What would you say if I told you that Israel is allowing a close ally of Iran, her archenemy, to fund the Hamas terrorist regime in Gaza?

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter 

In 2018, the tension on the Israel-Gaza border flared up. Hamas began flying fire kites and incendiary balloons towards Israel. This caused damage to Israeli farming lands and forced Israeli kindergartens and facilities to evacuate in fear of a mass fire spreading, forcing the Israelis to respond. The tit for tat between both sides quickly got out of hand. As part of a long-term 'arrangement' between Israel and Hamas, the Qataris offered to transfer monthly stipends of $15 million each month to Hamas officials in the civil sector. Additionally, $10 million was granted to purchase diesel for the Gaza power plant. The Qatari Gaza Reconstruction Committee began its work in 2012 with a $407 million grant. It is considered one of the largest donor organizations in the Gaza Strip.

Israel had hoped that improving the lives of Palestinians would give Palestinians one less reason to join the cycle of terrorism. By allowing the Qataris to elevate the humanitarian crisis, the Israeli believed it would lead to a quiet border with Gaza. Since Hamas is a recognized terrorist organization and the Palestinian Authority has extremely limited power in the Gaza Strip, Qatar would be the benefactor for the reconstruction of Gaza.

Over time, the Israelis have become accustomed to seeing the Qatari envoy enter Gaza with suitcases of dollar bills, paying Hamas officials, and have even become somewhat dependent on Qatari money in exchange for the quiet. Having Qatar fill such an important role in Israeli foreign policy poses a national security threat. Qatar benefits from a close economic relationship with Iran. They avoid criticizing Iranian domestic and foreign policy and are considered a close ally to the Persians.

It is worth noting that Iran supplies the terrorist organizations in Gaza with military technology and missiles. In a flip of a dime, Iran can cause the Gaza border to heat up. If the Iranians apply pressure on Qatar to stop the payments, Hamas will use the Iranian-made and Iranian-inspired missiles to attack Israel. This is in addition to the threats coming from the Iranian proxy, Hezbollah, on Israel's northern border – in Lebanon, and stationed in Syria.

While the Israelis continue their campaign against a nuclear Iran, the Iranians, through the Qatari assistance, hold the keys to the quiet on all the Israeli borders except those with Jordan and Egypt. Although the threat of Hezbollah is not in Israel's control, the dependency on the Qataris is very much Israel's choice.

Israeli security officials have been warning the world about the Iranian crescent in the Middle East – the Iranian attempt to "hug" the region with influence and proxies. The notion that Israel is allowing an Iranian ally to subsidize the salaries of a terrorist organization is counterproductive. It sends mixed signals to Israel's allies.

Israel must consider the tradeoff between decreasing Iranian influence in the Middle East and fragile serenity on the Gaza border. Allowing Qatari money to flow into Gaza may be a solution for quiet on the Gaza front, but in the long run, it will harm Israel's national security. In a way, the Qatari money is a form of bribery and it is only good as long as the Qataris keep on paying and there is mutual interest. These payments end up feeding Iranian interests, who are committed to destroying the Jewish state.

However, it is not too late to end this financial arrangement, even at the cost of a short-term de-escalation with Hamas. It will pay off in the long run by minimizing the Iranian influence in the region and preventing Iran from holding the keys to Israel's stability on her southern border. Israel must reassess the Qatari role in the region.

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

The post A headache named Qatar appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

In recent weeks, the breaking news notifications on my cellphone have switched from reports about the next Muslim or Arab country to normalize relations with Israel to Houthi attacks on Saudi Arabia and Shi'ite militia attacking US targets in Iraq. The commonality between the two groups of militias is their backing by Iran. How surprising is it that these attacks, along with Iranian threats, have increased since the new White House declared its intent to adopt a new foreign policy in the Middle East?

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter 

The criticism of former President Donald Trump's "maximum pressure" campaign was that it did not lead Iran to the negotiation table and did not eliminate the Iranian nuclear threat. Nor did it eradicate Iranian sponsorship of terrorism across the Middle East. Although not much has changed on the ground so far, US President Joe Biden's intent to roll back Trump's policy can already be felt across the region. His "maximum pleasure" campaign towards Iran has only led to destabilization and an uptick in violence.

Biden has been rewarding the Iranians and receiving nothing other than hostility in return. One of his first actions was to remove the terrorist designation of the Houthis. How did they respond? Within 24 hours, they attacked Saudi Arabia. Using Iranian-made drones and rockets, the Houthis have increased their attacks on Saudi airports, energy infrastructure and cities. Since January, the Iranians have installed dozens of advanced centrifuges, threatened to enrich uranium at a 40% or 60% level, restricted accesses for IAEA inspectors, began producing uranium metal and tested a ballistic missile in disguise as a satellite launch. The Iranians have even mobilized their Iraqi militia to attack US assets and kill American personnel.

While the pressure campaign may not have achieved its ultimate goal, it kept Iran in check. Biden's approach seems to be achieving the exact opposite. How would his authorization to release $3 billion of Iranian assets in Iraq, Oman and South Korea do any good?

When the Kuwaiti media recently reported that the Biden administration has asked Israel to refrain from striking Iranian assets in Syria – claiming that they have assurances from the Iranians to pull out their forces from Syria – I couldn't believe what I was reading. If the Iranians pull out their forces from Syria, Israel would have no reason to attack. The Biden administration has gotten everything wrong; instead of treating the problem, it is treating the symptom. That, I believe, is the biggest flaw in his Middle East policy so far – a distorted view of the region leading to a misperception of what is cause and what is effect.

Just look at how we have treated our allies: Israel and Saudi Arabia. One of the most important virtues in the Middle East is respect. It took Biden almost a month to acknowledge his Israeli and Saudi counterparts, keeping them in the dark and signaling that they are not so crucial. In the process, he managed to snub the Saudi crown prince – the future Saudi king. It seems that the United States is interested in negotiating a nuclear deal with Iran without taking into consideration Israel and Saudi Arabia, the two major forces in the region and under direct Iranian threat.

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

This reversed logic is thematic. Biden chooses to disregard Iran's long "laundry list" of bad behavior and to appease them in hopes to gain one gesture, while penalizing Saudi Arabia, a close ally that largely benefits the United States, despite its egregious record on human rights, which can equally be said about Iran. That's not how you treat an ally.

I would advise this administration to stop its current campaign. Do not cave to Tehran's demands of US concessions before it rolls back its nuclear program of enrichment, missiles and warheads. In the meantime, the "maximum pressure" campaign might not get us anywhere, but unlike the "maximum pleasure" campaign, it won't take us to places we don't want to go.

Reprinted with permission from JNS.org.

The post The president has it all wrong on Iran appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Following the failed attempt a month ago in the UN Security Council to renew the arms embargo, Iran has laid the groundwork and began negotiating arms deals with Russia and China. Just a day after the renewal of the embargo was thwarted, the Iranian Minister of Defense flew to Moscow to discuss the purchase of the S-400 system, the advanced SU-57 stealth fighter-jet, T-90 tanks and a number of missile systems.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter 

Iran has also recently signed a 25-year trade and military partnership with China worth $400 billion. According to reports, the military component includes joint training and exercises, joint weapons development, intelligence sharing, and, of course, arms sales, such as C-802 anti-ship cruise missiles.

This is a recipe for disaster, and an arms race waiting to happen. On Oct. 19, the day after the UN weapons embargo officially expired, Iranian Minister of Defense Brig. Gen. Amir Hatami announced the Iranian intention of selling more weapons than it will purchase.

If Iran is planning on a massive shopping spree of new weapons, systems and technology, that can only mean that they will be exporting a ton more to "the countries despised by the Americans if they ask for it," in Hatami's words. The natural reaction to this would most likely be an arms race in the Middle East.

That is not only a threat to the Middle East, but international stability as well. President Nicolás Maduro of Venezuela has an appetite for Iranian medium and long-range missiles. In response to Maduro's interest, an IRGC-associated Telegram channel posted: "The distance between Caracas and Washington is 3,500 km. If #Venezuela buy[s] ballistic missiles from #Iran it would be able to inflict serious damage on the US in case there was a war."

The fear of a Cuban Missile Crisis 2.0 has never been more real. Despite US sanctions and embargos on both Iran and Venezuela, Iran has been able to defy them multiple times with Iranian oil tankers reaching the shores of Venezuela.

Make no mistake, Iran has decades of experience and knowledge of smuggling weapons to its various militias and terrorist organizations around the world, using air, land and sea. If they can get by US sanctions with massive oil tankers, then nothing is stopping them from loading a couple of ICBMs or long-range missiles aboard as well, or even using smaller ships that are faster and easier to hide than massive oil tankers.

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

The crippling US sanctions and the January assassination of Qassem Soleimani, commander of Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, gives Iran every reason to place missiles in Latin America and threaten mainland America. Over the past few decades, they have cultivated close relationships with various Latin American countries, namely Venezuela, Colombia, and if current exit polls are correct and Evo Morales is re-elected, then Iran sees a strong ally in Bolivia, too. Many of these relations are through their Hezbollah proxy and the 910 Unit, Hezbollah's external security organization.

Yes, the United States plans to slap new sanctions on individuals and entities that engage with arms trade with Iran, but without the support of other countries, they will have a partial affect. These reimposed sanctions, pursuant to the snapback process UN Security Council Resolution 2231, has been widely ignored by the world.

Whether there is a new president in January or the current one remains, it is crucial for the United States to continue its "maximum pressure" campaign on Iran, and intensify it by finding and working with allies to curb Iranian influence and arms deals. Stopping Iran at all costs is paramount for the stability in the Middle East and to avoid another missile crisis between Washington and Tehran.

Reprinted with permission from JNS.org.

The post Is Iran pushing an arms race? appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Similar to Turkey, Israel inked arms deals with Azerbaijan and maintains robust trade relations with the Muslim country (Israel is Azerbaijan's third-largest export country after Italy and Turkey). However, it is not history that led Israel into Azerbaijan's hands; rather, it's the present and the future.

 Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter 

Since the establishment of modern-day Israel in 1948, the nation has been in a state of emergency and has constantly been under existential threat. Therefore, Israel's foreign policy has always viewed through the glasses of realpolitik, especially when evaluating relations with surrounding countries. It helps explain Israeli decision-making on the international stage, not being a party to the Non-Proliferation Treaty, never signing or ratifying the Biological Weapons Convention and never ratified the Chemical Weapons Convention, to mention a few. Currently, one of Israel's top existential threats is the Iranian nuclear program.

By maintaining close relations with Azerbaijan, Iran's neighbor, it grants the Jerusalem access to one of Iran's borders. Yes, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates are neighboring countries of Iran as well, but they have the Persian Gulf separating them.

Azerbaijan shares a land border with Iran – a much more valuable attribute that allows Israel to execute preemptive and preventive attacks against Iran. When the Mossad secretly snuck out of Iran with the entire nuclear archives, it was believed that the Israeli agents smuggled it out through the border with Azerbaijan. There have also been reports in the past claiming that Azerbaijan would allow the Israeli Air Force to use its territory as a launching pad for an airstrike against Iran.

Furthermore, Azerbaijan is a net exporter of energy. Until about a decade ago, Israel had no energy resources and was forced to import them all. Other than Egypt, Israel was unable to get many energy needs from neighboring countries in the Middle East. For energy security purposes, Israel had to import crude oil from a variety of countries, one of them being Azerbaijan. Even until 2019, Azerbaijan has still been exporting $1.33 billion worth of mineral fuels, oils and distillation products to Israel.

The goods that Azerbaijan provides, however, come with a price. Israel's trade with Azerbaijan is mostly security and military-related – arms and ammunition (including parts and accessories), aircraft and aerospace, machinery, optical equipment and more. These goods comprise nearly 50 percent of Israel's export to Azerbaijan to be precise.

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

Without picking a side in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, in Israel's eyes the relationship with Azerbaijan is not about what is moral or right, but about survivability and practicality. As long as Azerbaijan plays a role in providing Israel with energy security and national security, Israel will continue to support Azerbaijan. Israel does not have the luxury to lose Azerbaijan as an ally; it is more of a necessity than anything else. That said, this does not excuse Israel or any other arms provider on either side of the conflict from being partially responsible for the casualties and destruction due to the use of these weapons.

If Iran had never posed a threat to Israel's existence, I am certain that Israel's trade relations with Azerbaijan would have looked much different than the current trade. And in terms of the Azeri-Armenian conflict, Israel would have just stayed out and never have gotten involved in the first place.

Benjamin Weil is director of the Project for Israel's National Security for the Endowment for Middle East Truth (EMET), a pro-Israel and pro-American think tank and policy institute in Washington, DC. 

Reprinted with permission from JNS.org.

The post How Israel found itself on the same side as Turkey and Syrian rebels appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

The thought of Israel signing a peace agreement with any Arab country – let alone one of the most influential ones in the Middle East – was considered crazy up until a few years ago. This historic day, with the announcement of normalizing relations between Israel and the United Arab Emirates, has proven that this old concept is not valid and never was.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter  

Anyone following Israel's relations with Arab countries might have noticed a pattern. Israel first establishes secret security coordination with Arab countries. Given Israel's vibrant start-up and high-tech community, those security relations quickly spill over into technologies in the defense space and then into secret business ties. I am sure that this agreement will lead other Arab countries that have established connections with Israel to consider following the United Arab Emirates' steps. This includes Chad, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia and more.

The UAE has broken the glass ceiling and the fear of recognizing Israel publicly. The two countries have much to learn from and share with each other. Israel can offer the Emiratis technology and R&D, as well as future access to Mediterranean ports, thereby bypassing the needs to send oil tankers through the Straights of Hormuz.

In return, the UAE has capital, vision and influence to help Israel both economically and diplomatically. This agreement will change the face of the Middle East, or as longtime former Israeli diplomat Shimon Peres used to say, "a new Middle East."

To the "peace activists" in Israel and abroad, I am sure you have been working hard to convince governments from around the world that Israel is not serious about peace and is preventing chances for future peace with its communities in the West Bank. This announcement shows that Israel has never stopped and will never stop the pursuit of peace. I hope the peace activists join all Israelis and Emiratis in celebrating this milestone. After all, this is what they were fighting for, too.

As a final thought, I look to the three countries Israel has secured peace with: Egypt (1979), Jordan (1994) and the United Arab Emirates (2020). Interestingly enough, two out of the three Israeli prime ministers who have reached a peace agreement with these countries are from the Likud and are right-wing, Menachem Begin and Benjamin Netanyahu.

It is even more striking that out of the three agreements, only one of them included giving up land for peace, and that was Begin giving the Sinai Peninsula to the Egyptians. It is worth mentioning that Ariel Sharon, another right-wing premier from Likud, disengaged from Gaza to gain peace, though that effort failed. Looking at these examples, it seems that right-wing governments in Israel have been more successful in reaching peace agreements with Arab countries than the left.

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

I hope that this agreement between Israel and the United Arab Emirates is the first domino to fall, and that other potential Arab countries will see the benefit of establishing relations with the Jewish state. This will hopefully bring true peace and stability to the Middle East, and transform the region from an area of fighting and war to one of ingenuity, entrepreneurship, and building bridges between people and cultures so that our generation can reach a new peak.

Reprinted with permission from JNS.org.

The post Will UAE be the first Gulf domino? appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Although Mr. Khamenei is not a doctor, I would agree with his diagnosis, but not his prognosis. I agree with Mr. Khamenei that Israel may be a virus, but not the type he is referring to. In medicine, there are many types of bacteria and viruses – some of which are bad for us, like COVID-19, and some good for us. Bacteriophages (or "phages"), for instance, are viruses that infect and destroy specific bacteria. Mr. Khamenei can thank these therapeutic phages for treating his streptococcus and other bacterial pathogens.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter  

To determine whether Israel is a harmful virus, as Mr. Khamenei suggests, let's take a look at what Israel has contributed to the world, and compare Israel and Iran in a few key metrics of a healthy society to see which country is the harmful virus that needs to be eradicated and which is the good virus helping the world become a better place.

To start, Israel has invented Azilect to treat Parkinson's and Copaxone to treat multiple scleroses. I am sure that Mr. Khamenei would be delighted to know that his USB and the first VoIP were developed in Israel, too. Not to mention drip irrigation, Waze, Wix and many more medical devices and discoveries. I think it's safe to say that Israel has been saving lives of many people around the world thanks to these inventions.

When Ali Khamenei became president of Iran (1981-89), the country's GDP per capita (current USD) was ranked 55th in the world. Under his presidency, Iran's ranking dropped to 72nd place. How did Israel perform between those years? They were stagnant at 35th place.

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

In 1989, Khamenei became the Supreme Leader of his country. While Israel's ranking has risen from 1989 to 2017 (the last year the World Bank has data on Iran) from 35th place to 25th, Iran continued dropping to 107th place worldwide.

When looking at other metrics, such as the ranking of happiness and life expectancy, it seems that Israel has a healthy society – certainly healthier than Iran's. Out of the 153 countries that were examined, Israel is positioned in 14th place, Iran is listed as 118. Similarly, the UNDP ranked Israel's life expectancy at 19th place, ahead of Iran in 75th.

I would therefore suggest that Mr. Khamenei stop tweeting from his cell phone, which most likely has a chip, technology or cyber-security system that was developed in Israel, and start working on fixing his society. He can start by abandoning his nuclear program, defunding terrorist activities that destabilize the region and adopting some human rights, an invention which happens to be rooted in ancient Persia by Cyrus the Great, but were clearly forgotten under Mr. Khamenei's leadership.

Reprinted with permission from JNS.org.

The post A dose of sobering medication to Khamenei's tweet appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Both the timing and structure of the visit give me a reason to believe that he did not come to Israel to discuss Israeli sovereignty over the West Bank or US-Israeli cooperation on COVID-19. Rather, it was more about the "Iranian malign influence," which seems like an urgent issue.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

A few logistical aspects of the visit raise some crucial defense questions. Why did Pompeo go to Israel right away and not wait a couple of days until the new government was sworn in?

He came to Israel for a few short hours before heading right back home. His reason for not spending the night here was that he didn't want to sleep in a hotel due to the coronavirus. For someone traveling on a plane and meeting people abroad, it hardly seems that the pandemic is one of Pompeo's fears. Especially these days, it is fairly easy to secure a hotel room in advance, to be thoroughly disinfected, especially for someone of his level. Above all, why is the secretary of state traveling during a pandemic? Wouldn't it have been safer and easier to talk with Netanyahu and Gantz on the phone over a secure line?

What could be so important that warrants Pompeo's last-minute trip to Israel? I believe that he is preparing for an upcoming conflict with Iran. Here's why:

Those who have been following Middle East news lately have probably noticed a number of unusual security developments in the region – in particular, the increasing aggressions of Iran towards the United States. It was first reported on April 15 that armed Iranian boats were pestering US ships in the Persian Gulf; a week later, Iran launched its first satellite to space. Although the satellite is equipped with low-resolution cameras, similar to those of Google Earth, putting it into orbit is particularly concerning to the US military and intelligence communities. Iran has proven capabilities of developing an ICBM that can reach Europe and possibly America.

The United States, on the other hand, has consolidated troops in Iraq. That can usually be either a defensive move to limit the exposure of American soldiers or an offensive move to consolidate forces and coordinate maneuvers before launching an attack. Not to mention that the United States has already moved C-RAMs (counter rocket, artillery, and mortar), artillery and mortar systems into Iraq and had plans to move in Patriot batteries, too.

On May 12, Iran announced that one of its ships in the Strait of Hormuz was hit by friendly fire, resulting in 19 dead soldiers. However, it was confirmed later by a high-ranking source in the Iranian military high-command that the Konarak frigate was not hit by friendly fire, rather was damaged by a marine mine that exploded during a secret mission to quickly lay mines in Gulf waters to protect against a future conflict with America. The Iranian moves and the US military actions in the region lead observers to believe that both the United States and Iran are preparing the grounds for an upcoming escalation.

I don't think it's unreasonable that Pompeo's visit was meant to coordinate moves with Israel, warn its ally, and collect relevant intelligence prior to any US action against Iran. Trump has recently vetoed the Iran War Powers resolution, a bill that would force congressional approval to use military force against Iran. The US embassy in Baghdad was just targeted with rockets, most likely by pro-Iranian militia, all while tensions between America and Iran grow around Iranian oil tankers making their way to Venezuela.

Iran has given Trump numerous reasons to react and the president's path to military action against the Islamic republic has never been smoother.

One last thought: Regarding Netanyahu's trip to Lisbon in December 2019, he flew for a few hours for the sole purpose of meeting with Pompeo. One month after that meeting, Qassem Soleimani was assassinated by the United States. According to several reports, Israel had a hand in that.

Pompeo's trip to Israel, much like Netanyahu's trip, seems to be more crucial than they would like us (and Iran) to believe. Could there be a war? Only time will tell.

Reprinted with permission from JNS.org.

The post Do America and Iran stand on the brink of war? appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Hezbollah operates a host of social programs: providing financial assistance, training to Lebanese farmers, free medical treatment for Hezbollah members, and operating hospitals and clinics, to mention a few. Most of Hezbollah's programs benefit the Shi'ite population in southern Lebanon. In the midst of this coronavirus, Lebanon defaulted its $1.2 billion loan this past March, setting up the stage for Hezbollah to take over the government's role in providing civil services.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

Armed with Iranian money, which has dwindled since the US sanctions on Iran, the terrorist organization has a chance to increase its influence beyond the Shiite community in the south. With the country facing bankruptcy, the people's trust in the Lebanese government will decrease while the trust in Hezbollah will grow ever stronger. As it is, in the recent 2018 general election, Hezbollah received 16.5% of the popular vote – more than any other political party. By stepping up in place of the government, Hezbollah's influence has the potential to grow further. This is something to look out for in future elections. It could shift the internal politics in Lebanon and pose a threat to future stability in the region.

In an effort to increase their political influence in Beirut, after the elections, Hezbollah was given the health ministry and appointed Hamad Hassan as minister. The current pandemic threw the new minister into the deep end and serves as a test. Should Minister Hassan successfully handle the health crisis, Hezbollah will be perceived as a legitimate political player.

Hezbollah has a good starting point: a number of their fighters have recently returned from Iran where they helped fight the virus – giving them a chance to learn from the mistakes of their protégé. The party has already mobilized tens of thousands of medical staff and is pouring money into renting a disused hospital and prepared dozens of medical centers. It, therefore, seems that the organization will be successful in managing the coronavirus, thus further increasing its influence.

The biggest concern is that Hezbollah, riding the wave of high approval rates in the Lebanese society, coupled with their increasing control in the government and parliament, will feel a boost of unnecessary confidence to take greater risks and destabilize the region further. Since Hezbollah fighters are active in Syria and Iraq as well, this risk impacts not only on US operations in the region but on of their regional allies as well. Hezbollah's confidence, for instance, may motivate the terrorist organization to continue developing their precision guided munition (PGM) program with Iran.

This lethal program is designed to upgrade Hezbollah's 150,000 "dummy missiles" by inserting a GPS component and wings into each missile so that they can close in on a predesignated target and have the ability to correct their trajectory in mid-air. This is considered one of Israel's greatest threats since the Iron Dome is designed to intercept dummy missiles. Moreover, if Hezbollah launched hundreds of missiles simultaneously, that would overwhelm the Iron Dome system.

There are a number of ways to mitigate this risk. The first action that must be taken is making sure no bailout for Lebanon without guarantees from the Lebanese government that would result in the untangling of strings between them and Hezbollah. It is imperative that a portion of the bailout money is dedicated to funding healthcare and welfare services in order to rollback Hezbollah's medical and civil programs. Enforcing counter-terrorism laws and laws regarding the funding of terrorist organizations are also crucial.

At the same time, we must back the opposing parties to the Amal-Hezbollah bloc in the parliament. If we let Hezbollah gain more power and influence in Lebanon it would lead to greater conflicts across the Middle East. Alternatively, if we wait to bail out the country at a point where Hezbollah is already too strong, Hezbollah might get the credit for the financial recovery - this will only fuel the organization's credibility in the minds of the people. Much like the coronavirus, we must act now and act hard before we lose control of the situation.

The post COVID-19 might be a blessing, not a curse, for Hezbollah appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Looking at the years prior to the 1979 Islamic Revolution, the United States has helped Iran develop government institutions and Westernize the country culture. One such move was the White Revolution, an aggressive campaign of social and economic Westernization that included redistribution of land, increased rights for women, and attempts to improve literacy and health in rural areas. Following the revolution and the rise of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, Iran has become more hostile towards the West and turned its back to the liberal reforms.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

In Turkey's case, while it remains a member of NATO, Erdogan has abandoned Mustafa Kemal Atatürk's vision of a secular country to become more religious. Will his next move be disengagement from the West? Only time will tell, though the recent acquisition of the S-400 missile system from Russia suggests that Turkey is heading in that direction.

Much like Iran, Turkey sees itself as regional power. Both countries have a rich history of regional dominance; Iran trying to recreate the Persian Empire from centuries ago, and Turkey looking back at the Ottoman Empire form decades ago. Iran has spread its tentacle across the region by creating proxies and militias in Gaza, Lebanon, Iraq, Syria and Yemen. Turkey has supported Hamas in Gaza, has created proxies in Syria and sent fighters to Libya.

As Iran and Turkey grow their influence in the region, so, too, does their opposition grow. There have already been clashes between Iran and its rival: Saudi Arabia. According to some reports, Iran was behind the drone attack on Saudi Aramco's facilities in September 2019. At the same time, Turkey has also launched an aggressive campaign in the Mediterranean Sea. It has signed a maritime border deal with Libya in November 2019 to demarcate their Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), and disregard Greek and Egyptian maritime borders.

According to the deal, unrecognized by any other country, a portion of Egypt's EEZ has been recognized by Turkey as Libyan. Turkey has also been trying to hinder any energy activity or project development in the sea. So far Egypt – Turkey's regional rival – has yet to react, but this route that Ankara is headed down may lead to some sort of escalation between the two countries.

The maritime agreement between Turkey and Libya has granted Turkey the power over a popular shipping route, similar to the Straits of Hormuz that is partially controlled by Iran. Much of the maritime trade route between the Far East and the Gulf to Western Europe and North America goes through the Suez Canal and the Mediterranean Sea. While the Canal is controlled by Egypt, the Turkish-Libyan deal will allow Turkey to block any ship in the Eastern Mediterranean, should it wish to.

At the moment, Turkey has already sent a number of warships to Libyan waters and has a record of activating its military navy to "escort" civilian ships out of areas in the Mediterranean. The Turkish blockade of the Italian drillship in Cyprus in 2017 and the deporting of the Israeli research ship out of Cypriot water in 2019 have gone with no reaction. It is not out unrealistic to imagine Turkey following Iranian footsteps in the Straits of Hormuz and block the Mediterranean Sea should a country decide to act against it.

And there is the relationship with Europe. In regards to the JCPOA, Iran has been trying to eat the cake and keep it. On one hand, it signs a deal with the countries and doesn't adhere to it; on the other hand, Iran continuously threatens Europe that it will leave the Iran nuclear deal (JCPOA, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action) if it doesn't get its way.

Similarly, Turkey has an open request to join the European Union, albeit the negotiations are stalled, at the same time that Turkey threatens Europe to flood the continent with refugees. In essence, Iran and Turkey are trying to hold the European Union hostage. In the Iranian case, it has driven a wedge between Europe and the United States; in the Turkish case, there is still hope for US-EU cooperation. It's not too late to form a coalition of countries to work with Turkey and steer them off the path of becoming "Iran 2.0." Despite Ankara facing away from the West, the United States and Europe must come up with a way to address Turkish concerns, as well as Erdogan's desire of becoming a regional superpower without posing a threat to Mideast allies.

This all leads to one conclusion: This Turkey problem must be addressed right away. The longer the United States continues to ignore this problem, the bigger it will get in the future. We must draft a clear policy that clearly outlines the US-Turkey relationship. America must make it clear to the Turks that if they would like to be a Western-style country and a part of NATO, then they must act like one.

Contrary to popular opinion, there is a way that Turkey can be voted out of NATO. Erdogan has been hiding behind his NATO membership as he has gotten closer and closer to Russia by purchasing the S-400 missile system. It's time we understand who our friends are, who our enemies are, and not allow potential enemies to hide in the sheep's clothing of NATO membership.

Reprinted with permission from JNS.org

The post How Turkey is turning into the next Iran appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.