Archive for December 26, 2014

Thawing U.S. ties: Cuba today, Iran tomorrow?

December 26, 2014

Thawing U.S. ties: Cuba today, Iran tomorrow? Al Arabiya NewsMajid Rafizadeh, December 26, 2014

(Please see also Obama’s Worst Lie About his Dirty Castro Deal is in his First Sentence.

Obama Cuba negotiations

Also, Obama’s need for a legacy consistent with his ideology trumps all else, including Iran’s abysmal human rights record, its theocratic government, its support for terrorism, its hatred for Israel and desire to eliminate her, its duplicity in its P5+1 negotiations and its insistence on getting (or keeping) nukes. True, removal of statutorily based sanctions would require congressional action. However, Obama has little interest in avoiding constitutional irregularities. No congressional approval was granted for the “temporary suspension” of sanctions and laws inconsistent with Obama’s desires can be and are waived. Litigation over the de facto removal of sanctions by executive order would take many years.– DM)

After almost 53 years of Cold War between the U.S. and Cuba, the transformation of ties between these two adversaries has sparked a considerable amount of debate with respect to the normalization of ties with other longstanding rivals. The possibility of resolving other diplomatic imbroglios, specifically the revival of diplomatic ties between the U.S. and Iran is a case that comes to mind.

Some Iranians showed their excitement on Twitter with regards to the Cuban deal. Some showed hope that their government will be next and they could soon see an American embassy in Tehran. However, others thought that an Iran-U.S. deal is an idealistic and unreachable dream.

Indeed, any normalization of diplomatic relationships between the Islamic Republic and the U.S. will likely have significant positive impacts on both nations, leading to a critical strategic and geopolitical shift in the Middle Eastern political chessboard. Currently, both countries have some shared strategic and geopolitical objectives in Iraq and Syria particularly when it comes to fighting ISIS.

A possible Iranian deal will remove the economic sanctions on the Islamic Republic, assisting Tehran to achieve its highest economic potential in exports, imports and wealth. The tourist industry would be revived in Iran, with many European and Americans fond of visiting thousands of years old historical sites in Esfahan Shiraz, Hamadan, and other provinces. Normalization of diplomatic ties will lead to the flow of (primarily) European companies to do business with the Islamic Republic. In addition, as Iranian youth have shown to be in favor of American brands and products, American manufactures will find a share in Iran’s market as well. Further, U.S. airplane companies will begin cooperation with Iranian airlines.

As many people are pondering on the likelihood of a deal similar to the recent Cuba agreement with Iran, the question is whether the executive order to lift the embargo on the Islamic Republic and conducting back channel diplomacy to fully open ties with Tehran is possible?

Iran’s file is more complicated and multilayered

There are some partial similarities between the Obama administration’s method to initiate a deal with Raul Castro’s government and the way it has recently approached the Islamic Republic. The major commonalities are the back channel diplomacy and talks.

Similar to the Cuban deal, the Obama administration has conducted back channel talks with Iranian politicians with respect to Iran’s nuclear program. In addition, President Obama sent a clandestine letter to Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei highlighting some of the shared strategic, national and geopolitical interests that both nations have in the Middle East.

Nevertheless, these commonalities in diplomatic approaches have led some scholars, politicians, and policy analysts to jump to the conclusion that the same deal should be applicable to the case of Iran because such an approach was possible with Cuba and the embargo on Cuba was lifted.

But, not too fast.

Iran’s file is much more complicated, multifaceted and multilayered than the Cuban case. While Cuba is a small island close to the state of Florida with a population of approximately 11 million, Iran, with a population of over 80 million, is located in the complex geopolitical chessboard of the Middle East, and entangled among mixture of alliances and enmities in the oil rich region.

Second of all, from Washington’s perspective, Cuba has hardly been a serious threat to American strategic, geopolitical, or economic interests. On the other hand, the Islamic Republic has been a major player in scuttling U.S. foreign policy objectives and opposing its allies (including Israel) in the Middle East.

Third, several crucial regional developments are viewed from the prism of a zero-sum game for both Iranian and American officials. Iranian leaders are less likely to accept any compromises on their top foreign policy priorities, such as: keeping President Bashar al-Assad in power, withdrawing its financial, advisory, intelligence, and military support to the Iraqi and Syrian government, and assisting formidable proxies such as Hezbollah.

Fourth, there was no international consensus on the U.S. embargo and economic sanctions against the Cuban government. As a result, President Obama can issue an executive order to lift the embargo. Many European countries were doing business with the Cuban government and the United Nations repeatedly condemned U.S. sanctions. On the other hand, the four rounds of economic sanctions on Tehran came with the approval of the U.N. Security Council. Unlike Cuba, many regional and global powers are dubious about Iran’s nuclear and regional hegemonic ambitions.

Fifth, several developments in Iran, such as revelations of clandestine nuclear sites, the possibility of testing exploding detonators for nuclear weapons in Parchin military site, and the military dimension of Tehran’s nuclear program, have led to regional and international strain.

Finally, and more fundamentally, unlike Castro, Khamenei has shown no interest in fully normalizing diplomatic ties with the United States. For example, the Obama administration received no positive response from Khamenei through its diplomacy. In addition, there is no official public debate among Iranian politicians, across various spectrums of Iran’s political system, of even allowing the opening of an American embassy in Tehran. The U.S. domestic opposition to normalize ties with Iran, particularly from the Republicans, is much higher in comparison to the Cuban case. Although the Obama administration has taken some back channel steps to negotiate with the Islamic Republic, Iran’s supreme leader has not responded with signs of willingness to normalize relationships and he has been clear in not trusting the “Great Satan. “

The signal that Iranian leaders received from the Cuban deal is not what the Western media depicts- that Iran is optimistic about normalizing ties with the U.S.. The message that Tehran received was that the Islamic Republic has to persist in its policies and that economic sanctions will ultimately fail. As foreign ministry spokeswoman Marzieh Akfham articulated: “The defense by the Cuban government and people of their revolutionary ideals over the past 50 years shows that policies of isolation and sanctions imposed by the major powers against the wishes of independent nations are ineffective.”

 

Is there a solution?

December 26, 2014

Is there a solution? Israel Hayom, Dror Eydar, December 26, 2014

(For European nations, America and others, abortive efforts to bring “peace” among Israel and warring Islamic factions provide welcome distractions from difficulties elsewhere which are even less tractable and more damaging to them. — DM)

[N]ot even a utopian-style peace treaty will end the fight against Israel that is being waged by Europe and the global left wing (and here as well, to some degree). The dozens of organizations that have been established to take away the Jews’ right to their own land (for some reason, these groups are known as “human-rights organizations”; after all, you know, we Jews have no human rights) will no longer show any interest in the cruel dictatorship that they helped set up next door. Instead, they will aim their heavy artillery against Israeli society, which they will accuse of racism for being an exclusive state for the Jewish ethnic group instead of a “state of all its citizens,” which is actually code for “a state of all its nationalities.”

*****************

1. The upcoming elections have plunged Israel into a wartime atmosphere, and a good deal of blame is being thrown about. Each side, instead of looking to its own misdeeds, is making accusations against the other. They are not saying, “We have sinned,” but rather, “You have sinned.”

Here, too, the accusations are meant to generate shallow headlines rather than addressing deep issues. This is a big mistake. Despite the piles of mud and refuse that are customarily dumped onto the average Israeli, the average Israeli is generally well aware of what is going on. They understand ideology and vision.

On the political plane, one gets the impression that the discourse, at least on the Left, is still stuck in the 1980s, before the great experiments that the Oslo Accords brought upon us — before Hamas, before Islamic State, before the Middle East fell to pieces. What can Tzipi Livni accomplish with the Palestinians that she hasn’t done over the past two years, when she was in charge of the talks with them? Did she bring any sort of agreement to the government that it turned down? If so, let her tell us.

But she knows that there is nobody to talk to on the other side. They never had the slightest desire to end the conflict with the Jews. I would be glad to hear any Arab leader name his final demands — the ones for which, if they were fulfilled, he would sign on the dotted line that the conflict was over and state that he had no further claims. Are there any volunteers?

We have not even mentioned Jerusalem or the refugees or recognition of Israel as a Jewish state. The demand that our neighbors recognize Israel as the national home of the Jewish people was not for us, but for them. That is the litmus test of the integrity of their intentions. Do they recognize the right of Jews to any part of the historical Land of Israel? We know that any Arab leader who grants such recognition can expect an uncomfortable death.

That is the reason for the effort to anchor the Jewish nature of the State of Israel in a Basic Law. It is because not even a utopian-style peace treaty will end the fight against Israel that is being waged by Europe and the global left wing (and here as well, to some degree). The dozens of organizations that have been established to take away the Jews’ right to their own land (for some reason, these groups are known as “human-rights organizations”; after all, you know, we Jews have no human rights) will no longer show any interest in the cruel dictatorship that they helped set up next door. Instead, they will aim their heavy artillery against Israeli society, which they will accuse of racism for being an exclusive state for the Jewish ethnic group instead of a “state of all its citizens,” which is actually code for “a state of all its nationalities.”

2. As we look on, Europe is falling like a ripe fruit at the feet of the radical Islam sweeping over it. The more terrorism conquers the streets of Europe, the greater the Europeans’ desire will be to pay the terrorists a ransom in exchange for being left in peace, unmolested. As history has taught us, the ransom will be the Jews. The ludicrous statements by the European parliaments about recognizing the Palestinian state show the blindness of a society in decline that lost its basic instincts long ago. The Europeans care nothing about the Palestinians, whom they have doomed to a life of misery and suffering under oppressive regimes that are among the worst in the world, where there is no such thing as basic human rights.

The Palestinians are the last thing that the Europeans care about, just as they care nothing about the atrocities being perpetrated in Syria, Iraq or Africa. The Europeans are recognizing the Palestinian state not because they have any desire to improve our neighbors’ situation, but because they have a problem with the Jews. They always did.

Ironically, the return to Zion made the Jewish problem worse because it gave the Jews an independent political living space — which the Europeans find completely unacceptable. That is also the reason why there are dozens of European organizations in this region, and why they funnel hundreds of millions of euros supposedly to help the Palestinians, but actually in efforts to undermine the legitimacy of the Jewish state. The “peace process” is just one more tool in that mechanism.

3. The talk of a “diplomatic agreement” is also a media ransom, lip-service paid by politicians who seek the sponsorship of the media party. Avigdor Lieberman is quite familiar with this work.

“We must reach a diplomatic agreement,” he said in a “closed-door conference,” and received flattering headlines right away. “What is going on today is that they are doing nothing; there is a status quo. The initiative must be a comprehensive regional agreement.”

Have we not heard those empty phrases a thousand times already? Have we not tried to reach a political agreement in all kinds of ways? Has Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu not gotten into trouble with his own camp over it? Did he not freeze construction in Judea and Samaria for ten months? And, before him, did Ehud Olmert not offer our neighbors what even Lieberman (I hope) would never dare offer?

And what about the two Yisrael Beytenu princes, Uzi Landau and Yair Shamir? Where are they? Why are they not responding to their party chairman’s heretical statements? After all, were they not the ones who gave Lieberman the stamp of approval to be a right-wing party? More evidence of Lieberman’s desertion to the Left is his use of the well-known leftist scare tactic terminology: “a political tsunami.” But what burst out this week was more of a police tsunami against the members of Yisrael Beytenu. Now that the leader has adopted the Orwellian language of peace and speaks the language of the media party, maybe they will cut him some slack.

4. In the end, the dispute between most of the Right and most of the Left boils down to one question: Do we believe the Palestinians or not? Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has declared many times that he will never recognize Israel as a Jewish state, and he specifically named 6 million, with all its symbolism, as the number of Palestinians who expect their demand for the right of return to be fulfilled. Abbas is currently being kept alive by the Israeli army, which is protecting him as they would a delicate flower from attacks by the street, which supports Hamas. This does not stop the Palestinians from going all over the world, accusing us of every possible atrocity.

The purpose of their action is to gain the maximum amount of territory at the minimum price — actually, for no price at all — but not to establish a tiny statelet. The past hundred years have taught us that what unites Arab-Palestinians is not the desire to improve their own living conditions, but to destroy the Jews’ lives. What more has to happen for us to believe what they say? In the meantime, they are sticking close to us so that we will protect them against Islamic State.

5. So what is the solution? First, whoever said that there was a solution? Second, if we tried and did not succeed, maybe we ought to leave something for future generations to accomplish. You do not really believe the well-known chorus of lamentation that things are bad here and that the country is “stuck.”

We have succeeded quite well, thank God, considering the fact that only one of our hands is engaged in construction, development and cultural work, since the other is busy with self-defense. Where were we just 70 years ago, in 1944 — and where are we now? Let us put things in perspective.

Sanction Relief Empowering the Mullahs, Not Citizens

December 26, 2014

Sanction Relief Empowering the Mullahs, Not Citizens, Front Page Magazine, December 26, 2014

(Surprise! And to which P5+1 nations, and to which entities within them, might the benefits of sanctions relief authorizing increased trade between the them and Iran go? — DM)

iran_2677161b-450x350

Four major institutions are benefiting mostly from the economic sanctions relief: Iran’s military-industrial complex, the Office of the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, a few top business figures who are connected with the government, and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), through either legal and illegal imports and exports.

******************

There has always been an argument claiming that economic sanctions normally do not yield any result due to the notion that economic sanctions do not target the ruling elite and governmental official, but the ordinary people. This argument is partially accurate.

Nevertheless, we need to remember that some targeted economic sanctions against the Islamic Republic (particularly the sanctions in oil and gas sectors and financial and bank institutions) did endanger the hold on power of the ruling cleric in Iran, particularly the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. That was the primary reason behind pushing the Iranian politicians to come to the negotiation table in nuclear talks.

On the other hand, the other side of the argument is that if economic sanctions are lifted, the major beneficiaries would be the ordinary people and the civilians. This argument would be accurate if the political and economic system of the given state is democratic, allows open opportunities for all, encourages the private sector, allows transparency, and holds those corrupt officials who commit illegal economic dealings accountable.

The Iranian political and economic system is devoid of the aforementioned standards. In fact, in states which the political system is mainly authoritarian or theocratic, and the economic system is monopolized by few people at top and is state controlled, any increase of wealth or flow of money will inevitably strengthening the ruling elite rather than the ordinary people.

To substantiate this argument, let us take a look on the ground in the Islamic Republic after the sanctions relief.

At the beginning, a majority of Iranian people were hoping that economic sanctions relief would alleviate their suffering, improve their standards of living, and push many families above the poverty line. Almost a year has passed since the Iranian government has been receiving sanctions relief.

After the interim nuclear deal and extension of the negotiations between the six world powers (known as the P5+1: China, France, Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States) and the Islamic Republic, the Iranian government had received an estimated $7 billion.  Iran continues to receive approximately $700 million every month under the extension deal.

In addition, there has been some sanction suspension with respects to some of Iran’s major industries, including Iran’s auto sector, gold and precious metals, as well as Iran’s petrochemical exports. The Iranian currency, the rial, has appreciated due to the sanctions relief, Iran’s oil and non-oil exports have increased, its economy is showing signs of stabilization, Tehran’s stock exchange has soared and Iran’s exports and business dealings with several countries have ratcheted up.

The suspension of sanctions has definitely given both psychological and financial support to the Iranian government.  But the real question is how this money is being spent and which institutions benefit primarily from this sanctions relief. Are ordinary people benefiting from these sanctions relief and flow of money?

Nevertheless, some Iranian civilians have begun to believe that even economic sanctions relief or even the lifting of the whole economic sanctions regime from the Iranian government are not going to assist civilians, their financial day-to-day activities, or bring concrete changes on the ground.

Four major institutions are benefiting mostly from the economic sanctions relief: Iran’s military-industrial complex, the Office of the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, a few top business figures who are connected with the government, and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), through either legal and illegal imports and exports.

For example, the IRGC controls and owns a considerable amount of shares in the aforementioned industries which have witnessed sanctions relief. In the petrochemical industry, The IRGC military-industrial complex owns Zagros Petrochemicals; 40% of Pars Petrochemical Company, part of Arak Petrochemicals; 25% of Kermanshah Petrochemicals; as well as 19% of the shares of Maroun Petrochemicals.

This phenomenon of the monopolization of the economy applies in other sectors of Iran’s economy as well.  When it comes to Iran’s economic system, the Supreme Leader and IRGC do have a considerable amount of control and shares in almost all industries including financial institutions and banks, the transportation industry, automobile manufacturing, mining, commerce, and oil and gas sectors.

As a result, these types of sanctions relief will mostly benefit the ruling elite, primarily the Supreme Leader and Iran’s military-industrial complex, IRGC. Iranian people will hardly observe any benefits from this economic sanctions relief or lifting of economic sanctions.

It appears that the easing of sanctions are strengthening the ruling elite without any sign of redistribution of wealth. This is predominantly due to the fact Iran’s economic system is a state and military controlled system, it lacks transparency, as well as the reality that it is crippled with widespread corruption by the ruling elite and few on top.

If the intention of economic sanctions relief is to assist the Iranian people and alleviate their suffering, there ought to be more efficient approaches to develop some types of targeted sanctions relief (for example, being directed at Iran’s educational system, health care, etc.) which aim at empowering Iranian civilians and primarily the middle class.

The Anatomy of a Scourge

December 26, 2014

Articles: The Anatomy of a Scourge.

By Isaac Yetiv

In the 19th century, Wilhelm Marr, known as “the father of modern anti-Semitism,” coined the word “anti-Semitismus.”  But the pathological hatred of Jews has a long history.

In the antiquity, the Pharaoh who ‘didn’t know Joseph” decreed to kill all the Jewish newborn males; and Haman, centuries later, convinced his Persian king Ahasverus to exterminate this “people whose religion and language are different.” Christian anti-Semitism, while benign in its beginnings when the early followers of the Jew Jesus were themselves a persecuted minority in the Roman world,  became ferociously violent after the Council of Nicaea, in the year 325, adopted the dogma, then very controversial, of the divinity of Christ. With  Emperor Constantine embracing Christianity, the whole Roman world, especially in Europe, followed suit, and the minorities of Jews dispersed among them were soon accused of being “the people deicide,” the killers of God, an anathema that have persisted for almost 17 centuries, until Vatican II, in our times, erased it.

Napoleon’s conquest of Europe brought with it the end of the ghettoes and the emancipation of the Jewish communities. The Jews could now attend universities, enter the liberal professions and commerce and excel in them, which added a new layer to the traditional religious anti-Semitism. The Jews now “dominate the trade, the media, the banks, etc.” They became more hated and despised and the vile objects of the infamous blood libels and the “Protocols of the Elders of Zion,” the Dreyfus Affair, and the pogroms, which paved the way for the eventual advent of Hitler and culminated in the Holocaust.  And, in the greatest irony of history, they also led to the establishment of the State of Israel.

For about half a century after the horrors of the Holocaust, anti-Semitism remained dormant if not nonexistent. The Jewish state repeatedly defeated the military assaults of its coalesced Arab neighbors and generated sympathy in the world that saw it as David fighting Goliath. But, after making peace with Egypt and Jordan, and after the constant rejection of peace offers by the Palestinians, their threats to destroy Israel by force and their actual acts of terrorism, (in the context of more menacing terror organizations inspired and financed by Iran, today’s archenemy of Israel and an aspiring nuclear power,)  Israel had no choice but to aggressively defend itself and protect its citizens. In the eyes of the “world” it became, falsely, the Goliath of the tragedy. Arab propaganda has succeeded by default because Israel’s counterpropaganda was nowhere to be found.

It seems futile to denounce anti-Semitism emanating from those with whom Israel is at war. But it is absolutely essential to fight it tooth and nail when it affects third parties, especially the good people in the world, the dupes of Arab propaganda who only heard one side of the story.  Attacking Jews outside of Israel because of alleged bad behavior of Israel is outrageous but it confirms the fact that, today, the hypocritical and cowardly excuse that “I am not anti-Semitic but ant-Zionist” has lost its currency. You can’t be anti-Israel without hating the Jews. I know: There are Jews who hate Israel, but we are not dealing with pathology here.

Although the two most vicious nests of “third-party anti-Semitism” today are at the UN and in Europe, the policies of the U.S. government aid and abet the perpetrators of this crime:

The UN: is now investigating Israel for “war crimes;” not North Korea, not Iran, not Syria where the victims count in hundreds of thousands, not the Gazans who deliberately attack Israeli civilians and launch their rockets from schools and hospitals and use their own children as human shields, but Israel, the only open-society democracy in the Middle-East, for taking very measured defensive measures to protect its people.

The UN is also considering a very anti-Israel resolution that will divide Jerusalem, force Israel to withdraw to indefensible borders, and put the Christian holy sites under the control of terrorists.

It is fitting to remember that we, U.S. taxpayers, pay the UN $1.2 billion dollars in “dues” plus $2.2 billion to the UN peacekeeping budget and we volunteer more money for specific projects (Recently, Obama asked Congress for $6 billion dollars to fight Ebola in Africa.) All added, the US pays 77% of the UN budget, and, after Israel, it is the most hated country at the UN.

In Europe, the recrudescence and intensity of anti-Semitism are stunning even for the most pessimistic observers: beatings of Jews wearing yarmulkes or a necklace with the Star of David, swastikas painted on Jewish property, signs all over with slogans like “burn the Jews,” but also murders of innocent passersby. The Jewish community lives in fear and thousands have emigrated to Israel. What happened here? In my view, there has always been an atavistic, knee-jerk resentment, even hatred, of the Jews, but the demographic revolution brought by the mass migrations from Islamic countries, coupled with the lies and distortions of the Arab propaganda, have revived and exacerbated the latent and dormant anti-Semitism that prevailed after the Holocaust.

It is true that the majority of perpetrators are Arab Muslim immigrants who fled the oppressive regimes in their country of origin and feel marginalized and alienated in Europe. Their numbers have increased immensely, which led many observers to speak of “the Islamization of Europe,” a frightening prospect to Jews and Christians alike. In Marseilles, Muslims make 35% of the population.

In Spain, there are places with 40% Muslims. In Brussels, the capital of the European Union, they are 30%, and the name Mohamed is the number one among the registered births. In Amsterdam, 25%. Even in the Scandinavian countries without a history of colonization, their number is quite significant: In Sweden, 30% of Malmo is Muslim and in Stockholm, 20%.

And they vote in these democracies, which they never did back home. They are courted by the candidates, which gives them much clout and the benefit of political correctness. It was reported that Francois Hollande, the Socialist Prime Minister of France, received 93% of the Muslim vote. And their leaders now aspire to be elected. The mayor of Rotterdam (Netherlands), M. Abutaleb from Morocco, was elected in 2009 and is still serving (In his city, 80% of the Muslim population are on welfare.)

Paradoxically, the “islamization of Europe,” while causing fear, anxiety, and contempt among the indigenous Europeans, has resulted in an unholy alliance, in Europe and to a lesser degree in the in the U.S., between the extreme Left and the Islamic purveyors of terror; unholy because the sacred cows of the Left are slaughtered by the radical Islamists ((treatment of women and homosexuals, honor killings, using children as human shields, for example.)

In the U.S.: The Obama administration’s confused policy in the Middle East does not help fight the scourge of anti-Semitism in the UN and in Europe; it also emboldens the Palestinians in their refusal to make a compromise for peace. The open hostility toward PM Netanyahu, the unbearable pressure on Israel to make all the concessions for the elusive “peace,” the veiled threats to not use the veto at the UN, and most recently, the leaked information that ” the White House and the State Department had held secret talks about the possibility of imposing sanctions on Israel”  (ironically, after they lifted them from Iran) and the contemptuous way of handling the “denial” (First, “we do not confirm nor deny” by the White House spokesman, but then, after a strong letter signed by 47 congressmen, the same spokesman completely denied it.)  This silly game does not endear Obama to the citizens of “the best U.S. ally and friend in the only democracy in the Middle-East. The U.S. government allied itself with the enemies of Israel in Europe. Like the Europeans, they recognize the right of Israel to defend itself — thank you very much — but not to exercise that right. Even after bloody terror attacks that kill and maim Jews, the State Department spokeswoman “deplores the cycle of violence and calls on both sides to show restraint.”

Meantime, the U.S. treasury is pouring money, and more money  borrowed from China, in the coffers of the Palestinian Authority and Hamas: The U.S. taxpayer may not know that we are giving the PA 665 million dollars a year, not counting the huge portion of the 5.4 billion to “reconstruct Gaza” after the periodic war started by Hamas. To date, the U.S. has given the PA more than 5 billion dollars.

Where did all this money go? It was reported that Abbas makes a million a month and that there are 1,700 millionaires in “poor Gaza.” They are laughing at their benefactor all the way to the Swiss bank, having tricked and duped the “Great Satan.” As the Arab proverb goes, “Eat the fruits, and curse those who gave them to you.” The problem is that by enriching and emboldening the PA and its partner Hamas, and by acceding to their demands, the U.S. ipso facto makes them more recalcitrant, which decreases the chances for real peace and increases anti-Semitism in the Middle East, in the UN, and in Europe.

What needs to be done?

This state of affairs should not be allowed to endure. What is absolutely necessary is a “Campaign for the truth,” to debunk the lies of the Arab propaganda. As Nazi Goebbels infamously said, “a lie repeated 1000 times becomes the truth.” One can’t blame honest and uninformed people for believing one side of the story when the other side is absent.

Can you believe that the “diplomatic” budget of Israel is less than half that of the PA, which is not even a country?

It is incumbent upon the sovereign state of Israel to take the lead of this project. Israel has shown how it had successfully countered the violent terrorism; it must now openly and ferociously combat the more insidious scourge of anti-Semitism. It should be done dramatically, through speeches to the world in the Knesset by no less than the Prime Minister or the President, to condemn in no uncertain terms the purveyors of abject lies and those who blindly support them. Let them be shamed in public. Let it be the talk in the press and the radio and TV broadcasts. Israel has nothing to hide, and does not hide anything. It should counter the narrative of lies with a counter-narrative of truth, and it will be aided in that endeavor by the Jewish organizations, the millions of Christian friends of Israel, and the huge majority of the U.S. Congress.

Israel is not perfect but it should be judged with the same yardstick as all other nations, especially when it is besieged with enemies sworn to its destruction, and not singled out for its peccadilloes, all done sub signo martis  (under the sign of war) and in self-defense when its neighbors commit every day atrocious crimes with impunity.

Even when under attack, with thousands of rockets raining on its civilians, Israel continued to supply its ferocious enemies with fuel, food, and medicines. Its hospitals continue to care for its enemies (including the daughter and mother-in-law of Ismail Haniyeh  the dictator of Hamas who started the war.)  Ichilov Hospital alone provided medical care to 1000 Palestinians in the year 2013. At one time, one quarter of the Safed hospital patients were Syrians, the victims of the internecine war fomented by their leaders.

As for the status of the Arab minority in Israel which, according to the anti-Semites, both the malicious enemies and the dupes of propaganda, are oppressed and discriminated against as second-class citizens, the projected counterpropaganda project will show that the Arabs in Israel are the only Arabs in the Middle East who vote and are elected, and serve in the Knesset where they enjoy unrestricted freedom of speech. They are doctors, lawyers, judges, and civil servants in the ministries and in the diplomatic corps.

Israeli Arabs are the best educated in the Middle East, and their standards of living are five to ten times that of their brethren in the neighboring countries. No wonder than when offered to be “repatriated” to a future “Palestinian state,” not even 2% agreed. Recently, an Israeli colonel, member of the Druze community, wrote: “The Israeli Arabs make 20% of the population and receive 5O% of the Bituah Leumi (National Insurance.) They don’t pay taxes, national and local. They live in villas (!?). They build illegal buildings which the government is reluctant to force them to demolish (as it does with Jewish builders.) They vote and elect and enjoy full civil rights. They demonstrate against the State and even threw Molotov cocktails. Many of them identify with the enemies of Israel, Hamas, Hizb’allah, and Iran.”

Is that the profile of an “apartheid state” as the shameless demonizers of Israel and promoters of radical anti-Semitism would have you believe?