US Secretary of State Antony Blinken's Jan. 29-31 visit to Egypt, Israel and the Palestinian Authority marked another milestone in his well-intentioned – but erroneous – Middle East legacy. It has backfired on vital US interests in general, and the pursuit of regional stability and peace in particular.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram

In Egypt

A major issue raised by Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sissi during his meeting with Blinken was the volcanic turbulence in Libya, which has traumatized the region since 2011, fueling Muslim Brotherhood terrorism in Egypt and overall Islamic terrorism in Africa and Europe.

This turbulence was triggered by a US-led NATO military offensive against the Moammar Gadhafi regime, and was masterminded, largely, by key policy-makers in the Obama-Biden administration. They included Blinken, then National Security Advisor to Vice President Joe Biden, and were led by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, her close adviser and Director of Policy Planning Jake Sullivan, UN Ambassador Susan Rice and Special Assistant to President Barack Obama Samantha Power.

The offensive was motivated by noble values of human rights, but went astray due to an intrinsic misreading of the Middle East in general, and of Libya in particular, where Gadhafi was not fighting innocent bystanders, but anti-US Islamic terrorists. In fact, these terrorists murdered the US Ambassador to Libya, Christopher Stevens, following their US-facilitated victory over Gaddafi.

While the aim of the offensive was to prevent a massive slaughter of non-combatant Libyans by Gaddafi, the outcome has doomed Libya to decades of chaos, turning it into a slaughterhouse that has dwarfed the worst casualty assessments of Clinton and Blinken.

The ill-advised offensive has transformed Libya – the soft underbelly of Europe – into one of the world's largest platforms for anti-Western Islamic terrorists, drugs and arms traffickers. It energized a global resurgence of Islamic terrorism, and became a home base for scores of terrorist militias as well as an arena for civil war, with the participation of Turkey, Qatar, Italy, Russia, Egypt, the UAE, Saudi Arabia and France.

Secretary Blinken's well-intentioned, but misguided, human rights-driven policy has ignored the only choice facing the United States in the Middle East: that between pro-US human rights violating Arab regimes, or anti-US human rights violating Arab regimes.

Refusal to accept this reality has also led to US military, financial and diplomatic pressure on the pro-US President el-Sissi – as well as the pro-US Saudi crown prince and the pro-US UAE crown prince – to desist from the rough-handling of Muslim Brotherhood terrorists and Iran-supported Houthi Yemenite terrorists, which the State Department establishment considers legitimate political, religious and social entities.

This US policy – highlighted by the eagerness to conclude another accord with Iran's ayatollahs, who threaten the survival of every pro-US Arab Sunni regime – has pushed Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Bahrain closer to China and Russia.

In Israel and the Palestinian Authority

As frustrated as Blinken is with the rogue conduct of Iran's ayatollahs, and notwithstanding the recently expanded US-Israel military drills, Blinken still opposes Israel's determination that the 43-year-old diplomatic option has dramatically failed.

Blinken rejects the Israeli suggestion (shared by all pro-US Arab regimes) that a credible threat to resort to regime-change and military action is the only way to abort the regional and global threats posed by the Islamic Republic. He still assumes that the apocalyptic ayatollahs can be enticed – via a generous financial and diplomatic package – into good-faith negotiation, peaceful coexistence and abandoning their fanatical 1,400-year-old religious vision.

Blinken's policy toward Iran's ayatollahs and the Muslim Brotherhood – which pose a lethal threat to all Sunni Arab regimes – has eroded US strategic credibility in pro-US Arab capitals, and has pushed Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Bahrain – reluctantly – closer to China and Russia, militarily and commercially.

During his visit to Israel, once again Blinken failed to distinguish between PA-incited Palestinian terrorists (killed by Israel) and Israeli civilians (murdered by Palestinian terrorists). Inadvertently, moral equivalence energizes Palestinian terrorism, while aiming to constrain Israel's counter-terrorist efforts.

His visit to Ramallah enhanced the legitimacy of the PA, while the latter has enshrined, since 1993, K-12 hate-education, which has brainwashed Palestinian youth against the existence of the "infidel" Jewish state. This rogue education system has been the most authentic reflection of the Palestinian vision – consistent with the 1959 and 1964 charters of Fatah and the PLO, which focus on the annihilation of the pre-1967 "Zionist entity."  The PA education system has become the most effective hothouse for and production-line of terrorists.

Blinken has accorded more weight to Palestinian talk than to the Palestinian walk. He has ignored the fact that a prerequisite to meaningful negotiation and peace is the uprooting of hate education, mosque incitement, monthly allowances to terrorists' families, and the glorification of terrorists through public monuments, schools, and other institutions.

He continues to attempt to convince Israel that the establishment of a Palestinian state is a prerequisite for bolstering Middle East stability and concluding an Israel-Saudi Arabia peace treaty. However, such a proposal should be assessed against the backdrop of the systematic failure of all State Department's proposals to resolve the Arab-Israeli conflict. They failed because they, too, ignored the Palestinian track record, the non-central role of the Palestinian issue in the Middle East, and the fact that preoccupation with the Palestinian issue created a Palestinian veto power.

In fact, Israel's peace treaties with Egypt, Jordan, the UAE, Bahrain, Morocco and Sudan were successfully concluded by bypassing the Palestinian issue, and focusing on Arab – not Palestinian – interests, which are increasingly served by enhanced defense and commercial cooperation with Israel. Arabs do not cut off their noses to spite their faces.

Blinken ignores Middle East reality, which highlights the non-centrality of the Palestinian issue (no Arab-Israel war has erupted due to the Palestinian issue, and no Arab country has flexed its military muscle on behalf of the Palestinians).

Unlike Blinken, the pro-US Arab Sunni regimes are aware of the despotic, corrupt, and terroristic nature of the Palestinian Authority, and the rogue nature of the proposed Palestinian state, as evidenced by the Palestinian intra-Arab track record. Arabs perceive the Palestinians as an intra-Arab role model of subversion, terrorism, treachery and ingratitude, that bites the hands that feed it (Egypt in the 1950s; Syria in the 1960s; Jordan in 1968-1970; Lebanon in 1970-1982 and Kuwait in 1990).

The Arabs are also aware of the systematic Palestinian collaboration with anti-Western rogue entities, such as Nazi Germany, the Soviet bloc, Iran's ayatollahs, Saddam Hussein, Latin American and other international terrorist organizations, Muslim Brotherhood terrorists, Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua, and North Korea.

The bottom line is that a Palestinian state west of the Jordan River would topple the pro-US Hashemite regime east of the river, transforming Jordan into another platform for Islamic terrorism (just like Libya, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Yemen), and triggering a domino scenario into the Arabian Peninsula. It would topple the pro-US Arab oil-producing regimes, undermine regional and global stability and economy and erode the US economy and geo-strategic posture, while advancing the fortunes of Russia, China, Iran's ayatollahs and anti-US Islamic Sunni terrorism.

Featured on JNS.org, this article was first published by The Ettinger Report.

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

The post Blinken continues to misread the Middle East appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

On Nov. 4, The New York Times' Tom Friedman, who reflects the worldview of the State Department establishment, lamented that "the Israel we knew is gone." Should one rely on Friedman's assessments concerning the Middle East?

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram

In September 1993, Friedman welcomed Yasser Arafat as a peace-seeking statesman. He established (an immoral) moral equivalence between a role model of terrorism, Arafat, and a role model of counterterrorism, Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin: "Two hands that had written the battle orders for so many young men, two fists that had been raised in anger at one another so many times in the past, locked together for a fleeting moment of reconciliation."

Friedman was trapped by Arafat's strategy of dissimulation (taqiyya), highlighting Arafat's peaceful English talk, ignoring Arafat's violent Arabic talk, and playing down Arafat's unprecedented terroristic talk following the Oslo Accords.

In July 2000, Friedman posed the question: "Who is Arafat? Is he Nelson Mandela or Willie Nelson?" A more realistic question would be: "Who is Arafat? Is he Jack the Ripper or the Boston Strangler?"

Friedman's pro-Palestinian stance dates back to his active involvement, while at Brandeis University, in the pro-Arafat radical-left Middle East Peace Group and Breira organizations. It intensified during his role as the Associated Press' and New York Times' reporter in Lebanon. There, he played down Arafat and Mahmoud Abbas's rape and plunder of Lebanon, and their collaboration with Latin American, European, African and Asian terrorists, while expressing his appreciation of the PLO's protection of foreign journalists in Beirut (who responded in kind).

The 2020 peace accords between Israel and the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Morocco and Sudan were concluded – contrary to Friedman's worldview – because they centered on Arab interests, bypassing the Palestinian issue and denying the Palestinians veto power over the Israeli-Arab peace process.

In a July 15 column, Friedman asserted that Saudi Arabia considered the Palestinian issue central to its agenda. He ignored the gap between the warm Saudi talk and the cold-to-negative Saudi walk on the subject. Contrary to Friedman's assessment, none of the pro-US Arab regimes welcome a Palestinian state, which they expect to be a rogue regime, and therefore have never flexed their military or diplomatic (and barely any financial) muscle on behalf of the Palestinians. They consider Palestinians a role model of intra-Arab subversion, terrorism and ingratitude, based on the Palestinian terrorist track record in Egypt (early 1950s), Syria (mid-1960s), Jordan (1968-1970), Lebanon (1970-1982) and Kuwait (1990).

Contrary to Friedman's worldview, all pro-US Arab regimes have realized that the Palestinian issue is not the crux of the Arab-Israeli conflict, a crown jewel of Arab policymakers or a core cause of regional turbulence.

In the July 15 column, Friedman referred to Mahmoud Abbas as a moderate, peace-seeking and anti-terrorism leader, ignoring Abbas' K-12 hate-education system, inciting sermons in Palestinian mosques, public monuments honoring terrorists and monthly allowances to families of terrorists.

In January and June 2000, Friedman was charmed by Bashar Assad's background: A British-trained ophthalmologist, married to a British citizen of Syrian origin, fluent in English and French and president of the Syrian Internet Association. Friedman compared the eventual Syrian dictator and butcher to Deng Xiaoping, who led China's economic reforms, modernization and rapprochement with the US

Swept up by wishful thinking, Friedman assumed that Bashar could liberalize Syria, attract international investors, end the Arab rejection of the Jewish state and demolish the Iran-Syria axis, terminating Iran's involvement in Lebanon. According to Friedman, the prerequisite for such a scenario was Israel's withdrawal from the Golan Heights. However, as expected, Bashar decided to adopt his ruthless father's brutality, demolishing Friedman's assumptions and slaughtering Syria's domestic opposition, irrespective of the Golan Heights and Israel's existence.

In August 2006, Friedman told NPR that Assad's Syria was not a natural ally of Iran. He maintained that Syria could become an ally of the pro-US Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt, ignoring Syria's anti-US track record since 1946 and its pro-Iran stance since 1979.

In June 2009, Friedman stated that "for the first time, [Middle East] forces for decency, democracy and pluralism have a little wind at their backs." He added, "The diffusion of technology – the internet, blogs, YouTube and text messaging via cellphones" tilted the Middle East in favor of the US He was determined to prevent Middle East reality from altering his vision, which is consumed by globalization, modernity, democratization and the internet. Unfortunately, the increasingly boiling and seismic Arab street from Morocco to the Gulf has repudiated his Pollyannish vision.

In February 2011, Friedman determined that "the Muslim Brotherhood is not running the [anti-Mubarak] show. … Any ideological group that tries to hijack these young people will lose. … The emerging spokesman for this uprising is Wael Ghonim, a Google marketing executive."

Seized by the Arab Spring delusion, Friedman concluded that the Egyptian street "tried [radical] Nasserism, tried Islamism, and is now trying democracy." He was convinced that "the democracy movement came out of Cairo's Tahrir Square like a tiger. … Anyone who tries to put the tiger back in the cage will get his head bitten off."

Friedman underestimated the surge of the transnational Muslim Brotherhood and its credo: "Allah is our objective; the Quran is our law; the Prophet is our leader; Jihad [Holy War] is our way; and martyrdom for the sake of Allah is the highest of our aspirations." To Friedman's chagrin, the Muslim Brotherhood aims to consolidate Islamic Sharia law as the legal foundation in Muslim and "infidel" lands, as a prelude to the establishment of a global Islamic Caliphate.

In a May 25, 2021 column, Friedman opined that a Palestinian state west of the Jordan River would serve US interests, ignoring the fact that such a state would doom the pro-US Hashemite regime east of the Jordan, triggering a domino effect southward that would threaten the survival of all pro-US oil-producing regimes in the Arabian Peninsula, according to a geostrategic bonanza (and a military foothold) to Iran's ayatollahs, Russia and China.

On July 15, Friedman wrote that sustaining Israeli control of Judea and Samaria will doom Israel to lose its Jewish majority. He ignores Israel's unique demographic reality, with an unprecedented momentum of Jewish fertility (number of births per woman), especially among secular women, which exceeds the dramatically westernized Arab fertility rate. He overlooks Jewish net immigration and Arab net emigration; the 50% inflated Palestinian census; and the 68% Jewish majority in the combined area of Judea, Samaria and pre-1967 Israel, which benefits from unprecedented fertility and a net-migration tailwind.

Has Tom Friedman been mistaken or has he been disingenuous?

Reprinted with permission from JNS.org.

The post Tom Friedman: Mistaken or disingenuous? appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram

In June 1967, Israel gained control over the topographically dominant mountain ridges of the Golan Heights, Judea and Samaria in a preemptive war against Egypt, Syria and Jordan, which dramatically enhanced its posture of deterrence.

Israel was transformed by the war into a violence-deterring national security producer and eventually evolved into a unique force multiplier for the United States, constraining the maneuverability of anti-US rogue entities.

The mountain ridges of Judea and Samaria, 3,000 feet above the Jordan Valley and 2,000 feet above pre-1967 Israel, play a major role in ensuring the survival of Israel, the Hashemite regime in Jordan and Jordan's neighbors in the Arabian Peninsula.

Israel's control of Judea and Samaria has eliminated much of the threat to Jordan and others from Judea/Samaria-based Palestinian terrorism and has deterred domestic and regional anti-Hashemite elements.

For example, in 2022, Iranian-inspired tension along the Syria-Jordan border – from the Golan Heights to Iraq – has intensified. It features Iranian-made drones and cyberattacks on Jordan, as well as increased infiltration by Syria-based Iranian terrorists, arms smugglers and drug traffickers. Iran's ayatollahs aim to topple the Hashemite regime, extending their reach toward the Mediterranean, undermining the US's strategic posture in the Middle East and intensifying the lethal threat to Israel and Saudi Arabia.

Jordan may not have been able to face the escalated Iranian threat on its own. While it did not rely on an effective US or Arab military deployment, it saw Israel as its only proven ally that had already flexed its military muscle against Iran. Moreover, Israel's posture of deterrence emboldened Jordan in the face of the Iranian threat, as it did against prior threats posed to the Hashemite regime from the Syrian front.

For example, on Sept. 18, 1970, pro-Soviet Syria invaded Jordan in an attempt to topple the Hashemite regime, which was entangled in a civil war against Palestinian terrorist organizations. A successful invasion would have triggered an anti-US domino effect throughout the Arabian Peninsula, at a time when America was heavily dependent upon Persian Gulf oil.

However, the invasion was rolled back on September 23, largely due to Israel's posture of deterrence, which emboldened the Jordanian military and deterred Syria. Israel's deterrence spared the United States the need to deploy its own troops in order to avoid an economic and national security disaster. It denied the USSR a strategic bonanza.

Israel would not possess such pro-US strategic clout if it were not in control of the Golan Heights and the mountain ridges of Judea and Samaria.

An Israeli retreat from the overpowering mountain ridges of Judea and Samaria would obliterate Israel's posture of deterrence and deny the US a major force-multiplier. It would transform Jordan's western border (with the proposed Palestinian state) into the straw that broke the Hashemite back, converting Jordan into a platform for anti-US global Islamic terrorism in the mold of Libya, Yemen, Iraq and Syria, intensifying the threat to all pro-US Arab regimes.

The impact of the proposed Palestinian state on the region and US interests is best assessed against the backdrop of the Palestinian track record: the intra-Arab Palestinian track record of subversion and terrorism against Egypt (1950s), Syria (1960s), Jordan (1970), Lebanon (1970s) and Kuwait (1990); the close Palestinian ties with Nazi Germany, the USSR, Muslim Brotherhood terrorists, European and Latin American terrorist organizations, Iran's ayatollahs, Saddam Hussein, North Korea, Cuba and Venezuela; and the Palestinian reaction to the unprecedented Israeli concessions of 1993, which included relocating the PLO leadership and 100,000 Palestinian terrorists to Gaza, Judea and Samaria, retreating from 40% of Judea and Samaria, and offering to retreat to the pre-1967 lines.

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

The Palestinians responded to these concessions with a massive terrorist war. In 2005, Israel uprooted all Jewish communities and IDF presence from Gaza; the result was two decades of rocket attacks and terrorism. There is also the Palestinians' unprecedented hate-education, mosque incitement, terrorism, glorification of suicide bombers, systematic violation of commitments, oppression of their own people and forcing a massive flight of Christians.

Based on the Palestinians' well-documented track record (rather than a speculative future track record), the proposed Palestinian state would be a rogue entity, adding fuel to the Middle East fire, adversely affecting the US economy and national security, adding an anti-US vote to the UN and enhancing Russia, China and Iran's strategic foothold in the critical intersection of Europe-Asia-Africa between the Mediterranean, the Red Sea, the Indian Ocean and the Persian Gulf.

Since leopards don't change spots – only tactics – the proposed Palestinian state, on the one hand, and US values and national security interests, on the other hand, constitute a classic oxymoron.

Featured on JNS.org, this article was first published by The Ettinger Report.

The post Israeli control of Judea and Samaria enhances US interests appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Operation Breaking Dawn, the extensive Israeli counterterrorism campaign against the Palestinian Islamic Jihad in Gaza, which took place last week, was a wake-up call for Israeli and Western policy- and opinion-makers, who are determined to observe and assess the volcanic and treacherous Middle East through the accommodating and relatively peaceful Western lens.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram

In particular, the war should wake up Israeli and Western "Palestine-Firsters." During the latest conflict, Arab countries showered the Palestinians with encouraging talk, but refrained from a supportive walk – militarily, financially or politically. The 2022 Arab walk was consistent with Arab conduct during all previous military clashes between Israel and Palestinian terrorism, such as the First Lebanon War, the first and second intifadas and the ongoing wars with Hamas in Gaza.

Over the past few days, I participated in several televised panel discussions with experts from Morocco, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain. All of them concurred with my perspective on the non-centrality of the Palestinian issue in Middle East affairs, displaying indifference or hostility towards the Palestinians themselves. They echoed the Arab image of the Palestinians as a model of intra-Arab subversion, terrorism and ingratitude.

In contrast to Western conventional wisdom, Arab policymakers are convinced that a Palestinian state would be a pro-Iran, pro-Russia and pro-China rogue/terrorist entity, fueling domestic and regional turbulence and intensifying existing threats to the survival of every pro-US Arab regime.

The latest round of fighting should also shake the convictions of those in both Israel and the West who adhere to the convenient but illusory dream of a diplomacy-based "New World Order" and "New Middle East."

These ideologues have been infatuated with the idea that Western ideas of peaceful coexistence, human rights, democracy and Marshall Plan-style enticements can tame rogue entities in the Middle East. But in this region, such noble values are superseded by religion, history, ideology and ethnicity.

In fact, the unprecedented financial and strategic benefits showered upon the Palestinians by the 1993 Oslo Accords and the 2005 Israeli withdrawal from Gaza yielded – as expected – unprecedented waves of terrorism, driven by the vision of eradicating Jewish sovereignty in "the abode of Islam." Similarly, the mega-billion-dollar financial bonanza given Iran's ayatollahs in the 2015 nuclear deal yielded – again, as expected – an unprecedented boon to Iran's rogue conduct.

The war with PIJ also demonstrated that Israel's policy of diplomacy coupled with periodic military reactions to Palestinian terrorism yielded dramatically stronger Palestinian terrorism, with thousands of missiles covering most of Israel, including Jerusalem and Tel Aviv.

It was, in fact, preemption that facilitated the elimination of most top PIJ terrorists. Thus, preemption and not reaction should guide Israel's war on Palestinian terrorism, which should seek to destroy arsenals of missiles and other lethal systems, as well as manufacturing and smuggling facilities, before they can be employed for terrorist purposes. Preemptive elimination of the leaders of Palestinian terror groups has also proven itself effective and imperative.

The war further highlighted the fact that the Iranian threat to regional and global stability is not only nuclear, but includes the conventional threats of Iran-supported subversion and terrorism, not only in the Middle East but also in the Persian Gulf, Central Asia, Africa and Latin America from southern Chile to the US-Mexico border.

In addition, the war with the PIJ shows that Israel's posture of deterrence was not enhanced because of its peace accords with a growing number of Arab countries. In fact, the reverse was true: Arab countries concluded peace accords with Israel because of Israel's enhanced posture of deterrence.

The military, intelligence and technological capabilities demonstrated by Israel during the war with PIJ have also highlighted Israel's role as an effective force multiplier for the United States in a critical region that has been an epicenter of anti-US terrorism, drug trafficking and the proliferation of advanced military systems throughout the globe, including Central and South America.

The war also highlighted the uselessness of diplomacy in regard to terrorist groups and terror-supporting regimes. The West must learn this lesson, especially because the diplomatic option has dominated US policy toward Iran's ayatollahs since their ascension to power in 1979. It has emboldened the ayatollahs' anti-US strategy and harmed all pro-US Arab regimes and the national security and homeland security of the US

Will US policymakers adhere to their own conventional wisdom or to the track record of their policy? Will they stick by their Western-oriented diplomatic option, or switch to the Middle East-oriented regime change and military preemption options? While the latter entails some cost, it would be dwarfed by the cost of facing a nuclear Iran.

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

The post Israel's war with Islamic Jihad was a wakeup call for the West appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Driven by a genuine desire to rid the Middle East and the globe of terrorism and war – and reflecting a long track record and ingrained worldview – Secretary of State Antony Blinken, National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan, Special Emissary Rob Malley and CIA Director William Burns are determined to reach an agreement with Iran's ayatollahs. They are determined to induce the Iranian leopard to change its spots, not merely its tactics.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram

Convinced that Iran's rogue conduct is not driven by an inherent, fanatic, megalomaniacal vision, Blinken is bent on limiting US policy towards Iran to diplomacy, while ruling out the military option and regime change.

Adhering to multilateral foreign and national security policy – rather than a unilateral, independent US policy – Blinken shapes his policy on Iran by according a significant role in vacillating Europe and the pro-Iran United Nations.

The Biden regime is confident that a generous diplomatic and economic package will make the ayatollahs' regime amenable to negotiation, peaceful coexistence and departure from their 1,400-year-old fanatic, imperialistic vision. The administration is resolved to take lightly the rogue track record of Iran's ayatollahs since the 1978/79 revolution, which overthrew the pro-US shah, catapulted the rogue ayatollahs to power and transformed Iran into "The Islamic Republic," which considers the United States to be "The Great Satan."

Consumed by his view of the ayatollahs as credible negotiating partners, Blinken has decided to accord his assessment of the ayatollahs' future conduct more weight than the ayatollahs' past conduct.

Trusting that Iran's ayatollahs prefer to be preoccupied with butter rather than guns, Blinken's policy on Iran is focused on diplomatic negotiation, not military confrontation.

Notwithstanding the aforementioned assumptions, the ayatollahs have been systematically involved in regional and global subversion, terrorism and war, while brainwashing their population through fanatic, anti-"infidel" (Christians, Jews, Baha'is, Hindus, Buddhists, atheists, etc.) and anti-"apostate" (Sunni Muslims) school curriculum, religious sermons and public events.

For example, Iran's ayatollahs closely collaborate with Hezbollah, the proxy of Iran's Quds Force, which is the arm of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps responsible for exporting the Islamic revolution. They have intensified their surge into South and Central America, from Chile (especially with the December election of President Gabriel Boric) to Mexico. They consider Latin America to be the soft underbelly of the United States.

Iran and Hezbollah have established an elaborate regional and global infrastructure of terrorism, drug trafficking, money laundering, counterfeiting, fundraising, training, Islamic proselytizing, recruitment and media centers. They also use the region to test advanced military systems. They forged strategic alliances with anti-US regimes (e.g., Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua and Bolivia), breaking their international isolation and collaborating with drug cartels and terror organizations.

Since the November 2009 visit to Venezuela by then Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iran has benefitted from uranium mines in Venezuela and Bolivia.

The entrenchment of Iran and Hezbollah in Latin America has undermined the United States' regional and global posture, intensified Iran's global war on the United States, and established an income-generating platform to support terrorism and the development of advanced military and terror capabilities. They have spread the Shi'ite Islamic revolution and global jihad through a multitude of mosques, seminaries and "Islamic cultural centers," and installed a support platform for sleeper cells in the United States.

The US-Mexico border has been targeted by Iran and Hezbollah, with the latter being involved in kidnapping, human smuggling, extortion, as well as drug and arms trafficking. They are expanding the proliferation of drugs from Mexico to the Middle East and Europe, sharing their terrorist experience with Mexican drug cartels (e.g., car bombing, improvised explosive devices, tunneling under the US border).

However, the principal safe haven for Iran and its proxy, Hezbollah, have been the lawless, corrupt and explosive tri-border areas (TBA) of Argentina-Paraguay-Brazil and Chile-Peru (the world's largest cocaine producer)-Bolivia (the world's third-largest cocaine producer), with their substantial population of Shi'ite Lebanese expatriates.

According to the Small Wars Journal, "There are no fewer than 145 Iranian diplomats in Bolivia, as well as a strong Iranian military presence. … Illicit activity like narcotics and human smuggling flows between the two TBAs. … With thousands of converts to Islam and counting, Hezbollah can generate cells in Latin America more rapidly with not only continual financial assistance from Iran, but with a social network operation across the region. … Iranian and Hezbollah operatives travel around the region to fundraise, launder money, train and recruit prospective sympathizers, plot against their enemies [e.g., the United States], and conduct other terrorist-related activities. … Chile's ports are an indispensable resource as Iran is regularly taking advantage by docking its vessels … ."

The Canada-based IranWire adds that "In recent years, the TBA of Argentina-Paraguay-Brazil has become the epicenter of world cocaine trafficking and narco-terrorism… with logistic support from Colombian, Mexican and Venezuelan cartels. … Hezbollah earns about $2bn annually through illegal drug trafficking in the TBA. … Hezbollah maintains links with some of the most violent cartels in Latin America, including Mexico's Los Zetas, Colombia's FARC [and Oficina de Envigado] and Brazil's PCC … helping them to obtain weapons and access to international smuggling networks outside Latin America … the most visible [Iranian media outlet] in Latin America is the 24-hour-news broadcaster HispanTV, a Spanish language arm of Islamic Republic Iran Broadcasting (IRIB) … airing in at least 16 countries … ."

The bottom line is that reality has demonstrated that the Iranian leopard will not change its spots, but only its tactics.

Reality has also established that Iran's ayatollahs are driven by a fanatic, religious, megalomaniacal vision, and not by despair or eagerness to be accepted internationally. Therefore, they are more concerned with guns than butter and are not amenable to credible negotiation, peaceful coexistence or the concepts of human rights and democracy. They should be dealt with militarily rather than diplomatically.

Furthermore, it has been determined that waving the military option and regime change while dealing with a rogue regime, amounts to concessions. The reality of vacillating Europe and the anti-US United Nations suggests that subordinating America's unilateral national security action in favor of multilateralism is the best-case scenario for Iran's ayatollahs.

Therefore, US policy on Iran should be based on the ayatollahs' proven track record, not their subjective and speculative future track record.

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

The post Iran threatens the US in Latin America appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Yom Kippur is considered to be a "super Sabbath" (shabbat shabbaton in Hebrew) – a soul-searching opportunity for the pious and evil alike.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

Yom Kippur is observed on the 10th day of the Jewish month of Tishrei (Sept. 16, 2021). Tishrei's astrological sign is Libra, which symbolizes the key themes of Yom Kippur: optimism, truth, justice, scales, humility and tolerance. Libra is ruled by the planet Venus (Noga in Hebrew – the name of my oldest granddaughter), which represents divine light and compassion.

Yom Kippur dates back to the biblical Exodus: "The Lord said to Moses, that the tenth day of this seventh month [Tishrei] is the day of Atonement…. Do not do any work on that day…. This is a lasting ordinance for generations to come" (Leviticus 23:26-32).

Yom Kippur (the 10th day of the Jewish year) concludes 10 days of soul-searching, atonement and repentance – the holiest Jewish time – which begins on Rosh Hashanah, the first day of the Jewish year, commemorating the creation of the first human being, Adam.

The number 10, which represents wholesomeness, has a special significance in Jewish history: The 10th Hebrew letter (Yod) represents God; the 10 Commandments; the 10 Plagues of Egypt; the 10 spheres of the spiritual universe, which were highlighted during the biblical creation; 10 reasons for blowing the shofar (ram's horn) on Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur; the 10 percent tithe; the 10 martyrs (Jewish leaders), who were tortured/murdered by the Roman Empire; the 10 generations between Adam and Noah and between Noah and Abraham; the 10 divine tests passed by Abraham; the 10-person quorum (minyan in Hebrew) required for a collective Jewish prayer service; the 10 sons of Haman and the 10 Nazi leaders who were hung; etc.

The Hebrew word "kippur" (atonement/repentance) is a derivative of the biblical words "kaporet," which refers to the cover of the Holy Ark in the Sanctuary, and "kopher," the cover of Noah's Ark and the Holy Altar in the Temple. Yom Kippur resembles a spiritual cover, which separates the holy from the mundane, the spiritual from the material. The "kippah" (skullcap, yarmulke) which covers one's head during prayers reflects a spiritual covering.

Asking for forgiveness of fellow human beings – and not only of God – is a major feature of Yom Kippur. From acrimony and vindictiveness to forgiveness and peace of mind. Hence, sinners and criminals are welcome at Yom Kippur services. Asking forgiveness is consistent with Leviticus 19:18 ("Love thy neighbor as yourself"), and with the philosophy of Hillel the Elder, a leading 1st century BCE Jewish sage: "Do not do unto your fellow person that which is hateful to you. That is the essence of the Torah; the rest is commentary."

Asking forgiveness of fellow human beings aims at displaying magnanimity, humility, compassion, consideration, responsibility, optimism, faith and genuine repentance. It means recognizing one's fallibilities, learning from one's mistakes, minimizing future missteps, elevating morality and enhancing family and community cohesion.

Fasting is a key feature of Yom Kippur, reducing the connection to the material in order to focus on soul-searching, examining and enhancing one's track record toward fellow human beings, and enhancing empathy with the needy. The Hebrew word for fast is "tzom," which is the root of the Hebrew word "tzimtzum," meaning to reduce/focus.

There are six annual Jewish fast days:

1) The 10th day of the month of Tishrei is Yom Kippur.

2) The 10th day of Tevet commemorates the beginning of the 586-589 BCE siege of Jerusalem by the Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar.

3) The 17th day of Tammuz commemorates the 586 BCE and 69 CE breaching of Jerusalem's walls by the Babylonian and Roman empires, as well as the breaking of the Stone Tablets by Moses upon confronting the Golden Calf.

4) The 9th day of Av is the most calamitous day in Jewish history, commemorating the destruction of the first (586 BCE) and second (70 CE) Jewish Temples, by the Babylonian and Roman empires respectively; the beginning of the Jewish exile from the Land of Israel; the Ten Spies' bankruptcy of faith; the crushing of the 132-135 CE Bar Kokhba Revolt by Roman Emperor Adrianus (600,000 Jewish fatalities); the pogroms of the First Crusade (1096-1099) in Germany, France, Italy and Britain; the expulsion of the Jews from Britain (1290) and Spain (1492); the eruption of the First World War (1914); and the beginning of the 1942 deportation of Warsaw Ghetto Jews to the Treblinka extermination camp.

5) The 3rd day of Tishrei commemorates the murder of the Jewish governor of Jerusalem Gedalyah Ben Achikam by another Jew, Yishmael Ben Netanyah (586 BCE).

The 13th day of the month of Adar is the Fast of Queen Esther – one day before the Purim holiday – which commemorates Queen Esther's three-day fast prior to her appeal to the Persian King Ahasuerus to refrain from exterminating the Jews (around 480 BCE).

Yom Kippur is concluded by blowing the shofar, 10 days after the blowing of the shofar on Rosh Hashanah (the Jewish new year). It represents a moral wake-up call, optimism, determination, humility and peace through strength. It commemorates the saving of Isaac by a ram, the receipt of the Ten Commandments at Mount Sinai, the conquest of Jericho by Joshua and Gideon's victory over the 135,000-strong Midianite army.

A Hebrew synonym for shofar is Yovel (Jubilee), which is the biblical role model for liberty, as well as a source of water.

A memorial candle in memory of one's parents is lit on Yom Kippur, reaffirming the commandment to "Honor Thy Father and Mother," providing an opportunity to ask forgiveness of one's parent(s) and asking forgiveness on their behalf.

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

The post Yom Kippur 2021: A guide for the perplexed appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Prime Minister Naftali Bennett, during his first official visit to Washington, will have to choose between two options: Blurring his deeply-rooted, assertive Israeli positions on the future of Judea and Samaria (the West Bank), which would be welcome by the Biden Administration, yielding to short-term political convenience and popularity inside the beltway; or tenaciously advocating his deeply-rooted, principle-driven positions, which would underscore a profound disagreement with the Biden Administration and the "elite" US media, while granting Israel long-term strategic respect, as demonstrated by previous Israeli leaders.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter 

For example, the late Prime Minister Shamir honed the second option, bluntly introduced his assertive Israeli positions on Judea and Samaria, rebuffed heavy US pressure - including a mudslinging campaign by President Bush and Secretary of State Baker – suffered a popularity setback, but produced unprecedented expansion of US-Israel strategic cooperation. When it comes to facing the intensified threats of rogue regimes and Islamic terrorism, the US prefers principle-driven, reliable, patriotic, pressure-defying partners, irrespective of disagreements on the Palestinian issue.

Assuming that Bennett won't budge on the historical and national security centrality of Judea and Samaria, it will behoove him to highlight the following matters during his meetings with President Biden, Secretary of State Blinken, National Security Advisor Sullivan, Secretary of Defense Austin and Congressional leaders (especially the members of the Appropriations Committees), including:

The 1,400-year-old track record of the stormy, unpredictable, violent and anti-"infidel" Middle East, which has yet to experience intra-Arab peaceful-coexistence, along with the 100-year-old Palestinian track record (including the systematic collaboration with anti-US entities, hate-education and anti-Arab and anti-Jewish terrorism) demonstrates that the proposed Palestinian state would be a Mini-Afghanistan or a Mega-Gaza on the mountain ridges of Judea and Samaria.

It would dominate 80% of Israel's population and infrastructures in the 9-15-mile sliver between Judea and Samaria and the Mediterranean, which is shorter than the distance between RFK Stadium and the Kennedy Center.

Thus, a Palestinian state would pose a clear and present existential threat to Israel; and therefore, Israel's control of the mountain ridges of Judea and Samaria is a prerequisite for its survival.

The proposed Palestinian state would undermine US interests, as concluded from the Palestinian intra-Arab track record, which has transformed the Palestinians into a role model of intra-Arab subversion, terrorism and ingratitude. Arabs are aware that a Palestinian state would add fuel to the Middle East fire, teaming up with their enemies (e.g., Iran's Ayatollahs, the Muslim Brotherhood and Turkey's Erdogan) and providing a strategic foothold to Russia and China. Consequently, Arabs shower Palestinians with favorable talk, but with cold and negative walk.

Hence, during the October 1994 Israel-Jordan peace treaty ceremony, Jordan's military leaders asserted to their Israeli colleagues that a Palestinian state west of the Jordan River would doom the pro-US Hashemite regime east of the River, and lead, subsequently, to the toppling of all pro-US Arab Peninsula regimes.

There is no foundation for the contention that Israel's retreat from the mountain ridges of Judea and Samaria – which are the cradle of Jewish history, religion and culture – is required in order to sustain Israel's Jewish majority. In reality, there is unprecedented Jewish demographic momentum, while Arab demography – throughout the Middle East - has Westernized dramatically. The Jewish majority in the combined area of Judea, Samaria and pre-1967 Israel benefits from a robust tailwind of fertility and migration.

Israel's control of the mountain ridges of Judea and Samaria and the Golan Heights, bolsters its posture of deterrence, which has daunted rogue regimes, reduced regional instability, enhanced the national security of all pro-US Arab regimes, and has advanced Israel's role as a unique force-multiplier for the US. An Israeli retreat from Judea and Samaria would transform Israel from a strategic asset – to a strategic liability – for the US.

5. As the US reduces its military presence in the Middle East – which is a global epicenter of oil production, global trade (Asia-Africa), international Islamic terrorism and proliferation of non-conventional military technologies – Israel's posture of deterrence becomes increasingly critical for the pro-US Arab countries (e.g., Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Oman, Jordan), who consider Israel to be the most reliable "life insurance agent" in the region.

Contrary to NATO, South Korea and Japan, Israel's defense does not require the presence of US troops on its soil.

Sustaining Israel's Qualitative Military Edge is a mutual interest for the US and Israel, which serves as the most cost-effective battle-tested laboratory for the US defense industries and armed forces. Thus, Israel's use of hundreds of US military systems has yielded thousands of lessons (operation, maintenance and repairs), which have been integrated, by the US manufacturers, into the next generation of the military systems, saving the US many years of research and development, increasing US exports and expanding the US employment base – a mega billion dollar bonanza for the US.

At the same time, the US armed forces have benefitted from Israel's military intelligence and battle experience, as well as joint training maneuvers with Israel's defense forces, which has improved the US formulation of battle tactics.

Bennett's visit to Washington is an opportunity to demonstrate his adherence to his deeply-rooted strong Israeli positions, rejecting the ill-advised appeals and temptations to sacrifice Israel's national security on the altar of convenience and popularity.

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

The post Bennett must stand up for Judea and Samaria appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Would a Palestinian state resolve or exacerbate the Israel-Palestinian conflict?  Would a Palestinian state enhance or erode Middle East stability? Would a focus on the Palestinian issue bolster or cripple the expansion of the Israel-Arab peace process? Would a Palestinian state advance or undermine US interests?

Are these assumptions consistent with the Palestinian track record?

Western red carpet vs. Arab shabby rug

Western governments are preoccupied with contemporary Palestinian diplomacy, according Palestinians red-carpet receptions. They prefer to speculate on future positive Palestinian behavior rather than be preoccupied with the rogue intra-Arab Palestinian track record. They court the Palestinians, while pressuring Israel.

On the other hand, the history-driven Arabs – who neither forget nor forgive – are mindful of the Palestinian track record, and therefore accord Palestinians shabby-rug receptions.  The Arabs have concluded that a Palestinian state would add fuel to the Middle East fire, while valuing Israel as a potent force against rogue entities such as Iran's ayatollahs and the Muslim Brotherhood. Thus, they have expanded commercial and security cooperation with Israel, and refrain from flexing military or substantial financial muscle on behalf of the Palestinians.

In fact, no Arab-Israeli war erupted due to – or on behalf of – the Palestinians, and no Arab countries intervened militarily in Israel's wars against Palestinian terrorism in Lebanon, Judea and Samaria and Gaza.

The intra-Arab Palestinian track record is one of subversion, terrorism and ingratitude. In the mid-1950s and mid-1960s, they were involved in terrorism in Egypt and Syria; in 1970, they triggered a civil war in Jordan, attempting to topple the pro-US Hashemite regime; and in the 1970s they were involved in terrorism and a series of civil wars in Lebanon. In 1990 they collaborated with – and publicly praised – Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait, which was the most generous Arab host of 400,000 Palestinians, including Mahmoud Abbas, Yasser Arafat and their families. Hence the expulsion of most Palestinians from Kuwait in the aftermath of the First Gulf War.

Notwithstanding Jordan's talk on behalf of Palestinians, the Hashemite kingdom's military and security forces are aware that a Palestinian state west of the Jordan River would doom the regime east of the River, triggering ripple effects which could topple all pro-US regimes in the Arabian Peninsula, adversely impacting the global oil market and US national security.

In addition, the Palestinian track record features systematic close ties with enemies and adversaries of the United States, such as Nazi Germany, the Soviet Bloc, international terrorist organizations, Iran's Ayatollahs, North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela, China and Russia.

Land for peace or land for terror?

The 1993 Oslo Accord showered the Palestinians with unprecedented authority, which was not accorded to them by Jordan or Egypt when the two countries occupied Judea, Samaria and Gaza. It established a five-year venue to a Palestinian state. However, instead of land for peace, the relocation of the PLO headquarters from Tunisia, Lebanon, Sudan and Yemen to Judea, Samaria, Gaza and eastern Jerusalem introduced the concept of land for terror and land for hate-education.

Moreover, the 2005 Israeli uprooting of its civilian and military presence from Gaza triggered four Hamas wars and a systematic wave of unprecedented Hamas terrorism.

Furthermore, in November 1947, the United Nations recommended the partitioning of the area west of the Jordan River between Jewish and Arab states, in violation of Article 80 of the 1945 U.N. Charter and the September 1922 League of Nations, which were committed to establishing a Jewish National Home in the entire area. The local Arabs and the surrounding Arab states rejected the 1947 Partition Plan and launched a war to annihilate the Jewish state.

In July 1937, the British Peel Commission recommended the establishment of a Jewish state over 18 percent – and an Arab state over 75 percent – of the area west of the Jordan River. The plan was rejected by the Arabs, who escalated terrorism.

Palestinian vision documented by education curriculum

Notwithstanding Palestinian diplomatic and public relations statements, the most authentic reflection of the Palestinian worldview, vision and territorial goal has been Abbas's K-12 education curriculum, which has become (since 1993) a most effective multiplier of terrorism, suicide bombing and anti-Jewish, anti-Israel and anti-peace fanaticism.

The 2020-2021 school textbooks of the Palestinian Authority highlight anti-Semitism, the repudiation of Jewish history, dehumanization of Jews and the Jewish state and the rejection of peaceful coexistence with Israel. They incite to martyrdom and jihad ("holy war") "in the service of Allah," herald suicide bombers and terrorism in general, glorify women terrorists as role models and promote maps with Israel replaced by an Arab Palestine from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea.

Peaceful-coexistence with Israel?

On the eve of the Sept. 13, 1993, signing of the Oslo Accord on the White House lawn, Arafat told the Jordanian TV that the accord was an interim agreement, consistent with the PLO's June 1974 Phased Plan. The latter legitimized the establishment of a Palestinian beachhead on any part of British Mandate Palestine, as a step toward eliminating the Jewish state and taking over the whole of Palestine.

Abbas and Arafat reiterated the Phased Plan on August 14, 2009; November 16, 1998; January 30, 1996 and May 10, 1994, drawing inspiration from Muhammad's Hudaybiyya Treaty – a major precept of traditional and contemporary Islam and Arab policy-making.

The Hudaybiyya Treaty was concluded between Muhammad and his enemies in Mecca in 628 C.E. While the treaty was perceived by Mecca as a permanent peace, Muhammad considered it to be a temporary truce and a means to achieve the Islamic imperialistic goal. Thus, Muhammad was able to regroup, breach the treaty and overwhelm the misled and tricked enemy. It has become a tactical role model for Muslim leaders, especially when confronting the "infidel."

Contemporarily, the Palestinian vision was codified by the charters of Mahmoud Abbas's Fatah and PLO in 1959 and 1964 – before Israel regained control of Judea and Samaria (the West Bank), eastern Jerusalem and Gaza – highlighting the goal "to liberate the whole of Palestine." In other words, the core issue has always been the existence – not the size – of the Jewish state, which is deemed illegitimate in "the abode of Islam."

The Palestinian vision is not driven by despair, but by a commitment "to liberate Palestine from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea."

The Palestinian issue and expanding the Israel-Arab peace process

The "Palestine Firsters" – who believe in the centrality of the Palestinian issue in the Middle East – introduced a litany of peace initiatives, which foundered on the rocks of Middle East reality.

At the same time, Israel concluded a series of peace accords with Egypt, Jordan, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Morocco and the Sudan, which bypassed the Palestinian issue, avoided the trap of a Palestinian veto and focused on Arab – not Palestinian – interests.

In conclusion

A wide gap exists between the Palestinian track record, on the one hand, and Washington's well-intentioned two-state-policy on the other.

Contrary to the expectations of Washington's policy-makers, Middle East reality documents that a Palestinian state would add another rogue regime to the stormy region, intensify terrorism and war, inflame regional instability, exacerbate the Israel-Palestinian conflict, undermine the expansion of the Israel-Arab peace process, generate a tailwind for rogue entities and cripple US interests.

An Israeli retreat to the pre-1967 8 to 15-mile sliver along the Mediterranean, dominated by the mountain ridges of Judea and Samaria, would obliterate Israel's posture of deterrence, and would transform Israel from a unique force-multiplier to a strategic liability for the United States, depriving the United States of "the largest US aircraft carrier, which does not require a single American on board."

Reprinted with permission from JNS.org

The post A Palestinian state would cripple US interests in the region appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

In 1948, the CIA opposed the re-establishment of the Jewish state, contending that it would be a feeble entity unable to withstand an all-out Arab war, which would yield a second Holocaust in less than 10 years. Such a state would be fully dependent on US soldiers for its survival, jeopardize US ties with the Arab world, imperil US access to Persian Gulf oil and probably join the Soviet Bloc.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter 

The US State Department and the Pentagon, along with The New York Times and The Washington Post, seconded the CIA assessment.

On the other hand, Clark Clifford, President Truman's trusted adviser, who dedicated much time to studying the track record of Jewish sovereignty in Middle East history, impressed upon the president that an independent Jewish state would be a most effective military power, reliable, stable and inherently pro-America.

Clifford was absolutely right, while the State Department, Pentagon, CIA, New York Times and Washington Post were resoundingly wrong.

Following Israel's impressive military performance in the 1948 War of Independence, Gen. Omar Bradley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, recommended that Israel be considered a favored strategic ally since "the Israeli army would be the most effective force south of Turkey, which could be utilized to delaying action [in the case of a Soviet invasion]."

The 1967 Six-Day War

Following the 1967 Israeli victory over Egypt, Syria and Jordan, the US national security establishment has recognized the potency of Israel to advance regional and global US national security interests, which supersede the Palestinian issue.

Unlike NATO, South Korea and Japan, Israel had extended the strategic arm of the United States without the need for US military personnel.

Thus, Israel had been transformed from a misperceived geo-strategic hindrance to a proven geo-strategic force multiplier for the United States.

The June 1967 military victory dramatically transformed Israel from a strategic liability into a strategic asset for the United States. The Israeli victory devastated the Egyptian military, at a time when the pro-Soviet Egyptian President Nasser was on his way to becoming the pan-Arab leader. Nasser actively attempted to topple the highly vulnerable regimes in Saudi Arabia and all other pro-US Arab oil-producing countries, at a time when the United States was heavily dependent upon the importation of Persian Gulf oil.

Moreover, 70,000 Egyptian soldiers were involved in a civil war in Yemen, attempting to employ Yemen as a springboard to topple the House of Saud in Riyadh. The resounding Israeli victory aborted Nasser's anti-US plan and led the way to the demise of the anti-US Nasser era. It spared the United States a huge economic and national security setback, and denied the USSR a climactic geo-strategic gold mine.

Twenty-five US military experts went to Israel for three months to study the lessons of the Six-Day War, as well as captured Soviet military systems, returning to the United States with top-heavy information that upgraded the performance of the US armed forces and defense industries.

Post-1967

As a result of the benefits derived by the United States, a team of 50 experts arrived in Israel for six months following the 1973 Yom Kippur War, collecting thicker volumes of information, which benefited the United States militarily and industrially, and bolstered the US defense of Europe in the face of Soviet threats.

The December 1969 "Operation Rooster 53" – during the War of Attrition between Egypt and Israel – highlighted Israel's unique intelligence and battle tactic capabilities, which have been shared with the United States. An Israeli commando unit snatched from Egypt a game-changing Soviet P-12 radar system, which was superior to similar US systems and was deployed throughout the world. The Soviet radar was studied by Israel and transferred to the United States, as was the case with additional Soviet military systems, enhancing the capabilities of the US intelligence, armed forces and defense industries.

According to the late Sen. Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii), who was a chairman of the appropriations and intelligence committees, the value of the Soviet radar to the US defense industries and armed forces was around $3 billion.

In 1966 and 1989, Israel acquired Mig-21 and Mig-23 Soviet fighter jets through the defection of Iraqi and Syrian pilots. The planes were shared with the United States, impacting the global balance of power and the performance of the United States Air Force.

In 1970, Israel manifested its posture of deterrence, when buttressing its military presence on the Syria-Israel-Jordan border (Golan Heights) in response to a pro-Soviet Syrian invasion of the pro-US Jordan. The Israeli deployment convinced Syria to pull back from militarily inferior Jordan. The Israeli show of force spared the US either a loss of an Arab ally (the late King Hussein), or the need to get involved militarily in an intra-Arab war. The potential toppling of the Hashemite regime in Jordan could have triggered ripple effects into the neighboring Arabian Peninsula, threatening the existence of the pro-US Arab oil-producing regimes, handing the USSR a geo-strategic bonanza.

The lessons of the 1976 Entebbe operation, which underscored Israel as a role model for counter-terrorism, were shared with US intelligence and special operations forces.

The 1978-79 toppling of the Shah of Iran ("the US policeman of the Gulf") and the 2003 rise of Recep Tayyip Erdoğan to the presidency of Turkey – two countries that were transformed from key US allies to key US adversaries – reflected the inherently transient allegiance of Middle East regimes, unlike the uniquely reliable, effective and democratic nature of Israel.

The 1981 Israeli destruction of Iraq's nuclear reactor – in defiance of fierce US opposition – spared the United States the potential devastation of a nuclear confrontation during the 1991 Gulf War. It saved the pro-US oil-producing Arab regimes from the jaws of Saddam Hussein.

The 2007 Israeli destruction of the Syria-North Korea-Iran nuclear reactor spared the region and the globe the potential of a nuclearized civil war in Syria

The 1982 Israeli destruction of 29 Soviet surface-to-air missile batteries operated by Syria – stationed in Lebanon's Bekaa Valley and perceived to be impregnable – along with the downing of 82 Soviet Migs, reinforced Israel's role as a unique force-multiplier for the United States in the areas of critical intelligence, game-changing battle tactics and jamming technologies.

The 1990 disintegration of the USSR transformed the bipolar world into a multipolar world. While the Israeli military and technological capabilities well served the United States during the Cold War, they have become much more significant in the emerging multipolar world, with the proliferation of many rogue terror regimes and organizations, threatening the United States and the free world.

The 2010 eruption of violence on the Arab Street (aka, the "Arab Spring"), which is still raging, has exposed the intrinsic intra-Arab violence and the inherently unstable, unpredictable and tenuous nature of Arab regimes, contrary to the stable, reliable, effective and democratic Israel.

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

Israel's 2021 posture of deterrence has constrained the military maneuverability of Iran and Russia in Syria, and bolstered the stability of the pro-US Hashemite regime in Jordan in the face of existential threats by Palestinian, the Muslim Brotherhood and Islamic State terrorism. It has buttressed the national security of the pro-US Arab regimes in the Arabian Peninsula; served as the first line of defense of Western democracies in the face of Islamic terrorism; and spared the United States the need to deploy to the Mediterranean and the Indian Ocean additional aircraft carriers and ground divisions.

If there were an Israel-like entity in the Persian Gulf, the United States could terminate its military presence in the region.

In 2021, US-Israel relations are a mutually beneficial two-way street. The United States makes an annual investment in – rather than extending foreign aid to – Israel, which yields to the US taxpayer an annual return of several hundred percents.

This article was first published by The Ettinger Report.

The post Israel's evolution into a US force multiplier appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

1:  According to Heinrich Heine, the 19th-century German poet, "Since the Exodus, freedom has always spoken with a Hebrew accent."

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

2:  Professor Yehudah Elitzur, one of Israel's pioneers of biblical research, maintained that the Exodus occurred in the second half of the 15th century BCE during the reign of Egypt's Amenhotep II. According to Elitzur, the biblical Joshua reestablished the Jewish Commonwealth in the Land of Israel when Egypt's rulers Amenhotep III and Amenhotep IV were preoccupied domestically. Moreover, the Tel el-Amarna tablets, which were discovered in Egypt's ancient capital city, documented a 14th-century BCE military offensive launched by the "Habirus" (Hebrews and other Semitic tribes), corresponding to Joshua's battles.

3:  Passover is a Jewish national liberation holiday, highlighting faith, humility and solidarity. It emphasizes patriotism, optimism, defiance of the odds, liberty, gratitude and education; the historic legacy which is the foundation for an enhanced future. It also emphasizes the ancient Jewish roots in the Land of Israel. Passover is one of the three historic Jewish pilgrimages to Jerusalem, in addition to Shavuot (Pentecost) and Sukkot (Feast of Tabernacles).

4:  Passover spotlights the centrality of women. Yocheved, Moses's mother, hid Moses and then breastfed him at the palace of Pharaoh, posing as a nursemaid. Miriam was Moses's older sister and adviser. Batyah, the daughter of Pharaoh, saved and adopted Moses (Numbers 2:1-10). Shifrah and Puah, two Jewish midwives, risked their lives to spare Jewish male babies, in violation of Pharaoh's command (Numbers 1:15-19). Tziporah, daughter of Jethro and Moses's wife, saved Moses's life and set him back on the Jewish course (Numbers, 4:24-27).

Dayenu and the US-Israel bond

"Dayenu" ("it would have been enough" in Hebrew) is a Passover hymn, which expresses appreciation for 15 benefits bestowed by God upon the Jewish people – though one benefit would have sufficed – such as the Exodus, the Parting of the Sea, the historical events at Mount Sinai and the return to the Land of Israel.

The US-Israel bond may be assessed in a similar manner:

If the Founding Fathers had considered the United States "the modern-day Promised Land" and the biblical Jubilee the role model for liberty, but had not been inspired by the legacy of Moses in the formulation of the Federalist Papers, the Declaration of Independence, the US Constitution, the Bill of Rights and US civic culture; Dayenu.

If US civic culture had been inspired by the legacy of Moses but over 400 US dignitaries, including Supreme Court justices, congressional leaders, governors and mayors had not signed the 1891 Blackstone Memorial calling for the reconstruction of the Jewish state in the Land of Israel; Dayenu.

If the Blackstone Memorial had been signed by more than 400 US dignitaries but the Abolitionist Movement, and especially Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., had not based their mission on the biblical Exodus and the books of Psalms, Jeremiah, Isaiah and Amos; Dayenu.

If the Abolitionist Movement had been inspired by Moses and the Exodus, but US-Israel relations were not based on shared values, as well as on mutually beneficial US-Israel defense and commercial cooperation; Dayenu.

If US-Israel relations were based on shared values and strategic cooperation but Israel did not provide the United States with more intelligence than all NATO countries combined; Dayenu.

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

If Israel provided the United States with more intelligence than all NATO countries combined but Gen. George Keegan, former chief of Air Force Intelligence, had not assessed that the United States would have to establish five Central Intelligence Agencies to independently procure the same intelligence; Dayenu.

If Gen. George Keegan had assessed that the United States would have to establish five CIAs to procure the intelligence but Gen. Alexander Haig, a former NATO Supreme Commander and US Secretary of State, had not defined Israel as the largest U.S. aircraft carrier, effectively deployed in a critical region but with no US personnel on board, sparing the United States the need to deploy a few more real aircraft carriers and ground divisions at a cost of $15 billion to $20 billion annually; Dayenu.

If Gen. Alexander Haig had defined Israel as the largest US aircraft carrier but Israel was not the most cost-effective battle-testing laboratory for the US defense industries and the US armed forces, sharing with the United States unique operational, maintenance and repair lessons and enhancing US military performance, upgrading the quality of hundreds of US military systems, improving US industrial research and development, increasing US exports and expanding the US employment base; Dayenu.

If Israel was the most cost-effective battle-testing laboratory for the US defense industries and armed forces but had not destroyed Iraq's Osirak nuclear reactor in 1981, sparing the United States a potential nuclear confrontation in 1991; Dayenu.

If Israel had destroyed Iraq's Osirak nuclear reactor but did not train US Special Operations units on their way to Iraq and Afghanistan in neutralizing suicide bombers, car bombs and Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs), thus saving many American lives; Dayenu.

If Israel trained US Special Operations units, but was not the site of research and development centers for more than 200 major US high-tech companies, yielding game-changing telecommunications, health care, Internet, cellular, cyber, artificial intelligence and social-media technologies and products, thus increasing US exports and expanding US employment; Dayenu.

If Israel were the site of R&D centers for more than 200 major US companies but was not the only stable, democratic, credible, unconditional and effective US ally; Dayenu.

The Jewish state is, indeed, the most reliable and potent ally of the United States, commercially and militarily.

This article was first published by The Ettinger Report.

Reprinted with permission from JNS.org

The post Passover and the US-Israel bond appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.