Specifically, my horror came in the form of Ehud Barak, who, in 2013, in one of his customary fearmongering sessions, warned us of the existential threats facing Israel, its democracy and the High Court of Justice: "We are facing a political tsunami most of the public isn't aware of. … Israel's delegitimization is on the horizon. … It's very dangerous and requires action." His prognostication in June 2011 that Syrian President Bashar Assad would survive the revolt in his country half a year at the most, is one his more famous bull's-eyes.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

Barak isn't alone. The demographer Professor Arnon Soffer, one of the more prominent champions of the "shrinking Israel" school of thought, declared in 1987 that "by the year 2000, Israel will no longer be Jewish."

"We've lost the fight against the Palestinian womb," he and his cohort cried out in feigned despair, while also completely discounting the feasibility of immigration from the former Soviet Union.

Enter Yair Lapid, who in December 2015 stated: "Our international situation has never, ever, in the entire history of the country from 1948 until today, been so terrible." He repeated the same message three times in one sentence, wanting us to believe we had fallen into the abyss. We can add the bevy of warnings against "religious coercion" and an imminent "halachic state" – all from the same school of thought, all casting a dark and foreboding shadow.

As expected, the current election campaign is being used to frighten us with prophecies of doom about Israel and its democracy. Barak is back on the scene to sound the alarm over Israel's besieged democracy and to tell us we are still teetering on the edge of oblivion. For the Left and its industry of hot takes, this election is Israel's last chance to save itself, from itself of course. But from the Left's point of view, Israel has been on the verge of self-destruction for the past 40 years now. We should take these scare tactics for what they're worth.

How ironic that the Left accuses the Right of fearmongering and calls Netanyahu "the national bully." This is true: The Right did issue warnings, but it was mocked and vilified. The Right cautioned against the Oslo Accords and was called "messianic." It warned against the Gaza withdrawal and was derided from the Knesset plenum. Netanyahu sounded the alarm over Iran's nuclear program, yet was accused of wrecking Israel's diplomatic relations with the world and the United States in particular.

It takes quite a bit of chutzpah to accuse the Right of fearmongering when the only thing you have to offer is 40 years of threats and warnings – not a single one of which has come true. Israel hasn't devolved into fascism; rather its democracy is more free and vibrant than ever. Watch out for the incoming tsunami, but Israel is widely courted in the international arena; every measurable parameter is pointing upward. How do I know this?

MK Ofer Shelah, Yair Lapid's colleague in the Yesh Atid party, said this in a recent radio interview: "Israel is the strongest country in the region, with the strongest army, the strongest economy, and the strongest international standing."

And the main thing to recall, as the song goes, is not to be afraid at all.

The post Take the Left's fearmongering for what it's worth appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Many years have passed, and the balance of power between Israel and its neighbors has shifted considerably: Israel now has complete air superiority and the risk of losing aircraft is negligible. While there is no room for complacency, the current reality is utterly different. The air force and other military branches are developing anti-missile and radar systems, which greatly reduce the potency of the Russian-made SA-300.

The latest news illustrates that Russia of today is not the Soviet Union of 50 years ago, nor is it the Russia of the previous decade. The willingness to convene a joint security summit in Israel (not a "peace summit"), with senior American counterparts, enhances Israel's standing.

Two days before the outbreak of the Six-Day War, France was still an ally of Israel. However, then-French President Charles de Gaulle chose to impose an embargo that effectively quashed the sale of French planes and weapons to Israel and mainly spare parts for equipment. This crisis gave birth to Israel's independent development of weapons systems, including the Merkava tank, and the Nesher and Kfir fighter jets. This, essentially, was the backdrop for the tremendous growth spurt of Israel's defense industry. The Soviet Union, for its part, continued arming Arab countries without restraint.

Amid the backdrop of the current diplomatic developments – the strengthening of Israel-U.S. ties; the special relationship between Israel and Russia; recognition of Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights, which was captured in the Six-Day War; the relocation of the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem and other achievements – I recall the words of then-Defense Minister Moshe Dayan, who said: "We're happy where we now stand."

And here we stand today, more than 50 years later; Arab states have come to terms with the fact that we cannot be defeated in war or even through a protracted campaign of terror. Israel's cooperation with a significant number of Arab countries in the struggle against Iran, the world's leading exporter of terror for 40 years now, their rapprochement with Israel and the Israeli government's steadfast adherence to the fundamental principles of its existence, illuminate the path for a better future for Israel and its neighbors.

The post 52 years later: Israel and the superpowers appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Former President Ronald Reagan launched his Star Wars initiative to intercept Soviet ICBMs with laser beams and other means of "science fiction."

Israel joined the initiative in 1985 to develop a surface-to-air missile system capable of intercepting ICBMs. The project was named "Arrow."

From a budgetary perspective, most of the funding – around 80% – comes from the Americans. Still, Israel has invested heavily in the system, and argued the price was too steep. That debate essentially ended around two decades ago. The Arrow 2 missile paved the way to the Arrow 3, with the Arrow 4 already in advanced stages of development.

In the 1990s, one argument raised by detractors of the Arrow project was that it would trigger an arms race in the Middle East. This concern has indeed materialized, as evidenced by the massive missile arsenals in the hands of Iran, Syria, and terrorist groups such as Hezbollah and Hamas. Let's put aside the chicken-or-the-egg question for a moment. From a practical standpoint, Israel developed its missile and rocket defense array methodically, and today it consists of several layers of defense.

Decision makers and defense experts have long argued over the meaning of the term "deterrence." Is it best achieved through offensive or defensive measures? The answer often lies in the worldview of the beholder, but it also depends a lot on timing. Because if, for example, a successful Arrow 3 test occurs on the same exact day a surface-to-surface missile fired by Iranian forces in Syria is intercepted, a few birds have been killed with a single stone.

The heavy cost of developing such a system shouldn't be downplayed. But when America's political and military leadership is so fundamentally in step with Israeli defense policy, the joint effort is bound to bear fruit – not necessarily in terms of procurement costs, but in the profound understanding that Iran is the key to Middle East instability.

It is no catchphrase to say that Iran is a threat to world peace. With all due respect to the threat posed by North Korean dictator Kim Jong-Un, the Iranians have declared intentions of to instill Islamic hegemony in our region – and perhaps in other parts of the world. This ambition has motivated the current arms race, particularly efforts to acquire missiles capable of carrying nuclear payloads. Defense missiles are not a luxury; they are a necessary pillar of Israel's national security. But they do not provide hermetic defense. The risk of even one Iranian missile slipping through the cracks requires additional offensive measures. The development of Iranian nuclear weapons must be prevented in any way possible, even by military force; and in conjunction with the friendly U.S. administration as far as possible.

All signs point to Israel's missile defenses adding another significant layer: Arab countries' rapprochement with Israel. Endless patience and painstaking work have gonie into these diplomatic inroads, and they should be enhanced along with our missiles.

The post Israel adds another layer of defense appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Although French President Emmanuel Macron yearns to transition to green energy, it is limited, expensive and not very accessible. And yet to remain committed to the Paris Agreement, he declared a tax increase on fuel consumption to subsidize green energy projects based on daydreams. We are now witnessing the French public's powerful response to Macron's policies.

So what are the French sages of Chelm doing to purify their green consciences? How does one join the "war on global warming"? As we know, 75% of France's energy resources come from nuclear power plants, whose operation does not result in CO2 emissions [except in the processes for mining and refining uranium ore and making nuclear fuel]. The sages passed a decision to decrease the use of nuclear energy by 50% for all electricity purposes, effectively shuttering the nuclear power plants. And where will the electricity come from? Why, "from green energy, renewable, accessible, cheap, from the wind and sun," of course. The green Chelm sages also decided to ban searching for natural gas, while in the United States the transition from coal to gas is the main cause for emission reductions. If this reminds you of how the green coalition behaved, often violently, in Israel to protest searching for natural gas, it's probably not a coincidence.

The first step is to devise a lie that increasing CO2 concentrations raises the planet's temperature, despite the fact that no actually knows what constitutes a dangerous increase and what is safe. Then you whoop like a crane that the earth is heating up and the end of humanity is near. And who is to blame? Man, of course. The same people taking great pains to teach us that man is not the center of the universe, and that Mother Nature should be treated graciously, are heaping the weight of the world on man.

Here's the truth about global warming in laymen's terms: Man's contribution to CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere is precisely one per mille. CO2 emissions comprise 3.5% of greenhouse gases, and man's contribution is 3.5% – and there you have a contribution of one per mille. And the march of lies continues unabated.

An unprecedented agreement was signed in Paris and it means that people will continue to barter in CO2 emissions and continue pressing the world to move to renewable energy while treating the taxpayers' pockets as bottomless bits. Green energy is an illusion. Germany has already invested $600 billion in green energy and will continue investing until 2025 in efforts to minimize CO2 emissions. What has been accomplished? Emission levels haven't been reduced and electricity prices have soared. Paris is burning because the government is using the people's taxes to "help save the planet." Thus France is learning, and with it the rest of the world, that a green planet comes at a cost and it is a painful one.

The post The illusion of green energy appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Just recently we marked the anniversary of Kristallnacht. There is no disagreement over the events of that night; everyone knows that the burning of nearly 1,000 synagogues and murder of hundreds of Jews was the ominous opening salvo of the horrors to follow. With that, some people deny the Holocaust, others doubt its scope, and there are those –as we've seen – who exploit it nefariously.

The president of the National Academy of Sciences warned fellow academics, those tempted to blindly accept the veracity of claims on subjects they don't specialize in, after they rushed to sign a petition calling for immediate action before a catastrophe occurs. The petition organizers were members of a foundation seeking to ban nuclear energy. The fall of the Soviet Union created a vacuum for anarchistic behavior, and they filled the empty space.

The NAS president's warning was too late. The messianic fervor had already set in. Claudine Schneider, a Republican congresswoman from Rhode Island, said at one university symposium: "Scientists may disagree, but we can hear Mother Earth and she is crying."

As for the Kristallnacht comparison story, there is more. In 2007, in an interview with "Frontline," then-Senator Timothy Wirth (a Democrat from Colorado) confessed how the date for the congressional hearing was chosen: "Believe it or not, we called the Weather Bureau and found out what historically was the hottest day of the summer. Well, it was June 6 or June 9 or whatever it was, so we scheduled the hearing that day, and bingo: It was the hottest day on record in Washington, or close to it. It was stiflingly hot that summer. [At] the same time you had this drought all across the country, so the linkage between the Hansen hearing and the drought became very intense."

Wirth was then asked if he also altered the temperature in the hearing room that day.

"What we did was we went in the night before and opened all the windows, I will admit, right? So that the air conditioning wasn't working inside the room and so when the, when the hearing occurred there was not only bliss, which is television cameras in double figures, but it was really hot," Wirth answered.

From the perspective of Al Gore, the guru of the fraudulent, unrestrained man-made global warming campaign – that night was his Kristallnacht.

After Gore's "Kristallnacht" came the "Holocaust." Anyone who viewed the calls of Claudine Schneider and many others of her ilk with skepticism was labeled an enemy of humanity. The religious zeal was all-consuming. In March 2006, CBS news anchor Scott Pelley was asked why he hadn't interviewed global warming skeptics. His reply: "If I do an interview with Elie Wiesel, am I required as a journalist to find a Holocaust denier?"

This is the atmosphere surrounding the science of climate change; the planet must march to the beat of the "green" agenda. Even if temperature measurements have repeatedly shown that climate changes occurred, occur and will occur regardless of mankind. Even if these measurements reveal a tremendous difference between biased forecasts put forth by bought-and-paid-for climate scientists and reality, we the "greens" will change science. And if governments must be extorted for this purpose, well that is a very small price to pay. The upcoming United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in Katowice, Poland, will confirm the claims.

The post Global warming skeptics are 'holocaust deniers' appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

While we cannot make light of the new reality vis-à-‎vis Syria, the danger the S-300s pose to Israeli ‎aircraft and the rise in Iran's regional power, we ‎would be wise to keep the matter in proportion. ‎Looking from the outside in, one could think Israel ‎has suffered a major military blow from which it ‎cannot recover and this is certainly not the case. ‎

The IAF has learned the lessons of the 1973 Yom ‎Kippur War, when it was ravaged by Egyptian and ‎Syrian anti-aircraft fire, well. It proved that on the ‎first day of the 1982 Lebanon War, when it decimated ‎Syrian air defenses in the first two days and went ‎on to down 80 Syrian planes in the following two ‎days. ‎

Syria was stunned, especially since the Israeli ‎operations exposed the weakness of its Russian-made ‎air defenses.‎

Russia is currently trying to upgrade its military ‎capabilities to an operational level that is on a ‎par with NATO forces. Given this effort, can Moscow ‎afford to take on – and lose to – the Israeli Air ‎Force again? ‎

Could it be that the IDF's 200 strikes on Iranian ‎assets in Syria since 2017, which penetrated the ‎Russian-backed Syrian air defenses and cost Israel ‎only one fighter jet, were not a big enough hint as ‎to the fact that the IAF's abilities have only ‎increased over the past 36 years? ‎

One must also ask why Russian decision-makers insist ‎on blaming Israel for Syrian air defenses shooting ‎down their plane last week, instead of seriously ‎examining whether the Israeli-Russian deconfliction ‎channel operated as it should have. ‎

What is so special about the S-300 surface-to-air ‎missiles that has everyone in a panic? Israeli pundits ‎make it seem as if this system, first developed in ‎the 1970s, is making Israeli pilots shake in their ‎boots and our decision-makers lose sleep. Is that ‎really the case? ‎

The S-300 system has never been tested on the ‎battlefield. While it can engage dozens of targets ‎simultaneously and has a range of 200 kilometers ‎‎(120 miles), its most recent models were produced in ‎‎1992.‎

The IAF has been studying this system for a long ‎time, as have other Western air forces. No air force ‎would allow such a threat to exist without devising ‎several contingencies, which is something even the ‎Russians understand. ‎

The IAF is more than ready to deal with this threat ‎and the pundits are panicking for nothing. ‎

Syria may get its hands on S-300 missiles thanks to an unexpected, tragic incident, but this ‎deal – if it indeed takes place – is all about the ‎money, and the currency Syria will use will be ‎Iranian.‎

The only question that one must ask the Russians is ‎why they believe giving Syria an improved anti-aircraft system would make Russian planes flying in ‎Syrian skies safer. If anything, Syria may one day ‎use this system against Russia itself.

The post No need to panic appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

On Monday, Israel activated the "David's Sling" air defense system – which represents the layer of air defense directly above the more famous Iron Dome. Its job is to eliminate midrange missiles flying at higher altitudes from Israeli airspace. After David's Sling, the next layer of the country's air defense is occupied by the Arrow 2 and Arrow 3 systems, which can intercept long-range ballistic missiles – such as the Iranian Shihab missile – far above and beyond our own borders.

Although David's Sling was delivered to the IDF several years as fully operational, its first live-fire test this week – when it attempted to shoot down Syrian SS-21 ground-to-ground missiles over the Golan Heights – didn't go well and the missiles landed in Syrian territory, not far from the Israeli border. The defense establishment is investigating the incident. We are receiving erratic information and opinions, and the explanations aren't necessarily convincing.

Something has happened here in recent years. The performance bar has been set extremely high, and it demands direct, reliable and detailed coverage of every military action, every errant bullet or mobilized tank. This bar is so high that there isn't even the slightest room for failure; or what engineers call a "lack of success." A shell leaving its cannon has to hit the mark. A plane taking off has to land home safely with its pilots unscathed. A military operation has to be perfect – as if we are shooting at fake targets and people on the other side aren't fighting for their lives exactly like us. There is no room for error. Is this trend warranted?

One of the more famous mathematical terms, the "Gaussian curve" is named after renowned mathematician Carl Friedrich Gauss who lived in the 18^th century. This curve allows for natural outliers: There are average occurrences and there are exceptions. No engineering system in the world – from a fighter jet to a space shuttle to a home food processor – is free of glitches.

One system – for example, a cigarette lighter – can have a simple purpose, while another – shooting down one missile with another midflight – can be the pinnacle for aeronautical engineers. In any system, from the smallest to the largest, there will be "lacks of success" – or what the media likes to call "failures." The difference is semantic but it establishes essence. As the world makes technological strides in a variety of fields, usually we only hear about the successes. It takes a long time for a complex system to function properly.

It's very possible that the David's Sling system wasn't delivered entirely ready. It's possible this one error falls within the minuscule range of expected flaws. However, there's quite a distance between these possibilities and the current lamentations surrounding the failed interception. Israel's security doctrine won't collapse because a missile fell from the sky, just as it doesn't collapse when a satellite's trajectory isn't figured properly. The defense establishment will overcome the failures and rebound with unprecedented achievements.

The post Unreasonable performance expectations appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

First, we should remember that wars aren't decided by missiles, either surface or surface-to-air. The use of rockets goes back centuries. As early as 1379, the Italians used rockets, and the Chinese did so decades before them. In June of 1815, the British army used rockets in the Battle of Waterloo. In World War II, the German artillery forces convinced Hitler to develop missiles that would tip the scales in their favor. Germany made a massive investment in missiles, equal to the Americans' effort to develop a nuclear bomb in that same period. A total of 1,190 German missiles were fired at London and had less effect than one Allied airstrike. Fewer than 3,000 British citizens were killed by missiles – a horrible price to pay, but Britain, as we know, did not surrender.

Surface-to-air missiles are part of defense against aircraft and cruise missiles. Indeed, most fighter planes lost in wars are brought down by anti-aircraft artillery, but bringing surface-to-air missiles into battle made them a more valuable talisman.

Our planes suffered hits during the War of Attrition (1967-1970) and especially during the 1973 Yom Kippur War, but these missiles being in play did not determine which way the wars went.

"Freedom to maneuver" is a term that changes when it comes to IDF aircraft. A strike by our aircraft, even unmanned ones, is supported by systems of electronic warfare, the same what that cruise missile attacks carried out by the U.S. and its allies Britain and France are. However, the S-300 system in automated and has the capability of engaging dozens of targets simultaneously, especially ones that lie within a range of 150 to 200 kilometers (93 to 120 miles), meaning that Israel cannot operate without hesitation.

And there is the question of cost. In recent years, a demand to wage wars or military operations at "zero cost" has wormed its way into our consciousness. This thinking reached its height in the glum broadcasts and analyses about how we were "defeated" following the IDF jet downed during a strike in Syria. Even if this thinking is colored by condescension toward the enemy, as if it is nothing more than a paper tiger, the demand for zero casualties weakens our defense capabilities. It stems from the sweeping opposition some of us have to an attack on Iran, and of course the enthusiastic support for the nuclear deal with Iran brokered by the Obama administration.

In other words, the cries of defeat after the plane was shot down are a tool with which to bind the government's hands in defending its citizens, using the excuse of a "heavy price." Wars come at a cost, but blowing it up into a national disaster only bolsters the enemy's desire for war.

The post Missiles don't decide wars appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

At any point in human history, when researchers look at the Greek, Roman, Persian and Egyptian empires across time, they will all display similarities in terms of the process of their rise and fall. This is not the case with regard to the Jewish people in its history. Sometimes, it seems that the Jewish people are a tiny universe, both a master and a slave.

The Jewish nation has produced prophets whose long-term vision installed shortsighted kings, while at the same time producing magnificent works of philosophy, morality, justice, true law and the Song of Songs. What is the meaning of this diversity? Looking at it from the perspective of the ages, it is exceptional, especially when compared to other nations. It is truly a wonder.

But one does not toot one's own horn. Mark Twain once said of the Jewish people that their commercial importance, contribution to the global list of great names in literature, science, art, music, finance and medicine are beyond any relation to the weakness of its numbers.

Indeed, in almost every sphere you will find the originality and forward-thinking ways that have come to characterize brilliant Israeli talents, as reflected, among other things, by the number of Jewish Nobel Prize laureates and winners of other prestigious prizes.

A Jew can doubt the importance of Israeli prophecy, but further examination illustrates how the miracle of Jewish existence complies with the ancient texts of our people, and no Jew can deny the fulfillment of Prophet Zechariah's divination: "Thus saith the Lord of hosts: There shall yet old men and old women sit in the broad places of Jerusalem, every man with his staff in his hand for very age. And the broad places of the city shall be full of boys and girls playing in the broad places thereof" (Zechariah 8:4).

The existence of Israel since the beginning of the return to Zion is an objective miracle in every sense of the word.

The independence of the Jewish people has yet to be completed, and much work lies ahead. However, it seems to me that the process of coming together here and the growth and prosperity of many fields are irreversible. The naysayers will be made to stand corrected at the glory of the Jewish state, the State of Israel.

The post The miracle of Jewish independence appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.