the latter will be a victory for the former. Apart from the “lies” that Netanyahu adopted, especially regarding the number of Palestinian martyrs in Rafah, as he claimed, when asked about the number of civilians killed there, that “no one was killed,” “except for one incident, when shrapnel from a bomb hit a Hamas weapons depot, killing twenty people,” Netanyahu’s speech, according to observers, did not carry anything new, and did not add any changes to the division within the United States regarding the war in Gaza. According to a report published by the Atlantic Council, although Netanyahu only mentioned the Lebanese front relatively quickly in his speech, the “framework” in which he placed the threat posed by Hezbollah seemed striking; he classified the latter as an “existential threat” to Israel, which cannot be separated from “Israel’s struggle against Hamas, the Houthis, and Iran.” According to those who hold this view, one of the possibilities raised is that “the speech aims to pave the way for a ground incursion into southern Lebanon, and to soften global public opinion regarding such a decision.” The report adds that “opening a new active front against Hezbollah would be disastrous for several reasons, both humanitarian and strategic,” noting that “for the besieged (Israeli Defense Forces),” such a scenario “means entering into a large-scale war against a well-armed opponent,” and increases the possibility of the war expanding regionally. In his speech, which lasted about an hour, Netanyahu stressed the need to strengthen American support for Israel and lift the ban on some weapons, considering that “fast-tracking American military aid could greatly accelerate the end of the war in Gaza and help prevent a wider war in the Middle East,” and claiming that “Israel is participating in intensive efforts to secure the release of the hostages.” Regarding his vision for “the day after,” which remains a point of contention between him and Washington, Netanyahu said that he wants “a demilitarized and non-extremist Gaza,” led by Palestinians “who do not seek to destroy Israel.” After focusing on attacking the axis of resistance with all its components, Hamas responded by issuing a statement about the speech, in which it considered that the latter “reflects the depth of Netanyahu’s military, security, and international crisis,” stressing that “his talk about intensive efforts to return the hostages is a complete lie and misleading of Israeli, American, and international public opinion, while he is the one who thwarted all efforts aimed at ending the war and concluding a deal to release prisoners (...) which holds him fully responsible for the repercussions of this position and for the fate of the prisoners in the Gaza Strip.” The movement also stressed that “the war criminal Netanyahu’s perceptions about the future of the Gaza Strip are mere illusions and fantasies that he is trying to market,” considering that “his attack on the axis of resistance reflects the depth of his military and security crisis due to the open fronts.” The movement concluded by calling on the “United Nations,” the “League of Arab States,” and the “Organization of Islamic Cooperation” to “declare their position of rejecting the occupation and working to end it by all means, and to support the steadfastness of our Palestinian people and their resistance.”

At the Capitol complex, protests were held in which thousands of people opposed to the visit of the occupation prime minister and his speech before the joint session of Congress participated, while American media reported that the Secret Service is looking into reports that the demonstrators managed to reach the hotel where Netanyahu is staying in Washington, DC, where they released insects in the hotel and “activated the fire alarms.” These demonstrators had their “share” of the attack in Netanyahu’s speech, in which he described them as “idiots who benefit from Iran” and who are funded by them, claiming that “when the tyrants of Tehran who hang gays from cranes and kill women for not covering their hair praise you, promote you and fund you, you have officially become idiots who benefit from Iran,” he claimed. As for inside the Capitol, approximately 100 Democrats from the House of Representatives and 28 Democrats from the Senate attended, according to a tally conducted by Axios. This means, in practice, that about “half” of the Democrats in both chambers were absent from the speech, including former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, making the boycott much wider than the one Netanyahu faced in 2015, when 58 Democrats were absent from his speech. However, even some officials who attended the session were keen, in one way or another, to “annoy” Netanyahu and express their opposition to the genocide being committed in Gaza. For example, among the attendees were a number of critics of the occupation prime minister, including progressive Jewish representatives Jamie Raskin (Democrat of Maryland) and Jerry Nadler (Democrat of New York), who was carrying—and sometimes reading—a book titled “The Netanyahu Years,” which criticizes the “failures” of the latter’s rule, in a photo that was widely circulated on social media. Also in attendance was Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), the only Palestinian-American in Congress and a vocal critic of Israel, wearing a keffiyeh and holding a small sign reading “Guilty of Genocide” and “War Criminal.” Today, Netanyahu is expected to meet with former President Donald Trump at Mar-a-Lago, according to a post on his Truth Social platform, in their first meeting since relations between them deteriorated since the 2020 elections. Trump’s post also included: “During my first term, we saw peace and stability in the region, even signing the historic Abraham Accords,” “and we will do it again,” stressing that the wars in Ukraine and Gaza must end through the implementation of the “peace through strength” agenda, adding: “Millions are dying, and Kamala Harris is in no way capable of stopping it.”

+

Consensus of International media outlets: Netanyahu's rhetoric will not garner support without resolving the Gaza crisis

International newspapers focused on the repercussions of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's speech in the US Congress and his pressure on the White House to approve a specific list of weapons in the upcoming presidential elections. The British newspaper "The Times" saw that Netanyahu had resorted for decades to giving a speech in Congress when he was facing a decline in the voting rate, noting that the speech did not provide clear answers to those wondering about victory in the Gaza war and the threats accompanying

She pointed out that "the most difficult thing Netanyahu will have to face after his trip to Washington is the Israeli public, which is accustomed to his speeches."

In the same context, the Israeli newspaper "Haaretz" said that Netanyahu's eloquence will not mobilize support for Israel without a final solution to the crisis in Gaza, adding that "Netanyahu's words have no weight since he is in no hurry to free the prisoners and continues to refuse to discuss a clear plan for the day after the war in Gaza."

The newspaper stressed that the Israelis are more interested in the return of the prisoners and the end date of the war, not Netanyahu's popularity at home.

On the Israeli-American relations front, Politico revealed that the delegation accompanying Netanyahu during his visit to Washington is putting pressure on the administration of US President Joe Biden to agree to provide Israel with a specific list of weapons. According to the newspaper, Israel is trying to boost its transfers and weapons stockpile before the presidential elections, and quoted a source familiar with the weapons list as saying that Israel is concerned about the possibility of a larger confrontation with the Lebanese Hezbollah.

In turn, the French newspaper "Le Monde" said in its editorial that Biden has a good chance to save the two-state solution and fight forcefully against the Israeli occupation of the West Bank after announcing that he will not run for the upcoming elections.

Biden has a historic opportunity to match his words with his actions, according to the newspaper, especially since the extremist policy pursued by the ruling coalition in Israel is in stark contrast to the official American position.

As for the American newspaper "New York Times", it focused on a British study that concluded that the death toll and injuries provided by the Ministry of Health in Gaza during the first weeks of the war are credible.

___________
> Content was updated to include media reactions after Wednesday's speech, and subsequent developments.

Sampling reactions on social media, newspapers commentaries, and government officials' statements

Dehumanizing Opponents as an Instrument of Supremacism: "human animals"

Dehumanizing Opponents as an Instrument of Supremacism: "human animals"

    Monday, July 15, 2024   No comments

We have not forgotten the descriptions and expressions that Yoav Galant, the occupation's Minister of War, made at the beginning of the Israeli war on the Gaza Strip, when he said, "Israel is fighting human animals and is acting accordingly," until he returned, after more than nine months of the war of extermination that "Israel" is practicing in the Strip, to repeat the same descriptions about the resistance and its people. Is it a coincidence that Galant, followed by Netanyahu, returned two or three days later to the same speech, or is the matter related to considerations and a general context that governs Israeli colonial behavior. The expressions that Minister Galant used at the time, or those he uses today, were not born of the moment of the shock of the flood or the "outburst of anger" that was generated in Israeli society immediately after October 7, as some like to describe it, and this behavior of "Israel" is not a new policy that it is practicing today, but rather an extension of a colonial policy that it has been practicing for many years, the title of which is death, destruction, pain and terror, and what it produced in this war is nothing but a double mixture of the same horrors.

Looking at "others" with inferiority, from a position of superiority, as something "different", as "goyim", primitives, or "human animals" living in this universe that is harnessed to serve the "chosen Jew" and is fed by a huge store of hatred and arrogance.

This superior, “Western in origin” view of the “backward” world has not disappeared since the time of colonial Europe, just as racism has not disappeared today in the Zionist racial mentality, even after 9 months of massacres, and even after these racist, supremacist descriptions were used against “Israel” and its leaders by the South African representative and by judges in the International Court of Justice.

Although it was met with strong international human rights rejection, as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch considered the statements of the occupation’s minister of war “disgusting and an explicit call to commit war massacres,” Netanyahu and his Zionist minister of war still see Gaza as a “human animal cage,” slaughtering whoever he wants, whenever he wants, and however he wants, then razing it to the ground, and torturing its “primitive” people, who are cut off from electricity, water, and food, just as the Minister’s European ancestors did with the “human animals” they brought from Senegal and the Congo until they died of thirst, cold, and disease outside the walls of the Roman Catholic Church in Brussels, because they are “human animals, nothing more.” This description, which Galant deliberately and provocatively uses, is enough to indicate Israel's intention, coupled with action, to do everything and anything to take revenge on the Palestinians, even if this revenge results in killing children and the elderly and demolishing hospitals, shelters, schools and mosques on the heads of the displaced. As long as these are just "human animals", any harm that Israel inflicts on them, no matter how heinous, is "permissible and legitimate because they deserve it".

More importantly, in addition to what we have indicated about the deep-rootedness of this approach in the Israeli consciousness and behavior since the inception of this usurping entity, understanding the Israeli reaction, which adopts a policy of complete destruction without restrictions and without any regard for the rules of international humanitarian law, requires understanding the backgrounds and motives that specifically drive it today and push its leaders to return and insist on repeating its ABCs, especially describing the Palestinians as "human animals".

The first of these motives is to reproduce the narrative of the war and its spirit within Israeli society as if it were its first day, so that Israeli society remains led by its government and its agenda, thus silencing all voices and protests calling for an end to the war and demanding a negotiating path that leads to political arrangements, allowing Netanyahu and his partners to evade the societal accountability that will end the rule of this extremist right-wing coalition if the war stops, as if the charge of anger that is being fueled by the continued evocation of the narrative of “human animals” will, over time, reduce the extent of what many of them described as the massive military and security failure on October 7 and what followed. Because this narrative needs support to remain present in the consciousness of Israelis and the world, it must continue to be reminded and broadcast through media platforms from time to time. The second is the fierce competition in which the leaders of "Israel" compete to incite against the Palestinians and the people of Gaza in particular, as Israeli politicians, military personnel and religious men excel in inciting against the Palestinians, to the point that repeatedly describing the Palestinians as "animals" has become an essential part of their political discourse.

In this race of incitement, "Israel", its leadership and its army are using everything they have at their disposal without limits, crushing all of Gaza and leveling it to the ground without mercy. For the people of Gaza and Palestine in general, mercy has always been outside the dictionary of Israeli aggression, which means that the repeated mention of "human animals" in Galant and Netanyahu's speech was nothing more than a "natural" description in the context of the spirit of war and fighting that has inhabited Israeli society since its inception.

The third is that "peaceful" and "civilized" "Israel" must weave its vision of the other "barbaric and backward" party, as the Palestinians are not human beings, and it is determined to give the world a new narrative that moves it from the position of self-defense to the position of "exterminating animals", while preserving its "humanity".

In order to ensure that it "whitens its image and behavior", Israel must continue to criminalize and dehumanize the "other", to ensure that the world does not turn against it while it exterminates "these animals", accusing it of confronting what it calls "atrocities" with greater atrocities, and what it calls "terrorism" with more horrific terrorism. This is what was expressed by the position of the Chief of Staff of the occupation army, Herzi Halevi, a few months after the beginning of the war, when he said: "We fight with determination and remain human, unlike the other side that fights like animals."

The fourth motive is the contempt for international law and its institutions, as "Israel" has a superior ability to destroy, and its history is littered with the rubble of cities and villages and human remains, and its record also has a long history of destroying international law, kicking it and turning its back on it, as Netanyahu stood proudly a few days ago, saying: "We have proven that no force in the world can stop us."

Because international law, when it comes to "Israel", is very theoretical, very timid, very weak, and far removed from reality, all its prohibitions are violated and violated to the point of insane chaos as long as the victim is a "Palestinian Arab" and the killer is an "Israeli Jew." Perhaps this is also a message to those who rely on the rules of international law and the Geneva Conventions, and bet on "rationalizing" "Israel's" behavior and preventing it from targeting unarmed civilians, as the Israeli army, according to Galant, does not see itself bound by these agreements, as it kills "human" animals, and these rules and agreements do not include them. It seems that stripping opponents of their humanity has become a basic method in racist wars, and "Israel" is the protégé of the colonial West and its creation and image, imitating today, as it used to do in the past, what its early Western European colonial ancestors did, and it is inhabited by narratives of violence that shape the public conscience in "Israel", and in which religion, culture, and art intertwine by pressing the trigger of the fire that Gaza is burning with Today, the earth is uprooted and its "human animals" are burned alive.

_________

Muhammad Halsa, Writer and researcher; content of byline articles express the opinion of author(s).

Media review: NYT's Friedman, "Biden must push Israel to accept Hamas' demands"

Media review: NYT's Friedman, "Biden must push Israel to accept Hamas' demands"

    Tuesday, June 18, 2024   No comments

American journalist Thomas Friedman confirmed that the Israeli occupation entity is currently living in "existential danger", at a time when the axis of resistance has managed to "tighten its grip on Israel", while "the latter has no military or diplomatic response".

In an opinion piece he wrote in the American newspaper "The New York Times", Friedman warned of the danger of war with Hezbollah on "Israel", noting that the Islamic resistance in Lebanon is armed with precision missiles capable of destroying large areas of the Israeli infrastructure.

Friedman explained that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu "leads Israel, while he must remain in power, in order to avoid the possibility of being sent to prison on corruption charges", at a time when the occupation faces the possibility of war breaking out on several fronts.

According to him, Netanyahu, in order to remain in power and avoid prison, "sold his soul in order to form a government with right-wing extremists, who insist that Israel must fight in Gaza until Hamas is eliminated, in order to achieve complete victory", as they claim.

Now, the Israeli "war cabinet" has collapsed, due to "Netanyahu's lack of a plan to end the war and safely withdraw from the Gaza Strip," while "extremists in his government coalition are looking forward to their next steps to reach power," according to Friedman.

While the American journalist pointed out that these extremist ministers "caused a lot of damage," he warned that "no friend (of Israel) should participate in this circus," as he described it.

In this context, Friedman stressed the need to form a new government in "Israel" and remove Netanyahu from the position of Prime Minister, through new elections.

The American journalist also expressed his support for what former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak confirmed in the American newspaper Haaretz last Thursday, which is that "Israel is facing the most serious crisis in its history."

In light of this, Friedman warned that "every American should be concerned about this matter," explaining that it represents "a recipe for dragging the United States into a war in the Middle East to help Israel."

In this context, Friedman believed that US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken "should not make another trip to the Middle East without the agreement of both Israel and Hamas on a clear plan to end the war."

While acknowledging the need for US President Joe Biden to push the occupation to submit to Hamas's conditions to stop the war, Friedman stressed that "Biden must tell Israel that it must accept Hamas's main demand: to end the war completely now, and withdraw from the Gaza Strip, in exchange for the return of all Israeli prisoners."

Friedman believed that ending the war in the Gaza Strip would "lead to reaching an agreement mediated by the US with Hezbollah, in order to calm the war on the northern border."

He added that Netanyahu's idea that some Palestinians, who do not belong to Hamas or the Palestinian Authority, will run the place for "Israel" is "a fantasy." In light of all this, the American journalist stressed that "Israel must leave Gaza," while the head of the Hamas movement in Gaza, Yahya Sinwar, continues to run the Strip.

Friedman argued his point of view without even mentioning the human cost of this reckless war that civilians in Gaza have endured for more than 250 days and that may last for months more.

Media Review: Haaretz asks, "Did the right-wing celebration of the Rafah massacre reveal the “ugly face” of Israel?"

Media Review: Haaretz asks, "Did the right-wing celebration of the Rafah massacre reveal the “ugly face” of Israel?"

    Tuesday, May 28, 2024   No comments

Some say that the Israeli right's celebration of the massacre of civilians in Rafah is the true ugly face of Israel, making those who believe or actually know that there is a "different Israel" face an impossible challenge in their quest to prove the opposite.

This is what is summarized by an article in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, which confirmed at the beginning that the massacre that took place in the Palestinian city of Rafah last Sunday was inevitable, as regardless of how accurate the Israeli military strikes were, and in light of the presence of more than a million Palestinian refugees in the region’s camps, it was inevitable, Sooner or later, this will cause mass human casualties.

 She explained that this Israeli raid caused widespread destruction, killing at least 45 people, and the footage showed civilians floundering in tents surrounded by hell.

 As usual, the article's author, Alison Kaplan Sommer, says Israel's leaders, citizens, and supporters abroad were ready to defend Israel's "moral" army.

 The writer pointed out that they expressed their rejection and denunciation of any accusation that the aggression could have been avoided, or any suggestion that what happened was intentional, including the use of words such as “genocide” or “massacre.”

 Such accusations are “an inaccurate distortion of the truth at best and vile anti-Semitism at worst,” they claim.

 “But before they could do it this time, it became painfully clear from the beginning that their efforts would be in vain,” Sommer said.

 Far-right media voices in Israel soon began celebrating the fires, and thus the deaths of those engulfed in the flames, by jokingly comparing the images to the memorial bonfires lit on Lag Baomer - the Jewish holiday that fell on the same day as the massacre.

 She added that these extremists expressed their happiness that this fire was “the central bonfire in Rafah,” wishing those affected a “Happy Eid,” in tweets that were later deleted, but they will not be forgotten, and will be referred to as evidence that the fire was intentional, and was even celebrated, As she said.

 Sommer explained that the most prominent journalist who fanned the flames of hatred is Yinon Magal, who is constantly proven to be Itamar Ben Gvir by the Israeli media, and it seems that, like the extremist minister, he rejoices and is proud of the insolent manifestations that indicate disdain for the lives of the Palestinians and denial of their humanity.

 She concluded that Ben Gvir and Magal's behavior provides sufficient evidence of malicious intentions to obstruct any attempt by Israel to defend the behavior of its army, which makes erasing the image of "the ugly face of Israel" difficult for those who believe that it has another side.

Another US governmental official and a Biden Appointee, who is also Jewish, resign protesting Biden's handling of the war in Gaza calling it a Genocide

Another US governmental official and a Biden Appointee, who is also Jewish, resign protesting Biden's handling of the war in Gaza calling it a Genocide

    Friday, May 17, 2024   No comments

In a move that some observers described as a resounding rejection of Biden's handling of the war in Gaza, a high-ranking Jewish employee in the administration of US President Joe Biden announced her resignation from her position on Wednesday, due to what she described as his disastrous and ongoing support for the Israeli war on the Gaza Strip.

In an article published by the Washington Post, Lily Greenberg Call, Special Assistant to the Chief of Staff at the Interior Ministry, cited her Jewish upbringing and relationship with Israel and recounted how her family fled from Europe to America to escape anti-Semitic persecution there.

In her resignation letter (see below), Greenberg Call - who made the first public resignation by a Jew over Biden's support for Israel - wrote, "I can no longer in good conscience continue to represent this administration amid President Biden's disastrous and continuing support for the genocide in Gaza."

In an interview she conducted with writer Yasmine Abu Talib Yasmine Abu Talib, Greenberg Call said that resigning was a difficult decision because of the society in which she grew up, but the Jewish values ​​in which she was raised led her to make this decision.

“Judaism is the most important part of my identity, and all the values ​​I was raised with and all my Jewish education are what led me to this decision,” Greenberg Call said. She added, "What Israel is doing in Gaza and to the Palestinians throughout the land does not represent the Jews and is a shame to our ancestors."

Commenting on her position in the Biden administration, she said, “Everyone here is thinking about achieving the American dream and rising to the top, but I asked myself several times during the past eight months: What is the benefit of power if it is not used to stop crimes against humanity?”

Earlier this week, a US Army major working for the Defense Intelligence Agency resignedUS Army major working for the Defense Intelligence Agency resigned, writing in an open letter that he felt “incredibly ashamed and guilty” when he realized that his work contributed to the suffering and killing of Palestinians.

A political official also resigned from the Ministry of Education last January, and an employee at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs who worked on transporting weapons to foreign countries last October.

In february of this year, U.S. airman Aaron Bushnell U.S. airman Aaron Bushnell set himself on fire at the Israeli embassy in Washington, D.C., after he described his action while walking to the location as an extreme act of protest against the war in Gaza—a desperate plea to “free Palestine,” as he screamed while flames engulfed his body.

As early as October of last year, some US officials, including State Department officials, have resigned rejecting Biden's blind support of a genocidal war in Gaza.

Whi is Lily Greenberg Call

 An American Jewish politician and human rights activist at the local and international levels. She served as Special Assistant to the Chief of Staff at the US Department of the Interior, and participated in the election campaigns of US President Joe Biden and his Vice President, Kamala Harris.

She worked for many years within Zionist groups supporting Israel, then took an anti-occupation stance, opposed violence in the occupied Palestinian territories, and called for peaceful coexistence between Palestinians and Jews.

Lily Greenberg Cole was born and raised in San Diego, California. Her origins go back to a Jewish family that immigrated to the United States of America to escape the persecution practiced against Jews in Europe.

Her family lived on Ellis Island, New York, and spent decades suffering under the weight of racial discrimination, which affected Lily's upbringing and her vision of issues of justice and discrimination.

Greenberg grew up in a Jewish community in which unconditional support for Israel prevails, to the point where it is considered part of the Jewish identity, so she was a prominent youth in pro-Israel activism in her high school years, and has been involved in the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) since her freshman year of high school. She was elected president of the Israel Defense Club at her school.

When she was 16 years old, she went on a trip to the occupied territories and stayed there for a full year, as part of a program for the “Jewish Youth” movement, which included making trips in the occupying state and joining educational courses. Among the activities were meetings with Palestinian teenagers, the goal of which was Developing the spirit of coexistence between the two parties.

When she joined the University of California, she joined pro-Israel groups, and became the leader of a student movement supporting Israel and known within the university.

In 2017, she led a trip to Israel, organized by the Hillel Berkeley Jewish Student Center. Students from a wide range of ethnic and religious backgrounds joined the trip, visited Palestinian cities such as Bethlehem and Ramallah, and met Palestinians and settlers.

Greenberg worked for many years as an activist to defend Israel, but experiences began to change her convictions. During a relief mission in Greece, she forged friendly relations with refugees of Palestinian origins, developed deep relationships with Palestinians through academic programs, and established close relationships with Palestinian Americans during periods of study and campaigns. Electoral relations, and those relations had a significant impact on changing the ideas on which they grew up.

In her article about severing its relationship with AIPAC, Lilly stated that she realized that the organization, through its unconditional support for the Israeli government, was supporting violence, which was contrary to its values, and so she joined to work with other groups.

Greenberg also worked with non-Zionist organizations, such as the "If Not Now" organization, which opposes the Israeli occupation in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.