Tuesday, November 26, 2024

Ceasefire in Lebanon to be announced by Biden, taking effect at 10 a.m. tomorrow - Yuval Barnea

by Yuval Barnea

The deal passed through the war and general cabinet before being fully approved.

 

French President Emmanuel Macron (left), US Special Envoy to the Middle East Amos Hochstein (center),  and Lebanese PM Najib Mikati (illustrative). (photo credit:  REUTERS/Mohamed Azakir, 3D Earth Photography from Getty Images via Canva Pro, REUTERS/Nathan Howard/Pool, REUTERS/Sarah Meyssonnier/Pool)
French President Emmanuel Macron (left), US Special Envoy to the Middle East Amos Hochstein (center), and Lebanese PM Najib Mikati (illustrative).
(photo credit: REUTERS/Mohamed Azakir, 3D Earth Photography from Getty Images via Canva Pro, REUTERS/Nathan Howard/Pool, REUTERS/Sarah Meyssonnier/Pool)

A ceasefire in Lebanon is expected to be announced by the United States and France at 10 p.m.

Presidents Biden and Macron will announce the deal during the night, with the alleged agreement set to take effect at 10 a.m. tomorrow.

This comes after several days of strained last-minute negotiation, in which Israel pushed for the removal of France as guarantor of the security situation in Lebanon, citing current diplomatic tensions between France and Israel.

The deal passed through the war and general cabinet before being fully approved. Netanyahu is also ran the ceasefire past by the heads of the local authorities in the North, may of which responded with anger at being told the deal would not lead to an immediate return to their homes.

 Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Gaza, November 19, 2024. (credit: MAAYAN TOAF/GPO)Enlrage image
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Gaza, November 19, 2024. (credit: MAAYAN TOAF/GPO)

Members of the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee demanded Defense Minister Israel Katz present the ceasefire agreement to them before final approval.

What's on the table?

An Israeli official told Maariv that the ceasefire was not the end of the war and that Israel maintained its right to respond to any threat.

The source also said that the severing of the connection between the Gazan and Lebanese fronts would leave Hamas isolated, something also highlighted by Netanyahu in his speech.

Sources told Saudi channel Al Hadath that there would be no buffer zone in South Lebanon according to the agreement.

Hassan Fadlallah, a Hezbollah MP, told Reuters in response to the announcement that Hezbollah would remain active, including in providing social services to displaced Lebanese civilians.

Fadlallah called the final hours before the ceasefire "dangerous, sensitive hours," given that the IDF launched a large-scale attack on Beirut earlier on Tuesday.

MK Zvi Sukkot, Otzmah Yehudit, said he would support a ceasefire as the IDF had managed to remove 80% of the leading figures in Hezbollah, reversing his previous opposition.

Several other right-wing figures have come out either conditionally approving or rejecting the ceasefire, including Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and Naftali Bennett.


Yuval Barnea

Source: https://www.jpost.com/breaking-news/article-830838

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Jack Smith finally ends a $90 million legal assault on Trump, but leaves vexing DOJ issue unsettled - John Solomon

 

by John Solomon

Courts must decide still whether Smith’s appointment was unconstitutional, shaping the future of politically sensitive probes in America.

 

Trump dance
Former US President and Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump dances as he arrives to speak during his final campaign rally at the Van Andel Arena in Grand Rapids, Michigan, on the early morning of November 5, 2024.
(Getty Images)

Three special prosecutors and at least $90 million later, Donald Trump remains standing, unscathed and now free of any federal criminal charges. It’s a herculean feat certain to be written into the annals of legal and political history.

“I think the federal cases are over. They are done with, and nobody should say that President Trump is under indictment for federal cases,” famed Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz declared Monday on his daily podcast The Dershow, dismissing any possibility the president-elect will be charged again in the same matters after he leaves office.

“Now they are going to say, 'Well, yeah technical reasons.' No, they are not technical reasons. They are constitutional. And remember Trump didn’t have a chance to defend himself,” he also said.

But Special Prosecutor Jack Smith’s simultaneous dismissals Monday of a Jan. 6 election subversion case in Washington and a classified records case in Florida left behind one vexing question that could restrain future investigations of major political figures in America.

Where the appointments of both Smith and previous Russia collusion special counsel Robert Mueller constitutional?

Both men were appointed by attorneys general without having been a Senate-confirmed U.S. attorney. Trump’s legal team decided not to challenge the legality of Mueller’s appointment in part because he never charged the president with crimes.

But Trump’s attorneys proceeded with a challenge to Smith on the grounds that his special counsel appointment without Senate approval violated the Appointments Clause of the U.S. Constitution. Unlike many past DOJ special counsels, Smith wasn’t a sitting U.S. attorney and came from an international court without Senate confirmation.

Trump got a winning ruling from U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon this summer, which remains on the books as the lone declaration on the issue.

“The bottom line is this: The Appointments Clause is a critical constitutional restriction stemming from the separation of powers, and it gives to Congress a considered role in determining the propriety of vesting appointment power for inferior officers,” Cannon wrote in July. “The Special Counsel’s position effectively usurps that important legislative authority, transferring it to a Head of Department, and in the process threatening the structural liberty inherent in the separation of powers. 

“If the political branches wish to grant the Attorney General power to appoint Special Counsel Smith to investigate and prosecute this action with the full powers of a United States Attorney, there is a valid means by which to do so. He can be appointed and confirmed through the default method prescribed in the Appointments Clause,” she also said.

In short, Cannon declared DOJ can only appoint a sitting U.S. attorney as special counsel. And if the department goes outside that pool of candidates, it must seek a Senate confirmation under the Appointments Clause for the special counsel to be empowered to prosecute crimes.

The issue was pending in the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals when Smith filed a motion to dismiss Trump from the case since he is a soon-to-be-sitting president who is immune from prosecution while in office.

“Dismissing the appeal as to defendant Trump will leave in place the district court’s order dismissing the indictment without prejudice as to him,” Smith wrote. “The appeal concerning the other two defendants will continue because, unlike defendant Trump, no principle of temporary immunity applies to them.”

With Trump – the covered elected official who required the special counsel appointment to be made in the first place – now dismissed from the case, the appellate judges will have to decide whether to proceed with the appointments clause challenge with the two remaining defendants, Trump aides Walt Nauta and Carlos de Oliveira.

A new DOJ under Trump could render the case moot by withdrawing the charges or changing its position in the case from the Biden-era team, or Trump could issue pardons for Nauta and de Oliveira. Or it could let the appeals proceed – perhaps all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court – to settle the case law all the way.

Such optionality is certain to be watched closely in legal circles and inside the DOJ, and the final outcome is certain to shape the future of politically sensitive prosecution that might require special counsel appointments.

Meanwhile, the sheer magnitude of cost of the eight-year lawfare against Trump waged by the Justice Department is coming into clear focus. Mueller and his deputy, Andrew Weissmann, spent $32 million before writing a report saying there was not evidence to charge Trump with any alleged conspiracy with Russia to hijack the 2016 election.

A subsequent special prosecutor, John Durham, spent a comparative bargain of just $7.6 million before writing a report concluding that the FBI didn’t even have a legal basis to investigate Trump in the Russia matter.

And then Smith and his deputy, Jay Bratt, have reported spending over $50 million through this summer, with that bill still rising. 

For taxpayers, at least $90 million was spent to hire special counsels to prove whether Trump committed crimes, and he now stands declared innocent in all federal matters.

Yes, other defendants went down in the process. But conservatives have a powerful argument to begin a second Trump term with: The large financial bill and the eight years of political capital hardly seemed worth it. In fact, it may have created an opposite effect than what Democrats had hoped.

“For nearly eight years, Bob Mueller, Andrew Weissmann, Jack Smith, Jay Bratt, and other political operatives have spent nearly $100 million attempting to destroy President Trump and his America First movement,” said former Senate Judiciary Committee lawyer Mike Davis, the the founder of the Article III Project.

“This unprecedented Democrat lawfare and election interference backfired spectacularly in the Supreme Court and the lower federal courts, with even the appointment of a special counsel declared unconstitutional,” Davis added. “And this backfired spectacularly on November 5th, when the American people delivered our verdict.”


John Solomon

Source: https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/all-things-trump/jack-smith-finally-ends-90-million-legal-assault-trump-leaves

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

What’s Iran next move if a ceasefire with Lebanon happens? - analysis - Seth J. Frantzman

 

by Seth J. Frantzman

The ceasefire will be important for Iran and the region and could be a turning point.

 

THE FLAGS (from right) of Iran, Hezbollah, and Lebanon are on display in Tehran. The Lebanese people should not allow Iran to build a Shi’ite crescent from Tehran to the Mediterranean Sea; they should stop suffering for the sake of Hezbollah, the writer urges. (photo credit: WEST ASIA NEWS AGENCY/REUTERS)
THE FLAGS (from right) of Iran, Hezbollah, and Lebanon are on display in Tehran. The Lebanese people should not allow Iran to build a Shi’ite crescent from Tehran to the Mediterranean Sea; they should stop suffering for the sake of Hezbollah, the writer urges.
(photo credit: WEST ASIA NEWS AGENCY/REUTERS)

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said that Iran backs the “resistance” in Lebanon during a phone call with an Iranian official.

Iran is talking up the “resistance” ahead of a possible ceasefire in Lebanon between Israel and Hezbollah, stressing that it backs the Lebanese “people and government.” Iran sent a medical mission to Lebanon this week as part of that show of support, but behind the scenes, Iran continues to smuggle weapons to Hezbollah.

“Speaking in a phone call with the special representative of the Minister of Foreign Affairs in the West Asian region, Mohammad Reza Ra’ouf Sheibani, Araghchi praised the Resistance Front, especially the resistance of the Lebanese people in recent weeks against the Zionist regime’s army,” Iran’s state media IRNA said on Tuesday.

“He also commended the courage of the resistance fighters in southern Lebanon. Meanwhile, Sheibani presented a report on the latest efforts to stop the Zionist regime’s aggression against Lebanon and to establish a ceasefire.”

The ceasefire will be important for Iran and the region and could be a turning point. This is because Iran has sought to link Hezbollah to Gaza so that it was forced to enter the war against Israel after the Hamas attack on October 7.

A war between Israel and Lebanon (illustrative) (credit: ING IMAGE, REUTERS)Enlrage image
A war between Israel and Lebanon (illustrative) (credit: ING IMAGE, REUTERS)

Even though Hezbollah supports Hamas, it is believed not to have known the exact timing of the attack, and as such, Hezbollah may have been pre-empted and drawn into a war at a time it did not choose. Hezbollah then sought to create an equation with Israel where Hezbollah carved out a “right” to attack northern Israel after Israel attacked some Hezbollah sites in southern Lebanon.

That all changed in mid-September when Israel vowed to return its citizens to the North to areas threatened by Hezbollah. Since then, Israel has launched a ground operation in Lebanon to clear Hezbollah from the border.

On Tuesday, the military released photos of the head of IDF’s Northern Command at the Litani River. He is literally putting his boots where Hezbollah once was. This is supposed to be a symbolic victory photo. Israel has reached the proverbial Rubicon and has turned back toward a ceasefire. At least, that’s what the reports indicate.

Iran weighing its own Rubicon

Iran is also weighing its own Rubicon, the river in northern Italy, which Caesar reached before he marched on Rome 2,000 years ago. Iran may now move towards nuclear armament. It may also seek to push its proxies in Iraq and Syria to strike at Israel or increase threats to the Golan.

If there is a 60-day period for the ceasefire, Iran will have much to do because the 60 days coincides roughly with the lead-up to US president-elect Donald Trump taking office. The next weeks will be important to see which way Iran heads. Does it focus internally on nuclear weapons, or does it seek to push its proxies to escalate attacks on Israel? 


Seth J. Frantzman

Source: https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/article-830825

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Trump’s Plan to Squeeze Iran Financially - Hugh Fitzgerald

 

by Hugh Fitzgerald

Mullahs in panic mode.

 


[Want even more content from FPM? Sign up for FPM+ to unlock exclusive series, virtual town-halls with our authors, and more—now for just $3.99/month. Click here to sign up.]

While the IDF has now devastated Iran’s air defense system, including the four S-300 anti-missile systems that protected Tehran, and destroyed its ballistic missile plants, as well as a top secret nuclear research plant at Parchin, the Trump administration is planning to apply its own financial pressure to bring Iran’s economy to its knees. More on Trump’s plan can be found here: “Trump admin. plans to bankrupt Iran with ‘maximum pressure’ policies – report,” Jerusalem Post, November 16, 2024:

US President-elect Donald Trump’s administration is preparing to reinstate its “maximum pressure” strategy against Iran, targeting Tehran’s economic stability and its ability to support militant proxies and nuclear development, The Financial Times reported on Saturday, citing sources close to the transition team.

The sources revealed that the administration plans to impose stricter sanctions, particularly on Iran’s oil exports, which serve as a critical revenue source.

The anticipated sanctions could drastically reduce Iranian oil exports, which currently exceed 1.5 million barrels per day, up from a low of 400,000 barrels per day in 2020. Experts suggest that these measures would severely impact Iran’s economy. Bob McNally, an energy consultant and former US presidential adviser, indicated that reducing exports to a fraction of current levels would leave Iran in a far worse economic position than during Trump’s first term, Financial Times reported.

According to the report, the renewed strategy aims to bring Iran back to the negotiating table for a comprehensive nuclear deal. According to Trump’s transition team, the approach involves crippling Iran’s financial resources to push its leadership into talks.

However, experts cited in the report expressed skepticism, noting that Tehran is unlikely to agree to what are expected to be stringent US terms. The Financial Times highlighted Trump’s campaign statement regarding Iran in September, saying, “We have to make a deal because the consequences are impossible.”

Not giving in to pressure

Iranian officials have already rejected the possibility of resuming negotiations under coercion. In a statement posted on X/Twitter earlier this week, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi warned that repeating the “maximum pressure” policy would result in failure, as it had during Trump’s first term….

The Iranian reaction to the news of Trump’s renewed campaign of “maximum pressure” was the expected bravado — “we came out stronger from your first campaign” — but in fact the sanctions Trump imposed in his first term proved devastating. And now Trump is planning even more severe sanctions. He aims to cut into Iran’s oil sales, possibly by secondary boycotts of countries that continue to buy Iranian oil, possibly even by an embargo on oil exports from Kharg Island. A decline in oil sales will hurt Iran much more this time, because during Trump’s first term, Iran still had a financial cushion from years of oil sales, but that cushion no longer exists.

The poverty rate in Iran is the highest it has ever been. More than 26 million Iranians now live below the poverty line, representing over 30 percent of the country’s total population. Iran’s GDP went down steadily during Trump’s first administration, reaching its lowest point in 2020. Then, with the sanctions removed by Biden, the GDP has steadily risen. And now, with those even stiffer sanctions about to be imposed, Iran’s GDP will again plummet. Iran’s currency collapse is another sign of Iran’s vulnerability to sanctions. The Iranian rial now stands at 703,000 to the dollar; in 2015, it was 32,000 to the dollar. The Iranian economy, already enduring a steep downturn, will be kicked into the basement after Trump imposes his sanctions designed to impose “maximum pressure.” And as its economy unravels further, how can Iran keep up sending supplies of expensive weapons to Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis?


Hugh Fitzgerald

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/trumps-plan-to-squeeze-iran-financially/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

'Surrender agreement': Northern Israeli leaders slam potential Lebanon ceasefire deal - Jerusalem Post Staff

 

by Jerusalem Post Staff

Kiryat Shmona mayor Avihay Shtern termed the potential deal "a surrender agreement."

 

Fires in Kiryat Shmona  (photo credit: Eyal margolin / Flash 90)
Fires in Kiryat Shmona
(photo credit: Eyal margolin / Flash 90)

Heads of localities in the North have criticized in recent days the ceasefire deal between Israel and Lebanon that could be signed in the near future.  

"A ceasefire agreement between Israel and Lebanon that does not include an arrangement to ensure the security of the communities along Israel's northern border would be a disaster," Moshe Davidovich, head of the Mateh Asher Regional Council, said on Tuesday.

"If a ceasefire agreement is signed between Lebanon and Israel and it does not include a significant arrangement to restore the security of the residents of the front-line communities before they return home — including a buffer zone near the border with a strong international force and the removal of Hezbollah beyond the Litani River — it will be a disaster for generations," he stated. 

"We do not want to find ourselves repeating history, facing the same failures as after the First and Second Lebanon Wars with unenforced agreements. I remind the Israeli government that the residents of the North are Israel’s first line of defense, and as such, their security must be ensured."

'October 6 reality'

Kiryat Shmona mayor Avihay Shtern termed the potential deal "a surrender agreement" in a Facebook post on Monday. 

A war between Israel and Lebanon (illustrative) (credit: ING IMAGE, REUTERS)Enlrage image
A war between Israel and Lebanon (illustrative) (credit: ING IMAGE, REUTERS)

"When you propose to return us to the reality of October 6 in the North, where our sons could be taken captive, our daughters raped, and our homes burned — we will not agree, we will not return, and we will not cooperate with these surrender agreements," he wrote. 

Later on Tuesday, Walla reported that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu invited the heads of regional councils in the North to a meeting regarding the deal.

Tens of thousands of people are still displaced from their homes in the North after they were evacuated following October 7 of last year.

The US-brokered ceasefire proposal outlines a 60-day truce during which Israeli forces would withdraw from southern Lebanon, where the Lebanese military would be deployed, barring Hezbollah from entrenching itself in the area. 

Joanie Margulies, Reuters, and Hannah Sarisohn contributed to this report. 


Jerusalem Post Staff

Source: https://www.jpost.com/breaking-news/article-830772

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

UN advisor fired after determining no genocide in Gaza - Israel National News

 

by Israel National News

Alice Wairimu Nderitu, the Kenyan who is the Special Advisor on the Prevention of Genocide, will not have her contract renewed after declaring that the war against Hamas does not meet the qualifications for genocide.

 

United Nations headquarters
United Nations headquarters                                                                                       iStock

The Wall Street Journal reports that Alice Wairimu Nderitu, the Kenyan who is the Special Advisor on the Prevention of Genocide, will not have her contract renewed after declaring that the war against Hamas does not meet the qualifications for genocide.

The final say in her dismissal lies with Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, as he has the authority to renew or discontinue the contracts of UN employees.

The UN has denied the report, saying that she is leaving only due to her contract expiring and specifically rejecting any connection to her determinations regarding genocide. A UN statement noted that “genocide is strictly defined in international law and any legal determination is made by appropriate judicial bodies.”

Nderitu has in the past issued warnings against officials using the term 'genocide' too flagrantly, as it has suffered from “frequent misuse in referring to large scale, grave crimes committed against particular populations.”


Israel National News

Source: https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/399781

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

The Trump Counterrevolution: A Return to Sanity - Victor Davis Hanson

 

by Victor Davis Hanson

A lethal challenge to entrenched elites, bureaucracies, and progressive ideologies.

 


[Want even more content from FPM? Sign up for FPM+ to unlock exclusive series, virtual town-halls with our authors, and more—now for just $3.99/month. Click here to sign up.]

We are witnessing a historic counterrevolution after Trump’s victory, far different from his first election in 2016.

The orthodox and the supposed scripted future are now suspect. And they are likely to be dethroned—from the trivial to the existential.

Critics claim Trump has no mandate to stage such a counterrevolution. They argue that he did not win 51 percent of the popular vote or achieve a Reaganesque landslide in the Electoral College.

Yet all the initiatives he advanced and won on polled landslide public approval.

Despite being the target of Democrat lawfare for years, a defiant Trump promised to end an open border, massive illegal immigration, rising crime, and soaring prices. He pledged to slash government and its administrative state, terminate racial and gender identity politics, and restore deterrence abroad.

The people overwhelmingly wanted those messages but were waiting for an unorthodox messenger who would actually deliver them.

The Trump messenger reassured weary citizens that they were not crazy.

Instead, they had good cause to be sick of being talked down to by a media, academic, bureaucratic, and political elite that never earned nor deserved such self-appointed status.

The FBI, the CIA, and the DOJ, not the massive crowds at rallies, were the ones truly out of control.

President Joe Biden was really suffering from dementia, not those who said he was.

Criminals with weapons are as deleterious to society as law-abiding citizens deprived of them.

It is not a thought crime to believe there are two sexes—not three or four or more. No one should be forced to buy an electric vehicle, disconnect their natural gas stove, or submit to racial or gender indoctrination sessions.

Americans should speak their minds and write what they wish without worry of being censored, blacklisted, ostracized, doxxed, or shadow-banned—or jailed.

Campuses are not oases of tolerance, disinterested inquiry, and free expression.

They instead increasingly became overpriced indoctrination centers that shred the Constitution and graduate indebted students who know less—but are far more biased—than when they enrolled.

Trump and his MAGA appointees promise to slash over a trillion dollars from the annual federal budget, disbanding entire agencies.

Is the objection that an ever-expanding government—$37 trillion in debt, running nearly $2 trillion in annual deficits—should keep growing?

Trump pledges to reform the Pentagon—ending DEI Pentagon commissars and revolving-door corporate generalship.

He vows to hold the 4-star class responsible for the catastrophe in Afghanistan and to reenlist soldiers who were driven out due to draconian vaccination mandates or woke intolerance. Trump envisions changing the entire system of military procurement.

Does the status quo object on the grounds that our military leadership has been winning our wars abroad?

Is the Pentagon currently awash in eager recruits?

Has it stockpiled a huge surplus of shells, bombs, and rockets?

Trump promises historic deportations of the 12 million who destroyed the southern border and surged in without health or criminal audits.

Trump vows to rescue swamped social services and stop crimes by illegal alien felons.

Is that really worse than the Biden administration’s original massive importation of millions of illegal aliens, empowered by drug-importing and sex-trafficking cartels?

Who are the culpable? Those flagrantly mocking and breaking the law, or those vowing to enforce it?

Trump says he will deter enemies without bogging America down in “endless wars”—and did just that in his first four years as president.

Is the current alternative preferable to convincing enemies that there are few consequences to their aggression, sandbagging allies like Israel, or feeding the war in Ukraine without any plan of either winning or ending it?

The Trump revolution is also cultural and social. Shared class interests have replaced race, ethnicity, and gender chauvinism.

Athletes of all races are no longer taking a knee in protest of America’s supposed systemic racism during the national anthem. Sometimes they celebrate their scoring by doing honorific Trump YMCA/golf-swing dances on national television.

Enlistments to help craft the Trump counterrevolution are not always predicated on degrees, conventional resumes, or past lengthy government service. Race and gender do not determine qualifications alone. Nor does class.

Common sense, successful lives outside of government, and a desire to end the current nonsense count instead as better prerequisites.

For Trump, party identification, titles, and traditional prestige matter less as he is surrounded by an ideologically diverse cadre including Elon Musk, Robert Kennedy, Jr., Dana White, Tulsi Gabbard, and Joe Rogan.

The country no longer must apologize incessantly for its past or present but can move on—content that it need not be perfect to be better than all the alternatives.

The age of flashing pronouns, renaming iconic landmarks, statue toppling, trashing the dead, vandalizing with impunity the campus library, or spouting anti-Semitic venom is passing.

So, another name for the Trump counterrevolution is a simple return to sanity.


Victor Davis Hanson

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/the-trump-counterrevolution-a-return-to-sanity/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Taiwan: Ukraine's Survival Is Our Survival - Gordon G. Chang

 

by Gordon G. Chang

If Russia keeps the territory it has seized — certainly if it grabs even more — countries will believe that American promises to defend them are worthless and will begin building a nuclear deterrent of their own.

 

  • [T[he United States has an obligation to defend Ukraine — and it is definitely in its interest to do so.

  • In the Budapest Memorandum, the three parties [the US, the UK and Russia] made six pledges to the former Soviet republic, the most important of which was "their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the CSCE Final Act, to respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine."

  • "[W]hen negotiating the security assurances, U.S. officials told their Ukrainian counterparts that, were Russia to violate them, the United States would take a strong interest and respond." — Steven Pifer, former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine.

  • If Russia keeps the territory it has seized — certainly if it grabs even more — countries will believe that American promises to defend them are worthless and will begin building a nuclear deterrent of their own.

  • Russian President Vladimir Putin, after all, will not stop there, just as he did not stop after breaking apart Georgia in 2008 or after seizing Crimea in 2014. "If Ukraine falls, Poland, the Baltic republics and other NATO member states will face existential threats," Greg Scarlatoiu, president of the Committee for Human Rights in North Korea, told this publication. Then, the U.S. and its NATO partners will be even more stretched — and less able to defend Taiwan — than they are now.

  • When Chinese leaders saw Washington's failure to act, they soon moved against Second Thomas Shoal and other Philippine reefs in the South China Sea, went after Japan's islets in the East China Sea, and started reclaiming and militarizing features in the Spratly Island chain. Obama and Biden legitimized the worst elements in the Chinese political system by showing everybody else that aggression worked.

  • The best way to stop China from attacking Taiwan is to defeat its proxies, especially Russia in Europe.

  • As Tsai Ing-wen, who stepped down as Taiwan's president in May, said on November 23, "A Ukrainian victory will serve as the most effective deterrence against future aggression."

The best way to stop China from attacking Taiwan is to defeat Russia in Europe. As Taiwan's former President Tsai Ing-wen said this month: "A Ukrainian victory will serve as the most effective deterrence against future aggression." Pictured: Taiwanese march in support of Ukraine, in Taipei on March 13, 2022. (Photo by Sam Yeh/AFP via Getty Images)

"We should cut off U.S. military aid to Ukraine, until our European allies step up," said U.S. Senator Josh Hawley in a February 2023 speech at the Heritage Foundation. "That won't happen so long as we're doing their job for them."

Many, if not most, Americans would agree with the senator from Missouri, but is he right?

Hawley's address was titled "China and Ukraine: A Time for Truth." The truth, however, is that the United States has an obligation to defend Ukraine — and it is definitely in its interest to do so.

Why? As an initial matter, America wants to stop the spread of nuclear weapons.

In December 1994, Ukraine agreed to give up those weapons, which it took possession of upon the breakup of the Soviet Union. In return, Ukraine received territorial guarantees from the United States, Great Britain, and Russia, contained in the Memorandum on Security Assurances in Connection with Ukraine's Accession to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. The document is commonly known as the Budapest Memorandum.

In the Budapest Memorandum, the three parties made six pledges to the former Soviet republic, the most important of which was "their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the CSCE Final Act, to respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine."

"Some have argued that, since the United States did not invade Ukraine, it abided by its Budapest Memorandum commitments," wrote Steven Pifer of the Brookings Institution and former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, in 2019. "True, in a narrow sense. However, when negotiating the security assurances, U.S. officials told their Ukrainian counterparts that, were Russia to violate them, the United States would take a strong interest and respond."

If Russia keeps the territory it has seized — certainly if it grabs even more — countries will believe that American promises to defend them are worthless and will begin building a nuclear deterrent of their own.

Apart from ignoring America's Budapest Memorandum obligations, the let's-abandon-Ukraine crowd believes that the defense of Ukraine undermines the ability of the U.S. to discharge a more important task: protecting Taiwan. The argument is that American resources are finite and Washington has to make a choice.

"Saying that we should prioritize Taiwan over Ukraine is like arguing that a fire truck should be parked at a house down the street to guard against a fire breaking out in the future instead of knocking down the fire at the burning house," argued John Walters, president of the Hudson Institute, at an event at his think tank in April 2023.

He is right.

"Whenever you think World War III began, China is fighting it now," Kenneth Abramowitz of Citizens for National Security told Gatestone this month. "It is fighting the rest of the world in Ukraine, in Israel, and everywhere else. We have to confront bad actors everywhere they attack us. It's not like a menu at a restaurant where you only have to choose one."

There are many reasons to choose Ukraine. Russian President Vladimir Putin, after all, will not stop there, just as he did not stop after breaking apart Georgia in 2008 or after seizing Crimea in 2014. "If Ukraine falls, Poland, the Baltic republics and other NATO member states will face existential threats," Greg Scarlatoiu, president of the Committee for Human Rights in North Korea, told this publication. Then, the U.S. and its NATO partners will be even more stretched — and less able to defend Taiwan — than they are now.

China also does not stop on its own. China, for instance, took Scarborough Shoal from the Philippines in early 2012. The Obama administration, while Vice President Joe Biden was in charge of foreign policy, did not oppose the audacious Chinese seizure.

When Chinese leaders saw Washington's failure to act, they soon moved against Second Thomas Shoal and other Philippine reefs in the South China Sea, went after Japan's islets in the East China Sea, and started reclaiming and militarizing features in the Spratly Island chain. Obama and Biden legitimized the worst elements in the Chinese political system by showing everybody else that aggression worked.

China is on the move today, fighting proxy wars in Ukraine — Beijing greenlighted the invasion with its "no limits" partnership declaration just before Vladimir Putin's attack — in North Africa and in the Middle East. The best way to stop China from attacking Taiwan is to defeat its proxies, especially Russia in Europe.

"Ukraine is not going to drive Beijing's decision whether to attack Taiwan," said Elbridge Colby, who has led the charge against defending Ukraine. "Instead, what's most critical for deterring a war over Taiwan is the military balance in Asia." At this moment, that balance may or may not favor China, but the most critical factor, I think, is casualty-averse Beijing's assessment of whether America and its partners have the will to defend Taiwan.

It was, after all, a perceived failure of will that led Putin to believe he could invade Ukraine. The invasion shortly followed Biden's catastrophic withdrawal from Afghanistan and his weak public statements in the days preceding the attack.

It was this withdrawal that emboldened China. As Afghanistan was falling, Beijing's main propaganda narrative was that the U.S. could not hope to counter China because it could not deal with even the Taliban.

Beijing then went after Taiwan's governing organization, the Democratic Progressive Party. "The DPP authorities need to keep a sober head, and the secessionist forces should reserve the ability to wake up from their dreams," an editorial from Global Times, which is controlled by People's Daily, stated. "From what happened in Afghanistan, they should perceive that once a war breaks out in the Straits, the island's defense will collapse in hours and the U.S. military won't come to help."

Worse, China's leaders seem to think the U.S. is incapable. "It cannot win a war anymore," Lu Xiang of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences told the Global Times as the Taliban captured Kabul.

Losing Ukraine will make China even more confident in that assessment.

The Taiwanese, in fact, think that their security is closely tied to events in Eastern Europe. "Ukraine's survival is Taiwan's survival," declared Bi-khim Hsaio last year while serving as Taiwan's representative in Washington and before becoming the island republic's vice president. "Ukraine's success is Taiwan's success. Our futures are closely linked."

As Tsai Ing-wen, who stepped down as Taiwan's president in May, said on November 23, "A Ukrainian victory will serve as the most effective deterrence against future aggression."


Gordon G. Chang is the author of Plan Red: China's Project to Destroy America and The Coming Collapse of China, a Gatestone Institute distinguished senior fellow, and a member of its Advisory Board.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/21156/taiwan-ukraine-survival

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Israel foils dozens of Iranian recruitment attempts daily - Israel National News

 

by Israel National News

Over 100 Israeli citizens have recently reported suspected recruitment attempts by Iranian intelligence.

 

Fake Iranian account

Over 100 Israeli citizens have recently reported suspected recruitment attempts by Iranian intelligence.

Israel Hayom quoted security officials stating that due to these reports, there is an ongoing need to foil dozens of espionage attempts and clandestine operations within Israel daily.

Most reports involve online profiles familiar to Israeli security agencies and those previously exposed by ISA as fake profiles used by Iranian intelligence to try to recruit Israeli citizens.

The Iranians operate by 'spraying' appeals out online to make numerous contacts while maintaining communication with anyone who responds, hence the push to raise public awareness of the recruitment attempts.

"Citizen alertness is one of the means of dealing with the threat, and also continues to prevent the Iranians' intentions to spy within Israel," security officials say.


Israel National News

Source: https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/399778

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Utah, other Western states ask Supreme Court to return millions of acres of land back to the states - Kevin Killough

 

by Kevin Killough

“The federal burden in the West infringes on our sovereignty and undermines our equality with other States, all in direct violation of the Constitution,” Rep. Harriet Hagemen, R-Wyo., said.

 

Federal control
Wild horses run free on BLM land along the historic Pony Express Trail on October 16, 2020 outside Dugway, Utah.
(Getty Images)

A map of the U.S. showing land under federal control paints large swaths of the West. In August, Utah filed a lawsuit against the federal government, arguing that it’s unconstitutional for the feds to retain unappropriated land in a state indefinitely. 

Since the lawsuit was filed, a dozen other states, including Idaho, Alaska and Wyoming, have filed briefs asking the court to hear the case. Additionally, a coalition of counties in Arizona and New Mexico, the Pacific Legal Foundation, the Utah Legislature and the Wyoming Legislature have also filed briefs in support of the lawsuit. 

“The federal burden in the West infringes on our sovereignty and undermines our equality with other States, all in direct violation of the Constitution,” Rep. Harriet Hagemen, R-Wyo., told Just the News. Hageman joined Utah’s congressional delegation in filing a brief in support of the Supreme Court’s review of Utah’s complaint. 

Unappropriated lands

According to a “Stand For Our Land” website set up by the State of Utah to explain the lawsuit, the Bureau of Land Management restricts public use of federal lands, and these restrictions don’t help Utah efficiently and effectively manage its lands. 

The lawsuit only applies to unappropriated lands, which are those the federal government holds without any clear congressional designation. As a result, the lawsuit won’t impact national parks, forest lands, monuments or tribal lands. 

It “is instead directed at the tens of millions of additional acreage that is owned by the federal government for no reason other than to dictate and control land use policy in the West,” Hageman said. 

In Utah, the federal government controls nearly 70% of the state’s total land area, which is second only to Nevada, which has nearly 85% of its land in federal control. Of the 22.8 million acres in Utah controlled by the BLM, 18.5 million acres are “unappropriated.” 

While the federal government disposed of much of the land it controlled in the East, the Homestead Act of 1862 allowed certain citizens to claim land in the U.S. territories of the West, so long as they lived and cultivated the land. Similar laws were passed in the years that followed in order to encourage more people to move out West. 

While the West was populated, it was much more sparse than the East, leaving millions of acres unsettled. These remained under the federal government’s control. In 1976, the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) reaffirmed federal authority over public lands, while requiring the feds to involve states and local governments in management decisions through coordination and cooperation. 

While debates about federal authority over public lands have been going on for decades, the State of Utah, according to the “Stand For Our Land” website, decided to take action as a result of more decisions being made in Washington, D.C., without any meaningful consideration of input from states and local governments. 

Restoration leases

The proverbial straw that broke the camel’s back was the BLM’s Public Lands Rule. The rule created “restoration leases” or “mitigation leases.” These work just like oil and gas or cattle grazing leases, except the “use” of the land would be to conserve it, which typically means erasing or eliminating human impact on the untouched landscape.

Critics of the rule say it effectively takes public lands off the table for any uses, including recreation, but supporters have said it would only allow for restoration and mitigation activities alongside other uses. The BLM’s final rule describes them as a means to put conservation work on “equal footing” with grazing and mineral development.

The State of Utah said it is “contrary to the BLM's legal obligation to promote multiple-use and sustained yield under the Federal Lands Policy and Management Act (FLPMA).” 

Another factor likely motivating Utah’s decision to file the lawsuit now is the Supreme Court decision in June that shot down the 1984 doctrine known as "Chevron deference," which allows federal agencies broad latitude in interpreting laws when Congress hasn’t provided specific guidelines. Under the doctrine, if Congress has granted an agency the general authority to make rules with the force of law, courts generally defer to the agency’s implementation of that general authority. This is no longer the law of the land.

John Ruple, University of Utah law professor, told High Country News that the high court’s ruling in the matter was “definitely a motivating factor” in filing the lawsuit. 

The Department of the Interior under the Biden administration had made a number of decisions limiting oil and gas production, as well as mining opportunities. Against Utah’s wishes, The BLM closed over 317 miles of popular roads and trails, an action the State of Utah says impacts recreational activities and local businesses that rely on tourism. The BLM is also considering future restrictions. 

The U.S. responded Thursday to Utah's complaint, arguing that the lawsuit doesn't satisfy the requirements for the complaint to go directly to the Supreme Court. This, the U.S. argues, gives the court discretion in whether or not to take up the case. 

"Utah’s complaint does not satisfy the Court’s usual criteria for entertaining an original case; it faces significant jurisdictional and procedural barriers; and it plainly lacks merit," the federal government said in its brief

Critical concern

Under the Biden administration, the BLM took similar actions in other states, including Wyoming, where the agency selected an alternative resource management plan that would, according to Cowboy State Daily, designate 1.8 million acres of Wyoming as “areas of critical concern.” The proposal drew statewide opposition, over concerns it would limit grazing, mining and oil and gas production in the “Cowboy State.” These industries, along with tourism, are the basis for almost all economic activity in the state. 

“Although this brief only relates to Utah, it is an argument that could have far reaching benefits for all western states, including Wyoming, where 48% of all surface lands are owned by the feds. The ability to generate revenue from these lands would be a huge benefit to state and local budgets and reduce the tax burden on the public,” Hageman said. 

Hageman said better outcomes would result if these decisions were made on the state level. 

“Transferring these lands to state and local control will result in the implementation of better management practices and policies, provide for more accountability, and prevent the federal government from blocking their productive use. It has been shown time and again that states are more qualified, effective, and better prepared to manage real property within their boundaries, while also limiting the problems associated with insect infestations, catastrophic forest fires, and invasive weed species,” Hageman said. 

Should the Supreme Court take up the case and ultimately rule in Utah’s favor, the ruling could potentially put 200 million acres of the West under state control. 


Kevin Killough

Source: https://justthenews.com/government/courts-law/utah-and-west-ask-supreme-court-return-millions-acres-federal-land-back

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Monday, November 25, 2024

US believes Israel, Lebanon have agreed on terms for Israel-Hezbollah ceasefire - report - Joanie Margulies

 

by Joanie Margulies

The war cabinet is expected to convene on Tuesday to finalize.

 

A war between Israel and Lebanon (illustrative) (photo credit: ING IMAGE, REUTERS)
A war between Israel and Lebanon (illustrative)
(photo credit: ING IMAGE, REUTERS)

US President Joe Biden and French President Emmanuel Macron are expected to announce a 60 day ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah on Tuesday, Saudi news outlet Al-Sharq Al-Awast reported Monday evening.

The war cabinet is set to convene the same day to approve the pending ceasefire that would bring an end to hostilities on Israel's northern border with Lebanon. An Israeli official told Reuters that the cabinet would convene to discuss a deal that could be cemented in the coming days.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reportedly had approved a ceasefire with Lebanon "in principle" while meeting with Israeli officials on Sunday evening, citing outstanding issues before approval. 

The source said that Israel still has reservations about certain details, which will reportedly be transferred to the Lebanese government on Monday. 

Lebanon's deputy speaker of parliament, Elias Bou Saab, told Reuters on Monday that there were "no serious obstacles" left to beginning the implementation of a US-proposed 60-day truce to end fighting between Israel and Lebanon-based terror organization Hezbollah.

Enlrage image

"There appear to be no serious obstacles in the way of starting to implement the US proposed ceasefire agreement," Bou Saab said.

Bou Saab said the proposal included a 60-day timeline for Israeli forces to withdraw from Lebanese territory, giving time for the Lebanese army to deploy to southern Lebanon.

According to the spokesman, one focal point being negotiated is who would monitor the ceasefire, and that a five-country committee would be set up to monitor, including France and chaired by the United States.

A Lebanese official and Western diplomat told Reuters that the US had informed Lebanese officials a ceasefire could be announced "within hours."

France, which Lebanon sought the involvement of in negotiations, was met with restraint in negotiations after announcing that the European nation would enforce the ICC warrants. Netanyahu was displeased with one of the key parties overseeing agreement implementation.

According to Axios, US President Joe Biden spoke with French President Emmanuel Macron to try to come to a solution. The report claims that Biden told Macron that Netanyahu was within his rights to be angry and that mediation would not be possible between parties when one is pledging to arrest the head of state of one of the negotiating parties.

On both sides of the Israel-Lebanon border, thousands of people have been displaced from their communities, leading to copious fatality counts of both Israeli and Lebanese civilians.

Israel's motivation to finalize ceasefire

Overnight, reports from international media suggested significant American guarantees were on the table. Other sources pointed to Israel's motivation to finalize the ceasefire at this specific time. 

Israeli state broadcaster KAN cited Israeli sources saying that an agreement with Lebanon may already be reached this week.

Israeli public officials have responded to reports of a pending ceasefire.

Foreign Minister Gideon Saar said that a ceasefire agreement with Lebanon would hinge on enforcement that would keep Hezbollah disarmed and away from the border.

"The test for any agreement will be one, not in words or phrasing, but in enforcement only of the two main points. The first is preventing Hezbollah from moving southward beyond the Litani (River), and the second, preventing Hezbollah from rebuilding its force and rearming in all of Lebanon," Saar said in Knesset, in broadcast remarks.

National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir called an agreement with Lebanon "a big mistake. A historic missed opportunity to eradicate Hezbollah. I understand all the constraints and reasons, and it is still a grave mistake," he wrote on social media platform X.

Danny Danon, Israel's Ambassador to the United Nations, said that talks were moving forward, but denied that Israel should halt all strikes on southern Lebanon.

This is a developing story. 

Maya Gur Arieh and Reuters contributed to this report. 


Joanie Margulies

Source: https://www.jpost.com/breaking-news/article-830653

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

'Rule of law disgraced by ICC': Alan Dershowitz to assemble team to defend Israel in The Hague - Jerusalem Post Staff

 

by Jerusalem Post Staff

"I am assembling a team of world-class lawyers from around the globe to help defend Israeli leaders against the false charges," Dershowitz said.

 

American jurist Alan Dershowitz sits for a photo during a visit to Israel, whose leaders he met to discuss proposed reforms to the country?s Supreme Court, in Tel Aviv, Israel December 8, 2022.  (photo credit: REUTERS/AMIR COHEN)
American jurist Alan Dershowitz sits for a photo during a visit to Israel, whose leaders he met to discuss proposed reforms to the country?s Supreme Court, in Tel Aviv, Israel December 8, 2022.
(photo credit: REUTERS/AMIR COHEN)

US defense lawyer and former Harvard professor Alan Dershowitz is assembling a team to defend Israeli leaders in The Hague, he announced in a Sunday Wall Street Journal op-ed.

Dershowitz noted that the case would be tried in the court of public opinion as well as in The Hague.

"For that reason, I am assembling a team of world-class lawyers from around the globe to help defend Israeli leaders against the false charges," Dershowitz wrote.

Last Thursday, the International Criminal Court issued international arrest warrants for war crimes allegedly committed by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former defense minister Yoav Gallant.

Various countries, such as the Netherlands, France, and Ireland, have announced they would uphold the ICC decision and arrest Netanyanhy and Gallant if they chose to land in those countries. 

 Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu and defense minister Yoav Gallant during a press conference in the Kirya military base in Tel Aviv , Israel , 28 October 2023. (credit: ABIR SULTAN POOL/Pool via REUTERS)Enlrage image
Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu and defense minister Yoav Gallant during a press conference in the Kirya military base in Tel Aviv , Israel , 28 October 2023. (credit: ABIR SULTAN POOL/Pool via REUTERS)

However, the United States rejected the ICC decision.

"The United States fundamentally rejects the Court’s decision to issue arrest warrants for senior Israeli officials. We remain deeply concerned by the Prosecutor’s rush to seek arrest warrants and the troubling process errors that led to this decision," a government spokesperson said.

In the WSJ op-ed, Dershowitz added that several prominent lawyers have already promised to join the legal battle, including multiple former US attorneys and a former FBI director. 

No jurisdiction against Israel

“We will argue that the ICC has no jurisdiction against Israel, not only because it isn’t a member, but also because the treaty that established that court precludes it from considering cases against any country with a valid judicial system that is willing and able to investigate the alleged crimes,” he wrote.

“We will also demonstrate that Israel’s actions in Gaza don’t violate any international law or laws of war over which the ICC has jurisdiction.”

Germany, which supplies 30% of Israel’s military equipment, expressed criticism of the petition for arrest warrants, saying that the court had no jurisdiction since Israel has not signed the Rome Statute. Nevertheless, Germany has made clear in the past that it will respect the ICC’s decisions.

Dershowitz continued, “By issuing arrest warrants… the court is seeking to equate the terrorism of Hamas, which murdered, raped, and kidnapped approximately 1,450 Israelis, mostly civilians, with the self-defense efforts of Israel to prevent a promised recurrence of Oct. 7.”

Netanyahu responded publicly on Thursday evening, condemning the decision that ruled for his arrest. "This is a moral bankruptcy that undermines the natural right of democracies to defend themselves against murderous terrorism," he said.

Israel's President Isaac Herzog similarly noted that the decision reflects the choice to side with "terror and evil over democracy and freedom" and that it turned the justice system into a human shield for Hamas's crimes against humanity.

Dershowitz concluded, “Our group of lawyers hopes to bring justice to Israel and its leaders, as well as the rule of international law, which is being disgraced and destroyed by the ICC. We welcome others to join in this endeavor.”


Jerusalem Post Staff

Source: https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/article-830595

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Why Palestinians Will Not Have New Leaders - Bassam Tawil

 

by Bassam Tawil

Those who are hoping that a new (and pragmatic) Palestinian leadership will take over one day are in for a disappointment. Even after 89-year-old PA President Mahmoud Abbas is gone, his cronies and inner circle will continue to run the show. They will not, under any circumstances, share the cake with other Palestinians.

 

  • For the past three decades, leaders of the Palestinian Authority (PA) and Hamas have systematically targeted political activists, journalists, social media users, students, professors and human rights activists as part of an ongoing campaign to silence critics and deter others from speaking out against the lack of democracy and freedom of speech.

  • Torture included beatings, solitary confinement, feet-whipping, threats and taunts, and forcing detainees into various painful positions for extended periods. [Human Rights Watch] commented that "the habitual, deliberate, widely known use of torture, using similar tactics over years with no action taken by senior officials in either authority to stop these abuses, make these practices systematic."

  • This abuse has transformed the PA-controlled areas in the West Bank and the Hamas-run Gaza Strip into Palestinian dictatorships similar to those that have long existed in most Arab countries. In addition, it has resulted in the suppression of the emergence of new leaders capable of leading the Palestinians towards security, stability and prosperity.

  • Palestinians still remember how political activist and human rights defender Nizar Banat, an outspoken critic of corruption in the Palestinian Authority, was beaten to death by PA security officers in Hebron in 2021. Until today, no one has been punished for the killing of Banat.

  • The family of the slain political activist was naïve enough to believe that the ICC or any other international agency would serve them justice.

  • The ICC does not care about crimes committed by Palestinians against their own people. Instead, the court's antisemitic prosecutor is busy searching for ways to punish Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for daring to fight back in a war that was launched by Hamas on October 7, 2023.

  • Palestinians have not only been deprived of a large portion of the international financial aid -- stolen by corrupt Palestinian leaders -- but also of the right to elect new leaders and representatives through free elections.

  • Those who are hoping that a new (and pragmatic) Palestinian leadership will take over one day are in for a disappointment. Even after 89-year-old PA President Mahmoud Abbas is gone, his cronies and inner circle will continue to run the show. They will not, under any circumstances, share the cake with other Palestinians.

  • The same applies to the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. No Palestinian will agree to play any role in the administration of the Gaza Strip after the current Israel-Hamas war, as long as the Iran-backed terrorist group and its friends are still around. That is why it is necessary to eliminate Hamas completely and make sure that it loses its military, political and civilian capabilities in the Gaza Strip. This could take a few more months or years, but it is far better than ending the war in a way that keeps Hamas in power.

Palestinians still remember how political activist and human rights defender Nizar Banat, an outspoken critic of corruption in the Palestinian Authority (PA), was beaten to death by PA security officers in Hebron in 2021. Until today, no one has been punished for the killing of Banat. Pictured: Plain-clothed PA security officers beat a man in Ramallah on June 26, 2021, during a demonstration to protest Banat's killing. (Photo by Ahmad Gharabli/AFP via Getty Images)

Palestinian leaders have a long history of cracking down on their political rivals and opponents. For the past three decades, leaders of the Palestinian Authority (PA) and Hamas have systematically targeted political activists, journalists, social media users, students, professors and human rights activists as part of an ongoing campaign to silence critics and deter others from speaking out against the lack of democracy and freedom of speech.

In 2017, Magdalena Mughrabi, Deputy Middle East and North Africa Director at Amnesty International, warned that "the last few months have seen a sharp escalation in attacks on journalists and the media by the Palestinian authorities in the West Bank and Hamas in Gaza in a bid to silence dissent." She added: "This is a chilling setback for freedom of expression in Palestine."

Since then, the situation has only worsened, as a growing number of Palestinians have found themselves targeted by both the PA and Hamas.

In 2018, Human Rights Watch (HRW) published a report exposing 86 cases of arbitrary arrests and torture of peaceful dissenters by both the Palestinian Authority and Hamas, based on personal interviews with the victims and their families. Torture included beatings, solitary confinement, feet-whipping, threats and taunts, and forcing detainees into various painful positions for extended periods. HRW commented that "the habitual, deliberate, widely known use of torture, using similar tactics over years with no action taken by senior officials in either authority to stop these abuses, make these practices systematic."

Another Amnesty International report published in 2019 found that "Palestinian security forces in the West Bank and Gaza routinely used torture and other ill-treatment with impunity" and noted that during that year (2019) there were 143 allegations of torture in the West Bank and 156 in Gaza.

This abuse has transformed the PA-controlled areas in the West Bank and the Hamas-run Gaza Strip into Palestinian dictatorships similar to those that have long existed in most Arab countries. In addition, it has resulted in the suppression of the emergence of new leaders capable of leading the Palestinians towards security, stability and prosperity.

That is the main reason the Palestinians' only choice today continues to be the current Palestinian Authority and Hamas leaders. It is hard to find Palestinian political activists in the West Bank and Gaza who would agree to speak out publicly against the PA or Hamas, or even demand reform and democracy. These activists are afraid to express their opinion in public because they do not want to end up in a PA or Hamas prison. Others are afraid of being killed or fired from their jobs in the Palestinian public sector.

Palestinians still remember how political activist and human rights defender Nizar Banat, an outspoken critic of corruption in the Palestinian Authority, was beaten to death by PA security officers in Hebron in 2021. Until today, no one has been punished for the killing of Banat.

Banat's family has urged the International Criminal Court (ICC) to prosecute those responsible, saying they had lost confidence in the PA's judiciary. "For those of us who live in corrupt countries where genuine justice is out of reach, the ICC remains our hope for an unpoliticised investigation and prosecution of criminals," Banat's brother, Ghassan, said outside the court in The Hague. "The way they [PA security officers] killed him and are trying to get away with it reflects the level of impunity and of moral corruption that plagues this [PA] regime."

The family of the slain political activist was naïve enough to believe that the ICC or any other international agency would serve them justice.

The ICC does not care about crimes committed by Palestinians against their own people. Instead, the court's antisemitic prosecutor is busy searching for ways to punish Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for daring to fight back in a war that was launched by Hamas on October 7, 2023. Then, thousands of Hamas terrorists and "ordinary" Palestinians invaded Israel from the Gaza Strip, murdering 1,200 Israelis and wounding thousands. Many of the victims were raped, beheaded, tortured or burned alive, while 240 others were kidnapped to the Gaza Strip, where 101 remain in captivity.

The PA and Hamas crackdown does not bode well for the future of the Palestinians living in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. These Palestinians have not only been deprived of a large portion of the international financial aid -- stolen by corrupt Palestinian leaders (here, here and here) -- but also of the right to elect new leaders and representatives through free elections.

Those who are hoping that a new (and pragmatic) Palestinian leadership will take over one day are in for a disappointment. Even after 89-year-old PA President Mahmoud Abbas is gone, his cronies and inner circle will continue to run the show. They will not, under any circumstances, share the cake with other Palestinians.

If the international community wants to see new faces in the Palestinian leadership, it must exert pressure on Abbas and the "old guard" leadership to stop targeting young political activists, journalists, and human rights defenders. This can be done, for example, by threatening to suspend or cut off financial aid.

The same applies to the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. No Palestinian will agree to play any role in the administration of the Gaza Strip after the current Israel-Hamas war, as long as the Iran-backed terrorist group and its friends are still around. That is why it is necessary to eliminate Hamas completely and make sure that it loses its military, political and civilian capabilities in the Gaza Strip. This could take a few more months or years, but it is far better than ending the war in a way that keeps Hamas in power.


Bassam Tawil is a Muslim Arab based in the Middle East. His work is made possible through the generous donation of a couple of donors who wished to remain anonymous. Gatestone is most grateful.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/21152/palestinians-new-leaders

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter