The ongoing violence and disorder in Israel's Arab communities, most recently amongst the Bedouins of the Negev during festive Tu Be'Shvat tree plantings, and punctuated by events during Operation Guardian of the Walls last spring, are extremely dangerous to Israel's national security.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram

The threat is made all the more perilous and existential by Iran's exploitation of it. The regime of the Ayatollahs recognized a long time ago the effectiveness and advantages of supporting hostile forces from within Israel's Arab citizenry, in addition to those amongst the Arabs of Judea, Samaria, and Gaza.

Iran's Qassem Soleimani was one of the architects, if not the main architect, of this strategy. Hostilities in Israel's mixed cities and Arab population centers undermines Israel's internal security and creates an active war-front against Israel from within its own borders for Iran to utilize (similar to how the Arab states took advantage of the activities of local Arab armed groups during Israel's War of Independence in 1948). In the early 2000s a similar dynamic was present during the "Second Intifada", but the broader direct threat from Iran and the status of its nuclear program were less acute at the time.

This attempt to create a domestic war-front in Israel is also bolstered by the recently more intense manipulation and exploitation of Israel's free society and democratic system against itself.

In an open war between Israel and Iran, in addition to a domestic front, Israel would have to face large scale battles on and beyond its borders, as well as confrontations with "over the horizon" forces as far away as Yemen along with airborne and ballistic attacks on the home front. For Iran, this concentrated array of threats against Israel is an ideal force posture. Israeli military and intelligence efforts over the last number of years have degraded Iran's assets and capabilities, but they have not yet been neutralized to a high enough degree, and Iran is not lacking in determination.

This past November the Israel Police said that a significant increase in weapons smuggling into Israel from Lebanon and along Israel's eastern border with Jordan, were a coordinated effort by Hezbollah, and by extension Iran, to arm hostile forces amongst Israel's Arab citizens.

Amongst those hostile forces a good portion double as criminal elements. This makes the weapons in their possession and smuggled to them a problem in day-to-day life for many law-abiding Arab citizens who often fall victim to them. Even if not killed or injured by the illegal weaponry, large swaths of Arab society in Israel are adversely affected by the criminality they facilitate.

However, Illegal weapons retention – weapons also acquired from smugglers and workshops in Arab areas of Judea and Samaria – is, unfortunately, more than a niche phenomenon amongst Israel's Arabs. Weapons held and sometimes stockpiled in the general Arab public for anything from celebratory gunfire at weddings to the day a clan blood feud might erupt, are an armory with the potential to be called upon in a new Intifada/insurrection.

Iran capitalizing on, and from their perspective hopefully directing, at least in part, domestic Arab violence throughout Israel, has the potential to be as, or even more, complex to suppress than during Operation Guardian of the Walls. Such a challenge for the State of Israel would be a significant advantage for Iran in open general war.

That difficulty in preventing or quelling a domestic war-front brings me back to the point about the manipulation and exploitation of Israel's free and democratic society. This phenomenon has been recognized as a growing problem throughout the West. Various forces both foreign and domestic try to use Israel's very freedoms and openness to undermine its identity and capabilities, something that was not a factor in 1948 when there was widespread violence within all of Israel's borders.

Self-righteous political correctness, disinformation legitimized and magnified by social media, corruption of democratic processes, attempts at national identity and cohesion erasure, divisive multiculturalism, identity politics, and faux tolerance in the service of intolerance and silencing opposition, are but a few weaponized tools in this exploitation of freedom and democracy.

In Israel's case, the problem is even more menacing, as it is compounded, and again the Iranian's understand this well, by consistent external threats. Essential steps such as administrative detentions, more aggressive rules of engagement, proactive riot prevention and suppression, severe prison sentences, and the deployment of IDF forces within the borders of the country, would need to be implemented without a moment's hesitation to quell a potential insurrection-a mother of all Intifadas – by hostile elements of the Arab population within Green Line Israel.

In Judea and Samaria as well, a vigilant and perhaps even stronger defense posture will be necessary to ensure that in a general open war with Iran the various terrorist groups and armed factions there do not act as an Iranian light infantry brigade and succeed in opening up another front against Israel.

The perils of a war front from within were brought into stark focus by comments from the now-former commander of the IDF's Technology and Logistics Division back in November 2021. He stated that the IDF would avoid certain transport routes that are in proximity to Israeli Arab population centers during wartime. The disbelief and outrage at the statement were swift, and the IDF would subsequently make clear that no such dangerous precedent would be made, and that nothing would obstruct the IDF.

Also this past November, Israeli Defense Minister Benny Gantz revealed that Iran attempted to smuggle explosive ordinance to terrorists in Judea and Samaria back in 2018 by way of a drone launched from the T-4 airbase in Syria. The incident was well-publicized at the time, but the weapons smuggling aspect of it was kept under wraps.

This illustrates a clear aspiration on the part of Iran to not only have weapons smuggled by land into Israel but also by air, much like with their ongoing efforts throughout the broader Middle East and even beyond to arm their allies and proxies. For Israel, this is not surprising given past events such as the Karine-A affair back in 2002. The explosives-laden drone from Syria was intercepted and shot down by Israel. The evolving threat the event demonstrated however is still ever-present – a new and sinister way to arm terrorists within Israel's borders –though given Israel's very effective and unprecedented air defense systems, not a very viable one.

The Iranians also look to their experience turning Gaza into a full-fledged war front against Israel, something that was achieved years ago. They view it as a template for Judea and Samaria, just as southern Lebanon was a template for Gaza. Now the Iranians have increased their voracious appetite and feel the time is ripe to add large swaths of Israel's Arab citizenry to their war plans.

The restoration of law and order, proper governance, and the full exercising of Israel's sovereignty amongst its Arab population are critical national security priorities in and of themselves. Taking into consideration Iran's designs on a potential Israeli Arab insurrection, it is a national security priority that becomes part of a strategic effort against a wide-scale existential threat. Israel must act accordingly.

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

The post Intifada, insurrection, and the Iranians war plan appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Syria is a linchpin in the developing geostrategic situation in the Middle East and as to what the long-term results of over a decade of regional upheavals will be.  This past decade of Middle Eastern revolutions-at least as dramatic and convulsing as Europe's 1848 Spring Time of Revolutions-along with the drawing of battle lines in the area between regional and world powers, came on the heels of a previous decade of direct American intervention and now withdrawal from the region.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter 

Iran, Turkey, the moderate Sunni Arab countries, Russia, and Israel all now have strategic and vested interests in what develops in Syria as part of what is a highly refined realpolitik situation.  The United States and Europe are also highly attentive to what the ultimate outcome in Syria will be although they are less willing and able to be directly involved in effecting that outcome due to the growing disengagement of the US mentioned, and the fatigue it has incurred both domestically and internationally from its involvement in the Middle East in general since 2001.  Now once again like the sands of its deserts, the interests and relationships in the region are shifting.

The UAEhas reportedly been in contact with the Assad regime in Damascus in an effort to basically sway him and Syria back into the Arab fold and away from Iran and its imperial schemes.  Having to deal with the Assad regime one way or another was all but assured years ago after the disastrous policies and lack of action by the US administration of President Barack Obama, when rhetorical non-existent lines were drawn for Bashar Assad and Iran was seen more as an asset and partner against ISIS by the US, rather than a regional hegemon and the greatest exporter of terror and mayhem in the history of the modern Middle East.  With Russia's subsequent intervention on his behalf, Assad would go on to assure his survivability and control over at least part of Syria as a geographic entity.

Fast forward to today, with Russia not all that interested in competing with Iran in Syria, and Iran's imperial ambitions there not a part of Russia's strategic vision, an opportunity has presented itself to pull Assad away from the Ayatollahs and remind him that even after a horrifying and blood-soaked sectarian civil war, Syria is not Persian, and the Alawites and Shi'ites in the country aren't either, and so the probing by the Emiratis.

It is an open question still as to whether Assad will respond positively to these contacts with the Emirati's but this channel is not the only one working to change the partnerships present in the region since 2010 and to a certain extent before that. The recent face-to-face meeting between the Israeli Prime Minister and Russian President also dealt with Syria as well as Iran.  A meeting that reportedly lasted five hours no less.  These are topics that are always part of the Israeli-Russian discourse in recent years, but in conjunction with the other regional 'dialogues' that have been developing, there could be momentum building for more conclusive joint initiatives on the issue of Syria specifically.

If Israel and Russia can come to terms on a "grand deal" as it were for Syria the newly minted Abraham Accords and the deep clandestine relations which proceeded them could bring the moderate Sunni Arab states to round out such a deal and provide Assad incentives beyond the already major ones provided by Russia [security, stability, and a buffer against Turkey and Iran swallowing Syria whole].  Russia would like neither imperialistic fundamentalist Iran nor imperialistic Islamist Turkey to dominate Syria.  Both countries were useful to Russia in neutralizing various rebel groups who opposed each of the three nations' tactical and strategic goals [in a complex web of oftentimes "strange bedfellow" partnerships] in Syria and the region.

In the case of Iran and more specifically its proxies, they also served as the bulk of the foot soldiers alongside Assad's own troops, in preserving the regime and battling not only rebel groups but the threat posed to Damascus by ISIS and Al-Qaida affiliated groups.  This allowed the Russians to focus more on special operations and air and naval strikes in Syria, rather than pouring large amounts of ground troops into the arena and risking a debacle like their experience in Afghanistan in the 1980's or that of the Americans there and in Iraq in the last two decades.

Russia, as has been the case for most of its history, will in the end pursue Russia's best interest and not impair or degrade that interest because of partners that are no longer useful or even more so partners who become competitors\rivals.

Israel for its part has made it clear over the years to Russia that it will not tolerate in any way what are essentially forward offensive forces of Iran in Syria and the use of Syria as a bridge to its other expeditionary forces and outposts in Iraq and Lebanon- existential and intolerable threats to Israel. After numerous strikes, overt and covert, against those forces in Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq [attributed mostly by foreign reports to Israel], while at the same time Assad has had his position in Damascus become more stable and no longer under the immediate threat of rebel or Sunni Jihadist removal, Russia is now in a position to close accounts with both Iran and Turkey.

This would allow for Assad to be more fully relieved of Israel potentially eliminating his regime in the context of it being part of Iran's aspiring neo-Persian empire, as well as from the Sunni Arab states taking varied actions against him including ostracizing Syria indefinitely for much the same reason.

As for Turkey, it would want to hold onto or maintain a sphere of influence at the very least in areas of northern Syria.  In a "grand deal" both Russia and Israel would want limits on such a presence, or its removal entirely, and that could lead to Turkey, as it has in other instances in the region, to have an alignment of interests with Iran, and attempt to obstruct such a deal.

There is no love lost between Ankara and Moscow both historically and more recently including direct confrontations in Syria only a few years ago.  President Erdogan and his Muslim Brotherhood based government's sabotaging of once model and intimate relations between Israel and Turkey are infamous.  Assad then will potentially have to face the choice of taking a stronger Russian backed position of moving to take control of Syria's northern border regions, relegating those regions to an exterritorial status, or more provocatively but less likely, allow the strengthening of the Kurds in the area to neutralize Erdogan's designs for it.  Strengthening Kurdish autonomy and self-determination in the region in fact is not only just, but as seen by a joint statement in September of this year from Irbil in the Kurdish autonomous region of Iraq, by Sunni Arab, Kurdish, and even some Shi'ite Iraqi's, calling for Iraq to join the Abraham Accords, it is a strategic asset for the forces of stability, security, and prosperity in the region.

The bottom line is Israel must continue and when necessary, intensify, its years long proactive and decisive stance on Syria and against the hostile forces therein for a "grand deal" to come to fruition, or alternatively, to fully remove the threat of Iran and its proxies from the country.  In other words, results through strength and resolve.  Israel's standing and position amongst the moderate Sunni Arab states, it's relationship with Russia and potentially a more regionally involved China, the expansion of the Abraham Accords, and the ultimate defeat of Iran itself, are all highly effected by what Israel has done and will do in relation to the linchpin that is Syria.

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

The post What lies ahead for Syria? appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

A financial crisis that is among possibly the top three worst since the middle of the 19nth century is how the World Bank recently described the current situation in Lebanon.  A socio-economic meltdown which has the country teetering on failed state status.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter 

The parasitic state within a state model which Hezbollah and their masters in Teheran have developed over decades in Lebanon coupled with the coronavirus crisis and its many ramifications, along with the devastating Beirut Port explosion almost a year ago [one of the largest non-nuclear blasts in history] have brought Lebanon to its knees.  The current reality on the ground to our immediate north has created a crossroads with implications that reach far beyond the empty gas tanks and pharmacy shelves of Beirut.

Make no mistake, there is no addressing the implications of what is going on in Lebanon without first and foremost dealing with the central and dangerous role that Iran and of course its proxy Hezbollah play in the country, the crisis, and the region.

Since the Islamist Iranian Revolution of 1979, a cornerstone of the Ayatollahs' regime has been the late Ayatollah Khomeini's calamitous vision of "exporting the revolution." Civil war-torn Lebanon of the 1980s was the foremost victim of this vision and its effects created the Lebanon we know today with the state within a state reality mentioned above.  Lebanon is and has been the forward operating base of the Iranian revolution in the form of Shi'ite sectarian politics, civil society, and charities managed and operated by the many tentacles of Hezbollah and to a lesser extent Amal.

Lebanon also serves this purpose in military terms with Hezbollah's men and material representing a heavily armed and mobilized Iranian force which in recent years has garnered immense experience while serving their masters in Syria, Iraq, and perhaps beyond.  Now with Lebanon's economy not functioning, its politicians' abject failure in forming any type of government, a worthless currency, and severe shortages of even the most basic goods, Iran and Hezbollah are faced with a choice.  One option is to take total and official control of Lebanon and the apparatuses of the state, which would end the state within a state model, and with it, in any future aggression against Israel the convenient arrangement which separated Lebanon proper, its resources, and its vital infrastructure and assets, from Hezbollah and its actions.

This is not necessarily a new modus operandi that either Hezbollah or the Ayatollah's are eager to adopt for numerous reasons, the most obvious being that it enlarges Israel's target bank in Lebanon significantly, and allows the IDF to bring much greater force to bear in any future conflict along with increased legitimacy to do so.  This would for all intents and purposes mean mass destruction throughout Lebanon instead of it being limited to Hezbollah strongholds such as the southern environs of Beirut as in the 2006 conflict.  In addition, it risks open and robust pushback from major segments of Lebanese society, many on sectarian grounds, who are more and more opposed to Iranian intervention and Shi'ite domination of their country.

Another option for Iran and her allies is to come to the aid of the Shi'ite population in the country and ensure they remain socio-economically stable while attempting to convince the existing Lebanese state to accept enough aid whether in raw materials or otherwise to prevent the total collapse of the country; a middle way as it were.  Without the acquiescence of the state to such an arrangement the Iranians would risk the alienation of the Shi'ite populace from the other ethnoreligious groups in Lebanon, who would continue to suffer in a failing state, which in turn would lead inevitably to a new\old civil war in Lebanon.

The Iranians might even attempt to convince certain so inclined European nations or even Russia or China to provide the Lebanese state assistance, while they themselves buffer their Shi'ite proxies and those who depend on them.  Yet another possibility is that the Iranians do nothing directly or beyond their existing support for Hezbollah, and gamble that the international community will rescue Lebanon from the abyss.

If Iran chooses to take complete and official control of Lebanon via Hezbollah it has implications for Israel's entire geostrategic posture, as Lebanon would effectively become an Iranian colony, and the few obstacles remaining which prevented certain parts of the country from becoming Iranian assets would melt away.  Though Israeli military and civilian leaders have repeatedly [even before the current acute crisis in Lebanon] made clear that any future conflict with Hezbollah would see a much wider scale and devastating Israeli military campaign in Lebanon than in the 2006 conflict, complete Iranian domination would require numerous and varied pre-emptive and pro-active military steps by Israel before an actual war would break out.

Clearly, any Iranian "annexation" of Lebanon would be inexorably linked to Iran's greater regional ambitions and ideological goals.  As the often-cited verse from the Book of Jeremiah makes clear: "And the LORD said to me: From the north shall disaster break loose upon all the inhabitants of the land!" (Jeremiah 1:14). These eternal words tragically held true repeatedly throughout Israel's history, and are still valid as a warning today to the dangers of Iran and her allies' plans and ambitions.

Throughout the low points of our history, Israel was never felled by ordinary hostile neighbors or forces, but by mighty empires, whether from the East or the West.  And regardless of their geographic origin those empires would execute their main invasion of Israel from the North, what are today the states of Lebanon and Syria.

The Assyrians, the Babylonians, and the Romans [three empires that would conquer, destroy, occupy, and colonize our land and exile masses of our people] would all follow the same basic formula for attacking and invading – conquer and incorporate the lands to Israel's north into their empires; recruit, coerce, and deploy allies amongst the populations of those lands many of whom were already in conflict, sometimes for centuries with Israel, and who were full of enmity and resentment toward it.

That would be followed by invasion and entry into the Galilee and Golan regions followed by penetration into the remainder of Israel using the most advanced weaponry at the disposal of these empires and their allies.  Iran, whether consciously or not (the former in my humble opinion), has been pursuing the same stratagem.  Lebanon's complete collapse, especially if followed by the seizure and complete and outright control of the country by Iran, makes the threat even more palpable and direct.  As it aspires to become a Neo-Persian empire, infused with radical Shi'ite Islam and a messianic Mahdiism, Iran has consolidated like-minded forces all along Israel's immediate borders as well as further afield, and armed them with much of the best and most advanced weaponry Iran possess' in order to create a literal and figurative ring of fire around the State of Israel.

Hezbollah along with Iranian military and Revolutionary Guards forces already in Lebanon and Syria, joined by Shi'ite militia contingents from as far away as Afghanistan along with elements of the Syrian military, is the forward vanguard of Iran's aspiring empire.  A collapsed Lebanon controlled directly from Teheran would serve to further entrench the northern end of this Iranian ring of fire.

Hamas and Islamic Jihad as well as "offshoots" of Fatah in Gaza and Judea and Samaria represent another element of Iran's expeditionary forces to Israel's south and in its heartland.  Shi'ite armed groups in Iraq and Yemen, as well as whole sections of the Iraqi military controlled by loyalists to Iran complete the ring of fire to the east and far south of Israel.

A disturbing flirtation, somewhat in its infancy, between the Jordanian monarchy and the regime of the Ayatollahs, is also a cause for concern and a possible additional layer of threat from the east. In just the past few days, the increased direct and indirect Iranian attacks on US forces and assets in Iraq and Syria illustrate Iran's determination and focus on tightening its grip further and deeper all along the Fertile Crescent which runs parallel to the northern and western arcs of their ring of fire.  Recent Iranian maritime activities in the Mediterranean and their possible deeper strategic cooperation with Turkey in Syria and elsewhere seek to form the western arc of the ring.

This ring of fire is part and parcel of Iran's overall strategy to weaken and then destroy Israel.  A potential Iranian nuclear weapon is the centerpiece of that strategy, and the various forces arrayed by Iran to our north are the immediate ground troops to be used at an aspired to a future date to attack and capture Israeli territory.  Furthermore, contrary to popular hyperbole amongst many abroad and unfortunately some at home, the Iranian empire, if allowed to rise, would have no qualms whatsoever in using a nuclear weapon/s in one capacity or another.

The development of electromagnetic pulse weaponry or tactical nuclear weapons to be deployed in a limited fashion and mainly against the Israeli military, security, or critical infrastructure targets – avoiding an urban\population center target profile – is the most obvious example of weapons of mass destruction attack Iran would believe, mistakenly, to be below the threshold of instant genocide, and therefore of a nuclear response.  Such calculations, by extension, would have the Iranians believe that such an attack could be more easily "explained away" to the world.   [The actual formulation of doctrines on limited\small scale nuclear weapons use, have been alluded to openly by nuclear weapons states such as the US, Russia, and China in recent years].

A Lebanon fully controlled or just simply more beholden to Iran is a scenario for which Israel will need to adjust in its continued response to Iran's nefarious plans, and specifically as part of an already extant direct and aggressive posture by Israel for a number of years now towards hostile forces in Syria and [according to foreign reports] Iraq, and against targets in Iran itself.

For the State of Israel, there can be no real division between different parts of Iran's multi-pronged empire-building plans, not its advanced weapons programs, or its increased physical presence in the lands around us, or its WMD production efforts.  They all must be treated for what they are, part of a highly organized, coordinated, and well-executed plan to "wipe Israel of the map."

Israel must continue to confront, obstruct, and ultimately defeat Iran and its minions.  This is vital regardless of negotiations between Iran and world powers on reviving the disastrous JCPOA, or disagreements between Israel and those same world powers, especially the US on Iran policy in general, lest we repeat the recurring folly of our past and allow an empire to knock at our gates.  Lebanon is in the headlines but the specter of an ever-growing genocidal Neo-Persian empire looms large over the crisis in the Land of Cedars as well as over the future of the entire region and the world.

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

The post The shattered cedars of Lebanon appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

To the woke-ist, the liberal progressive-ist, the post-modern-ist, the post and anti-Zion-ist, and all their fellow travelers; understand the following and educate yourselves a bit beyond memes, social media, and flavor of the moment "causes."

The hatred and persecution of the Nation of Israel, the most ancient prejudice against a collective, is termed antisemitism for a reason.  This hate is based on the fundamental identity of the collective it is targeted against, its identity as a people, a nation of a particular ethnic\racial character.  Hence the application of the accurate term to reflect that basic principle: antisemitism is being against the Semitic people that is Israel.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter 

In today's world of leveraging ignorance, general indifference, and short attention spans to achieve propaganda goals and spread false narratives, which in turn affect the public discourse so widely, it is even more important to lay out certain basic truths which have been overlooked, forgotten, or brushed aside.  The nation of Israel is just that a nation, in fact, the oldest continuous nation in existence. A Semitic nation that preserved, throughout millennia of exile and oppression and speaks to this day, a West-Semitic tongue.

That language, Hebrew, is indigenous to the region of the Middle East known as the Levant, of which the homeland of this nation is a geographic part. The annals and chronicles of the nation, known to the world as the Hebrew Bible, make it abundantly and repeatedly clear that the character of the collective\civilization it records is a Semitic group, Bnei Yisrael [the sons of Israel], whose origins lay in a tribal confederation, who in turn developed from a clan with a clear patriarchal line.

But don't take the nation's own texts as the basis for their identity (although with any other nation\ethnic group such documentation would never be questioned or trivialized in such a manner)- refer instead to the texts and inscriptions of the ancient Egyptians, the Assyrians, the Babylonians, the Persians, the Hellenes, the Romans, and many others throughout the ages- the ethnonational group Israel, from the Land of Israel, and of the Hebrew tongue is historically documented in all of them.  This nation's peculiar monotheism and worship regimen of the G-d of their forefathers (an ethnonational determinative) in a singular temple in their country's sole and celebrated capital city is also documented repeatedly by foreign sources.

This foreign recording of Israel's nature and history would continue (including in Arab and Islamic sources) into and throughout the nation's long dark exile precipitated at the hands of the Roman Empire.

Antisemitism as the racist hatred of the Nation of Israel is precisely what today those claiming to 'simply' be opposed to the existence of the State of Israel, are trading in and practicing.  One cannot bifurcate, regardless of how much tongue twisting terminology or self-contradicting arguments one makes, antisemitism from the denial of the Nation of Israel's basic and historic right to national liberation and self-determination, i.e., Zionism and the state in resurrected.

There is no, I have no problem with Jews and Judaism but I hate and despise the fundamental character of their existence and practice, which is their geographic, linguistic, and ethnic\racial identity and self-expression.  Furthermore, apart from the fundamentally racist and bigoted view that the Nation of Israel has no right to its native land, it is a denial of indigenous people's rights in general, a supposed priority of the parties mentioned in the opening of this piece.  Yes, indigenous peoples' rights- historically, geographically, linguistically, genetically, and in every other significant way (again don't take Israel's word for it, open the works of Cassius Dio and Tacitus or go view the Lakhish Reliefs or Merneptah Stele housed in some of the greatest museums in the world)- as the Nation of Israel is, as obviously as the name overlap implies, the indigenous people of the Land of Israel.

Anti-Zionism and the denial of the State of Israel's right to exist are point-blank antisemitism on another practical and destructive level.  As history has starkly proven time and again, when the nation is in exile, a minority of strangers in strange lands, devoid of self-governance and collective self-defense, it is subject not just to consistent, systemic, and unrelenting oppression and violence, but to genocidal annihilation.

The absence of an independent and free State of Israel equals enslavement, expulsion, death, and destruction along with many other horrors for the Nation of Israel. Those who support and promote "an end to Israel", the "dismantling of Israel", etc… are supporting and promoting those acts against an entire people not just a polity.

Finally, the charade of 'Jews okay, Israel no way', as if Israel is some sort of special case pariah amongst the countries of the world, exposes yet another clear and basic antisemitic banality- the double standard.  While states that actually do commit war crimes and atrocities of the worst kind such as Syria, which has killed more Arabs identifying as Palestinians during the civil war there than all those killed in the operations and battles between Israel and Hamas run Gaza- that butchery garnered no Hamas propaganda hashtags from the Hadid sisters, or slanderous US late night tv host monologues crying out for the despair and wellbeing of those Palestinians, or calling for the erasure of the state of Syria.

The hypocrisy of this grotesque and outrageous double standard cries out to the heavens. These snake-oil salesman of antisemitism, knowingly or not, also deployed an additional timeless weapon of antisemitism- the blood libel.  They peddled in the BIG lie that innocents are deliberately and maliciously targeted or killed without remorse for absolutely no reason, and in an unprecedented manner even implying that it is a result of the inherent behavioral traits or nature of Israel nation and state.  Not to mention the complete lack of even a passing reference by such parties as to Israel's Arab citizens having the ability and privilege to live in a country and state that not only affords them freedom but a meritocracy allowing them to aspire, attain, and succeed; instead, they only disingenuously shriek about apartheid (which also trivializes the actual Apartheid of South Africa's past).

These spurious falsehoods and lack of context spread globally like a plague, as did unhinged media interviews with the likes of US Senator Bernie Sanders spewing self-righteous sanctimonious canards about Israel and his relationship to it, pouring fuel on the double standard fire.  These actions lay bare the blatant antisemitic reality of judging and holding the State of Israel by standards applied to no other country or nation on earth. Not to the tyrannical despotic regimes which are Israel's polar opposites and many times her enemies such as Iran, Syria, and Turkey, nor to our fellow free and democratic states such as the UK, France, and the US who have caused far more civilian casualties and collateral damage in their wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and against groups such as ISIS and al-Qaida, than Israel ever has in its conflicts with Gaza or the Arabs of Judea and Samaria.

No one is calling for an "end to" or "dismantlement of" those countries, nor do they delegitimize their very existence.  At most, there are those who call for the replacement of the dictatorial and despotic regimes of countries such as Iran or Venezuela.

These self-evident truths have been buried under what is now decades of dumbed-down propaganda, fake news, disinformation and big lies. Anti-Zionism is antisemitism pure and simple.  It is perfectly legitimate for one to criticize certain policies of the Israeli government, it actually happens to be a national pastime in Israel itself, but negating Israel's very right to be is as unprecedented, unparalleled, and unacceptable as it is antisemitic.

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

The post Don't be fooled by dumbed-down propaganda appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Asymmetric kinetic attacks, psychological and economic warfare, cyber-attacks, the manipulation of the media and public opinion, disinformation and misinformation, embedment in, and leveraging of, the civilian population- these are all the fundamental hallmarks of what has been labeled by militaries and intelligence agencies worldwide as "hybrid warfare."

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter 

This, whether we realize it or not, is the type of conflict that the Islamist terrorist group Hamas, as well as the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, mounted against Israel, not only in May of 2021 but on a number of occasions over the past few years, since initially taking over the Strip in 2006.

Hybrid warfare was designed to allow for an inferior enemy – whether in size, capabilities, or otherwise – or one with no just cause or clear casus belli, to make significant gains or even achieve victories against a far more superior, legitimate, and moral opponent. In Israel's case, these tactics, as deployed by Hamas and the PIJ, also create consequences far beyond our borders, namely a flood of semi-legitimized, excused, or ignored antisemitism on top of an already existing surge.

The State of Israel, in Operation Guardian of the Walls, as in past operations and conflicts involving Gaza's terrorist groups, has effectively countered or neutralized almost all the elements of hybrid warfare deployed by the enemy except one.

That element is the manipulation and weaponization of the international media and in more recent years social media.  Part of the problem in effectively neutralizing this facet of hybrid warfare, which is exploited and leveraged to create a public opinion maelstrom against Israel – and by extension diplomatic tensions between Israel and her friends and foes alike – is that the platforms themselves are many times critical or hostile to the State of Israel.  Furthermore counter-intuitively since the Oslo process and so-called "two-state solution" it has become more and more legitimate and even polite conversation for many to question Israel's very right to exist.

This exacerbates the problem of how Israel is portrayed and dealt with in the global public discourse.  That point blank antisemitic position of denying Israel's natural and historic rights has filtered into and been magnified, by both the western mainstream media and in even more disturbing ways on social media platforms.  The Arabs of Gaza and Judea and Samaria, as well as many Arab Israelis, unfortunately, now promote the delegitimization of Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people to an amenable international audience of billions.

We see the violent manifestations of this online and 'on air' wholesale delegitimization and "canceling" of the State of Israel on the streets of New York, London, Paris, Toronto and beyond.  When psychological, informational, and cyber borne attacks translate into real-world violence and destruction, hybrid warfare has been highly effective.

While Israel Advocacy NGO's and Zionist organizations both at home and in the diaspora truly put a up the best fight they can against the media and public consciousness campaign waged against Israel, they can no longer maintain it on their own let alone win it.

At the same time as Israeli government bodies and the IDF's Spokesperson's Unit produce quality content and information that can be used in this effort, there is a lack of effective overall command and control which could bring to bear not only the parties mentioned above but also new non-traditional Israel advocates and activists, such as the huge Christian Zionist communities across North and South America.

Just a few days ago the Israeli public was made aware of the size and impact of this sector of the Christian world, as well as the challenges posed by social media platforms themselves to Israel advocacy, with the blocking by Facebook of the 'Jerusalem Prayer Team' page. Dr. Mike Evans, the head of the Jerusalem Prayer Team organization, as well as the founder of the Friends of Zion Museum in Jerusalem, is an old tried and trusted friend of the State and Nation of Israel, and has a following of seventy-seven million people on the blocked Facebook page.

The potency of integrated and organized cooperation with such groups and organizations cannot be overstated.  Having a point-person to head the national public diplomacy effort, an unfilled position that has been spoken about by many in the last few days, is important, yes, but it's not enough.

Israel must allocate time, budgets, and resources to build a body modeled on IDF Intelligence or Israel Security Agency operational units with dedicated staff and a full-time operational command center, to fight the information\multimedia war.  The enemy knows disinformation and media\public opinion manipulation are an essential facet of its plans and strategy as part of hybrid warfare, the great world power that is the State of Israel must respond in kind and beyond.

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

The post Gaza's hybrid war appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.