Middle East Press On: Israel, Hostage Crisis, Gaza Protests, Antisemitism, Palestinians, And Civil War: New Age Islam's Selection, 1 April 2025
By New Age Islam Edit Desk
1 April 2025
· Don't let Israel's power struggles distract from hostage crisis
· Gaza protests show disconnect between Palestinians and their supporters
· A state, not a shtetl: Why Israel forges ties with the far Right to fight antisemitism
· Israel's police violence crisis: Responsibility carries accountability
· ‘Israeli peace’ not a silver bullet for the Levant
· Who will step in to save the Palestinians?
· The imminent threat of civil war in Israel
-----
Don't Let Israel's Power Struggles Distract From Hostage Crisis
By Jpost Editorial
April 1, 2025
It seems that, these days, Israel is more rife with internal powder kegs, and time ran away from us the last few weeks. The Gaza hostage and ceasefire deal talks slowed to a stalemate, despite the grand promises and threats of US President Donald Trump, and despite a successful first phase.
Israel does not want to advance to the second phase because that would mean a military pullout from Gaza, without assurances that Hamas would honour releasing all the remaining hostages. Israel has insisted that military pressure has pushed Hamas into somewhat of a corner so far, thus moving talks along.
A security source revealed on Monday that Israel demanded 10 living hostages in the first phase of a 40-day ceasefire and hostage deal, instead of the five that Hamas was reportedly offering. Whatever deal is possibly pending, time is of the essence.
Time to bring them home
Testimonies from released hostages all highlight that very clear message: They are out of time. It is preposterous to say it a year and a half after they were kidnapped, but those who are alive are being tortured like animals and hanging on by a thread. They need to be brought home now, and the importance and duty to do so do not get diminished by internal strife, regardless of the strains.
Einav Zangauker, whose son Matan is still being held in Gaza, gave Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu a letter at his criminal trial on Monday, detailing the conditions in which her son is held and calling on him to bring all the hostages back. She wrote that Matan is genetically predisposed to a type of muscular dystrophy, and that the stress of captivity could trigger it. Zangauker also reminded the prime minister that all of the hostages are humanitarian cases and are bearing impossible conditions, telling him that they all must be brought home.
This is reiterating what hostage families and released hostages have said for months—those who have told their story publicly and those who preferred anonymity, given the gravity of what they endured and the very real fear that the hostages who remain behind could get hurt. Released hostages have consistently said that their own healing—and that of the entire nation—cannot start without the full return of the hostages.
Last month, Eli Sharabi, who was released in February, said in a harrowing interview that 24-year-old hostage Alon Ohel became like a son to him. He wasn’t sure how Ohel would manage alone in captivity, both physically and mentally. One of the main reasons he did the interview in the first place was to cry out for Alon.
Alon’s parents, Kobi and Idit, spoke with Netanyahu this week, after sending him a letter detailing his conditions as relayed by freed hostage Or Levy. Kobi said after the phone call that he felt somewhat encouraged, and that health experts say Alon’s condition has significantly worsened in captivity due to an untreated eye injury from October 7, as well as continuous inadequate living and sanitary conditions.
Twenty families came together on Sunday to pen a letter to Strategic Affairs Minister Ron Dermer to emphasize their deep worry for their loved ones. Dermer has supposedly been the frontal figure leading the negotiations since Trump won the American elections.
“We write to you with worry, dread, and growing fury—it appears that the hostage negotiations stalled and have not continued, as their time is running out,” they wrote.
They added, “It feels as though this issue of returning our loved ones has fallen to the bottom of the national priority list, in a glaring and audacious disregard of the basic obligations and responsibilities that a state has towards its citizens.”
They noted that a month has passed since Dermer joined the team, but there have been no advancements. They implored the minister to take the initiative and push for the release of the remaining hostages.
As the news tumbles with another scandal each day, we must not lose sight of the core values that bind us together: brotherhood. They must come home.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-848329
---------
Gaza Protests Show Disconnect Between Palestinians And Their Supporters
By Josefa Gonzalez
April 1, 2025
Thousands of Gazans have been risking their lives by protesting against Hamas, while college students on US campuses continue to protest on behalf of the terror group. The protests in Gaza are the largest anti-Hamas protests the enclave has seen since the war started. We are witnessing a dramatic disconnect between Western Pro-Palestinian interpretations of liberation and the liberation sought by Gazans.
For months, college students have protested – some peacefully, some violently (most protests containing deeply antisemitic messaging) – against Israel’s campaign against Hamas, the terrorist organization that infiltrated Israel’s border on October 7 and massacred over 1,200 people.
Over the past year and beyond, the war has wreaked havoc on Gaza. Large swaths of the enclave do not exist anymore. There have been countless deaths, both civilian and combatant alike. Notably, the civilian-to-combatant ratio is one of the most precise for urban warfare. As with all wars, tragedy is inevitable; civilians often find themselves helpless as destruction rages around them or are forced to flee.
But the Israel-Hamas War, in particular, is more tragic than most because the forces claiming to fight “on behalf of Gazans” are not actually fighting for them. Instead, Hamas is unabashed in its genocidal aims directed at Israel and the Jewish people. In many cases, Hamas militants stage their attacks and launch rockets from civilian areas.
Why are Gazans protesting against Hamas?
For months, Hamas has seized aid intended for Gazans in need, commandeering trucks filled with humanitarian supplies and positioning themselves atop them with machine guns. Those brave enough to risk their lives speaking out against Hamas often face brutal beatings as a grim display of force.
That’s why protests in Gaza against Hamas are significant. Hamas was never and will never be the solution for the Palestinian people. The idea that a terrorist group fighting for “liberation” would not be the right conduit for “Freeing Palestine” is a taboo concept to pro-Palestinian (and Marxist) college students who claim to protest on behalf of “Gaza.”
We Westerners are blessed not to know what real oppression feels like. Yet some of these college students are too oblivious to appreciate our freedom. Instead, they play-act as oppressed figures, absurdly demanding “basic humanitarian aid” in the form of DoorDashed dinners.
These so-called “pro-Palestinian protesters” are not advocating for what real Gazans want or need. Instead, they are parroting talking points directly from Hamas while threatening Jews on campus. Even worse, it is alleged that some pro-Palestinian student groups were tipped off about October 7 before it took place.
The protesters in Gaza, chanting “Hamas are terrorists!” are risking not only their livelihoods but their lives to speak out against an oppressive regime. As we’ve seen in the Women, Life, Freedom protests in Iran, a movement can be born when enough citizens come together to voice their dissent. We can only hope that the Gazan civilians who are speaking out will not be fatally punished for their actions.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-848295
------
A State, Not A Shtetl: Why Israel Forges Ties With The Far Right To Fight Antisemitism
By Yisrael Medad
April 1, 2025
On March 27 in Jerusalem, a conference on the issue of the revival of intense and dangerous antisemitism was held, sponsored by Israel’s Diaspora Affairs Ministry. Who didn’t attend?
Invited participants who declined their invitations included Jonathan Greenblatt, CEO of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL); the UK’s Chief Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis; Germany’s anti-antisemitism strategist Felix Klein; and French philosopher Bernard-Henri Lévy.
On the other hand, Sylvan Adams, the new World Jewish Congress-Israel Region head, spoke, and Malcolm Hoenlein was among those who attended. Grassroots people and many dozens of other involved activists, including Michael Rappaport and Elizabeth (Lizzy) Savetsky among other influencers and people with online presence, also attended and were enthusiastically involved.
French and Spanish were competing with English and Hebrew.
It wouldn’t be that unfair to say that the dividing line could be seen as between those who are actually getting things done and those who are either trying to get things done – or more often – just giving the impression they are doing anything truly effective.
According to Haaretz, “There were hardly any leaders of major Jewish organizations or communities in attendance.” I was present, and I can attest there were leaders present and those not of any Jewish establishment, including students and those of the younger generation and, perhaps, more importantly, non-Jewish leaders.
At a press conference, MK Amichai Chikli did not hold back in responding to Haaretz’s criticism. He said the newspaper “stabbed IDF soldiers and the state of Israel in the back” and added that it “promotes antisemitism.” Perhaps, as if to validate Chikli’s estimation, the paper published an anti-conference op-ed by Em Hilton, who is policy director at Diaspora Alliance and a co-founder of Na’amod UK, both extremist anti-Zionist groups.
Na’amod’s notoriety stems from its members’ recitation of kaddish (the mourner’s prayer) in front of England’s Parliament for fallen Hamas terrorists back in 2018. Another of the group’s co-founders informed the antisemitic Owen Jones in an April 2024 interview that its main focus is to “de-centre Israel from Judaism.”
To fraternize with certain antisemites is acceptable as long as it’s all for the cause of denigrating Israel, we can conclude.
There were those with their feet on the ground, their fingers on their keyboards, and their minds constantly trying to come up with new initiatives rather than those simply with their posteriors in executive boardroom chairs. The former are the ones trying.
It can be surmised that this, too, is what truly annoyed the conference’s opponents.
Of course, there is a limit to grassroots activism. There’s not enough money, nor is there enough political leverage.
And their reach is not comparable to Jews-in-suits, who can enter senior political echelons. For that, yes, the Conference of Presidents, the ADL, the French CRIF, and Britain’s Board of Deputies possess a level of access those lower down the totem pole don’t have.
One would assume that fighting antisemitism would be a cause that would unite Jews. That was not to be at this conference.
Non-attendees and critics meet with Israel’s Arab antisemitic enemies
In the case of Rabbi Mirvis, his office released a statement saying that he would no longer be attending after he was made aware that “a number of far-right populist politicians” would be attending.
Oddly, a month earlier, on February 11, Rabbi Mirvis was presenting King Charles III a copy of the Drumlanrig Accord, a document that sought to “affirm the principles of coexistence, peace, and a shared commitment to justice and compassion” between Muslims and Jews.
The accord notes that the Quran “instructs Muslims to invite people of the Scripture to come together on a ‘common word’ (Qur’ān 3:64)” and emphasizes “the importance of dialogue and reconciliation.” An admirable statement.
Yet three verses later in that Qur’an chapter, we read that Abraham was a Muslim, a reverse supersessionism, as a simple search by the blogger Elder of Ziyon discovered.
Moreover, verses 69-71 are quite anti-Jewish. Jews, they read, “would love to lead you astray,” they reject “the revelations of God,” and they “confound the truth with falsehood and knowingly conceal the truth?” This antisemitism Rabbi Mirvis can get along with? He can shake hands with its authors and pose for shared photographs? Yet “European far-right politicians” are outside any fraternization.
Many of those who criticized the inviting of controversial political figures into the “tent” are very much in favour of inviting themselves into confabs, dialogues, and other meetings with Israel’s Arab antisemitic enemies. No problem there.
As a new report by Palestinian Media Watch’s Itamar Marcus published on March 26 details that there is a rebirth of Nazi ideology in the Palestinian Authority. They see the Jews just as the Europeans and Hitler saw the Jews. They are antisemitic but Jews abroad insist we make peace with them.
At the conference, a leader of France’s National Rally, Jordan Bardella, declared, “I’m aware of the symbolic significance of this invitation.” Unfortunately, those in the Diaspora who declined to participate refused to accept its significance.
Israel is not a shtetl. It is not a small community of Jews who need to assure its existence and well-being out of self-recognition of its own weakness and physical powerlessness. It is a state, and, as a result, its interrelationships with the non-Jewish world are necessarily different than those of the shtadlan, the intercessor for the interests of the ghetto.
Moreover, as much as those who think otherwise, if not for Israel’s existence and strength, a strength based not only on its army but also its innovation, its economy, and its national spirit, Diaspora Jewish life would be more than endangered. Mobilizing politicians from all viewpoints to combat antisemitism is not a choice but a duty. It will also better protect the Jews residing abroad.
Israel’s strength is also exhibited in its ability to persuade rightists and, in some cases, those formerly unfavourably inclined towards Jews, to reverse their thinking. This is what was at the core of last week’s conference, and too many Jewish leaders could not accept that.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-848272
--------
Israel's Police Violence Crisis: Responsibility Carries Accountability
By Ari Zivotofsky
April 1, 2025
For a healthy democracy to function, there must be public trust in the criminal justice system, of which law enforcement is a key component. In Israel, this trust is low and tanking.
According to surveys by the Israel Democracy Institute, in 2003, 68% of Israeli Jews had faith in the police, and the trust slowly declined; it spiked back up to almost 60% after the police’s heroic efforts in October 2023, but by October 2024 it had plummeted to a mere 39%.
Cover-ups, real or perceived, of extreme police violence leave a very bitter taste in the public consciousness and damage public trust. Even if the average rank-and-file officer does his job honestly, diligently, and selflessly, if the system appears to prevent transparency, the public loses faith in the system.
There are at present two festering cases in which Israeli law enforcement was engaged in extreme violence, and the establishment has adamantly refused to even investigate the officers involved. This must change. Officers deserve some degree of protection, but they do not have absolute immunity. Continuing to stonewall objective inquiries into the conduct of the individual officers and the department’s response will only lead to further erosion of public confidence.
There are certain professions in which the practitioner makes significant and often difficult decisions relating to others and for which society grants them a certain degree of immunity so that they are able to more freely carry out their duties.
This immunity is, of course, limited, and when boundaries are crossed it is important to hold the individual accountable. Both the limited immunity and the accountability are recognized in Jewish and civil law and apply to such professions as physicians, judges, and law enforcement officers.
Jewish law regarding accountability
Regarding judicial errors, the Talmud distinguishes between recognized authorities and ad hoc judges and between errors involving “accepted law” and errors in judgment.
Physicians, like judges, sometimes have time to contemplate options, but at other times they must make split-second decisions. The Jewish laws governing physician culpability are complex.
Some of the considerations are that if a physician erred as the result of “laziness” (hitrashlut) or failure to exercise due diligence (lo iyein yafeh), Rabbi Yechiel Michel Epstein (Shulhan Aruch, 336:2) finds him culpable. So too, in order to benefit from this leeway, the physician must be “accredited” by the local Jewish court (Shulhan Aruch, 336:1), a condition that – as Rabbi Yitzchak Zilberstein is fond of quoting – is fulfilled today by licensing by the relevant government authorities.
Law enforcement officers, whether they be police, soldiers, or others, often must maintain constant and uninterrupted vigilance. A momentary lapse in their concentration or an erroneous decision on their part can have disastrous consequences – for themselves or for others. Their responsibilities are awesome, and as a society we demand from them excellence and grant them authorities given to no one else.
Police officers are allowed to use force in situations where, for civilians, such actions would be deemed assault. They are trained to use “violent methods” in their effort to protect themselves and others.
However, that force must be reasonable and proportionate to the threat they face. For example, in the US, the legal standard for police use of force is often based on what an “objective officer” would do in the same situation, as described in the Graham v. Connor decision (1989).
In Israel, pretty much all segments of the population believe they receive “special” (negative) treatment at the hands of the police and are subjected to unwarranted violence. This is true of Arabs, Ethiopians, haredim, “hilltop” youth, and most recently “Kaplanists.”
All have the perception that at their (and only their) protests, police use excessive and unreasonable force.
In order to maintain some degree of faith and confidence in law enforcement, it is crucial that such claims be investigated and, when officer errors (or worse) are found, that they be dealt with, both to maintain accountability and to improve the system.
Examples of police violence
There have been recent infamous cases in the US. In 2014, Michael Brown was shot and killed by Officer Darren Wilson in Ferguson, Missouri. A perception of racist-based policing led to widespread looting.
Following a thorough investigation, a grand jury declined to indict Officer Wilson, and the US Department of Justice found that there was insufficient evidence to charge him with civil rights violations. In 2020, George Floyd died while being detained by the police, leading to widespread violent protests. Officer Derek Chauvin was convicted in 2021 of second-degree unintentional murder, third-degree murder, and manslaughter.
Israel has also seen examples of lethal and nonlethal but excessive violence by police officers, which generated investigations.
In 2019 Solomon Teka, an Ethiopian Israeli, was shot and killed by an off-duty police officer in Haifa. A thorough investigation was carried out, and the officer was indicted for manslaughter. A full trial took place and in 2024 the officer was acquitted, as the court determined that he legitimately felt threatened.
In 2020 Iyad al-Hallaq, an Arab, was shot and killed by Border Police officers in Jerusalem. A comprehensive inquiry ensued, in 2021 the officer was indicted for manslaughter, but in 2023 the court acquitted him.
These are examples where there was a question of excessive violence, and an investigation was carried out.
In many instances when the courts determined there had been nonlethal but excessive violence, rather than an individual officer bearing responsibility, the Israeli Police as an organization pays the penalty. For example, in 2021 police carried out a violent, unjustified strip search on three yeshiva students.
The police department, but not the officers involved, was ordered to compensate the boys with NIS 25,000, while the individual offenders faced no consequences. While these investigations are commendable, the absolving of the wrongdoer is troubling.
The important point in all of those cases, irrespective of the outcome, is that an independent and thorough investigation was carried out.
In contradistinction, there are two recent incidents in which Israeli police acted in a particularly violent manner, serious bodily harm or death resulted, and as far as the public is aware, the establishment has adamantly and consistently refused to even investigate the officers involved and clarify the circumstances.
The first involves the 2020 death of 16-year-old Ahuvia Sandak. Ahuvia and four friends were driving when police spotted them, suspected they had been throwing stones at Arabs, and gave chase at high speed. As part of the chase, the police rear-ended the car of the fleeing teens, which flipped over. Ahuvia was thrown from the vehicle, which landed on top of him, killing him.
There was no serious investigation, no taking of responsibility, and no clarification of the circumstances. Less than a month after the incident, then-attorney-general Avichai Mandelblit ordered the case closed. A young man is dead following an incident involving the police, and the establishment has yet to even investigate what actually happened and whether departmental protocols were violated.
In what can only be described as a mockery, in 2022 the courts ordered the state to compensate the Sandak family for the shockingly paltry sum of NIS 3,000. The family and other concerned citizens are still demanding a transparent, objective investigation. Sadly, it seems that none is forthcoming.
A more recent event is also raising concern and drawing criticism. On January 20, 2025, a police officer opened fire on a group of Jewish youth, shooting about eight bullets. Two people were wounded, one critically. The officer involved was released to house arrest that night.
To this day, seven weeks later, the police have refused to meet with the families or lawyers of the wounded. No eyewitnesses have been interviewed by the Police Investigation Department. It is almost as if the department is not interested in the incident. Israelis were shot and critically wounded by an Israeli police officer and there is no serious investigation. And there is no indication that one is on the horizon.
These two doubly tragic incidents, tragic because of what happened and tragic because of what is not happening, highlight why trust in the Israel Police is now near an all-time low.
Faith in those who are entrusted to make fateful decisions under pressure, whether it be doctors, judges, or police officers, is vital for a functioning society. These professionals have tough jobs, and for there to be a mutually beneficial relationship between them and the public, there needs to be certain limited immunity granted to them, but there must also be accountability when they exceed their authority or act against accepted standards.
A serious change in attitude on the part of the Police Investigation Department is a must or the public will continue to lose faith in the system. These two incidents must be investigated in an unbiased, independent manner, lessons learned, and if there are guilty individuals, they must be held responsible.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-848278
-------
‘Israeli Peace’ Not A Silver Bullet For The Levant
Eyad Abu Shakra
March 31, 2025
In Jeddah last week, Syrian Defence Minister Murhaf Abu Qusra and his Lebanese counterpart Michel Menassa signed a promising agreement to end lingering border issues between their two countries. In truth, neither the new Syrian government nor the current Lebanese authorities contributed to these issues, which were inherited from the birth of the existing Syrian and Lebanese territories during the French Mandate period and on the ruins of former Ottoman provinces and states.
The decades that followed brought tensions and understandings between the rulers of Damascus and Beirut, until Hafez Assad succeeded — with regional and international approval — in imposing Damascus’ “hegemony” over Lebanese decision-making. Indeed, the Syrian security apparatus-controlled Lebanon from the late 1970s until the departure of Syrian forces in 2005, following the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri.
Hariri’s assassination created new facts on the ground, including Bashar Assad accepting that Damascus would exchange ambassadors with Beirut and recognize Lebanon’s independence. However, the border issue remained complex and thorny in the north, centre and south. Keeping the issue as such became even more important as Iran, through Hezbollah, inherited Syria’s hegemony over Lebanon.
In the south, the identity of the Shebaa Farms and Kfar Shuba hills became a pretext to justify Hezbollah's “resistance” and ensured it could retain its weapons. In the north, some border villages inside the Syrian province of Homs became the initial justification for Hezbollah’s participation in suppressing the Syrian uprising in 2011.
Today, the Syrian and Lebanese entities, which in the past shared similar existential challenges, are now sharing (and will continue to share) similar existential dangers. In an era where Israel plays a hegemonic role in international decision-making capitals regarding the politics of the Middle East, the prospect of a disastrous “Israeli peace” looms large for the countries of the Eastern Mediterranean.
This Israeli peace appears to many as a powerful storm — too overwhelming to confront — especially given the current US administration’s total alignment with Benjamin Netanyahu’s government and the hard-line Israeli right.
This right-wing faction has succeeded in dragging Iran into a war larger than it can handle and is now reaping the benefits of its “response” to the Oct. 7, 2023, operation. Having managed, through unprecedented American support, to diminish Iran’s regional stature, it is now accelerating the imposition of its dominance — whether direct or indirect — over the Eastern Mediterranean region and its four Arab entities.
The major headlines here include the forced transfer of Palestinians and the implementation of an old plan to divide and fragment the region’s remaining entities along religious, sectarian and ethnic lines.
Israeli penetration of the region has been underway for some time across various components, but it is now nearly overt. The blow dealt to Hezbollah has liberated voices that were previously concealed or had dual allegiances (particularly within Syria and Lebanon) who are now openly calling for an “Israeli solution” to the issues of coexistence between majorities and minorities.
In Syria, one can recall Rami Makhlouf’s warning to Israel — at the onset of the uprising — that the fall of the Syrian regime would not be in its interest. Some of the violent incidents involving the killing of civilians on Syria’s coast during the new government’s pursuit of remnants of the former regime ended up serving those who sought to add fuel to the fire.
There is also the matter of reckless statements made by certain separatist Kurdish leaders, which they quickly backed away from, especially after the commander of the Syrian Democratic Forces, Mazloum Abdi, proceeded to sign an understanding with the new Syrian leadership.
In southern Syria, Israeli penetration is now taking on dangerous dimensions, particularly through its deliberate investment in the Druze community via arming, funding and courting certain figures within the religious establishment. Simultaneously, a fierce media and social media campaign is currently underway targeting any Druze voices that oppose the “replication” of the Israeli model and its attempt to reengineer the national and religious identity of Druze communities.
The situation in Lebanon is not much different. Much of the alluring rhetoric that was once cloaked in the language of “change,” at times in “federalism” and even “fighting corruption,” has since shed its cautious facade, revealing its true agenda of division and suspicious foreign alignment.
The Eastern Mediterranean has long been part of what was known as the “Eastern question” — a landscape marked by seismic fault lines between religions, sects, ethnicities and fragile statelets. This is a historical reality. However, the only consistent and constructive way to deal with it has always rested on alleviating the fears of minorities and addressing the sense of injustice felt by majorities.
As long as fear and resentment persist within fragmented, diminished entities whose decision-making lies elsewhere, the region will find no rest. It will continue to swing from one episode of exploitation to another, from one conflict to the next.
In more advanced parts of the world, political actors have managed to arrive at tailored arrangements that reflect the needs of each context, ranging from federalism to administrative decentralization.
Some in our region reject federalism, arguing that it will lead to partition.
Perhaps so.
That may be true in certain tribal societies. But federalism has succeeded in most countries where it has been implemented — from Switzerland and Belgium to India and Brazil.
But what about administrative decentralization?
In the case of the Eastern Mediterranean, administrative decentralization is precisely the model outlined in the 1989 Taif Agreement in Lebanon. Yet the Damascus regime resisted its implementation — perhaps out of fear that it might actually work.
In my view, there can be no political solution to the crises facing any of the Eastern Mediterranean states unless it is based on administrative decentralization within a unified, sovereign and independent state — one in which all citizens enjoy the same rights, responsibilities and foundations of citizenship.
When people feel justice and safety, their sense of belonging will grow. The cycle of oppression and counter oppression will never be broken through reliance on foreign powers.
https://www.arabnews.com/node/2595480
--------
Who Will Step In To Save The Palestinians?
Chris Doyle
March 31, 2025
The Israeli government is engaging in three processes that are shaping the future of Palestinians: ethnic cleansing, genocide and apartheid.
This is what Palestinians face. Emphasis should be on the word “process.” All three take place over time. All three were at play prior to Oct. 7, 2023, for those who were not paying attention. And all this occurs as international law is being ripped up, alongside the legal institutions established to deal with these very atrocities.
In Gaza, Israel is now offering a US-endorsed choice: ethnic cleansing or genocide. Stay and be killed, that is via bombing, starvation or disease. Or Palestinians can leave, to a third country, never to return — textbook ethnic cleansing.
Palestinians in the West Bank have faced a regime of apartheid for years. The systematic discrimination against Palestinians is only getting worse. Sunday’s decision to push ahead with the so-called fabric of life road to the east of Jerusalem will create yet another example of Israeli citizens benefiting from a first-class road and Palestinians being forced on to riskier, slower routes, while being denied access to yet more areas around Jerusalem.
Ethnic cleansing is a feature in the West Bank too, as it was within what is now Israel between 1947 and 1949. Israeli settlers and the military authorities drive this process. About 50,000 Palestinians have been forcibly displaced since mid-January, with sites like the Jenin refugee camp rendered uninhabitable. Settler-army attacks on Palestinians in the South Hebron Hills have only escalated since the Oscars triumph for the film “No Other Land.”
Israel is on the cusp of annexing all or part of the West Bank. Annexation, no doubt endorsed by the US, will be the formal confirmation of this apartheid. We can be certain that Palestinian residents of the West Bank will not be offered the vote in Israel or equal rights, or anything close.
With these terminal processes heating up and the White House actively encouraging them, who can step in to save the Palestinian people? That sounds stark and it is meant to.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his ilk within Israel have never accepted Palestinians have rights as a people. For him, they do not have any collective rights but might be allowed temporary status if they behave. If some Palestinians do survive these processes, they will be foreigners living in a state of Israel — tolerated guests.
The most powerful force likely to prevent such a scenario is within Israel itself. A recent poll showed that 73 percent of Israelis want January’s Gaza ceasefire deal to enter the second phase; in other words, for the pause in the bloodshed to resume. The unhappiness with Netanyahu’s imperial rule is also escalating, as he trashes the vestigial remains of Israel’s institutions.
Arab states lack the clout on their own. Too many key states — from Iraq to Syria and Libya — are in too fragile a condition to offer any genuine support. The wider Islamic world is an option but here too there are divisions.
China and Russia are not seriously engaged. Besides, both enjoy the benefits of the US trashing its own reputation across much of the world. Israel’s grave breaches of international law — all Washington-approved — also give them the cover to commit the same breaches when needed.
Perhaps Europe is the only bloc that might make a difference. Europe has punched below its weight for so long in this conflict. It has considerably more power than its leaders let on. Most of Israel’s trade is with Europe. Already at odds with most of the Middle East, Israel can hardly afford to fall out with Europe too.
Could leading Arab states and European powers work together? A few signs of this have sprouted. On March 8, the UK, France, Germany and Italy put out a joint statement welcoming the Arab League’s reconstruction plan for Gaza. It was never stated explicitly, but it was a clear repudiation of President Donald Trump’s “riviera” plan.
Follow-up is vital. European powers can get even more involved in backing the plan, including pledging serious funds for it and helping shape some of the detail. It could become an Arab-Euro plan, with the emphasis on the former. Others like Canada could also get involved. This coalition plan would be far harder for the US and Israel to dismiss in the arrogant fashion they have exhibited thus far.
It also requires a joint Euro-Arab call to return to the January ceasefire and enter phases two and three of that plan. This would tie Europe to the broader sway of Israeli public opinion.
This is a watershed moment. Europe has to be prepared to challenge Israel’s total impunity. Netanyahu will not stop unless there is a serious cost to him continuing down this path. This could range from disengagement with Israel, such as reducing the scale of ties, to all-out sanctions.
Protesters throughout the world have for years been screaming “Free Palestine.” Soon, it will have to be “Save Palestine.”
https://www.arabnews.com/node/2595479
------
The Imminent Threat Of Civil War In Israel
Ramzy Baroud
March 31, 2025
The words “civil war” are among the most dominant used by Israeli politicians today. What began as a mere warning from Israeli President Isaac Herzog is now an accepted possibility for much of Israel’s mainstream political society.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu “is ready to sacrifice everything for his survival and we are closer to a civil war than people realize,” former PM Ehud Olmert stated in an interview with The New York Times last week.
The assumption is that the feared civil war reflects the political polarization in Israel: two groups divided by strong views on war, the role of government, the judiciary, budget allocations and other issues.
However, this assumption is not entirely accurate. Nations can be divided along political lines, but mass protests and security crackdowns do not necessarily indicate that a civil war is imminent.
In Israel’s case, references to civil war stem from its historical context and social-ethnic makeup.
An important but largely concealed CIA report, titled “Israel: The Sephardi-Ashkenazi Confrontation and Its Implications,” was almost prescient in its ability to detail future scenarios for a country with deep socioeconomic and, therefore, political divisions. The report was prepared in 1982 but only released in 2007. It followed the 1981 elections, in which the Likud Party, led by Menachem Begin, won 48 seats in the Knesset, while Labor under Shimon Peres won 47.
Ashkenazi (European) Jews had for decades dominated all aspects of power in Israel. This dominance makes sense: Zionism was essentially a Western ideology and all elements of the state — military (Haganah), parliamentary (the Knesset), colonial (the Jewish Agency) and economic (Histadrut) — were largely composed of Western European Jewish classes.
Sephardic and Mizrahi Jews, of Arab Middle Eastern backgrounds, arrived in Israel mostly after its establishment on the ruins of historic Palestine. By then, the Ashkenazim had already established dominance, controlling the country’s political and economic institutions, speaking the dominant languages and making major decisions.
Begin’s election victories in 1977 and 1981 came after an arduous battle against Ashkenazi dominance. The Likud, a coalition of several right-wing factions, was established four years before the first of those triumphs. Through appealing to and manipulating the grievances of fringe ideological and ethnic groups, Likud managed to remove the Ashkenazi-dominated Labor Party from power.
The 1981 elections represented a desperate Labor attempt to regain power and thus class dominance. However, the almost perfect ideological split only highlighted the new rule that would govern Israel for many elections — and decades — to come, where Israeli politics became dominated by ethnic orders: East versus West, religious fanaticism versus nationalistic extremism, though often masked as “liberal” and the like.
Since then, Israel has either managed — or, more accurately, manufactured — external crises to cope with internal divisions. For example, the 1982 war on Lebanon helped, at least for a while, to distract from its shifting social dynamics.
Though Begin and his supporters reshaped Israeli politics, the deep-rooted dominance of Ashkenazi-led institutions allowed Western liberals to continue their control over the army, the police, the Shin Bet and most other sectors. The Sephardic political resurgence mainly focused on populating Israel’s illegal settlements in the Occupied Territories and increasing privileges and funding for religious institutions.
It took nearly two decades after Begin’s 1977 victory for the Sephardic constituency to expand its power and establish dominance over key military and political institutions.
Netanyahu’s 1996 coalition marked the beginning of his rise and the start of coalition-building with Sephardic and Mizrahi alliances.
To maintain that newfound power, the political core of Likud had to change, as Sephardic and Mizrahi representation increased exponentially within Israel’s now-dominant party.
Though it is accurate to argue that Netanyahu has managed Israeli politics ever since by manipulating the grievances of disadvantaged socioeconomic, religious and ethnic groups, the fundamental change in Israel, as correctly predicted in the CIA document, was likely to happen based on the country’s own dynamics.
Netanyahu and his allies accelerated Israel’s transformation. To permanently marginalize the Ashkenazim, they needed to take control of all institutions that had largely been dominated by European Jews, starting with altering the system of checks and balances that had existed in Israel since its inception.
This battle preceded the Israeli genocide in Gaza. It largely began when Netanyahu rebelled against the Supreme Court and attempted to fire then-Defence Minister Yoav Gallant in March 2023. The mass protests that followed highlighted the growing chasm.
The war on Gaza further widened these divisions, with Netanyahu and his allies deflecting all blame and using the events of Oct. 7 and the subsequent failed war as an opportunity to eliminate their political rivals.
Once again, they turned their gaze toward the judiciary, reordering the system to ensure that Israel, as envisioned by Western Zionists, was transformed into a completely different political order.
Though the Ashkenazim are losing most of their political power, they continue to hold most of the economic cards, which could lead to disruptive strikes and civil disobedience.
For Netanyahu and his supporters, a compromise is not possible because it would only signal the return of the balancing act that started in the early 1980s. For the Ashkenazi power base, submission would mean the end of Israel’s David Ben-Gurion, Chaim Weizmann and others — essentially, the end of Zionism itself.
With no possible compromise in sight, civil war in Israel becomes a real possibility — and perhaps an imminent one.
https://www.arabnews.com/node/2595477
--------
New Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism