How Israeli Arab Leaders Betray Their Own People - Khaled Abu Toameh

 

by Khaled Abu Toameh

I do not want to live under a Palestinian government. Which means I only have one home, even if I'm not Jewish: Israel." — Nuseir Yassin ("Nas Daily"), Israeli Arab blogger, the day after October 8, 2023.

 

• "For the longest time, I struggled with my identity. A Palestinian kid born inside Israel. Like...wtf. Many of my friends refuse to this day to say the word 'Israel' and call themselves 'Palestinian' only. But since I was 12, that did not make sense to me. So, I decided to mix the two and become a 'Palestinian-Israeli.' I thought this term reflected who I was. Palestinian first. Israeli second. But after recent events, I started to think. And think. And think. And then my thoughts turned to anger. I realized that if Israel were to be 'invaded' like that again, we would not be safe. To a terrorist invading Israel, all citizens are targets.... And I do not want to live under a Palestinian government. Which means I only have one home, even if I'm not Jewish: Israel." — Nuseir Yassin ("Nas Daily"), Israeli Arab blogger, the day after October 8, 2023.

• These [Arab Israeli] leaders will do anything to grab the attention of the media – even if that means inciting against Israel. They know that when they deal with the real problems facing their Arab constituents – such as unemployment and poverty – no one will write about them in the media. Yet, when these leaders make fiery statements against Israel, they often win headlines and front-page stories. As far as they are concerned, "I don't care what you write about me as long as you spell my name right."

• By engaging in anti-Israel incitement, these Israeli Arab leaders are causing huge damage to their own constituents. These leaders make the Israeli Arabs look as if they are a "Fifth Column" -- an enemy within. These leaders are stoking fear and mistrust between Jews and Arabs inside Israel, while ignoring that most Israeli Arabs say they feel comfortable living in the Jewish state.

• If Israeli Arabs want to secure a prosperous future for themselves and their children, they need to get rid of extremist Arab leaders who speak and act against the interests of the Arab community inside Israel. If these Arab leaders are unhappy living in Israel, they are welcome to move to the West Bank, Gaza Strip or any Arab country -- where they will quickly miss Israel's democracy and freedom of speech.

While the attitudes of the Israeli Arabs toward Israel are encouraging, some of their leaders continue to act against the interests of their own people. These leaders, including current and former members of the Israeli Knesset (parliament), have long been taking advantage of the country's democratic system to engage in anti-Israel rhetoric, causing huge damage to their own constituents. Pictured: Arab Israeli Members of Knesset Ayman Odeh (L), Ahmad Tibi (R) and Aida Touma-Suleiman in the Knesset chamber, in Jerusalem on July 10, 2023. (Photo by Menahem Kahana/AFP via Getty Images)

The Iran-backed Palestinian Hamas terrorist group has long been seeking to spark a civil war between Israel's Arab and Jewish citizens. Over the past few years, Hamas has called on the two million Arab citizens of Israel to revolt against their own country and join the Jihad against Israel.

Hamas's attempts were partially successful in May 2021, when some Arabs attacked their Jewish neighbors. The assaults occurred at the same time as an Israeli military operation in the Gaza Strip. That operation was launched in response to rockets fired by Hamas and other Palestinian terrorist groups at Israel. Fortunately, the violence that erupted in 2021 ended quickly.

Since then, Israel's Arab citizens appear to have reconsidered the mistake they made when they heeded Hamas's calls for rising against their own state. After the October 7, 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel, which resulted in the murder of 1,200 Israelis and the wounding of thousands, the Arab citizens of Israel have not only refrained from engaging in violent acts against their Jewish fellow citizens, but have gone as far as denouncing the atrocities.

A poll conducted after the October 7 massacre showed that a majority of the Arab citizens of Israel (68%) believe that the attack did not reflect Arab society's values, the Palestinian people, and the Islamic nation. The poll also found that 86% support helping out with civilian volunteering efforts during the war between Israel and Hamas, while 70% reported that they feel part of Israel and its problems.

Commenting on the results of the survey, Prof. Mouna Maroun, Vice President and Dean of Research at University of Haifa and the former Head of the Sagol Department of Neurobiology, the first Arab woman to hold a senior faculty position in natural sciences, said:

"I'm an Israeli Arab... I'm embarrassed. And Hamas is to blame... For the sake of humanity, I implore the Arab community to move forward and to cleverly and responsibly understand the Jewish narrative, as we have been asking them to understand ours for 75 years. For the first time, as an Arab minority we are requested to stand with empathy and understand the majority's narrative...

"In the city of Haifa, there are mixed neighborhoods and mixed apartment buildings. At the University, Jews and Arabs learn and grow together. This is the paradigm that Israel must replicate in order to move on from the tragedy of Oct. 7.

"This [Arabs identifying with Israel] demonstrates that the Arab community in Israel aspires to further integrate into society and distance itself from bad faith actors like Hamas...

"Israeli Arabs and Jews are like salt and pepper: They both belong on the table, and once they're sprinkled into a dish it's almost impossible to distinguish between them. We must embrace and cherish our shared destiny by working with each other, engaging in meaningful dialogue, and understanding that when it comes to coexistence and shared life, there's nothing to fear."

Maroun, of Haifa University, is among other Arab women who hold senior positions in Israeli universities.

In 2021, the Board of Governors of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem announced that Prof. Mona Khoury-Kassabri had been elected Vice President of Strategy and Diversity at the university. It was the first time that a member of the Arab community was appointed to the senior position of vice president. "I am deeply honored to be the first Arab to serve as a Hebrew University Vice President," Khoury-Kassabri said.

"I feel confident that my experience both inside the classroom and in senior roles at the university will serve me well in promoting the strategic goals and inclusionary values of this great institution."

In addition to education, Israel's medical field has always served as a model of Jewish-Arab equality and coexistence. Jewish and Arab patients often share the same room in Israeli hospitals, where Jewish and Arab doctors and nurses work together.

The percentage of Arab Israeli physicians in Israel has been on the increase. By the end of 2021, Arab physicians constituted 24% of Israeli doctors aged 67 and younger. That same year, 43% of new licenses for physicians were awarded to Arab and Druze doctors. The share of Arab citizens in other healthcare professions is also considerable.

According to Fahima Abbas, a researcher at Adva Center, an Israeli progressive think-tank that monitors social and economic developments:

"Hospitals, the places in which so many individuals experience pain and illness, are also the places of cooperation between Jewish and Arab physicians. It is incumbent upon us to remember that and to strengthen that cooperation in ordinary times as well as in emergencies. "

In 2022, Judge Khaled Kabub became the first Muslim appointed to Israel's Supreme Court. All previous Arab Israeli justices on the 15-member court had have been Christians, another example of how Israel's Arab citizens have access to senior positions in the public sector.

In 2019, Samer Haj Yehia became the first Arab head of a major bank in Israel when he was appointed Chairman of the Board of Directors of Bank Leumi.

Since 1948, more than 80 Arab citizens have been elected as members of Israel's Knesset (parliament). In 2020, the Knesset had 17 Arab members out of 120.

A survey conducted by the Moshe Dayan Center at Tel Aviv University found that 57% of Israelis Arabs believe that Hamas intentionally targeted civilians, including women and children, during the October 7 onslaught. At least 54% approve of Arab Israelis taking part in the efforts to explain Israel's position in the war to the world. Another 66% of Israeli Arabs are in favor of an Arab party joining the government coalition in Israel.

The study was initiated by the Konrad Adenauer Program for Jewish-Arab Cooperation, part of the Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies at Tel Aviv University. The head of the program, Arik Rudnitzky, said the study proves that Arab Israelis identify more with Israel than in the past:

"The war between Israel and Hamas has generated an unprecedented change in the positions of Israel's Arab citizens. It is manifested in the fact that for the first time, in contrast to all previous surveys, civic Israeli identity plays as strong a role [for Israeli Arabs] as national Arab identity."

While the attitudes of the Israeli Arabs toward Israel are encouraging, some of their leaders continue to act against the interests of their own people. These leaders, including current and former members of the Israeli Knesset (parliament), have long been taking advantage of the country's democratic system to engage in anti-Israel rhetoric.

These leaders will do anything to grab the attention of the media – even if that means inciting against Israel. They know that when they deal with the real problems facing their Arab constituents – such as unemployment and poverty – no one will write about them in the media. Yet, when these leaders make fiery statements against Israel, they often win headlines and front-page stories. As far as they are concerned, "I don't care what you write about me as long as you spell my name right."

By engaging in anti-Israel incitement, these Israeli Arab leaders are causing huge damage to their own constituents. These leaders make the Israeli Arabs look as if they are a "Fifth Column" -- an enemy within. These leaders are stoking fear and mistrust between Jews and Arabs inside Israel, while ignoring that most Israeli Arabs say they feel comfortable living in the Jewish state.

The Hamas-led October 7 atrocities did not distinguish between Jew and Arab, old and young, male and female, black and white. At least 23 Arab Israeli citizens were murdered by Hamas terrorists during the attack on that day or by Hamas rocket attacks in the ensuing days. Most of the victims were Bedouin residents living in the south of Israel. Moreover, several Bedouin men and women were abducted by Hamas.

The day after the massacre, Israeli Arab blogger Nuseir Yassin, popularly known as "Nas Daily," posted the following on X (formerly Twitter):

"For the longest time, I struggled with my identity. A Palestinian kid born inside Israel. Like...wtf. Many of my friends refuse to this day to say the word 'Israel' and call themselves 'Palestinian' only. But since I was 12, that did not make sense to me. So, I decided to mix the two and become a 'Palestinian-Israeli.' I thought this term reflected who I was. Palestinian first. Israeli second. But after recent events, I started to think. And think. And think. And then my thoughts turned to anger. I realized that if Israel were to be 'invaded' like that again, we would not be safe. To a terrorist invading Israel, all citizens are targets.... And I do not want to live under a Palestinian government. Which means I only have one home, even if I'm not Jewish: Israel."

If Israeli Arabs want to secure a prosperous future for themselves and their children, they need to get rid of extremist Arab leaders who speak and act against the interests of the Arab community inside Israel. If these Arab leaders are unhappy living in Israel, they are welcome to move to the West Bank, Gaza Strip or any Arab country -- where they will quickly miss Israel's democracy and freedom of speech.

• Follow Khaled Abu Toameh on X (formerly Twitter)
  

Khaled Abu Toameh is an award-winning journalist based in Jerusalem.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/21245/israeli-arab-leaders

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Court orders Biden administration to stop selling border wall material - Misty Severi

 

by Misty Severi

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said the Biden administration has confirmed that it will oblige the court order and stop disposing of any further border wall materials over the next 30 days.

 

A court on Friday ordered President Joe Biden's administration to stop selling border wall construction materials ahead of the next presidential administration.

The administration has been selling excess border wall materials for low prices ahead of President-elect Donald Trump's second term. It comes after Biden halted construction of the wall, and Congress authorized the administration last year to dispose of unused border wall materials as part of the National Defense Authorization Act.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said that the administration has confirmed that it will oblige the court order and stop disposing of any further border wall materials over the next 30 days, according to Fox News.

"We have successfully blocked the Biden Administration from disposing of any further border wall materials before President Trump takes office," Paxton said in a statement. "This follows our major victory forcing Biden to build the wall, and we will hold his Administration accountable for illegally subverting our Nation’s border security until their very last day in power, especially where their actions are clearly motivated by a desire to thwart President-elect Trump’s immigration agenda."

The order comes after Texas promised to help Trump finish building a wall along the United States southern border with Mexico. 

Trump previously pleaded for the Biden administration to stop selling material for the wall, claiming it was an almost "criminal act."

"What they're doing is really an act, it's almost a criminal act," he said. "They know we're going to use it and if we don't have it, we're going to have to rebuild it, and it'll cost double what it cost years ago, and that's hundreds of millions of dollars because you're talking about a lot of, a lot of wall."

Misty Severi is a news reporter for Just The News. You can follow her on X for more coverage.

Source: https://justthenews.com/government/courts-law/court-orders-biden-administration-stop-selling-border-wall-material

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

International Energy Agency’s ‘net zero’ bias undermines global energy security, report warns - Kevin Killough

 

by Kevin Killough

Environmental groups spent millions on campaigns to pressure the IEA to develop forecasts that would help advance the "green" energy transition. The agency went along without considering negative impacts to global energy security, the report explains.

 

The influential International Energy Agency (IEA) was once a valuable informational source on global oil supplies. Policymakers worldwide, as well as the petroleum industry, placed a lot of stock in its reports and projections. 

A new report by Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., ranking member of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, details how the agency has evolved in the past few years into a political advocacy organization helping to advance the so-called energy transition.

This has undermined the objectivity of the agency’s forecasts, leading to bad energy policy, such as the Biden administration’s moratorium on liquid natural gas (LNG) export permits. It’s also negatively impacted the oil and gas industry, the report also argues. 

“It's unfortunate they've intentionally changed the mission of this agency from what it originally was to just another narrative pusher. We've got plenty of those. Every major media organization serves that function,” energy analyst David Blackmon told Just the News.

Bad policies 

Beginning in October 1973, the Organization of Arab Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), a cartel of major oil-producing countries, initiated an embargo on exports of crude oil, creating a "energy crisis" in the U.S. This was prior to the development of shale resources in the U.S., which has made the U.S. the largest global producer of oil and gas. In 1973, the U.S. was heavily dependent on oil from the Middle East, and the embargo drove up the price of crude oil nearly 400%. 

In the wake of the embargo, the United States and other oil-consuming allies established the IEA as an autonomous intergovernmental organization, tasked with ensuring the security of oil supplies. It also created a coordination mechanism by which nations could address vulnerabilities in oil supplies and respond effectively to supply disruptions and subsequent price shocks. As part of this mission, the agency provides forecasts of energy supply and demand. 

These forecasting documents “carry tremendous influence on the world’s collective perception of future energy trends. In doing so, they exercise enormous influence on energy policy, the investment decisions of public, publicly-traded, and privately-held companies and associated financing from public and private entities alike,” the report explains. 

Over the past five years, the report states, the IEA has placed greater emphasis on helping to advance an energy transition toward the goal of reaching net zero emissions by 2050, a goal that was endorsed by a vote of the agency’s governing board. 

Shift in direction

The report explains that this shift in direction politicized the agency’s forecasts. A profoundly impactful change, according to the report, was its decision to abandon in its forecasts a “business as usual” scenario. This scenario provided a baseline in which only policies that were already adopted and implemented were modeled. This was replaced with policy scenarios in which additional but unspecified policies are adopted to achieve net-zero policy targets, “no matter how realistic or aspirational those targets may be.” 

The “business as usual” scenario, the report explains, was necessary for evaluating the costs and benefits of energy and climate policies. Without that baseline, policies to address climate change have no such baseline for such an assessment. 

The report contrasts the IEA with the U.S. Energy Information Administration, a federal agency entirely separate from the IEA. The U.S. EIA forecasted robust global natural gas demand through 2050, but the IEA’s World Energy Outlook 2023 scenario projection had natural gas demand peaking this decade and declining thereafter. In enacting the pause on LNG export permit approvals, Biden administration officials cited the IEA forecasts, ignoring its own EIA data. 

“No one doubts the importance of U.S. LNG to the world energy economy. It is a perverse irony that an international organization established to boost energy security now produces ‘reference’ modeling scenarios that one of its founding members [the United States] is using to justify a policy that undermines energy security,” the report states. 

From overly optimistic assumptions of EV adoption rates to a failure to consider critical mineral sourcing needed for a green energy expansion, Barrasso’s report highlights several examples of poor policy decisions inspired by the IEA’s biased forecasting. 

Influence on oil and gas investing

Besides the impact on policymakers, the agency’s forecasts, the report argues, are “tailor-made” to “discourage investment in oil and gas while promoting decarbonization targets few believe will happen.” 

In May 2021, the IEA launched a roadmap to reach net zero by 2050. Fatih Birol, executive director of the IEA told The Guardian that “there will not be a need for new investments in oil and gas fields, or new investments in coal mines.” He made similar remarks to The Financial Times in 2023. The report warns that statements like this could lead to underinvestment in oil and gas production and infrastructure, creating future energy shortages. 

According to Blackmon, the energy analyst who publishes his work on his “Energy Absurdities” Substack, these forecasts also discourage lending institutions from considering oil and gas projects.

“When Fatih Birol said that everybody needs to stop investing in the discovery and development of new oil reserves, that made it harder for every company to get financing for major new projects,” Blackmon said, as institutions viewed the investments as much more risky. 

The IEA has also, according to the report, stated openly that it seeks to undermine investments in oil and gas. In a 2024 communique, the agency announced that it intends “to mobilise and diversify additional necessary investment in the energy sector, and to achieve a fully or predominantly decarbonised electricity sector by 2035.” This includes supporting “efforts to make financial flows for the energy sector consistent with the financial commitments and goals under the Paris Agreement,” referring to a 2015 international agreement to reach net zero emissions by 2050.

The report also details how anti-fossil fuel groups have pressured the IEA to bring its forecasts in line with their political agenda. Oil Change International, which is funded by the staunchly anti-fossil fuel advocacy foundation the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, issued a report in 2018 accusing the IEA of undermining a transition away from oil, gas and coal. The group even launched a campaign in 2019 to pressure the IEA to align its energy forecasts to align with the goal of net zero emissions by 2050. 

The report provides other examples of climate activist groups across the globe spending millions of dollars to lobby the IEA to advance an anti-fossil fuel message. The report also notes that these campaigns were successful. The IEA produced a net zero roadmap in 2021, and its forecasts abandoned a “business as usual” baseline scenario, replacing them with baselines that the activists wanted. 

Back to the mission

By continuing to produce biased information driven by anti-fossil fuel activists, Barrasso’s report explains, the agency's credibility is gradually declining. “It risks losing the confidence of many of its members and much of the public who follow these issues. Once trust is lost, it is very difficult to recover. It is troubling that a politician can state, as French President Macron did, that IEA is “the armed wing of the Paris Agreement” without any word of dissent from IEA,” the report warns. 

The report offers a few proposals for the IEA to return to its original mission of producing objective reports that help secure global energy supplies. This includes reinstating the “business as usual” policy scenario as a baseline for its modeling scenarios, which can be used to assess the cost and benefits of competing policy proposals. 

The IEA, the report argues, should also be more wary of cautioning companies about oversupply, and it should be more transparent with its data. Many of the reports from the taxpayer-funded agency are only made available with an additional cost. This limits public access and scrutiny of the agency’s forecasting. 

Lastly, the report warns that cheerleading the energy transition without considering the security implications of that transition undermines global energy security. “China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, and Venezuela pose challenges both old and new to world energy security. A strong, unbiased IEA can help us navigate these challenges, but only if it has the confidence of its members,” the report concludes. 

The incoming Trump administration won’t likely champion net zero by 2050 goals. Blackmon said that defunding the IEA would take an act of Congress, which is unlikely to have the votes to pass. However, President-elect Donald Trump could possibly attach strings to the funding or in other ways pressure the agency to return to its original mission. 

“It's just a matter of how much political capital the President wants to spend on it,” Blackmon said. 

 
Kevin Killough

Source: https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/energy/international-energy-agencys-net-zero-bias-undermines-global-energy-security

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Debunking the Gaza ‘genocide’ blood libel won’t dissuade Israel-haters - Jonathan S. Tobin

 

by Jonathan S. Tobin

Hamas casualty and famine claims continue to be exposed as lies. But as long as much of the world accepts the canard that the Jewish state is illegitimate, that won’t matter.

 

Trucks with humanitarian aid for Gaza seen in Zikim, southern Israel, on Nov. 28, 2024. Photo by Oren Cohen/Flash90.

The effort to discredit and delegitimize Israel is a project that never allows the facts to get in the way of a fictitious “genocide” narrative. That’s something that is made clear not so much by efforts by the Jewish state’s defenders as it is by that of its critics like The New York Times. But even if the worst smears of Israel are debunked by those who seek to brand its soldiers and leaders as war criminals, don’t expect that to change many minds.

This was amply demonstrated by a major investigative piece published this week by the Times that required the efforts of seven of its reporters who claim to have interviewed “100 soldiers and officials in Israel, dozens of victims of the strikes in Gaza, and experts on the rules of armed conflict.” While the headline promised scandalous findings that might bolster the bogus claim that the Israel Defense Forces were indeed carrying out illegal or even criminal strikes on Palestinian Arabs in Gaza. But the entire article could be summed up in a single sentence. After Hamas terrorists and other Palestinians attacked the Jewish state on Oct. 7, 2023, the IDF responded with greater force and under slightly looser rules of engagement against its foes than it had before that event.

That’s it.

All of the effort and reporting that went into the feature did nothing more than establish the following painfully obvious fact. Once Hamas launched the current war by breaching the border between Gaza and Israel—and engaging in an orgy of murder, torture, rape, kidnapping and wanton destruction—Israel’s military adopted different and more aggressive tactics than it had before its foes ended the ceasefire that existed on Oct. 6, 2023.

The truth about the IDF

Related Articles

IAF downs two Gazan rockets fired towards JerusalemDec. 28, 2024

IDF downs Houthi missile from Yemen, as sirens blare in JerusalemDec. 28, 2024

Soldier KIA in Gaza, bringing IDF wartime toll to 823Dec. 28, 2024

Those differences amounted to loosening the rules of engagement that would allow strikes on Hamas leaders that might not have been allowed during a period of relative quiet. That meant that attacks on enemies responsible for not just starting a war but the barbaric crimes of Oct. 7 were permitted, even if up to 20 civilians were present. That allowed the IDF to take out these criminals in their own homes, as opposed to previously when they could only be targeted if they were out in the open with few people around them.

Inevitably, that has led to higher civilian casualties. Then again, if Hamas operatives didn’t want civilians to be endangered, they would avoid using them as human shields. The terrorist group admits to actively seeking not just to hide among and behind non-combatants but to increase the number of those killed and wounded for propaganda and public relations purposes. And, as the Times also reported, when the IDF blundered, officers responsible for mistakes carried out in the heat of an ongoing battle were rightly disciplined. To claim that Israel’s loosened rules are unjustified requires one to accept the idea that terrorists waging an active war with blood on their hands ought to have the impunity to commit as many crimes as they like so long as they keep their family and friends around them.

The genocide claim is again given the lie by the Times reporting, which notes that even with these “loosened rules,” the process by which Israeli commanders are able to order strikes on Hamas targets is still rigorous and far from indiscriminate or intended to mass casualties. This is something backed up by experts on the laws of war like West Point’s John Spencer and Britain’s Col. Richard Kemp.

Indeed, the only real findings back up reports from both Israeli and Palestinian sources that 80% of the casualties in the Gaza Strip have been suffered by Hamas fighters and their relatives. That means the claim that Israel was deliberately targeting civilians in order to supposedly destroy the Palestinian population is an obvious falsehood.

This doesn’t even take into account that the total number of casualties provided to journalists by Hamas sources like the Gaza Ministry of Health, which have been uncritically accepted and broadcast around the world, has been debunked by those who study statistics.

None of this violates commonly accepted notions about what is or isn’t now permitted under international law during a war, which, as the Times conceded, consists of loosely defined concepts and rules.

The upshot of all this reporting is the entirely unremarkable conclusion that when terrorist groups start wars, more of the people they purport to represent and use as pawns are likely to be hurt. Equally unremarkable is the fact that nations involved in wars in which their civilians have been deliberately targeted for barbarous war crimes by terrorists are bound to be less restrained in their efforts to eradicate their enemies than in times of relative peace.

So, while the headline and the framing of the story may have sounded like fodder for those determined to demonize the Jewish state and its post-Oct. 7 efforts to destroy Hamas, the result of all that research and writing was so slender that one wonders why the newspaper bothered to explore the subject in the first place.

The reason for a food shortage

The same is true of its efforts to back up the claim that Israel is deliberately starving Gazans since the war began—another of the main planks in the attempt to justify the use of the term “genocide” to describe Israeli tactics.

A Times article published days before its report on Israeli rules of engagement provided some interesting details about the delivery of food to Gaza. Contrary to the claims that Israel is preventing humanitarian aid from reaching the coastal enclave, the Times confirmed Israel’s arguments that the fault lies with the Palestinians rather than its actions, albeit while framing it in the most negative manner possible.

As the newspaper told its readers, the primary obstacle to getting food to Gazans is Palestinian.

Hamas has been brazenly stealing aid intended for civilians and reserving it for its own use, with some of the thefts caught on film. Those shipments that were not taken by the terrorists who ruled Gaza before Oct. 7 are now being stolen by criminal gangs that operate in areas where Hamas is no longer active.

This is happening because the United Nations and its aid agencies have systematically refused to allow the IDF to guard the route and trucks through which food is distributed. That is why as many as 800 truckloads of food remain at a standstill in Israel at any given time since the various international aid agencies are afraid to send them into Gaza. The only secure route for food delivery is the one that Israel has supervised along the route from Egypt into Gaza.

So, again, the mainstream Western media that is hostile to Israel is providing reporting that gives the lie to the genocide narrative. This means that much of the ammunition that Israel’s defenders need to refute what amounts to a modern blood libel is being offered up by media sources whose coverage is consistently skewed against the Jewish state.

There is no genocide happening in Gaza. The war that Hamas started and continues to fight by refusing to free the Israeli hostages it took from their homes and a young person’s musical festival on Oct. 7 has indeed also taken many Palestinian lives. But about half of the fatalities have been Hamas fighters and operatives, and many of the civilians were those directly connected to them. Israel’s goal has been to defeat and destroy Hamas, not the Palestinians as a whole—who, even if you believe the terrorists’ statistics, have lost only a tiny percentage of the 2.1 million people believed to be in Gaza before Oct. 7.

To believe the genocide charge, every war in history must be labeled as a genocide. That drains a word coined to describe the Holocaust of any real meaning. That doesn’t even take into account that the explicitly stated goal of Hamas is the destruction of Israel and its population—the Oct. 7 atrocities were merely a trailer for what it wanted to do to the rest of the Jewish state.

Ideology over facts

These are findings that should be trumpeted to as wide an audience as possible. Yet even as outlets like the Times undermine their own editorial position with this sort of reporting, fair-minded observers should temper their expectation that this will help turn the tide in the information war being fought about the conflict.

That’s because those journalists, international “human rights” activists and politicians who continue to assert that what is going on in Gaza is a genocide of Palestinians don’t care about what is actually happening there. Even as they hyped Hamas’s misleading casualty numbers, they have not bothered to answer or take into account coverage that makes it clear what is happening is a war but not an ethnic cleansing.

Why?

The answer is that once the false narrative implicit in critical race theory and intersectional ideology is accepted and applied to the Middle East—where Israel and the Jews are falsely labeled as “white” oppressors—it doesn’t matter what either side actually does. Every institution that adheres to the woke catechism of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) that is used as a formula to justify discrimination against Jews and Israelis is the problem—not just the lies told by Hamas.

As best-selling author Ta-Nehisi Coates asserted in his ignorant pro-Hamas screed The Message, which was rapturously received by the mainstream media, the facts about Palestinian terrorism, Hamas intentions and the many Israeli efforts to achieve a compromise peace that would have created a Palestinian state that the Palestinians rejected, don’t matter. Such people believe Israel is in the wrong and has no right to exist or defend itself—ever. What either side does is therefore of no consequence. The Times and other left-wing outlets can publish daily articles debunking the genocide claim, and it would make no difference to those who throw the term around to drain its actual meaning.

This doesn’t mean that supporters of Israel should not continue to point out these facts and make the argument that its cause is just and its tactics defensible (and legal). But unless society is also prepared to attack the toxic woke ideologies that are the foundation of the baseless genocide charge, then it won’t matter how effective any arguments might be.

The target of fair-minded observers shouldn’t only be the flimsy and easily disproved libelous assertions about Israel but the entire edifice of woke ideology, which allows both the ignorant and those with malevolent antisemitic intentions to engage in fact-free smears of the Jewish state. Without tackling these ideologies, the lies about the Middle East will continue to proliferate, regardless of how often they are disproved.

Jonathan S. Tobin is editor-in-chief of the Jewish News Syndicate, a senior contributor for The Federalist, a columnist for Newsweek and a contributor to many other publications. He covers the American political scene, foreign policy, the U.S.-Israel relationship, Middle East diplomacy, the Jewish world and the arts. He hosts the JNS “Think Twice” podcast, both the weekly video program and the “Jonathan Tobin Daily” program, which are available on all major audio platforms and YouTube. Previously, he was executive editor, then senior online editor and chief political blogger, for Commentary magazine. Before that, he was editor-in-chief of The Jewish Exponent in Philadelphia and editor of the Connecticut Jewish Ledger. He has won more than 60 awards for commentary, art criticism and other writing. He appears regularly on television, commenting on politics and foreign policy. Born in New York City, he studied history at Columbia University.

Source: https://www.jns.org/debunking-the-gaza-genocide-blood-libel-wont-dissuade-israel-haters/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

US not ‘wiping every Houthi fighter off the map,’ White House says - Andrew Bernard

 

by Andrew Bernard

“This is about preventing them from hitting commercial and, quite frankly, naval ship activity in and around the Red Sea” and protecting Israel, John Kirby told reporters.

 

White House National Security Communications Adviser John Kirby speaks to reporters at the White House, Oct. 3, 2023. Photo by Oliver Contreras/White House.

U.S. airstrikes on Houthi rebels in Yemen will continue as long as the specially designated global terrorist group continues to pose a threat to Israel and international shipping, a White House adviser told journalists on Friday.

A reporter asked if the Biden administration intends, before leaving office in January, to crush the terrorists. John Kirby, the White House national security communications advisor, said that the focus is on undermining the Houthis’ ability to launch attacks in the Red Sea.

“This is about destroying their ability to conduct these kinds of attacks. It’s not about wiping every Houthi fighter off the map,” Kirby said. “This is about preventing them from hitting commercial and, quite frankly, naval ship activity in and around the Red Sea, as well as helping degrade and prevent their ability to continue to launch drones and missiles at Israel.”

The U.S. military launched “Operation Prosperity Garden” to patrol the coast of Yemen in response to Houthi attacks on Red Sea shipping in December 2023.

The Houthis have not attacked a commercial ship since November, according to the nonprofit Yemen Conflict Observatory. But the terror group has launched more than 200 missiles and 170 drones at Israel in support of Hamas since the terrorist attacks in southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, including a ballistic missile attack on Wednesday that forced millions of Israelis into bomb shelters.

Related Articles

IAF downs two Gazan rockets fired towards JerusalemDec. 28, 2024

Debunking the Gaza ‘genocide’ blood libel won’t dissuade Israel-hatersDec. 27, 2024

IDF downs Houthi missile from Yemen, as sirens blare in JerusalemDec. 28, 2024

Israel, in turn, has responded with air strikes on Houthi-controlled sites across Yemen this week, including strikes on Sanaa International Airport and a pair of coastal power stations on Thursday.

Following the air strikes, Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz suggested that the leaders of the Houthis would meet the same fate as Hamas and Hezbollah leaders.

“We will hunt down all the Houthi leaders. We will strike them, as we have done in other places,” Katz said. “No one will be able to evade Israel’s long reach.”

Kirby told reporters on Friday that U.S. and Israeli airstrikes have weakened the Houthis but have not yet eliminated the terror group’s ability to launch attacks.

“Clearly, they still have some capability to conduct these attacks, and not just against shipping but against the Israeli people as well,” he said. “But we do believe we have further degraded their ability to do so.”

Kirby also said that the Biden administration continues to seek a ceasefire-for-hostages deal between Israel and Hamas before U.S. President-elect Donald Trump takes office on Jan. 20.

“Our backs are to it,” Kirby said. “We would be sharing with you if we had some kind of breakthrough. We’re not there yet.”

“Hamas is the obstacle,” he added. “It is because of Hamas throwing up obstacles or refusing to move on any of these details that we are still not at a conclusion.”

 
Andrew Bernard

Source: https://www.jns.org/us-not-wiping-every-houthi-fighter-off-the-map-white-house-says/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

IDF issues Gaza evacuation orders after sirens activate in Jerusalem - Jerusalem Post Staff

 

by Jerusalem Post Staff

The IDF said two rockets were launched from Beit Hanoun in the Gaza Strip towards Jerusalem before being successfully intercepted by the IAF.

 

IDF Arabic Spokesperson Col. Avichai Adraee issues an urgent evacuation warning to areas in the northern Gaza Strip, December 28, 2024.

(photo credit: IDF SPOKESPERSON'S UNIT, SCREENSHOT/X)

IDF Arabic Spokesperson Col. Avichay Adraee issued an urgent evacuation warning for Gazans in the northern Gaza area, particularly Beit Hanoun, on X/Twitter on Saturday.

#عاجل ‼️ انذار عاجل إلى كل من لم يخلي بعد المنطقة المحددة في الخريطة ومنطقة بيت حانون بالتحديد
🔴لقد تم تحذير هذه المنطقة مرات عديدة في الماضي
🔴يعمل جيش الدفاع في هذه المنطقة بقوة.
🔴عليكم اخلاء المنطقة فورًا والانتقال جنوبًا نحو طريق صلاح الدين. الانتقال عبر طريق آخر يعرضكم… pic.twitter.com/UVgcMH8R9Z

— افيخاي ادرعي (@AvichayAdraee) December 28, 2024

The evacuation warning comes shortly after two rockets from the strip activated sirens in the Jerusalem and Shfela areas.

According to the IDF, two rockets were launched from Beit Hanoun in the Gaza Strip towards Jerusalem before being successfully intercepted by the IAF.

Rockets in Gaza border communities

Earlier on Saturday, additional rockets from the strip activated sirens in the Gaza border communities of Mefalsim and Nir Am in southern Israel.

According to Magen David Adom (MDA) no injuries were reported as a result of either rocket attack.

This is a developing story.

Jerusalem Post Staff

Source: https://www.jpost.com/breaking-news/article-835182

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

CDC can't substantiate COVID vaccine ingredient claims, FDA forced to turn over Pfizer data - Greg Piper

 

by Greg Piper

New dashboard lets users search free-text fields from vaccine-injury data the CDC tried to hide. Louisiana ditches "one-size-fits-all paternalistic guidance" on vaccinations, urges doctor-patient decision-making.

 

Federal public health agencies are known for black-and-white public service announcements that portray their favorite COVID-19 treatments as universally beneficial without providing supporting data, particularly the effectiveness of each new vaccine formulation.

Food and Drug Administration Commissioner-nominee Marty Makary once accused the current officeholder, Robert Califf, of wildly exaggerating data in claiming that since-rescinded bivalent vaccines, which targeted two COVID strains, showed a "significant reduction in hospitalization and death in all populations examined, which is clinically meaningful."

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which similarly claims COVID vaccines are safer than infections for all populations, has now been caught empty-handed when asked for data to support its claim, on the same "myths and facts" page, that "nearly all the ingredients" in the therapeutics are found "in many foods – fats, sugars, and salts."

The Informed Consent Action Network and Mississippi Medical Professionals for Informed Consent filed a Freedom of Information Act request for all documents including "studies, journal articles, manufacturer data, etc." that are "sufficient to show the foods that contain the same ingredients as those found in the COVID19 vaccines" to verify the CDC's claim.

They also asked for data on foods that contain the ingredients listed in the vaccine inserts, in another five FOIA requests: "recombinant spike protein from the SARS-CoV-2 virus … nucleoside-modified messenger RNA  …extracts from the soapbark tree" and exotic-sounding chemicals such as "methyl-α-D-mannopyranoside," and evidence that the body responds the same to an ingredient whether eaten or injected.

The CDC's response to the broadest request? Its National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases does not have "any documents pertaining to your request." 

The FOIA officer told the entities to ask the FDA for the data because "the subject matter expert notes that ingredients in specific vaccines fall under the responsibility of the FDA," and also told them how to appeal the agency's response up the FOIA command chain.

"Typically, if one agency points us to another, ICAN will have us submit the same requests to that other agency although here, ICAN was questioning the evidence justifying a statement on CDC’s own website so it’s unclear why CDC would have no records yet FDA would have them," ICAN's lawyer Elizabeth Brehm told Just the News in an email.

She shared the agency's responses to all six FOIAs, which gave the same no-records response but also cited various CDC and FDA pages, including kinds of vaccine ingredients and examples, such as the stabilizer gelatin and "residual inactivating ingredient" formaldehyde, and a long explanation of why certain ingredients are in vaccines.

No Records Found - Segment 1.pdf

"CDC’s approach to truth and data is a joke," Brehm's colleague Aaron Siri, who leads the effort, wrote on X. ICAN alleged the agency's shrugging response shows it's violating the Information Quality Act by not being able to "substantiate the quality of the information it has disseminated."

The CDC didn't respond to Just the News queries.

The agency's inability to back up its public messaging comes as the feds continue hiding safety data, healthcare workers worldwide express hesitancy toward COVID vaccines and some state public health agencies ditch one-size-fits-all recommendations.

Another FOIA filer beat the FDA this month, with a federal judge ordering the agency to produce its emergency use authorization file on the Pfizer COVID vaccine by June 30, 2025.

The FDA argued the EUA file isn't covered by Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency's FOIA request for the "biological product file" in the formal application for licensing, but U.S. District Judge Mark Pittman quoted its own press release on the vaccine's formal approval, which said it used and builds on the EUA's data. 

The Biden administration pulled out all the stops to delay the release of the FDA's COVID vaccine safety data that are kept apart from the public Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System, in response to Just the News litigation.

The docket shows the feds secured a stay of the proceedings before Donald Trump's election victory. The case is scheduled to resume five months into the second Trump administration.

ICAN recently launched a dashboard for searching the "free-text" entries from the CDC's v-safe surveys for the earliest COVID vaccine recipients, which the feds unsuccessfully fought to withhold for a year after turning over the "checkbox" answers from v-safe.

It took months longer to get the complete data, "with additional fields that allow us to see the date of injection, the number of days after injection each reaction was reported, and the MedDRA codes assigned for each reported reaction (a standardized coding system to classify medical events) along with every free text entry," ICAN said.

A relatively young National Institutes of Health branch director recently admitted in undercover video that he wouldn't get an updated vaccine because it would "increase my risk for the known myocarditis," questioned whether COVID vaccination "does anything" and suspected vaccines were rushed to full approval in 2021 to justify boosters.

A newly published survey of 7,000 healthcare workers in Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Italy, New Zealand, Spain, the United States and the United Kingdom, found a fifth had "strong or moderate" COVID vaccine hesitancy.

The most likely to be hesitant were midwives, followed by nutritionists, pharmacists, nursing professionals and public health professionals, according to the study in the journal Public Health. Large majorities believe "side effects were minimised by pharmaceutical companies" (67%) and public authorities (64%).

Louisiana joined Florida by dropping what its Department of Health calls "one-size-fits-all paternalistic guidance" and adopting a "more informative approach" that promotes individuals making decisions "in consultation with their doctor."

While Surgeon General Ralph Abraham, who partly oversees the agency, "has expressed personal concerns about the efficacy and safety of the COVID-19 vaccine," the department believes immunization, mask-wearing and social distancing "are an individual’s personal choice," the statement reads.

It is shifting to public health priorities that were "often deprioritized during the pandemic," including overdoses, maternal mortality and chronic disease.

NPR said four LDH employees confirmed that officials told "high-level managers" at a November meeting that they weren't allowed to promote COVID, flu or monkeypox vaccines in any way, from press releases and interviews to vaccination offerings at LDH clinics.

Greg Piper

Source: https://justthenews.com/government/federal-agencies/cdc-cant-substantiate-covid-vaccine-ingredient-claims-fda-forced-turn

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Lame Duck Hunting: Mr. Trump Plays the Long Game - Thaddeus G. McCotter

 

by Thaddeus G. McCotter

Politics is no game of chess but a loaded dice match where Trump, like a sly quarterback, warns GOP stumble bums to play ball—or face the bench.

 

The recent Detroit Lions’ victory over the Chicago Bears featured a trick play called “stumble bum.” The Lions’ quarterback pretended to trip, the running back took a few steps and fell, and the offensive linemen yelled, “Fumble.” That was all it took to bait the hook. Believing a potential turnover was afoot, the Bears’ defense froze for a moment, hunting for the loose ball. Too late did the Bears’ defense see the Lions’ running back stand up and make a block and the quarterback straightening and throwing the football to the Lions’ tight end, who had “missed” his block and was releasing toward the end zone. Touchdown, and victory, Detroit Lions.

In football, trickery is not unique, but it is not the rule. In politics, trickery is not unique, and it is the rule. This leads some conspiratorial minds to conclude the recent congressional tussle over the Continuing Resolution (CR) was an elaborate ruse to embarrass the departing President Biden and his Democrat-majority Senate by saddling them with a defeat and handing President-elect Trump and the House GOP a win.

But politics is not four-dimensional chess, nor even four-dimensional checkers. Politics is a back-alley game of craps rolled with loaded dice by stumble bums for other people’s bread. The CR’s congressional stumble bums were all too real. Fortunately, President Trump’s victory was equally real, as will be its benefits for his legislative agenda.

In ordinary times, one might wonder why the once and future president, Donald Trump, would precipitately cannonball back into the swamp during the increasingly routine Congressional food fight over a continuing resolution (CR), even calling for extending or eliminating altogether the debt ceiling.

As a matter of entertainment, this increasingly routine production of this tawdry political theater—CR vs. Shutdown: This Time It’s Personal—has grown as stale as month-old cornbread: “The government may or may not shut down,” the regime media hyperventilates; the public shrugs; and the crisis limps to a less than thrilling denouement, where a dangling narrative thread has been twisted into the shape of a noose upon which to hang yet another limp sequel. Such is hardly the somnambulant “entertainment” that the media-savvy Mr. Trump would ordinarily attach to his person or his brand.

As a matter of politics, on its surface, the CR fight had appeared to be the expiring administration and Congress’ flaming bag of feces dropped upon the threshold of his second term upon which Mr. Trump had best not stomp to extinguish. If the departing lame ducks could not resolve this budgetary impasse, the ensuing government shutdown would sully their legacy, not Mr. Trump’s. Even in the highly improbable prospect that a government shutdown would have persisted until the new Congress and Mr. Trump were sworn into office, the new president would have been armed with a GOP-led House and Senate to solve the impasse and end the shutdown.

Ultimately, however, lame ducks of a feather flocked together and resolved the CR crisis. Incoming President Trump played as constructive a role as possible by urging the outgoing GOP gaggle onward with his various and inimitable exhortations, admonitions, and threats, which helped significantly reduce the size and scope of the CR, though the debt ceiling remained a narrative thread for yet another sequel [sigh].

The big variable is whether Mr. Trump has furthered his overriding objective. It is not the passage of a “clean” CR with the extension or the elimination of the debt ceiling. Such was Mr. Trump’s short-term goal.

By engaging in lame duck hunting during the CR fight, incoming President Trump was playing the long game for his pending legislative goals. Upon resuming the presidency, he must pass his ambitious agenda through slim GOP congressional majorities in the House and Senate in a short period of time. As with so much in his political career, if Mr. Trump succeeds, it will constitute an unprecedented accomplishment.

Prior to the 2024 election, the only individual to be elected to non-consecutive presidential terms had been Grover Cleveland. In his time, Mr. Cleveland had a distinct, though not overwhelming, advantage over Mr. Trump. Though due to the American Cincinnatus, George Washington, there existed political precedence against it, Mr. Cleveland had the legal right to seek reelection to a third term. This provided him with leverage over his fellow Democrats in Congress to toe his personally defined party line and advance his agenda.

On his part, however, the 22nd Amendment constitutionally bars Mr. Trump from serving a third term. The amendment was heavily supported by Republicans who sought to prevent “another President Franklin Roosevelt” from garnering more than two terms of office. The 22nd Amendment reduces Mr. Trump’s leverage by barring him from seeking a third term and, ergo, placing a January 2029 expiration date on any threats he may make of using presidential powers to cajole and coerce members of Congress to support his agenda. Ironically, then, just as FDR did, Mr. Trump has signaled he will wield a singularly political cudgel to impose and exert his will over GOP members of Congress: supporting their prospective primary opponents.

In many ways, this is a more formidable threat, for it strikes at the very heart of what matters most to most duly elected Congressional servants—keeping their seat at all costs. Not getting a “log rolled” new road for the district in exchange for a vote or two can be dissembled away for a term or two as representatives wait out an antagonistic president. What cannot be so easily brushed off is a primary challenge from a credible opponent that is supported by an antagonistic president—especially an antagonistic president as popular within his party as Mr. Trump is.

This is why Mr. Trump singled out Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) for special disapprobation. It was sending a message that, if you cross the incoming president, not only will your legislative goals be blocked, you could very well get booted out of office by losing a primary. Indeed, it is why Mr. Trump helpfully provided the former Rep. Bob Good (R-Va.) precedent to the current Rep. Roy.

(As an aside, presidential leverage over internal caucus elections is limited for a host of reasons. The first is that they are, by constitutional design, a separate, equal branch of government, but the threat of supporting primaries against members of your own party does significantly curtail the House and Senate leadership’s ability to oppose the president’s agenda.)

History does provide a caution to Mr. Trump and future presidents about engaging in primaries against their congressional opponents. As Mr. John E. Moser records about FDR’s internecine attempts to unseat Congressional Democrats who opposed his New Deal:

The plan backfired. Critics, deliberately using a term associated with Stalin’s Soviet Union, suggested that Roosevelt was trying to “purge” his party of dissenters, and he was accused of attempting to establish a dictatorship. In the end, all but one of the incumbents whom the president had campaigned against managed to hold on to their seats—and, unsurprisingly, they were more than determined to resist Roosevelt’s agenda. In addition, the 1938 elections produced major gains for the Republican Party; while they had nowhere close to a majority in either house, Republicans were strong enough that they could, in combination with conservative Democrats, block any major new White House initiative. Meanwhile the president was increasingly focused on events beyond America’s shores, as a new world war seemed likely. The New Deal had come to an end.

Oops.

Nonetheless, by engaging in the CR tussle, Mr. Trump issued a clarion call that he understands the political constraints facing an incoming, immediately lame-duck president and that he will do everything he can to overcome these obstacles. Mr. Trump understands the clock began running on his second term the moment he won it. He wants the Republican stumble bums in Congress to know he knows it.

Or else.

***

An American Greatness contributor, the Hon. Thaddeus G. McCotter (M.C., Ret.) served Michigan’s 11th Congressional District from 2003-2012 and served as Chair of the Republican House Policy Committee. Not a lobbyist, he is a frequent public speaker and moderator for public policy seminars and a Monday co-host of the “John Batchelor Radio Show,” among sundry media appearances.

 
Thaddeus G. McCotter

Source: https://amgreatness.com/2024/12/28/lame-duck-hunting-mr-trump-plays-the-long-game/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Iran's Race to Nuclear Bombs: The Mullahs Have Got to Go - Majid Rafizadeh

 

by Majid Rafizadeh

Both the Iranian people and the entire region need to be freed from a future of tyranny. The future of a nuclear-armed Iran, run by mullahs on a mission, must be averted; the opportunity will not be there forever.

 

• In addition, now that Syria has been closed off as a supply route to rearm Hezbollah, Iran is reportedly considering weapons airlifts directly to Lebanon to resupply Hezbollah, so they both can continue their shared goal of eliminating Israel. The mullahs have got to go. So long as they remain in power, the chances for enduring peace in the region is zero.

• Iran's recent losses have left the regime clinging to the hope that nuclear weapons will enable it to secure its reign and dominate the Middle East, then the rest of the world, using Venezuela and the Caribbean to incapacitate the "Great Satan," the United States.

• Allowing Iran to succeed in these endeavors is not a great idea. Both the Iranian people and the entire region need to be freed from a future of tyranny. The future of a nuclear-armed Iran, run by mullahs on a mission, must be averted; the opportunity will not be there forever.

Both the Iranian people and the entire region need to be freed from a future of tyranny. The future of a nuclear-armed Iran, run by mullahs on a mission, must be averted; the opportunity will not be there forever. Pictured: A Fattah hypersonic ballistic missile is displayed during the annual military parade in Tehran, on September 22, 2023. (Photo by AFP via Getty Images)

This year, thanks to the relentless -- and often maliciously vilified -- efforts of Israel standing alone, like David against Goliath, to save the West from an autocratic tyranny, the Iranian regime has at last been facing significant setbacks. Israel, unthanked, has weakened Iran and its proxies, Hezbollah and Hamas, diminished their influence and destabilized their plan to wipe Israel -- and after that Western civilization -- off the map.

Compounding this, Iran's longstanding ally, Bashar al-Assad of Syria, collapsed, further isolating Iran's regime. These events have collectively dealt a heavy blow to Iran's strategic leverage and regional ambitions. Complacency, however, would be a grave mistake.

History has shown that underestimating one's adversary can lead to disastrous consequences. Now, more than ever, Iran's regime is desperate to secure its survival by accelerating their pursuit of nuclear weapons. With its allies and proxies crumbling, nuclear armament appears to be the regime's last hope for maintaining their grip on power and entrenching their rule.

In addition, now that Syria has been closed off as a supply route to rearm Hezbollah, Iran is reportedly considering weapons airlifts directly to Lebanon to resupply Hezbollah, so they both can continue their shared goal of eliminating Israel. The mullahs have got to go. So long as they remain in power, the chances for enduring peace in the region is zero.

In recent weeks, Iran has significantly ramped up its nuclear program, raising alarms -- finally! -- across the international community. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the UN's nuclear watchdog, has all but acknowledged that reviving the 2015 JCPOA "nuclear deal" is futile: Iran is now effectively a nuclear threshold state. IAEA director-general Rafael Grossi stated this month, "It has uranium at 60% — 90% is military grade — and is thus practically at the same level as nuclear-armed states."

Even traditionally cautious actors such as the United Kingdom, France and Germany have expressed concern. In a rare joint statement, these nations called on Iran to "reverse its nuclear escalation," emphasizing that there is "no credible civilian justification" for Iran's highly enriched uranium stockpile. They warned that Iran's unprecedented stockpile now enables it to "rapidly produce sufficient fissile material for multiple nuclear weapons."

Despite these alarming developments, the West so far seems committed only to "diplomatic tools" to curb Iran's nuclear ambitions. The joint statement from the three European countries repeated their determination to "use all diplomatic tools to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon." Good luck with that.

Unfortunately, we have already repeatedly seen the ineffectiveness of diplomacy with Iran. Its leadership has openly admitted that its nuclear program has always been geared toward developing weapons, undermining any subsequent pretenses of peaceful intentions. Diplomatic negotiations, including the 2015 nuclear deal, have merely provided Tehran with the time to advance its nuclear ambitions – as the deal's "sunset clauses" disastrously allowed.

The greatest problems now are political will and time. Should Iran announce that it has developed a nuclear bomb, the geopolitical landscape will have irreversibly shifted. Iran would achieve a level of invulnerability that comes with nuclear deterrence, enabling the regime to act with even greater aggression and disregard for international norms. Domestically, the regime could intensify its oppression, crushing any dissent with even more brutal efficiency. Internationally, Iran could equip its terrorist proxies with nuclear weapons, rendering them virtually untouchable, as well.

The implications for global security are worse than chilling: an extremist regime armed with nuclear weapons, openly calling for the annihilation of Israel and advancing anti-American and anti-Western objectives worldwide. This is a regime that has already launched hundreds of ballistic missiles at Israel, the "Little Satan" a country the size of New Jersey; what would stop it from using a nuclear bomb? Iran's former President Ali Akbar Hashem Rafsanjani targeted Israel more than a decade ago as a one-bomb country.

In addition, Iran's possible willingness to share its nuclear technology with like-minded dictators and terror groups in Latin America and other regions poses a threat to global security, not to mention the nuclear arms race that would doubtless follow in the Middle East.

Diplomacy, to the surprise of no one except perhaps the Obama and Biden administrations, has failed. The time for half-measures has run out. The West must not only impose the harshest sanctions imaginable, targeting every facet of Iran's economy; at the same time, it must above all support the Iranian people, who have long suffered under this brutal regime and yearn for freedom and democratic governance.

Iran's recent losses have left the regime clinging to the hope that nuclear weapons will enable it to secure its reign and dominate the Middle East, then the rest of the world, using Venezuela and the Caribbean to incapacitate the "Great Satan," the United States.

Allowing Iran to succeed in these endeavors is not a great idea. Both the Iranian people and the entire region need to be freed from a future of tyranny. The future of a nuclear-armed Iran, run by mullahs on a mission, must be averted; the opportunity will not be there forever.

• Follow Majid Rafizadeh on X (formerly Twitter)

 
Dr. Majid Rafizadeh is a scholar, strategist and advisor, Harvard-educated analyst, political scientist, and board member of Harvard International Review. He has authored several books on the US Foreign Policy and Islam. He can be reached at Dr.Rafizadeh@Post.Harvard.Edu

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/21248/iran-race-to-nuclear-bombs

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter