Middle East Press on: Israel, Foreign, Weaponry, US, War, Criminal: New Age Islam's Selection, 8 January 2025
By New Age Islam Edit Desk
8 January 2025
Israel Must Lessen Dependence On Foreign Weaponry
What Irks Israel’s Right Wing?
Jimmy Carter: The Best US President Israelis Have Ever Had
Strategic Threats: Turkey Rises In The Middle East, Israel-Bashing Rises In The West
Israel's Soldiers Are Selfless, Civil, Patriotic. Israel's Politicians Are The Opposite
The War Criminal ‘Victim’: Netanyahu’s Inevitable Fate
Can Netanyahu Maintain Control After The War?
Netanyahu’s Testimony An Embarrassment For Israel
Minorities In Syria: Prospects And Controversies
-------
Israel Must Lessen Dependence On Foreign Weaponry
By Jpost Editorial
January 8, 2025
Much has surprised Israelis in the post-October 7 world.
They were surprised by a threat 2,000 km. away in Yemen called the Houthis. They were surprised by the degree, depth, and intensity of antisemitism in the West. And they were surprised that the Jewish state was dependent on basic armaments – rifles, artillery shells, mortars, and bombs – from outside sources, primarily the US.
For many, the last surprise came as a jolt. Granted, Israel needed the US for major weapons platforms like fighter jets, aerial refueling aircraft, and heavy-lift helicopters. But for bombs and mortars? Wasn’t that a throwback to a bygone era, to the pre- and early-state days when Zionist arms merchants traveled the world looking for machine guns, mortars, and refitted planes to bring back to Israel?
Hadn’t Israel, now one of the world’s leading exporters of arms selling state-of-the-art weaponry around the globe, moved past that?
Israel is still dependent on foreign weapons
Apparently not, as report after report appeared in the media about one country or another embargoing arms sales to Israel, and the Biden administration slow-walking the supply of certain armaments – while providing billions of dollars of other weapons – because of a discomfort with the way Israel was waging the war.
This became painfully evident on March 1, when three soldiers were killed and another 14 were wounded when an explosion went off in a booby-trapped building in Khan Yunis.
In the debate that followed the incident over why the IDF sent in troops to destroy the building, rather than doing it from the air, one reason proffered was that the IDF was reserving the type of bomb that would have been needed to level the building for other operations. In other words, Israel was afraid of running out of bombs, and the IDF was carefully monitoring its supply of ordnance to be able to fight a long war on numerous fronts.
The long-term danger of this type of dependence on the US for arms became even more acutely evident in November, when Sen. Bernie Sanders sponsored three different bills that would have embargoed future arms sales to Israel, including the sale of Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) bomb guidance kits that turn “dumb” bombs into precision-guided ones, as well as tank and mortar shells.
Though the bills were roundly defeated, about one-third of Democratic senators voted for the measures, something that justifiably causes concern when considering whether the US will continue to be as forthcoming in its sale of arms to Israel a decade from now.
It is for that reason that the signing on Tuesday of two deals worth NIS 1 billion with Elbit Systems is so welcome. One deal will provide the military with thousands of heavy bombs, and the other will build a facility to produce raw energetic materials – all previously imported – that are essential for manufacturing propellants and explosives for rockets and missiles.
We believe that anything that advances greater arms and weapon independence is to be applauded.
“Both agreements will ensure sovereign capability in producing bombs and munitions of all types,” said Defense Ministry Director-General Eyal Zamir, adding that the aim is to “achieve full independence in these two areas.” This, he said, “is a central lesson from the war that will enable the IDF to continue operating powerfully in all theaters.”
Already in December, the Defense Ministry’s procurement division launched a local tender to purchase tens of thousands of assault rifles to replace the US-made M4.
Additionally, it also explored establishing the first-ever local production line of one-ton bombs, a type of bomb whose delivery from the US was delayed over disagreements over how the war was being waged in Gaza. In addition, the Defense Ministry signed another large contract with Elbit over the summer to supply it with artillery and tank shells that were previously bought abroad.
The war has highlighted Israel’s dependence on arms from abroad, overwhelmingly from the US. No country, especially not one of Israel’s size, can attain full weapons independence. But at the same time, this dependence can be reduced, so as to decrease the amount of leverage other nations – even friendly ones like the US – can have on Israel’s decision-making process during times of war. Tuesday’s announcement of the contract with Elbit moves the country in the right direction.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-836551
-------
What Irks Israel’s Right Wing?
By Yisrael Medad
January 8, 2025
On January 18, 1923, Vladimir Ze’ev Jabotinsky resigned as a member of the Zionist Organization’s executive council. In doing so, he created the political right wing in Zionist and Israel politics.
He was annoyed that his negotiations with agents of the Ukrainian military commander Symon Petliura had been misrepresented, as his purpose was solely to assure the security and defense of the Jews in the areas of pogroms.
He was also angry that Dr. Chaim Weizmann agreed to Winston Churchill’s interpretation of the Balfour Declaration, set forth in the June 1922 White Paper. The loss of Transjordan and the introduction of the “economic capacity” measure signified to Jabotinsky the weakening of the Mandate’s purpose.
He wished to advance changes in the Palestine administration, whose officials he deemed anti-Zionist, and to create a firmer Zionist attitude toward the British government. He sought, too, a more unyielding stance toward the Arabs after the 1920 and 1921 riots. “England has not fulfilled its Mandate” was his rallying cry.
Shortly thereafter, Jabotinsky’s camp was ostracized. Throughout the Mandate period, immigration rights, settlement land allowances, and employment opportunities of members of Betar were severely curtailed. During the period of the revolt against England’s White Paper administration during the 1940s, members of the Irgun were kidnapped by Palmah cadres, subjected to violence. Many dozens were handed over to the British during the “saison” period. And then, on June 22, 1948, there was the Altalena affair off Tel Aviv’s beachfront, which started at Kfar Vitkin two days earlier, when Irgun members were fired upon and killed.
The shunning, turning the Zionist Right into the ultimate “other,” politically, socially, and economically, set in motion a psychological mindset among Israel’s cultural elite. On the one side were the halutzim, the Palmahniks, the socialists, all those symbolized in the line of Haim Guri’s poem-turned-song “Camaraderie”: “those of the elegant forelock, the handsome.” On the other were the sourpuss bourgeoisie, ignorant immigrants from Arab lands, and terrorists of the motley crew led by a “fascist.”
Throughout the 1950s and into the 1960s, the Histadrut’s hegemonic domination not only of Israel’s economy but its theater, movies, and book publishing, and the media’s labeling of Begin as the ultimate extremist, largely denied members of the right-wing senior jobs as well as senior positions in the government bureaucracy or advancement in many other sectors. The various forms of exclusion eventually became potent political and social leverage.
The Israeli Right vs the remnants of the Ashkenazi, secular, and liberal elites
In today’s Israel, despite the Likud victory in 1977 and government coalition dominance since, a perceived assumed privilege by the remnants of the Ashkenazi, secular, and liberal elites is seen by the right-wing camp. It is found, it is claimed, in the behavior of the media, the judicial system, and academia as an echo of those earlier times.
The predominance of military veterans in the various protest movements against the Likud-led governments since Amir Haskel’s 2016 initiative leading to the 2020 Balfour Street demonstrations, exploiting their ranks and service, grates their sensitivities. The High Court for Justice also provides fodder, extending its self-assumed privilege to act as a semi-legislator body.
Particular antipathy is directed to the State Attorney’s Office ever since the various corruption charges were brought against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. It has only increased, not only as the courtroom testimonies have shown how weak their cases are (one of the original four was withdrawn and in another, the judges already indicated its criminal unsubstantiality).
But there’s a deeper aversion that exists, the one directed at the state’s attorney-general and the military advocate-general.
Both are seen as principled contrary to the government, seeking to insert sticks into the spokes of its wheels at every opportunity. For example, only a year after being asked by the Knesset speaker to investigate MK Gilad Kariv’s suspected illegal leaking of a subcommittee deliberation has Gali Baharav-Miara responded that her office has begun to do so.
Prime Minister Netanyahu’s requests that her office investigate cabinet leaks months ago have been ignored and overlooked. On the other hand, within days of a television report that Sara Netanyahu organized protests at her Caesarea neighbors’ house via an aide, a questionable “crime,” Baharav-Miara’s office announced it had instructed the police to investigate.
In another instance, Maj.-Gen. Yifat Tomer-Yerushalmi, the military advocate-general, has yet to deal with the leaking of what has been shown to be a faked video clip of a supposed forcible rape of a Nukhba prisoner at the Sde Teiman detention center. As it could only have originated in a very small number of people, all within the system, it is baffling that no investigation has developed.
The damage caused by the clip’s presentation by Channel 12’s Guy Peleg, especially as regards Israel’s “human rights crimes,” was enormous. But no one seems to be moved to pursue the leakers. The clip affected in a negative fashion Israel’s ability to protect the hostages from Hamas anger and the international tribunal. And yet not a peep from them to get at the bottom of the matter.
Add to this the detainment and interrogation of leakers Eli Feldstein and Ari Rosenfeld, on the other hand, and the unexplained delay of more than a year in the case of the suspected-but-forgotten spy who infiltrated top-secret consultations at the Southern Command base. Are double standards at work?
The media-orchestrated attention focused on Israel’s government, and its head, as the sole elements responsible for the lack of the release of Israel’s hostages who were taken by Hamas on October 7, 2023, also irked. From US President Joe Biden to Secretary of State Antony Blinken and on down, all insist Hamas is the guilty party in the negotiations’ failure. Nevertheless, talk show hosts and interviewers all concentrate their questions to their guests on Netanyahu and what he has done or hasn’t done.
Is it really only the right wing that has been irked? And if so, why?
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-836532
----
Jimmy Carter: The Best Us President Israelis Have Ever Had
By Yoram Dori
January 8, 2025
During a visit by Jimmy Carter to the President’s Residence in Jerusalem when Shimon Peres was president, I approached the former US president and told him that in my opinion, he was the best American president Israelis had ever had. At the time, there was an active anti-Carter sentiment among many Israelis.
He looked at me with a bewildered expression and asked: “Are you kidding?” I replied that I knew, as both a fighter in the Yom Kippur War who lost most of my friends, and as someone who served as Peres’s close political and diplomatic adviser, that he was the best and most important president for our future as a thriving, independent state.
There were certainly other presidents who helped us greatly – Lyndon Johnson, who worked closely with prime minister Levi Eshkol to improve our working relationship and gave us anti-aircraft missiles; Barack Obama, who opened US intelligence to us; George H.W. Bush, who mobilized the Iraqi missile warning system to protect us; and Ronald Reagan, who backed Peres’s inflation reduction and economic rescue plan.
But none of them compared to Carter
He initiated and worked hard to impose upon us the peace agreement with Egypt. Without that agreement, who knows where we would be today. His determination encouraged Menachem Begin and Anwar Sadat to rise and end the terrible cycle of violence that culminated with the heavy losses of the Yom Kippur War.
Carter expertly maneuvered within our political system to force Begin and the Likud Party to make a 180-degree turn from their position of not retreating a millimeter from Sinai. Begin had even symbolically established his presence in the Neot Sinai settlement, an area in which I was fortunate to sleep during my military reserve duty.
Carter also moved Sadat away from the “three noes of Khartoum,” a reference to the Arab League Khartoum Resolution of 1967, after the Six Day War, which had stipulated: No peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, and no negotiations with Israel.
He succeeded in making both sides appreciate and internalize the consequences of the war. Thanks to him, we all came to understand that military strength is not eternal, that it can erode, that even a perfect surprise and overwhelming force don’t lead to victory, and that enemies can inflict heavy losses on one another. (It’s a pity that current leaders and military commanders have not learned this lesson.)
In other words, Carter reminded us of the limitations of power and its use.
The peace agreement with Egypt allowed us to focus on internal matters and allocate vast resources to our education and welfare needs. Our economy flourished after this agreement: the number of students per classroom was reduced, and roads and highways sprouted like mushrooms after the rain. In short, the State of Israel and its people reaped the fruits of peace daily.
For all of these things, Carter deserves our nation’s gratitude. May his soul be bound up in the bundle of life.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-836516
----
Strategic Threats: Turkey Rises In The Middle East, Israel-Bashing Rises In The West
By Gol Kalev
January 8, 2025
In a 2009 Tel Aviv University lecture, the elderly British professor, Bernard Lewis, surprised the audience: One day, Turkey and Iran might switch; Turkey could become like Iran, and Iran like Turkey.
This was met with giggles and smiles by the crowd, which included Israeli business leaders, politicians, and academics. After all, Turkey is our ally, a member of NATO, which was on a trajectory to become part of the European Union. This was while Iran was trying to build its stockpile of weapons of mass destruction, acquire nuclear capabilities, and tighten its reign on the Middle East through proxies.
I shared Lewis’s comments in think tank discussions in New York about a series of position papers I authored on the transformation of Judaism – a precursor to my 2022 book, Judaism 3.0: Judaism’s Transformation to Zionism.
We connected the two seemingly unrelated topics, as we were both talking about a seismic shift of a strategic threat. Lewis was warning about a potential seismic shift of a physical threat: I was warning about a potential seismic shift of an ideological threat.
As Zionism is becoming the organizing principle of Judaism, the threat to the survival of Judaism is shifting from traditional antisemitism to Israel-bashing and anti-Zionism. Indeed, some 15 years later, more people are concluding that we are in the midst of such shifts, on both those fronts.
IN THE LAST two months of 2024, Iran suffered a significant blow to its grip on the Middle East and is now facing serious external and domestic survival challenges. At the same time, Turkey, which is no longer a Europe-facing liberal country, is expanding its influence in the Middle East, including through a new apparent proxy in Syria.
Some experts believe that we are heading toward a change from a Middle East based on two enemy powers – Israel and Iran – toward a very different Middle East based on Israel and Turkey as its power bases.
The threat to Judaism from the West escalates
Also, during the last two months of 2024, we saw a sharp escalation of the threat to Judaism from the West, funneled through the Israel-bashing ideology.
The November 2024 International Criminal Court arrest warrants against leaders of the Jewish state, along with instilling a modern-day blood libel that Israel soldiers are partaking in deliberate starvation of Palestinians, are just two examples. The immediate affirmation of these blood libels by European countries, along with pledges to collaborate with efforts to arrest Israeli Jews, is another.
And yet, just as there has not been sufficient focus during the last 15 years on Lewis’s warning of a possible seismic shift of focus from Iran to Turkey, there is not sufficient focus on the possible seismic shift of the strategic threat – from the Middle East to the West.
I SPENT the last month of 2024 on a US tour for my latest book, The Assault on Judaism: The Existential Threat is Coming from the West. Offering new strategies to counter the threat, I received occasional push-back for drawing the attention of decision-makers and influencers to an amorphous ideological threat coming from the West, at a time when Israel is facing a serious physical threat from Iran and its proxies: Missiles are coming in daily, Israeli soldiers are being killed every week, and over 100 hostages are still held in Gaza. Let Israel win the physical war first, and then launch your book. “This is a 2025-2026, post-war book,” I was advised.
Thankfully, many people to whom I presented the book chose to address its ideas: We are in the midst of a fast-moving, multi-front attempt to negate the idea of the Jewish state, and through it, the idea of Judaism. Western opinions are being formed day after day. If we wait till after the physical war is over, it might be too late.
Lewis was born during World War I, when the Ottoman Empire still existed, and passed away in 2018. Learning from him, we should understand the depth of long-term processes and not just analyze what is evident on the surface.
As discussed in this column, the assault on Judaism from the West is a byproduct of the 2,300-year-old European opposition to Judaism, which Theodor Herzl, the visionary of Zionism, deemed as chronic. The 1948 establishment of the Jewish state did not end this feud; it merely provided a tangible vehicle to funnel the opposition by Europe and those who adhere to European ideology.
The Western assault on Judaism is also a proxy for an assault on America and should be treated as a US national security issue. As the new administration is about to assume power, a fresh look at the threat-map facing the United States and its allies is needed.
With new, non-obvious threats emerging, dynamic strategies should be put in place to counter them.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-836531
----
Israel's Soldiers Are Selfless, Civil, Patriotic. Israel's Politicians Are The Opposite
By Gil Troy
January 8, 2025
Surprisingly, Itamar Ben-Gvir apologized. He claims to regret his manipulations that dragged Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu from his hospital bed shortly after prostate surgery and pulled MK Boaz Bismuth from his mother’s shiva. Both came to the Knesset to pass legislation the coalition deemed critical. While defying coalition discipline, Ben-Gvir refused to find legislators to “offset” these legitimate absences.
Ben-Gvir’s apology sits on Hypocrisy Highway, where “too little” meets “too late.” Clearly, the coalition blowback he received pressured him to take a rare step back – or sideways. Still, he behaved reprehensibly.
With one vote, Ben-Gvir launched two assaults on the civility our Jewish-democratic state should take for granted. Can anyone, no matter how anti-Bibi, look at the pictures of our pale, ailing prime minister while voting, and not feel badly for him? Can anyone, Right or Left, look at the pictures of our pale, ailing prime minister forced to vote by his own Frankenstein, and not feel badly for us?
Then, equally outrageously, the same parliamentary chest-pounders force another coalition colleague to disrupt the seven-day mourning for his mother.
Before the vote, Likud had “requested that MK Boaz Bismuth be offset against an Otzma Yehudit MK and was answered negatively.” That’s why Ben-Gvir’s apology feels as sincere as the wolf’s apology after eating a flock of sheep saying, “I didn’t realize you needed them for those sweaters we love!”
Is this the kind of politics we want? Are these the kind of leaders we deserve?
What kind of moral maggots represent us?
Before the right-besotted Channel 14 fanatics go ballistic, because anything anyone from the Right says or does is beyond criticism, let me be clear. The opposition behaved despicably, too. How come there weren’t two politicians of conscience from the 58 nay votes to say, “Bibi, Boaz, we got this?”
The two graceful MKs should have been Benny Gantz and Yair Lapid. Beyond being the leading opposition leaders, they launched their 2019 political alliance promising to elevate Israeli politics. Although many forces helped them fail, their callousness last week betrayed their core principles – again.
ISRAELIS ARE obsessed with many issues we cannot control, especially the hostages. Even Secretary of State Antony Blinken admits it’s beyond us. It’s mostly up to Hamas, which, Blinken claims, hasn’t received enough world pressure. “Where is the world?” Blinken asked The New York Times, telling Hamas: “End this!”
This debacle, however, was under Israeli control – and totally avoidable. Any two of 58 could have acted like “mensches” – and also score political points.
In politics as in life, doing the right thing often makes you look good, too. And acting ethically, graciously, has its own benefits, no matter the optics.
This moral misfire reflects a broader problem in Israel and the West. In our hyper-fluid age of doubt, when so many question so much, from God’s existence to their own gender identity, few people question their own political preferences. The zealotry that once characterized too many religious people is now polarizing politics destructively.
Ambiguity, Behaving decently, and Compromise are the ABCs of democratic politics. Living with ambiguity welcomes nuance, paradox, and a healthy confusion into our world and our political debates. By behaving decently, we paper over the tensions we feel, the clashes we have, the angers that might linger, with a broader commitment to the common good – and our shared liberal-nationalistic journey in any healthy democracy. And accepting compromise acknowledges that most hot button issues are complicated, with good patriots often arriving at differing conclusions.
ITAMAR BEN-GVIR has become Israel’s exemplar of the brutalization of politics worldwide. He is Netanyahu’s creation, the spoiled child who inevitably brutalizes the parents who over-indulged him. He takes Bibi’s take-no-prisoners politics to greater extremes, without being balanced by Netanyahu’s successes in weaning Israel from stifling economic bureaucracy or, most recently, waging this war with more determination than the Americans and the opposition wanted.
Alas, too angry, vindictive, and demagogic himself to rest on his recent diplomatic and military successes, Bibi also foments the ugliness. This time, it also backfired on him. Netanyahu finished 2024 with a short video defending his wife and their honor. Attacking the harassment some right-wing politicians endure, he said, “They chase them [coalition politicians] in the streets, they threaten their kids.” He then blamed the Left for creating “the real poison machine we face,” insisting, “it’s not just a machine, it’s an industry.”
His complaints are as sincere as a cheetah professing vegetarianism amid a herd of antelopes. Netanyahu clawed his way back into power powered by his poison industry as his lackeys harassed MKs and their kids. No faux indignation can negate that.
Israeli politics has often lacked civility. David Ben-Gurion called Menachem Begin “a Hitlerist type.” Golda Meir detested Shulamit Aloni. Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres squabbled constantly. And most politicians who served with Moshe Dayan hated him, for getting away with indiscretions they never could.
But today’s Knesset antics, during wartime, with both sides acting horridly, are inexcusable. They contrast with the stories of grace, generosity, civility, patriotism, and unfathomable sacrifice we hear describing our soldiers and reservists.
The gap between such selflessness and our leaders’ boorishness explains why some Israelis wish all 120 MKs would quit politics. And I certainly join the chorus hoping that our younger generation, which has done such a remarkable job saving us from our enemies, will jump into politics when the war ends – and also save us from ourselves.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-836500
-----
The War Criminal ‘Victim’: Netanyahu’s Inevitable Fate
By Dr Ramzy Baroud
January 7, 2025
Israel’s notorious former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant has suddenly disappeared into obscurity. The man who served in his country’s military for about 35 years, in politics for nearly 10, and oversaw major wars, including the ongoing genocide in Gaza, has retreated quickly from the headlines and political significance.
In his resignation letter, Gallant accused Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu — who fired him on 5 November — and his replacement as Minister of Defence, Israel Katz, of endangering the country’s security. However, he kept his criticism focused largely on the issue of military conscription for Israel’s ultra-Orthodox Jewish community.
Gallant’s refusal to offer an exemption to Israel’s Haredim had always been a source of tension between him and his domineering boss. Yet, the political weight of that issue seems to have been inflated greatly by all parties, each with a political purpose in mind.
Gallant wanted to signal to the more secular and nationalistic factions within the Likud Party — the largest in Netanyahu’s ruling coalition — that he advocated for a fairer and more equitable Israel. Netanyahu, who heads the Likud, wanted to appeal to the more extreme segments of the party and to his deeply religious coalition partners.
Gallant, who as of 1 January also resigned from the Israeli parliament (the Knesset), made his resignation letter largely about the Likud, and less about Israel itself. “My path is the Likud path, and I believe in its principles, trust its members and voters,” he said, linking his first vote for the party to a partnership in “Menachem Begin’s revolution,” while priding himself on remaining “loyal to the movement’s national and ideological path.”
Gallant’s sentiment could be understood in two ways: either as a way to seal his legacy before quitting politics altogether, or, more likely, as the charting of a new political discourse that would allow him to compete for the leadership of Likud, and perhaps even to become prime minister.
Netanyahu understands this well and seems to have concluded that his only path to political survival is the continuation of the Gaza war and the expansion of the conflict to engage multiple parties. It is this expanded war that has allowed him to recover his pre-war approval ratings and keep his coalition partners satisfied.
The Israeli prime minister’s strategy over the past 15 months of genocide has been consistent with his political legacy: achieving power and holding on to it. But the events that followed 7 October, 2023, have made his chances of political survival much slimmer.
In the past, Netanyahu mastered the art of survival by exploiting his rivals’ weaknesses, using his power to manipulate the Israeli public emotionally with a mix of nationalistic, religious and personal discourse. This narrative often portrays Netanyahu and his family as victims of numerous enemies who have plotted his downfall ceaselessly, despite all the good that he believes that he has done for the country.
Netanyahu’s “victim mentality” has long been a topic in Israeli media, even years before the war. It is a strategy that he has used to defend himself in court against accusations of corruption, and it continues to serve him during the war. Even the arrest warrants against him and Gallant issued by the International Criminal Court (ICC) on 21 November have been used to feed the narrative that Netanyahu is being punished for simply loving Israel too much.
However, when the war ends, merely playing the victim card will no longer suffice. It will be difficult, if not impossible, to explain what has transpired, beginning on 7 October, 2023: the collapse of the security apparatus, the failure of the military, the lack of strategy, the severely weakened economy, the splintering of the nation, the killing of hostages, and much more.
In fact, the right-wing coalition is already on the verge of collapse. The joining of Gideon Sa’ar and his New Hope Party on 29 September may have breathed some life into it, but the constant threats from Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir make the government unstable, at best.
The strength of the government was tested on 31 December, when a decisive vote on the budget law sparked a public fight between Smotrich and Ben-Gvir, almost leading to the latter’s removal.
Yet, the government remains intact simply because the war remains ongoing. The war, and the expanded conflict, have allowed Netanyahu’s ministers to push their extremist agendas without question, which ultimately allows Netanyahu to stay at the helm a bit longer.
None of this is likely to change the post-war scenario though; the coalition is likely to falter, Likud may enter its own civil war, and Israeli society will likely erupt in mass protests. It is then that coalition partners will become enemies, and the likes of Gallant may return, offering themselves as saviours of the state. What will Netanyahu do then?
https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20250107-the-war-criminal-victim-netanyahus-inevitable-fate/
---
Can Netanyahu Maintain Control After The War?
Dr. Ramzy Baroud
January 07, 2025
Yoav Gallant, Israel’s notorious former minister of defence, has disappeared into obscurity. The man who served his country’s military for about 35 years, was in politics for nearly 10 and oversaw major wars, including the ongoing genocide in Gaza, has retreated from the headlines and political significance.
In a letter announcing his resignation from the Knesset last week, Gallant accused Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu — who fired him from the Cabinet on Nov. 5 — and his replacement, Israel Katz, of endangering the country’s security. However, he kept his criticism largely focused on the issue of military conscription for Israel’s ultra-Orthodox community.
Gallant’s refusal to offer an exemption to Israel’s Haredim had always been a source of tension between him and his domineering boss. The political weight of that issue seems to have been greatly inflated by all parties, each with a political purpose in mind.
Gallant wanted to signal to the more secular and nationalistic factions within the Likud party — the largest in Netanyahu’s ruling coalition — that he advocated for a fairer and more equitable Israel. Netanyahu, who heads the Likud, wanted to appeal to the more religious segments of the party and to his deeply religious coalition partners.
Considering Israel’s shift toward the extreme religious right, it was only natural for Netanyahu to ultimately win this round. Gallant made his resignation letter largely about the Likud and less about Israel itself.
“My path is the Likud path, and I believe in its principles, trust its members and voters,” he wrote, linking his first vote for the party to a partnership in “Menachem Begin’s revolution,” while priding himself on remaining “loyal to the movement’s national and ideological path.”
Gallant’s sentiment could be understood in two ways: either as a way to seal his legacy before quitting politics altogether or, more likely, as the charting of a new political course that will allow him to compete for the leadership of Likud — and perhaps even the premiership.
Netanyahu understands this well and seems to have concluded that his only path to political survival is the continuation of the Gaza war and the expansion of the conflict to engage multiple parties. It is this expanded war that has allowed him to recover his pre-war approval ratings and keep his coalition partners satisfied.
The Israeli prime minister’s strategy over the last 15 months of genocidal war has been consistent with his political strategy: achieving power and holding onto it. But the events that followed Oct. 7, 2023, have made his chances of political survival much slimmer.
Netanyahu has mastered the art of survival by exploiting his rivals’ weaknesses, using his power to emotionally manipulate the Israeli public with a mix of nationalistic, religious and personal discourse. This narrative often portrays Netanyahu and his family as victims of numerous enemies who have ceaselessly plotted his downfall, despite all the good he has done for the country.
“Netanyahu’s victim mentality” has long been a topic in the Israeli media, even years before the war. It is a strategy he has used to defend himself in court against accusations of corruption and it continues to serve him. Even the arrest warrants issued against him and Gallant by the International Criminal Court last November have been used to feed the narrative that Netanyahu is being punished for simply loving Israel too much.
However, when the war ends, merely playing the victim card will no longer suffice. It will be difficult, if not impossible, to explain what transpired beginning on Oct. 7: the collapse of the security apparatus, the failure of the military, the lack of strategy, the severely weakened economy, the splintering of the nation, the killing of hostages and much more.
Even Netanyahu, the master politician, will struggle to keep the public on his side and his angry coalition partners in line. In fact, his right-wing coalition is already on the verge of collapse. The joining of Gideon Sa’ar and his New Hope party in September may have breathed some life into it, but the constant threats from Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir make the government unstable at best.
The strength of the government was tested on Dec. 31, when a decisive vote on the budget law sparked a public fight between Smotrich and Ben-Gvir, almost leading to the latter’s removal.
But the government remains intact simply because the war remains ongoing. The Gaza war, and the expanded conflict, have allowed Netanyahu’s ministers to push their extremist agendas without question, which ultimately allows the PM to stay at the helm a bit longer.
However, none of this is likely to change the post-war scenario, in which the coalition is likely to falter, Likud may enter its own civil war and Israeli society will likely erupt in mass protests. It is then that coalition partners will become enemies and the likes of Gallant may return, offering themselves as saviors. What will Netanyahu do then?
https://www.arabnews.com/node/2585529
-----
Netanyahu’s Testimony An Embarrassment For Israel
Yossi Mekelberg
January 07, 2025
For more than four years, since the beginning of his corruption trial on three cases of bribery, fraud and breach of trust, there was great anticipation for the moment Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would stand in the witness box and give his version of events under oath. Three weeks ago, that moment finally arrived and, predictably, there was no moment of epiphany for Netanyahu and no admission of the charges laid against him. There was not a hint of remorse, no sign of reflection and no acceptance that he could have done certain things better or differently.
Instead, it was the familiar and defiant Netanyahu: always evasive, always the victim and never in the wrong, while always shifting the blame onto others — on this occasion, including his wife Sara. His behavior in court showed clear signs of narcissism, which is usually characterized by a constant oscillation from hero to victim mode.
The hero complex in him cannot understand why he finds himself in this situation while he is busy with a historic mission to defeat the enemies of Israel and its people, including Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran, while single-handedly reshaping the entire Middle East. At the same time, he is the victim of his political opponents, the justice system and, generally, the “deep state,” who are conspiring to bring him down. Hence, for him, any move is legitimate if it helps to derail this unprecedented trial.
To be sure, what is being discussed in court is the legality of Netanyahu’s actions, not his morality or ethics, and it is for the judges to decide whether or not Netanyahu has broken the law, as the prosecution hotly contends. However, we are still entitled to express utter disgust at his behavior, which has already demonstrated that he has not a moral bone in his body, and stupendous lack of judgment that makes him entirely unsuitable to be in any position of influence, let alone leading the country.
After all, even he and his lawyers do not deny, for instance, that he received expensive cigars, Champagne and jewelry from the Hollywood mogul Arnon Milchan and the multimillionaire businessman James Packer. There is also hardly any dispute over whether Netanyahu discussed with John Kerry, then US secretary of state, the American visa status of Milchan, whom he likes to refer to as his “friend,” although it seems more of a transactional relationship than a friendship, while receiving presents from him.
If this is not a case of bribery, it is at least very murky, as few Israelis enjoy the privilege of the prime minister discussing their visa predicament with officials at the very top of the political pyramid. If he would not admit illegality, Netanyahu could have at least acknowledged inappropriate favoritism, but he did not.
The Netanyahus — Benjamin, Sara and their eldest son Yair — are also known for being obsessed with the media and everything reported about them. Nevertheless, in his evidence in court, Netanyahu was dismissive of the charge that he was wheeler-dealing with media proprietors and offering a relaxation of regulations that would financially considerably benefit them, should they ensure more favorable coverage of himself and his family.
However, in court, Netanyahu played down the importance of at least one media outlet, a news website called Walla, and the claim that he had a corrupt relationship with its owners. Instead, in a less-than-convincing argument, he portrayed himself as a knight in shining armor dedicated to the cause of balancing a lefty-progressive media by encouraging the creation of more right-wing outlets to ensure that Israel’s public can enjoy a wider spectrum of opinion.
No one in Israeli politics has been more obsessed with how they are portrayed by the media, new and old, than the Netanyahus. And for years they have been building an alternative media machine, not to widen the scope of the social and political discourse but to glorify themselves and smear their opponents.
To add to the bizarre saga of the Netanyahu family’s mission to remain in power indefinitely and obstruct the trial of the head of the family, all of a sudden Sara has seen fit to join their son’s self-imposed exile in Miami. So, she is staying thousands of miles away while her husband not only faces scrutiny in a trial that might lead him to a lengthy period behind bars, but when he has also recently undergone major surgery.
This seems rather convenient, considering Netanyahu’s suggestion in court that many of the requests for presents, or for the media to soften their criticism and sing the Netanyahus’ praises, originated from his wife. Evidently, there is a disturbing dynamic between Benjamin and Sara and, according to allegations in a recent episode of investigative program “Uvda,” it was the latter who was orchestrating the intimidation of a key witness in the corruption case against her husband and harassing the lead prosecutor in this case. This led Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara and State Attorney Amit Aisman to open an investigation into these allegations.
Netanyahu’s trial is a source of national embarrassment, especially in the middle of the most consequential crisis in the country’s history, when Israel is embroiled in a war that has caused extreme suffering. The country has become hostage to a corruption affair that has now lasted more than eight years. Netanyahu and his lawyers have tried every trick in the book to prevent indictment and, when they failed to do so, the gates of hell were opened for the weakening of the judiciary, the smearing of the prosecution and its witnesses and, in recent months, the attempts to postpone Netanyahu’s appearance in the witness box.
And now that he has finally begun to give evidence, he has been repeatedly interrupting the procedure with claims that the process must be halted while he attends to important state business, only for it to emerge that on one occasion, for example, he went on a PR tour of newly occupied Syrian territory.
If we have learned anything from the first few weeks of Netanyahu’s evidence in court, it is that he is ready to continue to abuse power to ensure that his trial is never concluded and that his attacks on the gatekeepers of the democratic system will only further escalate as the evidence mounts against him. It is therefore for the judges to end the Netanyahu circus and accelerate the trial’s progress toward a conclusion.
https://www.arabnews.com/node/2585541
-----
Minorities In Syria: Prospects And Controversies
Eyad Abu Shakra
January 07, 2025
I am not a fan of the excessive use of the term “minorities,” let alone exploiting it to reshape nations based on external interests.
However, political history across the globe has taught us the dangers of downplaying or ignoring the concerns of small or marginalized groups — whether based on sect, gender or other divisions. Such actions have, in many instances, provided a ready pretext for foreign intervention, leading to occupations, colonization or “protectorates.”
Overlooking the concerns of small or marginalized groups has also contributed to the arbitrary redrawing of borders, the dividing of unified populations into several newly formed states and condemning them to decades — sometimes even centuries — of civil wars and separatist conflicts.
Large political entities were historically built through conquest and the domination of smaller groups. The modern concept of the nation-state only emerged in 19th-century Europe. Yet, even there, democracy has struggled to resolve separatist tendencies, a problem known as irredentism.
Today, with the rise of far-right forces and their alliances with separatist or isolationist movements in countries like Italy, established European democracies face existential threats to their identity, despite once seeming secure in their sense of national unity. In major Western nations, including formerly vast empires like Britain, Germany and Spain, the interplay between isolationism and migration has fractured the once-cohesive understanding of national identity.
In Asia and Africa, the challenges are similar.
Consider the plight of large and ancient peoples, such as the Amazigh of North Africa, the Baloch across South Asia, Arabs in Turkiye and Iran, the Kurds of the Near East and the Fulani scattered across the Sahel and sub-Saharan Africa, from Senegal to Chad and Cameroon.
All these groups, including Palestinian Arabs displaced by the Israeli project, are peoples whose unity was torn apart by colonialism, scattering them across newly created entities or turning them into global diasporas. This has given rise to crises and separatist movements that have redefined regional and international political issues.
The issue of minorities has, along with women’s rights, become an essential aspect of the international community’s dealings with the new leadership in Damascus following the fall of the Assad regime.
Naturally, this approach has not been welcomed by many in Syrian and Arab circles, who see it as a form of imposition that undermines Syria’s sovereignty and questions Syrians’ ability to reach an understanding and coexist, ultimately building a progressive state for a people with one of the oldest and richest civilizations in the world.
These circles are bothered by what they view as an arrogant Western approach toward the Syrians. The Syrian people, who struggled for freedom throughout more than 50 years of bloody tyrannical rule, have the right to enjoy their newfound freedom and sovereignty. There is no doubt that they deserve to decide their future themselves after being deprived of that right for decades due to the intersection of interests imposed by geography, balances of power and strategic regional and international interests.
At the same time, those who accept international conditions for rebuilding Syria are not entirely wrong, but they must remain cautious of the apparent goodwill of international powers. This goodwill was absent when Syrians faced repression, torture, barrel bomb and chemical attacks, and displacement. The new Syrian administration is still in its early days and has a long road ahead of it. There is a vast difference between armed struggle and building a state and preparing the ground for national reconciliation.
The revolutionary efforts in Idlib achieved their liberation goals through armed struggle. However, the current challenge is uniting the country under the slogan heard across Syria: “The Syrian people are one.”
The aim is to build a united nation for all Syrians, based on equality, mutual respect and citizenship, transcending differences in religion, ethnicity and gender.
Accountability is crucial in this transition, so that the Syrian people can put the chapter of tyranny behind them. The process must be overseen by legitimate judicial and constitutional bodies, not military field courts — as seen in Iraq after the US invasion, when vengeance drove the so-called justice system that ultimately indicted both the guilty and the innocent.
The new Syria is transitioning from a police state to a state of institutions that is part of the international community. This demands that its new leadership define its political interest in dealing with regional and global players whose political, economic and security roles cannot be overlooked.
Let us not forget: politics is the art of the possible.
https://www.arabnews.com/node/2585544
------
URL: https://www.newageislam.com/middle-east-press/israel-foreign-weaponry-us-war-criminal-/d/134272
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