Those 23 words alone require two footnotes, one minor and one major. The minor point is that although the election is being held today, polling stations have already been open for several days of early voting. According to the city's Board of Elections, more than half a million people have already cast their ballots. The more important note is that, unlike the tired cliché of "crucial elections" repeated everywhere in the world before every vote, this time, for four key groups, New York's Jewish community, the State of Israel, the business community, and the Democratic Party, this election is truly decisive.

This article focuses on the first two groups, but before diving into them, a few words about the latter two. For the business community, the election is fateful because Mamdani defines himself as a socialist and intends to impose particularly high taxes on businesses in the city, which would make New York far less attractive to entrepreneurs.

For the Democratic Party, it is crucial because Mamdani represents a radical faction within the party, a faction that has until now scored few victories. If he is elected mayor, it would signal the direction the party is headed: from moderation to extremism.

For New York's Jewish community, this poses a real threat to their way of life and to their ability to live as a protected and cohesive community in a city that has long been their home.

For the State of Israel, a candidate who refuses to recognize Israel as a Jewish state and threatens to cut economic ties with it and with Israeli companies presents both an image and financial danger.

The support of certain Jews for Mamdani—43% of Jewish voters according to some polls intend to vote for him—is a glaring warning sign for Israel in particular and for the Jewish people as a whole. A small minority of these voters will cast their ballots for Mamdani because of his extreme views on Israel, but most will vote for him despite those views.

In other words, they are willing to tolerate his anti-Israel stance in the name of his economic platform and, above all, his opposition to Trump, whom they reject.

This warning must prompt Israel to take clear, consistent action that does not depend on who wins the New York mayoral election. Whether Mamdani prevails, or Andrew Cuomo or Curtis Sliwa wins instead, Israel must grasp the gravity of the situation and take significant steps with two main objectives. First, to reach out to those Jews who are voting—or have already voted, for Mamdani in early voting. That will be a complex and long-term mission requiring considerable effort. Therefore, most of Israel's focus should be on the second goal: making Israel important enough to liberal American Jews that they will no longer be willing to tolerate anti-Israel positions, even when they otherwise support a candidate's policies.

Fortunately, Israel will find a willing partner in this effort. Leading rabbis in the Reform movement, the largest and most liberal branch of American Judaism, are eager to do just that.

Rabbi Hirsch, one of America's leading Reform rabbis, recently said that when the Reform movement educated its youth to pursue "tikkun olam", it never intended for that to come at the expense of their love for Israel and the Jewish people.

The correction must be carried out hand in hand with the Reform and Conservative movements, which not only represent the majority of American Jews, but also most of New York's Jews and those planning to vote for Mamdani. Given the current situation, this will require Israel's leadership to stop its constant attacks on non-Orthodox Jews and, heaven forbid, perhaps even attend a non-Orthodox synagogue or two, something Israeli leaders have long avoided as if it was fire.

We are brothers and sisters, for better or worse. We must remember and remind ourselves of that, especially in times of crisis.

The post The day after New York appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

In recent years, antagonism toward Israel has practically become Ireland's national sport. Just in the past few months, Dublin has spearheaded initiatives against Israel alongside another problematic European partner, Spain. Those efforts have thus far failed, but Ireland remains undeterred.

In fact, Ireland first tried to advance the so-called "Control of Economic Activity (Occupied Territories)" bill back in 2018. But it failed due to legal hurdles – not minor ones, but major roadblocks stemming from a direct conflict with EU law, which states that only the EU itself can determine the trade policy of its member states.

As such, EU countries, including Ireland, cannot unilaterally decide to boycott certain countries or territories. The bill also risks violating Ireland's obligations under World Trade Organization rules, which prohibit discriminatory treatment of trade partners.

Beyond these legal issues, the bill has three additional implications – diplomatic, moral, and practical.

Diplomatically, the legislation has already created tensions with the most powerful country in the world, the US. Under American law, US companies – including those operating in Ireland – are barred from participating in boycotts not endorsed by Washington.

Such companies employ more than 10% of Ireland's workforce. If forced to choose between violating US or Irish law, many may opt to relocate, delivering a blow to the Irish economy. US Senator Lindsey Graham, a prominent figure in Washington, has already warned that the US will not turn a blind eye to Irish attempts to boycott Israel. And Graham is not someone the Irish would be wise to antagonize.

Morally, Ireland's decision to single out Judea and Samaria while ignoring far more egregious regions around the world is shameful. Dublin is not leading any similar crusades against companies operating in China's Xinjiang region, where millions of Muslims are persecuted, tortured, and imprisoned in "reeducation" camps.

When pressed on the issue, Irish officials did not even suggest banning goods from that region, some of which are produced through forced labor, and merely said they had conveyed their views to their Chinese counterparts. For contrast, enlightened countries like the US, Canada, and the UK have imposed restrictions on imports from Xinjiang.

Practically speaking, this law would not only harm Jews living in Judea and Samaria, but also Palestinians. Many Palestinians work in factories and businesses in areas such as the Maaleh Adumim and Barkan industrial zones. What do Irish lawmakers think will happen if these companies are boycotted?

Logic dictates two likely outcomes: The first is a drop in sales, leading to layoffs, including among Palestinian employees. Alternatively, the companies may relocate elsewhere in Israel – as SodaStream did after facing boycotts over its operations in Judea and Samaria. But in those new locations, they would not be able to employ Palestinians, meaning those workers would suffer even more.

Europe's obsession with Israel, and especially with Judea and Samaria, stems from various motivations - including antisemitism and a desire among some Europeans to ease their conscience. But in some cases, it's also driven by sheer ignorance. That ignorance won't be remedied by disengaging from dialogue, as evidenced by the closure of the Israeli embassy in Ireland. Irish Jews have spoken out against the bill, but they need Israel's support – diplomatically, legally, and in the court of public opinion – to stop it.

The post Ireland's antisemitic obsession appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

On Jan. 20, 2025, President-elect Donald Trump will be inaugurated amidst a great-power competition shaping US foreign policy. Trump recently announced his cabinet nominees, including figures known for their hawkish stances on China and others with significant commercial ties to the nation. This duality mirrors Trump's own ambivalence – on one hand, his campaign to "make China pay" for what he deems unfair trade practices, and on the other, his open admiration for Chinese President Xi Jinping. As in previous administrations, Taiwan and economic issues are likely to dominate Sino-American relations. However, this time, the cabinet room will include a broader spectrum of opinions and interests regarding China.

Trump's rhetoric during the campaign underscores his primary focus on economic concerns in US-China relations. In a televised debate with Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic presidential candidate, he mentioned China twice, both times in economic contexts, advocating for steep tariffs on Chinese imports. Similarly, in a three-hour interview on Joe Rogan's popular podcast, Trump referred to China 11 times, with four mentions tied to proposals such as imposing 100–200% tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles.

One notable nominee is Howard Lutnick, selected as Secretary of Commerce. Lutnick shares Trump's commitment to addressing the loss of American jobs to China, supporting proposals like 60% tariffs on Chinese goods. However, Lutnick's connections to China complicate his hawkish stance. His financial services firm, Cantor Fitzgerald, operates a branch in Hong Kong and partners with a Chinese government-controlled enterprise. This partnership has facilitated listings of Chinese companies on US exchanges, and Cantor's partner maintains ties with Huawei, raising concerns among US intelligence agencies. Despite these business interests, Lutnick has accused China of facilitating fentanyl trafficking into the US and is expected to support Trump's plan to impose 10% tariffs on Chinese goods until the drug trade ceases.

Another influential figure is Elon Musk, the billionaire owner of Tesla. While Musk's extensive operations in China, including a major factory in Shanghai, make him reliant on Chinese goodwill, his role in Trump's administration could foster reduced tensions between the two nations. Musk's economic ties to China could position him as a bridge for dialogue, especially given his personal rapport with President Xi and recognition from the Chinese government. However, his dependence on the Chinese market may also limit his ability to support broader trade restrictions.

Conversely, some of Trump's cabinet picks signal a hardline approach. Senator Marco Rubio, nominated for Secretary of State, is a vocal critic of China's human rights record, having spearheaded sanctions against officials involved in Hong Kong crackdowns and forced labor in Xinjiang. Rubio's views extend beyond economic rivalry, framing China as a strategic threat akin to the Soviet Union. Similarly, incoming National Security Advisor Mike Waltz emphasizes reducing US dependence on Chinese minerals and reviving the Monroe Doctrine to counter Beijing's influence in Latin America. Pete Hegseth, Trump's pick for Secretary of Defense, perceives China's military buildup as an existential threat aimed at supplanting the US globally.

Taiwan remains a focal point in US-China relations. Trump's campaign highlighted rising tensions over Taiwan, blaming President Biden for perceived weaknesses. While Trump has expressed a desire to avoid new wars, he also demands greater financial contributions from Taiwan for its defense. This stance reflects his broader "America First" approach, reminiscent of his NATO policies during his first term.

The economic rivalry with China is expected to dominate Trump's second term, with particular emphasis on critical sectors like electric vehicles, renewable energy, and advanced technologies. While Taiwan's strategic importance will persist, Trump's transactional approach may lead to demands for reciprocity. Unlike his first term, where there was broad consensus on China policy, this administration faces internal tensions between isolationist impulses and economic interests favoring engagement.

Ofir Dayan is a research associate in the Israel-China Policy Center at the Institute for National Security Studies.

The post Trump's China policy 2.0: Balancing hawks and economic interests appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Calin Georgescu was not a household name in Romania and elsewhere until the current election cycle. Even as a candidate, he was not a promising one as polls conducted on the eve of the elections predicted he would gain 5% of the votes, a result that would have left him far behind his other opponents. In reality, however, Georgescu did not only win approximately 22.9% of the votes, he also positioned himself as the leading candidate and will advance to the December 8 runoff against a more mainstream candidate who won around 19% of the votes.

Georgescu's clear lead worries many in Romania, as well as in Europe more broadly, as he is a known supporter of President Vladimir Putin, denied the existence of the COVID-19 Pandemic, and is a supporter of rethinking and reevaluating Romania's role and participation in NATO, the strongest military alliance in the world. His achievement should also worry European Jewry and the State of Israel as he is a fan of Ion Antonescu, the Romanian dictator and Nazi collaborator, which Georecscu called a "martyr" who did "good deeds."

These opinions gained traction in the popular social media app TikTok, the most used platform in Romania. Unrelated to Georgescu, but very much in line with some of his positions, TikTok failed in the past to monitor and remove Nazi videos from the platform, at some point numbering 73K videos. The app's algorithm, a company secret, is said to have expanded the exposure of 200 Nazi-supporting accounts, gaining millions of views. Some 50 Nazi videos that were reported were classified by the company as not violating its community guidelines.

However, the candidate's antisemitic remarks were not the main concern regarding his campaign. The rapid increase in the number of Georgescu's TikTok followers and the pattern of their engagement with his posts raised suspicions of inauthenticity as experts claimed that he deployed a large number of bots. Furthermore, the network of influencers advocating for him raised further concerns about the lack of transparency about his payments to those influencers, and the lack of proper identification as members of a political campaign, as required. Some even blame the Chinese-controlled app for not designating Georgescu as a political figure, lifting certain limitations on his content and profile.

These allegations led to the CEO of TikTok, Shou Zi Chew, being summoned to testify before the European Parliament, which some of its members suspect the platform broke EU rules regarding regulating social media outlets and their interference with political campaigns and elections. This is not the first time TikTok is seen as meddling in European elections. In the elections for the European representative body, TikTok approved all 16 political ads containing disinformation, while X removed all of them, and Youtube removed all but two.

TikTok, even more than other social media platforms, is increasingly perceived to be meddling in an ever-growing number of elections worldwide, including in EU countries, the United States, and Taiwan. This development requires all countries, but especially democracies, to craft and enforce rules and demand transparency from the platforms. This includes Israel, which is far behind other Western nations when it comes to managing these threats.

The post Romania, TikTok, and why we should be concerned appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

With one short video, Jonathan Pollard went from being a national hero to "spying for those who betrayed him," at least according to Likud MK Shlomo Karhi.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram

Without batting an eye, Karhi compared expressing support for the Zionist Spirit to espionage, and Ayelet Shaked to those who betrayed Pollard, leading him to spend 30 years in prison.

And if Karhi was the only one to express such an opinion, I would not be writing these words, but minutes after Pollard published his video in support of Shaked, the social media went into a frenzy, criticizing and even cursing him.

The same people who until a few days ago appreciated what Pollard had done for Israel made a U-turn and turned on the man who sacrificed his life for the survival of the Jewish state. Even if you disagree with the political views of an individual who spent his entire adult life behind bars for our sake, such ingratitude and dismissal of Pollard's contributions to Israel's defense are sickening.

Some argue that Pollard should have seen it coming. After all, this is how politics work in general, and in Israel, in particular. Expressing support for a candidate as unpopular as Shaked, who deceived her voters by entering the government with the Left, would undoubtedly garner criticism.

I have two things to say to them: First, this is just sad, and second, you are right. Public discourse has reached such a low that truly nothing else could have been expected. Unfortunately.

Perhaps Pollard, who immigrated to Israel not long ago, did not expect this to happen, and this is where the person who exposed him to this war comes in. Ayelet Shaked and her faction cannot stop talking about the threats and criticism against them, which leaves two possibilities – either they don't really believe that there is wild incitement against them, and they are only saying this for short-sighted political purposes, or they knowingly pulled Pollard into this mess without considering the price he could pay. Neither option is great.

True, Pollard is not a child and bears responsibility for what he says or whom he supports, but where is the humanity of the Zionist Spirit lawmakers? How low are they willing to stoop to cross the four-Knesset-seat electoral threshold?

The most important part is how the affair ended. After less than a day, Pollard was forced to withdraw support for Shaked and her party.

The official reason was that Shaked – unsurprisingly – failed to meet several requirements agreed upon with Pollard, including changes to the Knesset list and a promise to only be a part of a right-wing government.

The unofficial reason and I cannot believe some try to deny it, is the criticism Pollard was subjected to in the hours following the release of the video.

Let's put things into perspective and remember that political support is just that. Life goes on. Pollard's support for Shaked does not ensure that she will garner the necessary votes, so it certainly does not make him a traitor.

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

The post Free Pollard, again appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Like many Israelis and others around the world, I looked on in shock at the images coming out of Capitol Hill Wednesday night. The Confederate flag, in the name of which many fought to maintain slavery during the American Civil War, was flown in the US Senate, protesters made it into the Senate Chamber, and some even entered House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's office.

The background for the riots was a meeting that began on Wednesday and ended Thursday morning, in which the US Congress convened to certify President-elect Joe Biden's election victory. The protesters, supporters of US President Donald Trump, believe there has been widespread voter fraud and are therefore unwilling to accept the election outcome. Trump, for his part, did not stand on the sidelines. He inflamed tensions in a speech in which he said, "We will never give up. We will never admit defeat." Those are not just empty words; they led many protesters to use violent means to break into and wreak havoc on the US Congress.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

But the compound and the offices weren't the only things destroyed in the riots. American democracy and the Republican party were destroyed along with them. The world's most important democracy has proved how low a threshold it has. Despite all the talk of promoting democracy around the world, Americans find it hard to implement the system at home.

The protesters, who clearly do not represent the majority of Republican voters, have also destroyed the party's legitimacy. To my mind, their behavior has delivered such a blow, some might even call it a knockout, that the party may find it hard to recover. The radicalization among some of the party's members has already made it something of an outcast in certain circles. Up until now, some people's disgust with the Republican party had more to do with the way they played the game, and the moves it made some considered extreme.

All that changes from now on. The disgust will no longer be over party moves but rather because some of its supporters preferred to simply set the entire playing board on fire. Instead of using democratic means to promote moves their rivals oppose, they now rule out democracy when they don't get their way.

Two hours after the riots broke out, Trump posted a video in which he said, "Go home. We love you." In the video, the president basically said that while he was unwilling to burn the entire system down, he would accept a small fire. That is a mistake.

If the Republican party wants to maintain any shred of legitimacy moving forward, it, as well as the man at its head, must speak in one clear voice and say, "Yes, we like protesters who stand outside the Capitol with signs. No, we do not like those who violently break into the US Capitol."

Americans have a right to protest if they believe there was voter fraud. But they don't have the right to try and forcefully change the election outcome. Unfortunately, Trump has not said anything along those lines, and for that, generations of Republican leaders will be made to pay down the line.

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

The post Capitol riots prove Americans don't practice what they preach appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Thank the Lord – and it's still hollow joy. Jeremy Corbyn, who was head of Britain's Labour Party and nearly became British prime minister, has been suspended. When he was elected party leader, British Jews started voicing concern. They pointed not only to his pro-Palestinian positions, including his support of academic and economic boycott of Israel, but also their fear of systematic racism in the party itself. Only a few believed these claims, and they were accused of personal attacks against the new leader because of his criticism of Israel.

But by a certain stage, no one could deny it any longer: there was a problem of anti-Semitism. More and more evidence from within the party and from Corbyn's inner circle began to surface, and that led to a wave of resignations by Labour MPs. Others were suspended, and the party's Israeli counterpart announced it was cutting ties with Corbyn.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

That doesn't seem to have perturbed Corbyn particularly. He continued his campaign toward No. 10 Downing St. But then something amazing happened: the Jewish community united and led a campaign to expose the dark side of the Labour leader to Britain and the world. Corbyn led his party to its worst defeat in 30 years, but remained at its head until April 2020. Last week, he was officially suspended after a report determined that he had ignored and failed to address anti-Semitism in the party. His response? That the accusations of anti-Semitism were overblown. No regret whatsoever.

But Corbyn's suspension is not enough. As the report reveals, anti-Semitism has trickled down through the party's institutions, and if it wants to shake off Corbyn's problematic legacy it will have to clean house. The party must get rid of the anti-Semitism in its ranks, and neutralize all the mechanisms that allowed for discrimination and racism disguised as "criticism of Israel" and "solidarity with the Palestinians." If Labour ever wants to be a political home for Jews, it owes them wide-reaching changes – with all due respect to the important suspension of its former top official, who is no longer relevant, anyway.

But this story illustrates yet again how powerful the Jewish community can be when it pulls together. There can be no doubt that many outside the community took, and are still taking, part in the mission to eradicate anti-Semitism in the party, but without an unequivocal and unwavering stance by the Jewish community – zero tolerance for anti-Semitism – it's doubtful that things would have turned out this way.

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

The post The battle doesn't end with Corbyn's suspension appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

The US presidential election is steaming toward us, and will be here before we know it. A lot of Israelis will be awake the entire night to watch the results in real time. Until not long ago, Israelis were complacent that the current president, Donald Trump, would take the race in a walk.

The Democratic party, which is competing against him, started the race with over 20 candidates who saw themselves as fitting to lead the world's biggest superpower, and how could they win with that kind of indecisiveness?

 Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

Then, when Bernie Sanders, a radical socialist, almost a communist, appeared to be the leading candidate, Israelis were sure that the Democrats wouldn't win, because how could they win with such a radical candidate? Even many in his own party see him as too radical.

When Joe Biden won the Democratic nomination and became the party's candidate, many Israelis dismissed him. They saw him as an older, American version of Benny Gantz – not particularly articulate, not particularly impassioned. How could a person like that win against someone who looks like he was born for the stage, Donald Trump?

But in the past few weeks, something has changed. Polls indicate that Biden is going to win by a large margin. True, polls are often wrong. We saw that in the previous election, but this time things feel different. Maybe it's COVID and the economic crisis it has brought with it, maybe it's the blatant irresponsibility Trump showed after he himself was diagnosed with the virus, and maybe it's other things entirely – but many Israelis are starting to realize that there is a real risk that Trump won't be president these next four years.

That fear grows stronger as many Israelis begin to realize that we haven't taken full advantage of the term of the current president. Even though we have secured historic, exceptional steps, including the relocation of the US Embassy to Jerusalem and the recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital, as well as the recognition of the Golan Heights as Israeli and normalization agreements with Gulf states, it seems as if we could have done more. Whether it's sovereignty in Judea and Samaria or other issues, a number of Israelis are starting to fear that we won't see more opportunities of this kind in the next four years.

This concern could very well be justified, and there is a real chance that Joe Biden, as unattractive a candidate as he might be, will beat Trump. In my opinion, what should be keeping us awake is bigger than these two individual's approaches toward Israel. Israel and Israelis have taken a stance backing Trump entirely, which was the right thing to do when he was the leader of the free world, but in some cases, it was done without thinking.

In addition to valuing Trump's actions – he is without a doubt that most pro-Israel president the US has seen in decades, if not ever – we should have been maintaining ties with the top echelon of the Democratic party. Israel put all its eggs in one basket, and that is a dangerous and irresponsible policy.

Even if Trump wins the election, the Republicans won't be in the White House forever, and when the Democrats arrive, Israel will be in serious trouble. Total identification with Trump and the Republicans has led to hostility from Democratic politicians, and even US Jews.

We need to recalculate our path. It's still not too late. We have to make support for Israel a bipartisan issue again. If not, not only will we not have opportunities, we will pay a heavy price.

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

The post Israel put all its eggs in the Republican basket   appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Until recently, many thought this was a ridiculous conspiracy at best or a molehill that the president turned into a mountain, at worst. But last week, the New York Post published an article that sheds light on the details. The paper revealed an email sent by businessman Vadim Pozharsky, an adviser to the executive board of the Ukrainian gas company Burisma, to Hunter Biden, who at that time was on the executive board of the company for a salary of $50,000 a month, even though he admitted he had no relevant experience in the business. In the message, Pozharsky thanks Hunter for helping to coordinate a meeting with his father, the vice president.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter 

Biden, now running for president, has asserted that he never spoke with his son about his business abroad and has mostly denied that he ever put pressure on the Ukrainian government to fire a prosecutor who was involved in the investigation against Burisma, the company his son worked for.

But on one occasion he bragged that he threatened the Ukrainian authorities that he would withhold an American loan of one billion dollars if the prosecutor wasn't fired. The New York Post article also revealed an email from 2014, where Pozharsky asked Hunter to "advise how to use his [Hunter's] influence." The computer which held the emails also had embarrassing photos of Hunter.

These revelations, which cast a dark shadow over the credibility of Biden and strengthen the suspicions of corruption and misuse of power in order to promote his son's business were supposed to shake the election and cause an earthquake. But it seems that social media networks have taken upon themselves a historic role: to keep Joe Biden safe until the election.

Using the somewhat weak excuse that the article used a hacked email server (in fact, Hunter's computer was apparently left in a lab and never picked up), Twitter decided to censor the article, freeze the Twitter accounts of the White House spokesperson and of the New York Post, and even lock the account of the Trump campaign.

No one is surprised that the liberal American media is working for Biden and his running mate Harris. No embarrassing statement of theirs or revelations on corruption will change the strategic decision of the mainstream media to put the Democratic candidate in the White House. What's bothersome is the possibility that the social networks, possibly the most influential media giants of our time, are meddling in elections and that Silicon Valley is using its heavy artillery against the Right and the Conservative camp – in the US, and the rest of the world.

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

The post Social networks against democracy appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Countries across the world, including Argentine, Australia, and Canada, as well as organizations such as the Arab League, define Hezbollah as a terrorist organization. The ones that don't designate Hezbollah as a whole a terrorist organization – like the European Union, France, and Japan – define at least its military arm as a terrorist entity. Only this past year have other countries like Lithuania and Austria started to do so, as well.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

And these aren't the only problems to fall on the organization recently. In the past few months, popular protests have swept across Lebanon. Hezbollah, as part of the government, is seen by many of the protesters as responsible for the economic and social crisis that have engulfed the country. It started even before coronavirus. There are even some brave protesters who blame Hezbollah for an obsession with wiping out Israel that has hurt its ability to care for the Lebanese people. These trends gained traction after the explosion at the Beirut Port, which caused heavy damage as well as casualties.

And then came French President Emmanuel Macron. In a true post-colonialist world, he would have no reason to be there, other than to express solidarity and offer to help. But the former superpower that used to rule Lebanon still maintains far-reaching ties with its former colony. Macron has taken it upon himself to solve the political crisis in Lebanon, a mission that includes frequent visits and meetings with high-ranking officials. He limits himself not only to talks with legitimate, consensus officials, but also meets with representatives of Hezbollah.

As expected, the French president is not particularly proud of those meetings. On camera, he even voiced harsh criticism of a reporter from Le Figaro who published an article about the meeting. If only he could have announced that Hezbollah had shown a real willingness to accept new rules. But Hezbollah demonstrated blatant disregard for the French leader, to the point where representatives walked out of a dinner with him because he had brought wine.

Both politically and in terms of its image, Hezbollah is dying, and it would be better if western leaders let it happen. It is almost inconceivable that in certain circles, especially the liberal media, people are shocked at Macron scolding the Le Figaro reporters, and not at the fact that the leader of a nation that defines itself as enlightened is willing to give legitimacy to a murderous organization that is holding an entire country hostage. Macron even pretends that he doesn't buy the distinction between Hezbollah's political and military wings.

It's no wonder, really. Iran, which funds Hezbollah and is propping it up, gets treated similarly. A country that funds terrorism, with aspirations of expanding throughout the Middle East, and which is also in the midst of a deep economic and political crisis, can depend on Europe to pull it out of the mud instead of allowing its extremist regime to collapse.

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

The post Hezbollah, like Iran, can depend on Europe appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.