Sunday, October 31, 2021

China: A Dicey Ideological Shift - Amir Taheri

 

​ by Amir Taheri

The coming Central Committee plenum is likely to establish a clearer "roadmap" for fulfilling the pledge to regain control of Taiwan.

  • The Chinese economy has become subject to the classical rules of capitalism. This means cyclical boom and busts that do not coincide with the political needs of an ideology-based regime. It also means the emergence of a large middle class that, sooner or later, is bound to question the monopoly of power by a single party even if that party boasts some 80 million members.

  • Beijing uses various schemes to downgrade other ethnic identities. These include dividing larger ethnic groups into smaller and smaller communities. This is why the official statistics mention 56 different ethnic groups instead of the five broader ones accepted by most scholars.

  • In some notable cases, Beijing uses repressive measures to downgrade and, in time, eliminate ethnic identities.

  • The populist-nationalist ideological shift that Xi is seeking has another inevitable consequence: casting China as a conquering power. Putin showed the way by annexing Crimea....

  • In the case of China, we have already witnessed a number of similar moves, most notably the ditching of the "one-country two-system" scheme in Hong Kong and Macao and Xi's pledge in the recent party conference to regain control of Taiwan.

The populist-nationalist ideological shift that Chinese President Xi Jinping is seeking has another inevitable consequence: casting China as a conquering power. Putin showed the way by annexing Crimea. Pictured: Xi (left) delivers a speech at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing on October 9, 2021. (Photo by Noel Celis/AFP via Getty Images)

Political systems based on ideology always face a challenge when they realize that real events have rendered their ideology obsolete.

This could happen at different moments in an ideology-based regime's life.

The Nazi party in Germany realized that soon after sweeping to power and decided to script socialist pretensions out of its discourse and, with the Night of the Long Knives, to promote Hitler's cult of personality as kerygma [proclamation].

In the Soviet Union, the generation of Communist leaders represented by Mikhail Gorbachev tried to return to the Social Democratic roots of their party.

Both attempts ended in failure and the collapse of the ideology-based regimes concerned: Nazi Germany through defeat in war and the USSR with systemic collapse.

The latest ideology-based regime, also born in the last century, to face the challenge is the People's Republic of China under the Communist Party.

Three generations of Communist leaders, starting with that of Hua Kuo-feng and passing by that of Deng Xiao-ping and now Xi Jinping, have faced that challenge and tried to dodge it the best they could. Almost four decades of economic growth, made possible by the adoption of a state-controlled capitalism, made that dodging possible -- until now.

What is happening now is that the current generation of leaders under President Xi is beginning to realize that dodging is no longer possible.

The Chinese economy has become subject to the classical rules of capitalism. This means cyclical boom and busts that do not coincide with the political needs of an ideology-based regime. It also means the emergence of a large middle class that, sooner or later, is bound to question the monopoly of power by a single party even if that party boasts some 80 million members.

The Chinese Communist Party does not have a social-democratic past to dust out as an alternative ideological abode. Nor can it build a new cult of personality around President Xi to rival that of Mao Zedong in his heyday.

The party's current leadership realizes that the classical Marxist discourse, based on class struggle between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie, won't sound serious when it is the new bourgeoisie that pretends to represent the proletariat. This is why reference to Marx, Engels and Lenin and such terms as Marxism is a rarity in the party's discourse. The latest resolutions from the party Politburo promises a "better promotion of socialism" but clearly point to a shift towards a populist version of nationalism.

This means that the Xi generation is trying to transform the party into the kind of political machine that Vladimir Putin created after the chaotic period that followed the collapse of the USSR. The Soviet Union was always an ideological state, not a nationalist one. Thus Putin's recipe could work only after non-Russian nations had left the empire, allowing Russians to reassert their position as a nation.

The ideological shift that Xi is looking for is expected to come in the next full session of the Communist Party's Central Committee, scheduled for 8-11 November. The annual event brings together over 400 military, political and state-corporation leaders who rule the country. Xi hopes that the session will also endorse his plan for remaining in power for another five, or even 10, more years to complete the ideological shift from Mao's version of Communism (people's democratic dictatorship, as he called it) to a populist-nationalist discourse.

In its efforts to develop a populist-nationalist discourse, the Xi generation has replaced 1949, when the People's Republic was established by Mao Zedong, with 1911, when the first republic was born under Sun Yatsen. It was no accident that at the last party conference giant portraits of Sun Yatsen had replaced those of Mao.

Trying to transform Sun Yatsen into a populist-nationalist icon, however, is no easy task. An American-educated doctor, Sun was a convert to Protestant Christianity and an advocate of Westernization, albeit with a local coloring. His wife Sun Qinling was daughter of one of China's richest men, also converted to Christianity, and a sister of the wife of Chiang Kai-shek, the nationalist leader and chief rival of Mao for ruling China. Sun Qinling was named a Vice-President of the People's Republic under Mao, when the Communist Party played the "united front" card by pretending that it shared power with a number of smaller parties. Mao also tried to maintain a semblance of ethnic diversity symbolized by the five stars on his new republic's flag.

Xi's expected shift to a full populist-nationalist discourse could mean shedding such Maoist pretensions and promoting the Han ethnic element, accounting for some 87 per cent of the population, as the ideal version of "the Chinese man" and the dominant nation. Beijing uses various schemes to downgrade other ethnic identities. These include dividing larger ethnic groups into smaller and smaller communities. This is why the official statistics mention 56 different ethnic groups instead of the five broader ones accepted by most scholars.

In some notable cases, Beijing uses repressive measures to downgrade and, in time, eliminate ethnic identities. A notable current case is the plan to "re-educate", that is to say Hanify, the Uighurs of East Turkestan (Xinjiang) in special camps or by transferring their child-bearing women to Han-dominated parts of the country. In the case of Tibet, Hanifcation comes through state control over religious doctrine and institutions, while the card played in Manchuria and Inner Mongolia is mixed marriages and population shifts that look much like ethnic cleansing.

The populist-nationalist ideological shift that Xi is seeking has another inevitable consequence: casting China as a conquering power. Putin showed the way by annexing Crimea, while in India Prime Minister Narendra Modi, another populist-nationalist leader, cast the Ajodhya mosque as his war trophy. In the case of China, we have already witnessed a number of similar moves, most notably the ditching of the "one-country two-system" scheme in Hong Kong and Macao and Xi's pledge in the recent party conference to regain control of Taiwan.

The coming Central Committee plenum is likely to establish a clearer "roadmap" for fulfilling that pledge. And that, inevitably, would require an even greater emphasis on Beijing's military build-up which, in turn, could fuel a new arms race with the United States and its allies.

A generation ago, China's conversion to a peculiar form of capitalism was hailed as an element of stability in the Asia-Pacific region. Today, however, seeking an historic ideological shift, China may be recasting itself as a disturber or "perturbateur", as the French say, of the status quo.

Putin's experience has shown that the disturber enjoys an initial advantage but would soon find out that what is gained in domestic politics could be offset by the cost of adversarial relations with the outside world.

Will the coming plenum take all that into account? We have to wait and see.

This article was originally published by Asharq al-Awsat

 

Amir Taheri was the executive editor-in-chief of the daily Kayhan in Iran from 1972 to 1979. He has worked at or written for innumerable publications, published eleven books, and has been a columnist for Asharq Al-Awsat since 1987.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/17906/china-ideological-shift

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Trading Jerusalem for US Visas - Caroline B. Glick

 

​ by Caroline B. Glick

Given the Biden administration's near-obsessive determination to open a consulate to the Palestinians in Jerusalem, it's just a matter of time before it presents an offer it believes Israel will be unable to refuse.

Last Wednesday, in response to a question from Senator Bill Hagerty, (R., TN), US Deputy Secretary of State Brian McKeon admitted in testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that under both US and international law, the US cannot open a consulate in Jerusalem without Israel's consent. In other words, the prospect of the Biden administration opening a consulate to the Palestinians in Israel's capital city without requesting Israel's permission to violate Israel's sovereignty in Jerusalem is off the table.

Given the Biden administration's near-obsessive determination to open a consulate to the Palestinians in Jerusalem, it's just a matter of time before it presents an offer it believes Israel will be unable to refuse.

On Friday, Israeli financial daily Globes published the outline of such an offer. In exchange for an Israeli "concession to the Palestinians," US officials claim Saudi Arabia will open limited economic ties with Israel. Moreover, the US will provide limited visa exemptions to Israeli tourists.

The article suggests – and Congressional sources warn – that the "concession to the Palestinians," Israel will be required to provide is permission to the US to open a consulate in Jerusalem for the Palestinians.

This brings us to the apparent US offer. Its paltriness is as breathtaking as it is insulting. As the Globes article noted, Israel and Saudi Arabia already conduct economic exchanges, including trade deals through Abraham Accords partners the UAE and Bahrain. Israel also reportedly has enjoyed strong security ties with Saudi Arabia for the past several years, which have benefitted both nations.

The Globes article reported that Saudi participation in the Abraham Accords, which involve full normalization of economic and diplomatic ties between Israel and the participating Arab states, is not on the table. To date, Saudi King Salman opposed joining the Abraham Accords directly.

At the same time, he permitted Crown Prince Muhammed Bin Salman (MBS) to play a key role in designing them and shepherding them forward. While King Salman is not expected to change his position, while Donald Trump was president, most observers believed that MBS would bring Saudi Arabia into the Abraham Accords and fully normalize Saudi ties with Israel once he takes over. In recent months, in response to the Biden administration's open animosity towards Saudi Arabia generally and MBS in particular, Saudi foreign policy has become increasingly contradictory and MBS's hold on power has weakened.

Given the uncertainty, Israel's best move in relation to Saudi Arabia is to sit on the sidelines and allow internal Saudi processes to unfold. If MBS becomes the monarch and his Trump-era positions remain unchanged, he will normalize ties with Israel regardless of the nature of the US presence in Jerusalem. If MBS is deposed in favor of another prince who succeeds King Salman, the likelihood that Saudi Arabia will scupper its ties with Israel – whatever their level – will be very high. So whatever Saudi Arabia offers Israel today will be easily reversed.

On the other hand, if Israel agrees to permit the operation of a US consulate in Jerusalem, the damage will be irreversible.

If Israel approves the Biden administration's request to open a US consulate in Jerusalem, it will undercut its greatest achievement during the Trump presidency – US recognition of Israeli sovereignty over Jerusalem. By opening a consulate to the Palestinians in Jerusalem, the US will effectively abrogate US recognition of Israeli sovereignty in Jerusalem and transfer that recognition to the Palestinians. Israeli approval of the US's request will automatically be interpreted by everyone as an Israeli renunciation of Israel's sovereign rights to Jerusalem.

Apologists for the Biden administration and Israeli leftists will claim that the Jerusalem deal on the table is just a new version of the deal Israel made with the UAE last year. But this is completely wrong. The UAE offered Israel full peace. The deal reportedly being discussed with the Saudis is far more limited.

More importantly, in exchange for full diplomatic and economic ties with the UAE, Israel agreed to temporarily place a hold on its plan to apply its laws in parts of Judea and Samaria, in furtherance of then-President Donald Trump's peace plan. Israel can decide to end the hold and implement the sovereignty plan at any point.

In the case at hand, however, Israel's concession is irrevocable regardless of who leads the government in Jerusalem. Here Israel isn't being asked to put its plans on hold. The Biden administration is asking Israel to permit the US to subvert Israel's sovereign rights and control over Jerusalem by giving the Palestinians the power to challenge and undermine all aspects of Israel's municipal and national operations in Jerusalem with American backing.

This brings us to the second "gift" the Biden administration is apparently offering Israel – limited visa exemption for US entry to Israeli tourists. The offer itself is an expression of US contempt, rather than good will towards Israel. No country concedes its sovereignty over its capital city to make it easier for its citizens to vacation in America.

As McKeon admitted, Jerusalem's fate is in Israel's hands. The government needs to recognize that no offer – certainly not the absurdity now being bandied about – is worth sacrificing the capital.

 

Caroline B. Glick

Source: https://www.israelhayom.com/opinions/trading-jerusalem-for-us-visas/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

France: Can this Journalist Become President and Save France? - Guy Millière

 

​ by Guy Millière

Zemmour notes that he does not want to shrink the country, but save it from destruction and will not refuse to see what Islam is and what it can do. He frequently quotes the Algerian author Boualem Sansal, that Islamic neighborhoods in France are "budding Islamic republics".

  • Zemmour... tells the leaders of The Republicans that his proposals are exactly those included in their party's program from 1990... close the borders, suspend immigration, provide social benefits only for the French, and fight the increasing Islamization of the country. He tells Macron that "opening up to diversity" leads to the dissolution of France. Zemmour notes that he does not want to shrink the country, but save it from destruction and will not refuse to see what Islam is and what it can do. He frequently quotes the Algerian author Boualem Sansal, that Islamic neighborhoods in France are "budding Islamic republics". He tells those who say he is a far-right Jew that he is just a conservative attached to the French republic and to all the values ​​that made France great. He states that he is a French Jew, proud of his name, and that those who murdered Jews in France in recent years were not Jews. He rejects the charge of being an apologist for the anti-Semitic Vichy regime by pointing out that what he says about French Jews during WWII was laid out in a book, Vichy and The Holocaust: An Inquiry on a French Paradox, by Rabbi, Alain Michel, who works for the Yad Vashem Holocaust Museum in Israel. Zemmour stresses that he does not defend the Vichy regime at all, does not say that the Vichy regime "protected" French Jews, but only cites historical facts -- and asks those who criticize him on this point if they think Rabbi Alain Michel is an anti-Semite.

  • When asked about the Jews murdered by an Islamic terrorist at a Jewish school in Toulouse, Zemmour says that he does not blame their families for having them buried in Israel, that he does not think their families behaved like "foreigners." He simply notes a fact: that they think that above all they are Jews, which is the right of every Jew. He says that the concept of a "great replacement" of Western Christendom by Islam is not a conspiracy theory but a reality: that demographic data show that in many places throughout history, there is documentation of people who have replaced other people after they have imported a civilization that does not have the same values as theirs. He adds that this is not an idea shared only by white nationalists, but by all those who read history and live in areas that are changing rapidly.

  • France is in an extremely serious situation today. There are more than 700 "no-go zones" (Zones Urbaines Sensibles) ruled by ethnic gangs and radical imams. The police can only intervene in these zones through commando operations. A new kind of disturbance, defined by sociologists as "gratuitous violence" -- violence practiced for the pleasure of injuring and killing -- has been spreading. Hundreds of assaults take place every day; police reports show that the majority of them are committed by "suburban youths"....

  • A recent survey showed that 14% of young people in France aged 18-30 approved of the motives of the motives of [schoolteacher Samuel] Paty's murderer. A poll conducted in November 2020 showed that 57% of Muslims in France aged 18-25 consider Sharia law to be superior to the laws of the republic.... Entire French towns are now predominantly Muslim: Roubaix, Trappes, Sevran, Aubervilliers.... Each year, 400,000 immigrants legally arrive in France, mostly from the Muslim world. In addition, each year, tens of thousands of illegal immigrants, also mostly from the Muslim world, are added to that number.... the newcomers are young, and their birthrate is far higher than that of non-Muslims. A population change is taking place.... If the change continues at the present rate, France could be a predominantly Muslim country around 2050.

  • Zemmour is also the only presidential candidate who has dared to say that the Palestinian people were invented -- a statement long ago affirmed by former Palestinian Authority President Yasser Arafat -- and that Israel is a nation state that, like all states, has the right to defend itself and fight for its survival.

  • When Zemmour's supporters are questioned at a public meeting, they unanimously say that he is the only one telling the truth: that a "great replacement" is clearly taking place and could cause France as they know it -- proud of its secularism, Judeo-Christian values and individual liberty -- to "die".

When Éric Zemmour's supporters are questioned at a public meeting, they unanimously say that he is the only one telling the truth: that a "great replacement" is clearly taking place and could cause France as they know it -- proud of its secularism, Judeo-Christian values and individual liberty -- to "die". Pictured: Zemmour in Budapest, Hungary on September 24, 2021. (Photo by Attila Kisbenedek/AFP via Getty Images)

September 16. Éric Zemmour's new book, France Has Not Yet Said Her Last Word, immediately book becomes a bestseller. Two of his previous books, The French Suicide and A Five-Year Term for Nothing: Chronicles of the War of Civilizations, sold more than 500,000 copies, a high number for non-fiction in France. He is an exception. All authors who write of immigration and Islam without political correctness have been ostracized by the media for years. Not Zemmour. Each time he was fired by radio and television stations, another one hired him. As the last politically incorrect talk show host, his audience consists of people weary of political correctness. He has been dragged into court countless times and ordered to pay high fines, presumably to force him to be quiet. He has paid the fines but would not be quiet.

His earlier books, extremely pessimistic about the future of France, concluded that the country was dying, and unnervingly fast. The cause of death would be the population change resulting from uncontrolled immigration and the ensuing Islamization of the country. Islam, at war with Western civilization for thirteen centuries, he wrote, is incompatible with it. The Muslim population living in France, he went on, does not assimilate, but instead creates extremist enclaves in French territory from which non-Muslims are driven out; and now France finds itself colonized by Islam. French political leaders, he added, practice willful blindness, refusing to see what happens, and slip into submission. The situation, he concluded, is irreversible.

His new book breaks with his former pessimism and shows a willingness to fight. His publisher would not publish the book, so Zemmour published it himself. The book's release was accompanied by a poster campaign from a group, "Friends of Éric Zemmour," created a few weeks earlier. The posters show his face along with the words, "Zemmour President". Zemmour is not even officially a candidate for president of the French Republic - yet. Nonetheless, he acts as if he were on the campaign trail. He has been holding public meetings in large cities and attracting thousands of supporters who seem happy to pay 20 euros ($23) to attend.

On September 13, his television program on CNews was canceled after an institution responsible for regulating audiovisual media in France, the CSA (Superior Audiovisual Council), said that it was "impossible for a presumed presidential candidate to have a television show". Immediately, Zemmour was invited on virtually every radio and television station. In early September, polls credited him with 5%-7% of the 2022 election vote. Recent polls show that, in the first round, he could get 16%-18% of the vote, thereby placing him, in the second round, head-to-head with France's current president, Emmanuel Macron. Never in the history of the Fifth Republic has a presumed presidential candidate had such a dramatic rise to power.

The leaders of The Republicans, France's leading moderate right-wing political party, can see that many of their voters are considering voting for Zemmour, so they still have not chosen a presidential candidate. When they saw that Zemmour had every chance of receiving more votes than anyone else in the party, without even participating in the primary election, they announced that votes for Zemmour would not be counted. The president of the National Rally Party, Marine Le Pen, also can see that many of her voters are turning toward Zemmour. President Macron, for his part, until recently probably assumed that in the second round he would be facing Marine Le Pen, and could again use the fear of "fascism" and the "defense of the republic" by reminding the public that she is the daughter of an unreconstructed anti-Semite, Jean-Marie Le Pen, and therefore get easily re-elected.

Macron now seems visibly anxious and has begun to attack Zemmour's positions by saying that France must be "open to diversity" and that "the identity of France was never built on shrinking the country ". His advisers know it is not possible to accuse Zemmour of anti-Semitism: he is a Jew. French Jews supporting Macron now describe Zemmour as a far-right Jew betraying the values of Judaism. Zemmour has said that the Vichy regime saved French Jews during World War II by preventing them from being sent to the death camps, so some have accused him of defending the Vichy regime and its collaboration with the Nazis. Supporters of Macron and others say that Zemmour is a "racist" and a "fascist". Articles steeped in hatred are published daily in the mainstream media, and journalists who interview him on radio and television always say, before asking him questions , that he is a dangerous man. Some commentators have described him as an "infectious agent" and as a "virus more harmful than the Wuhan coronavirus".

The defamation poured out against him has even appeared in the international press. An article on October 24 in the Wall Street Journal states that Zemmour "has drawn inspiration from former President Donald Trump, is harnessing his celebrity to explore a run for president". It adds that Zemmour "defended the leaders of Vichy France, the regime that collaborated with Nazi Germany during World War II", and that

"Mr. Zemmour said that they protected French Jews while handing over foreign-born Jews to the Germans in a necessary compromise to occupation... Mr. Zemmour wrote that families of the children killed in 2012 at a Jewish school near Toulouse were behaving like foreigners for burying their children in Israel".

The newspaper added that Zemmour "has embraced a view held by white nationalists called the 'Great Replacement,' which contends that global elites are conspiring to bring non-European immigrants".

Never has a presumptive French presidential candidate been attacked so unanimously, so viciously and with so much savagery. To find similar attacks, it would be necessary to go back to the 1930s, and at the time the attacks came only from an anti-Semitic far-right press.

Zemmour responds to all criticisms and defamatory remarks. He tells the leaders of The Republicans that his proposals are exactly those included in their party's program from 1990, when, as the Rally for the Republic (RPR), it proposed to close the borders, suspend immigration, provide social benefits only for the French, and to fight the increasing Islamization of the country. He adds that The Republicans betrayed their own party by renouncing its old program.

Zemmour tells Marine Le Pen that she cannot win and she knows it, and Macron that "opening up to diversity" leads to the dissolution of France. He notes that he does not want to shrink the country, but to save it from destruction and that he will not refuse to see what Islam is or can do. He frequently quotes the Algerian author Boualem Sansal, who writes that Islamic neighborhoods in France are "budding Islamic republics". Zemmour tells those who say he is a far-right Jew that he is just a conservative attached to the French republic and all the values ​​that made France great. He states that he is a French Jew, proud of his name, and that those who murdered Jews in France in recent years were not Jews. He says he rejects the charge of being an apologist for the anti-Semitic Vichy regime, and points out that what he says about French Jews during WWII was laid out in a book, Vichy and The Holocaust: An Inquiry on a French Paradox, by Rabbi Alain Michel, who works for the Yad Vashem Holocaust Museum in Israel. Zemmour stresses that he does not defend the Vichy regime at all, does not say that the Vichy regime "protected" French Jews, but only cites historical facts -- and asks those who criticize him on this point if they think Rabbi Alain Michel is an anti-Semite.

Zemmour reminds those who call him a racist and a fascist that Islam is not a race, and that fascists are the enemies of democracies, while he is trying to save democracy. He adds that those who call him a "virus" remind him of those who called Jews "vermin" in the 1930s; that anti-Semites already decades ago called Jews "vermin," and that calling Jews "vermin" led to horrific consequences.

Zemmour says that he thinks that Donald Trump did great things for the United States -- he is one of the rare French journalists not to spit on Trump -- and that he, Zemmour, would have preferred not to think about running for president, but saw no one else likely to defeat Macron, and therefore has no choice.

When asked about the Jews murdered by an Islamic terrorist at a Jewish school in Toulouse, Zemmour says that he does not blame their families for having them buried in Israel, that he does not think their families behaved like "foreigners." He simply notes a fact: that they think that above all they are Jews, which is the right of every Jew. He says that the concept of a "great replacement" of Western Christendom by Islam is not a conspiracy theory but a reality: that demographic data show that in many places throughout history, there is documentation of people who have replaced other people after they have imported a civilization that does not have the same values as theirs. He adds that this is not an idea shared only by white nationalists, but by all those who read history and live in areas that are changing rapidly.

So far, only one French politician has agreed to debate with Zemmour: Jean-Luc Mélenchon, the leader of La France Insoumise ("France Unsubmitted"), a far-left party that includes former members of the French Communist Party. The other political leaders treat Zemmour with contempt. If he becomes a presidential candidate, and if he continues to attract a large number of voters, they will not be able to avoid debating him. They know him well, for thirty years, as a journalist and political commentator. He also knows them well -- and is a formidable debater.

Zemmour's presumed candidacy, his success, and the fury it provokes among politicians and journalists seem symptoms of the state of the country today. France is in an extremely serious situation. There are now more than 700 "no-go zones" (Zones Urbaines Sensibles), ruled by ethnic gangs and radical imams. The police can only intervene in these zones through commando operations. A new kind of disturbance, defined by sociologists as "gratuitous violence" -- violence practiced for the pleasure of injuring and killing -- has been spreading. Hundreds of assaults take place every day; police reports show that the majority of them are committed by "suburban youths" and that their victims are Caucasians. In many high schools and colleges, teachers have long since given up even mentioning the Holocaust. Since the beheading of high-school teacher Samuel Paty, who was advocating free speech, they have also given up talking about secularism. When, on October 17, 2021, a year after Paty was murdered, the French government organized a commemoration in all French schools, many violent incidents, unfortunately initiated by Muslim students, took place. A recent survey showed that 14% of young people in France aged 18-30 approved of the motives of Paty's murderer. A poll conducted in November 2020 showed that 57% of Muslims in France aged 18-25 consider Sharia law to be superior to the laws of the republic (in 2016, the figure was 47%).

Entire French towns are now predominantly Muslim: Roubaix, Trappes, Sevran, Aubervilliers. The department of Seine-Saint-Denis will very soon be predominantly Muslim. Marseille, the second-largest city in France, is 40% Muslim and will likely be a majority Muslim city in less than a decade. The population of Lyon, the third-largest city in France, is one-third Muslim.

Each year, 400,000 immigrants legally arrive in France, mostly from the Muslim world. Also each year, tens of thousands of illegal immigrants, also mostly from the Muslim world, are added to that number. Hardly any of them are deported. The French population is aging; the newcomers are young, and their birthrate is far higher than that of non-Muslims. A population change is taking place. The September issue of the French monthly magazine Causeur published a detailed investigation of the subject, titled "Smile, You Are Replaced!" It disclosed that while native French women have a fertility rate of 1.9 children, women coming from Algeria have a fertility rate of 3.6 children; from Tunisia, 3.5 children, and from Morocco, 3.4 children. If the change continues at the present rate, France could be a predominantly Muslim country around 2050.

President Macron has not done anything to stop or lessen the flow of Muslim immigration into France or to act against the change in population. He has often said that he wants to fight Islamism -- and always adding that Islamism is an ideology unrelated to Islam. He only once said that "Islam is a religion that is in crisis today, all over the world", without giving a clear explanation of what he meant. Most French Muslim organizations immediately reacted by saying that he had insulted Islam. Demonstrations were launched in several Muslim countries: Turkey, Lebanon, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia. French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian flew to Cairo to apologize to Sheikh Ahmed al-Tayeb, the Grand Imam of the al-Azhar Mosque, and emphatically to underscore France's deep respect for Islam.

Macron said in November 2020 that a law to fight "Islamic separatism" would quickly be passed. A law was indeed passed in August 2021, but it does not include the words Islam or Islamism. It is called a "law confirming respect for the principles of the Republic". It speaks of a "separatist dynamic which aims at division" and says that public services should respect secularism, that civil servants should be protected from threats, and that Islamic organizations should disclose their sources of funding. It prohibits polygamy and home schooling.

However, the public services were already supposed to respect secularism; civil servants were already supposed to be protected by the French state, and Islamic organizations were already supposed to reveal their sources of funding. Polygamy was already banned in France, but it exists nevertheless; several thousand French Muslims today are polygamous. Home schooling is practiced by many non-Muslims. The law offers no way to counter the Islamization of France and radical Islam. Two or three radical mosques were closed for a few months, but each year, dozens more mosques open up. Imams calling for jihad continue to preach. Most are French citizens and cannot be expelled. Islamic bookstores continue to sell anti-Semitic books banned in other bookshops. The expression "Islamic separatism" is now used by all political leaders -- including Marine Le Pen -- and by all French journalists when they speak of "no-go zones."

"The Islamists do not want to separate," Middle East scholar Bernard Rougier states in his book The Conquered Territories of Islamism, "they want to submit and conquer". Zemmour is the only journalist not excluded from the mainstream media for speaking like Rougier, and the only presumptive presidential candidate who reminds everyone that all the Jews murdered in France over more than a decade have been killed by Islamic anti-Semites. Zemmour is also the only presidential candidate who has dared to say that the Palestinian people were invented -- a statement long ago affirmed by former Palestinian Authority President Yasser Arafat -- and that Israel is a nation state that, like all states, has the right to defend itself and fight for its survival.

Polls show that the French population is extremely pessimistic about the future of France, and extremely dissatisfied with the current political parties. When French regional elections were held in June, they saw an unprecedented abstention rate for France of 66.7%.

When Zemmour's supporters are questioned at a public meeting, they unanimously say that he is the only one telling the truth: that a "great replacement" is clearly taking place and could cause France as they know it -- proud of its secularism, Judeo-Christian values and individual liberty -- to "die". They almost all add that they think the France of the Enlightenment actually could "die" and that the 2022 presidential election is probably the last chance to save the republic.

The Muslim electorate, increasing in importance in France, is -- no surprise there -- hostile to him. Zemmour says Muslims need to accept criticism of Islam. However, Muslims do not, and Islamic intolerance of free speech is rapidly gaining ground in France. When a teenage girl named Mila made negative comments about Islam on social media, she received so many death threats that she had to go into hiding and still fears for her life.

In spite of articles saying that "Zemmour causes discomfort among French Jews," a large number of them seem set on voting for him: they apparently view the possibility of continuing to live in an increasingly Islamized France as compromised. They have already fled from the Islamized neighborhoods and cities en masse. Nevertheless, the main French Jewish institutions seem to be blind to the danger to French Jews represented by Islamic anti-Semitism. They continue unconditionally to support Macron. "No Jewish vote should go to potential candidate Éric Zemmour", said the president of the Representative Council of the Jewish Institutions of France (CRIF), Francis Kalifat. "The ideas of Zemmour can only inspire disgust," he added. He had never used such harsh words for French politicians who supported Palestinian terrorist organizations. Ten years ago, the then-president of CRIF, Richard Prasquier, also warmly received the Palestinians' current leader, Mahmoud Abbas, not exactly known to be pro-Jewish, in Paris.

If Zemmour decides to become a presidential candidate, he will need to do so soon, and undoubtedly knows that being elected will be difficult. He has no support from any political party or any political leader. Attacks against him by the mainstream media will not just continue but intensify.

The French, Zemmour often says, do not want France to "die". The coming weeks will show if he is right.

 

Dr. Guy Millière, a professor at the University of Paris, is the author of 27 books on France and Europe.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/17905/eric-zemmour-save-france

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Something Big is Coming - Clarice Feldman

 

​ by Clarice Feldman

Are we looking at a major shift in America’s political tectonic plates?

Dilbert creator Scott Adams tweeted this week: ”The country’s energy is strange. Everything is amped up in every direction. Something big is coming.” He’s rarely wrong about such things.

Adams said he doesn’t know what that something big is, but I’m hoping it is a major shift in America’s political tectonic plates. I may be looking too hard for it, but I, too, feel it in my bones.

Infrastructure Faceplant

For one thing, the wacky spending program the Democrats were proposing and fiddling with seems to have hit the shoals, trapped between the far left and the more moderate senators Kyrsten Sinema and Joe Manchin. Even the leftward Politico cannot spackle over the dilemma, a dilemma that is the only thing preventing Democrats from turning our constitutional republic into a totalitarian socialist economic mess in which only the most authoritarian and corrupt rule over a greatly impoverished citizenry.

For the second time in less than a month, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her leadership team had to delay a vote on Senate-passed infrastructure bill amid progressive opposition, denying President Joe Biden a much-needed win as Democrats’ bigger, $1.75 trillion social spending plan also remains in limbo.

 “I think it’s wholly apparent that today was not a success,” said Virginia Rep. Abigail Spanberger, whose state has a high-stakes gubernatorial showdown Tuesday that Democrats were hoping to boost with the infrastructure vote.

“Because people choose to be obstructionists, we’re not delivering these things to my state or to the rest of the country,” the swing-district Democrat added. “I guess we’ll just wait because apparently failing roads and bridges can just wait in the minds of some people.”

Democrats slunk out of the House chamber embarrassed -- furious at the liberals who dug in and a White House that refused to pressure them to relent -- and openly fretting about the long-term repercussions, given the tough climb they face in the midterms.

Virginia Gubernatorial Race

Terry McAuliffe, who was supposed to be a shoo-in for a second term as governor of Virginia, seems to be in a lot of trouble. Good polls can only measure general sentiment in my view, but all that I’ve seen show that sentiment has rapidly shifted in favor of his opponent Glenn Youngkin. To my mind, McAuliffe’s fatal miscalculation was to stand with the teachers’ unions, the obstructive, dictatorial Loudon County school board against the parents. Northern Virginia is heavily populated by tech and professional federal employees who in recent years have tended to vote Democrat, but these are people who can be expected to be concerned with the public school education of their children, and McAuliffe, reflexively tone-deaf to such concerns, placed himself perilously on the third rail.

How bad is his campaign going? It could hardly be worse. So few people have turned out in places like Arlington, Virginia, that he’s skipped showing up at the final rallies -- rallies designed to snowball voter support. At one of those rallies. Pharrell Williams, a noted hip-hop singer and music producer, told the crowd it’s okay if they vote for Glenn Youngkin -- not something I’d think the rally organizers wanted to hear.

The odious and discredited Lincoln Project tried to help McAuliffe by staging a pretend white nationalist display for Youngkin. I suppose, because they were torn between trying to pay honor to diversity while smearing Youngkin, they included a young black man in the mix of demonstrators, immediately undercutting the message of the scam that this was a white nationalist demonstration. In fact, one of the “white nationalists” was the financial director for Young VA Dems. About the same time this ploy flopped, others reminded voters that McAuliffe had defended the present Democrat governor of Virginia Ralph Northam’s appearance in blackface costume, and it turned out that McAuliffe’s spokesperson (who also worked for the Harris and Biden campaigns) had posted racist tweets in 2012. Just as #MeToo backfired -- this week against New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, now charged with a misdemeanor sexual offense against a staffer -- the cancel culture mining of ancient racist comments is now backfiring against the Democrats who had made this something of a cottage industry.

Days later, McAuliffe was charged with accepting an illegal laundered $350,000 contribution from a Sri Lankan businessman. 

The National Legal and Policy Center is asking the FEC to "promptly investigate" whether the contribution to the Virginia gubernatorial candidate violated federal laws prohibiting campaigns from accepting political donations from foreign nationals.

"Terry McAuliffe has a history of accepting foreign contributions.  The FEC must fully investigate these serious charges that he accepted $350,000 in illegal foreign contributions for his current campaign," said Washington, D.C. attorney, Paul Kamenar, counsel to NLPC, who drafted and filed the complaint with the FEC.

LycaTel LLC, owned by Sri Lankan-British national Allirajah Subaskaran, gave McAuliffe $350,000 in July, the Free Beacon first reported in early October. The company is a New Jersey subsidiary of Subaskaran’s U.K.-based telecom conglomerate, which boasts a complicated web of offshore businesses and has been the subject of tax-fraud and money-laundering charges in France.

(Of course, as you imagine, Northern Virginia voters, whose main source of news is the Washington Post, will know little of such things, as the paper actively supports McAuliffe and buries these stories, so if you know any please send them the link to this.)

If, as I hope, McAuliffe loses, it will mean a gut check for those Democrats heading into a 2022 reelection fight. It tells them that people are sick of this craziness and their own careers are in danger. I expect that since their personal political careers are the first of their interests, self-seeking congressional Democrats will cut their strings to the loonies in the Squad and the Sandernistas.

Changing the Climate

Ostensibly to chat with the Pope about such theological issues as climate change -- apparently the latest religious belief superseding what most people consider Catholicism -- President Biden (who reportedly took 800 staffers with him to the Climate Conference in Glasgow, Scotland) cruised through Rome in an 85-vehicle motorcade.

What more could you ask to show how seriously Biden takes the issue of greenhouse gases and fossil fuels?

Speaking of “serious,” how can you not laugh at a president so stupid that he said, “When you buy an electric vehicle, you can go across America on a single tank of gas figuratively speaking. It’s not gas. You plug it in.” Sure, you do, and you have to plug it in every few hundred miles and wait for hours for it to charge unless somewhere someone has invented some very very long and sturdy extension cords. And, of course, plugging it in requires electric power from somewhere, and there’s a substantial shortage of it because of the same loony energy policies that are now forcing up gas and electric power prices around the country and the world.

Immigration Follies

Thousands of aliens are heading toward the border to join the more than one million who already illegally crossed under this administration, and, almost entirely unvetted, have been transported around the country. Citizens, many of whom jumped through years-long hoops to satisfy what is still immigration law totally ignored by this administration, are incredulous at the latest report, as Roger L. Simon explains:

WASHINGTON -- The Biden administration is in talks to offer immigrant families that were separated during the Trump administration around $450,000 a person in compensation, according to people familiar with the matter, as several agencies work to resolve lawsuits filed on behalf of parents and children who say the government subjected them to lasting psychological trauma.

“The U.S. Departments of Justice, Homeland Security, and Health and Human Services are considering payments that could amount to close to $1 million a family, though the final numbers could shift, the people familiar with the matter said.”

$450,000 a person? This when millions of actual taxpaying American citizens are suffering, barely able to make ends meet during the pandemic, and inflation is on a record pace. Not even Anthony Fauci, allegedly the highest paid government official, makes that much, at least in salary.

Psychological trauma? How about causing psychological trauma to a whole country at once? Never in my life have I heard anything so insane.

No matter how hard the mainstream press tries to bury such things, ordinary voters cannot miss the fact that the administration’s idiotic policies and tinkering already have resulted in supply shortages, higher prices, higher energy costs, and terrible schools that are miseducating their children and undermining parental authority. Just as bad, all this would lead to even higher taxes. They’re waking up and that means to me that the ground is shifting under the Democrats’ feet. That is “something big.”

To comment, you can find the MeWe post for this article here.

 

Clarice Feldman

Source: https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2021/10/something_big_is_coming.html

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Biden’s vow to protect Taiwan, walked back by White House, could signal internal policy debate, experts say - Adam Shaw

 

​ by Adam Shaw

Biden said the US has a 'commitment' to defend Taiwan if attacked

China urges US to avoid sending 'wrong signals' about Taiwan

Is the U.S. one step closer to being involved in a clash between countries? Fox News senior foreign affairs correspondent Greg Palkot with more on 'Special Report.'

President Biden’s statement last week, later walked back by the White House, that the U.S would protect Taiwan in the case of an attack by Beijing, could be a window into an ongoing policy debate about the Biden administration’s strategy in the region, experts told Fox News.

"China, Russia, and the rest of the world knows we have the most powerful military in the history of the world. Don't worry about whether we're going to – they're going to be more powerful," Biden said in the CNN town hall. "What you do have to worry about is whether or not they're going to engage in activities that will put them in a position where they may make a serious mistake."

AFTER BIDEN SAYS US WOULD DEFEND TAIWAN FROM ATTACK, CHINA SAYS THERE'S ‘NO ROOM FOR COMPROMISE’ 

Further pushed about whether the United States would defend Taiwan from a Chinese attack, Biden added: "Yes. Yes, we have a commitment to do that."

The remark quickly made headlines, as the U.S. policy for decades has been one of "strategic ambiguity" toward how it would respond to such an attack. The 1979 Taiwan Relations Act commits the U.S. to support Taiwan, including providing it defensive capabilities, but not necessarily to engage in a military conflict.

Oct. 18, 2021: President Joe Biden puts his mask back on as he walks back to the Oval Office. (Associated Press)

Oct. 18, 2021: President Joe Biden puts his mask back on as he walks back to the Oval Office. (Associated Press)

Beijing, meanwhile, views Taiwan as a breakaway province and claims that it is part of its own territory. The two countries split in 1949 and China has been increasing pressure on the self-ruled nation, while opposing its involvement in international organizations. The U.S. does not formally recognize Taiwan, but maintains an unofficial alliance.

There have been calls for the U.S. to move away from strategic ambiguity and instead move toward a policy of strategic clarity in the face of increasing aggression from Beijing -- which has seen the communist regime send dozens of military aircraft toward Taiwan.

After Biden’s remarks, the White House soon clarified the comment, and said the President was not abandoning strategic ambiguity.

A White House spokesperson told Fox News after the town hall that Biden "was not announcing any change in our policy and there is no change in our policy."

"The U.S. defense relationship with Taiwan is guided by the Taiwan Relations Act," the spokesperson said. "We will uphold our commitment under the Act, we will continue to support Taiwan's self-defense, and we will continue to oppose any unilateral changes to the status quo."

BIDEN PLEDGES TO DEFEND TAIWAN IF CHINA ATTACKS

While this led many to assume that this was yet another gaffe from a president known for them, experts told Fox News that it could also provide a window into ongoing policy discussions about the U.S. stance.

"I was surprised when Biden made those comments, I wasn't surprised that the White House walked them back and I don't think the White House walking them back mean that Biden doesn't mean what he said," Isaac Stone Fish, CEO of Strategy Risks, a firm which measures China risk, told Fox News.

"It’s really hard to know, did they walk it back because Biden misspoke, did they walk it back because this was the plan all along, and Biden was maybe saying something that they would counter to make them less harsh?" he said. "Did they walk them back as a reflection of a policy dispute within the White House whereas parts of the State Department want it to be slightly less aggressive than the way Biden frames it? It’s difficult to know what this signals."

Heino Klinck, a former deputy assistant secretary of defense for East Asia under the Trump administration, said that if one took Biden at his word "that would have meant a significant policy shift from strategic ambiguity to strategic clarity and that would have been significant."

"There are more and more voices calling for the United States to shift from a policy of strategic ambiguity to strategic clarity with respect to Taiwan," he said. "I would imagine that in policy circles there is a debate about whether it would be in the U.S. national security interest to make such a shift and again if that were to occur that would be significant."

China, meanwhile, was typically prickly in its response to the statements by Biden.

 

 


 

"No one should underestimate the strong resolve, determination and capability of the Chinese people to safeguard national sovereignty and territorial integrity," a Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson said, according to the Chinese Global Times. "China has no room for compromise."

Klinck said that this was to be expected, given that "there’s no issue more sensitive than Taiwan with respect to Beijing."

"Overarchingly China is concerned that the potential evolution of U.S defense policy regarding Taiwan is going to embolden Taiwan and advance the pro-independence movement," he said.

"Any time a U.S. official makes any comment about Taiwan with respect to strengthening the relationship or even implies that the relationship is going to be strengthened, China will push back vociferously."

CHINESE AGGRESSION TOWARD TAIWAN TESTING US RESOLVE IN WAKE OF AFGHANISTAN WITHDRAWAL, EXPERTS SAY

Stone Fish warned that there is also a difference between how the comment is received in Beijing, and how it portrays how that information has been received as it looks to scout out the U.S. position.

"I think that one of the things Beijing is doing with its aggression with Taiwan is trying to test the United States on where its red lines are and what would Beijing have to do to trigger a U.S. military response," he said. "So in some ways what the U.S. is trying to do is clarify its position toward Taiwan and there's a lot of strategic ambiguity built into these policies but Beijing wants to know how much they can do without the U.S. responding so that when they feel confident to mount an actual attack, they are much more in place than they would be otherwise."

As a sign of that continued tension, in a CNN interview this week, Taiwan President Tsai Ing-wen acknowledged that U.S. troops were on Taiwan for training purposes -- a move the Chinese Global Times claimed "has stepped on the red line."

On Saturday, the Chinese foreign minister released a stern statement warning G20 nations that countries would "pay a price" for backing Taiwan.

"Recently, the U.S. and other countries attempted to achieve breakthroughs on the issue of Taiwan, which is in contravention of the political guarantees they made when they established diplomatic relations with [the People's Republic of] China," Wang Yi said, according to Politico.

"If they couldn't stop the One China principle 50 years ago, it's even more impossible in today's world in the 21st century," Wang added. "If they forge ahead regardless, they will definitely pay a price accordingly."

Fox News' Tyler Olson and Andrew Mark Miller contributed to this report.

 

Adam Shaw is a reporter covering U.S. and European politics for Fox News. He can be reached at adam.shaw@foxnews.com.

Source: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/bidens-vow-to-protect-taiwan-walked-by-white-house-internal-policy-debate-experts

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

High-chair wars: Democrats still fighting amongst themselves about their porkulus bills - Monica Showalter

 

​ by Monica Showalter

If the reports are true that they still don't have their act together, it's another thing for Republicans to cheer about.

As if the likely victory of Glenn Youngkin in Virginia's gubernatorial race weren't enough of a ray of light, Republicans can also cross their fingers that the Democrats' two gargantuan spending bills in Congress are staying a hopeless mess.

That's the impression from Politico report, which states that Democrats are still fighting among themselves about this wretched matter:

As Biden prepared for the high-stakes meeting with House Democrats on Thursday, [Rep. Pramila] Jayapal made an urgent plea on a call with White House chief of staff Ron Klain: Don’t send the president to pressure liberals to vote Thursday on the Senate’s infrastructure bill without a more progressive social spending bill that’s fully done.

Klain pushed Jayapal, who leads the Congressional Progressive Caucus, to vote for the infrastructure bill during the call, according to a source familiar with their conversation. Jayapal responded that she wanted to avoid sending Biden off to Europe on Thursday with a failed vote, according to multiple Democrats.

What happened next is a dizzying fall of dominos. Biden didn’t directly ask House Democrats to pass his bipartisan infrastructure bill, leaving Pelosi to make the request. Then Jayapal’s progressives dug in against the infrastructure vote that the speaker wanted to tee up — using the president’s lack of a request for cover.

 By dinnertime on Thursday, House Democratic leadership’s plans to pass the infrastructure bill had imploded for the second time in a month, an embarrassing defeat as the president was en route to Rome. 

Well, good. Biden's trillion-dollar "infrastructure" bill, and his even porkier $1.7 trillion "reconciliation" bill, originally crafted by none other than far-left Sen. Bernie Sanders but since pared-down, might not ever get passed, given Democrats' high-chair behavior.

Politico reports that Klain asked them to vote on the infrastructure bill first, and the House progressives, likely including the crazed squad members, said 'no.' They wanted Joe Biden to ask them to vote on it and since he didn't, they refused to vote at all. Does this sound like toddler stuff? It does to normal people.

We thought they wanted this trash to pass, but it turns out, they will only do it if Joe asks. 

And for reasons that aren't entirely clear to us, Joe didn't ask:

As the day wore on, senior Democrats only grew more furious with the White House’s silence. While taking Air Force One to Rome, Biden made only one call House Democrats were briefed on — to Rep. Madeleine Dean (D-Pa.), to tell her he appreciated her CNN appearance talking positively about their agenda. Biden then reiterated that he wasn’t explicitly pushing for the House to pass the infrastructure vote immediately, according to multiple Democrats familiar with that conversation.  

Based on that Politico passage, it sounds like he didn't want to ask, he wanted Nancy to ask for him. Although she tried, for the far-leftists, that wasn't good enough.

“It all boils down to the fact that there wasn’t an ask,” [House Majority Leader Steny] Hoyer said, according to a source familiar with the meeting. 

Which sounds pretty stupid.

There are all kinds of explanations for this and here are maybe a few:

One, Joe knows the bill, if passed, will be despised by voters. Better to leave Nancy holding the bag than him since she's impervious to criticism.

Two, Joe wants to pull a fast one on the House progressive caucus and vote for just the infrastructure bill to get that much done. He knows the porkulus "reconciliation" will wash out in any voting aftermath, so at least he can snatch out a small victory with the infrastructure bill. Since the progressives know this, they want Joe all over this bill.

Three, Joe's a dotard and 'forgot' to ask for a vote. In his case, it actually could be that.

So now they're fighting among themselves about the Biden bills, which Joe had hoped would pass before his trip to Europe.

It didn't pass, and now all of them have got their eyes on the Virginia gubernatorial election to be held Tuesday, widely seen as a bellwether of Democrat fortunes. 

Which is why Pelosi and the other top Democrats are now in a rush to hold a double vote on both bills on Tuesday to get them in under the wire before the election results are announced. For them, it's the last-chance saloon. Expecting a Youngkin victory as they do, they figure they'll have to get more moderate if they want to survive as a party in such an aftermath. That of course, will enrage the squad, but for Democrats, it's always political survival first.

Axios, which tends to be biased toward the left side, reports that Democrats have now cooked up a new solution for this Youngkin-linked dilemma ahead of the vote, and now have it all in the bag:

House Democratic leaders are telling lawmakers they plan to pass both a $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill and a $1.75 trillion social spending bill as early as Tuesday, two sources familiar with the conversations tell Axios.

Why it matters: It’s a very ambitious timeline, but leadership is eager to deliver a win to President Biden while he meets with world leaders in Europe.

 I imagine the squad will want their porkulus "reconciliation" passed first, given that they don't trust Pelosi to really hold a vote on both bills.

But that may be impossible without passing the baseline infrastructure bill first, given how one follows from the other. So they've got to trust, and maybe they won't trust given the many times Pelosi has pulled a Lucy-holds-the-football with them in the past.

Axios adds a caveat to its all's going swimmingly report:

  • The aide emphasized the schedule is “not set in stone yet.”

Which sounds like maybe there are other problems that Democrats need to iron out amongst themselves. 

The whole thing suggests continued Democrat disarray despite the brave faces. It comes down to the intransigence of the squad, which cannot understand the concept of political compromise, plus the mismanagement of the Democrat political leaders, including senile Joe.

For us, that's good news and maybe a ray of light on the horizon. If these godawful bills go down in flames as Youngkin rises in Virginia, it couldn't be better news for Republicans and all freedom lovers who want this bill to die.

To comment, you can find the MeWe post for this article here.

 

Monica Showalter

Source: https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2021/10/highchair_wars_democrats_still_fighting_amongst_themselves_about_their_porkulus_bills.html

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Saturday, October 30, 2021

Top US official: We cannot reopen consulate without Israeli approval - Ariel Kahana

 

​ by Ariel Kahana

Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources Brian McKeon acknowledges that under US and international law, the Biden administration cannot go ahead with the highly contentious move unless the Israeli government gives its consent first.

 

Report: US, PA hold talks over consulate branch in east Jerusalem
The building that used to house the US mission to the Palestinians in Jerusalem | File photo: Oren Ben Hakoon

The United States cannot reopen its consulate for the Palestinians in Jerusalem unless Israel gives its consent first, Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources Brian McKeon said Wednesday.

McKeon appeared before the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations and was asked by Senator Bill Hagerty – who proposed a bill earlier in the week to block the consulate from opening – about the move.

The United States cannot reopen its consulate for the Palestinians in Jerusalem unless Israel gives its consent first, Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources Brian McKeon said Wednesday. Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter McKeon appeared before the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations and was asked by Senator Bill Hagerty – who proposed a bill earlier in the week to block the consulate from opening – about the move.

"I just want to confirm something, on the record – is it your understanding that under US and international law the government of Israel would have to provide its affirmative consent before the United States could open or reopen the US consulate to the Palestinians in Jerusalem?" Hagerty asked McKeon.

"Or does the Biden administration believe it can move forward to establish a second US mission in the Israel capital city of Jerusalem without the consent of the government in Israel?"

McKeon responded: "Senator, that's my understanding – that we need the consent of the host government to open any diplomatic facility."

The Biden administration has pledged to reopen the mission, garnering criticism from senior Israeli officials and members of Congress who argue it will harm Israeli sovereignty over the capital.

According to US sources involved in the matter, the Biden administration will try to reach an agreement with Israel, and if it does not succeed, it may take a unilateral step after the Knesset approves the state budget, bringing stability to the coalition.

Israel has argued that if Washington is interested in opening a diplomatic mission to the Palestinians in Jerusalem, it should do so outside of the municipality's jurisdiction, for example, in the neighborhood of Abu Dis. The US has rejected that proposal outright.

Former US President Donald Trump shuttered the mission in 2019. It currently serves as the official residence of the US ambassador to Israel.

 

Ariel Kahana

Source: https://www.israelhayom.com/2021/10/28/top-us-official-we-cannot-reopen-consulate-without-israeli-approval/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter