Category Archives: Middle East Analysis

Jews “In Any Part Of Palestine”

Posted on by
3

On February 18, 1947, senior members of the British Kingdom’s government assembled to discuss the Palestine Mandate. By this point, the British had already separated the area east of the Jordan River and handed it to the small Hashemite tribe who created the Kingdom of Trans-Jordan. The people assembled at this meeting were at an impasse of how to handle the remaining portion of Palestine in regards to the roughly 1,200,000 Arabs and 600,000 Jews.

It is worth reading the discussion in full, but I will only highlight a few points here.

By way of background, the British had assumed the Palestine Mandate as well as for Iraq in 1922, while France had mandates for Syria and Lebanon. Due to Arab revolts in Palestine which started in 1936, the British – contrary to their mandate – limited Jewish immigration to Palestine to only 75,000 during the European Holocaust; they placed no limits on Arab migration into Palestine, allowing the Arab population to grow rapidly (more than doubling from 1918, whereas Syria only grew by 50% over the period).

An interesting observation is that the word “Palestinian” appears nowhere in the discussion, as the current notion that it only means Arabs would not be concocted for decades. At this point in time, the idea of a possible “Palestinian State” would incorporate both Palestinian Arabs and Palestinian Jews, a term without meaning today.

Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Ernest Bevin (1881-1951) led the discussion about the difficulty squaring the demands of both the Arabs and Jews. He was against the establishment of a Jewish State and even sent the Jewish refugee ship Exodus back to Germany. He had mocked the United States proposal to allow 100,000 Jews into Palestine immediately “because they do not want too many of them [Jews] in New York.” As a member of Winston Churchill’s war cabinet, he had prioritized friendly relations with the Arab world and with Muslims worldwide, as the UK still controlled India.

In discussing the desire of the local Arab population in Palestine, Bevin said that the Arabs were “unwilling to contemplate further Jewish immigration into Palestine,” even when survivors of the European Holocaust were desperate to come to the Jewish homeland. He added that the Arabs “are equally opposed to the creation of a Jewish State in any part of Palestine.“

Remarks by FM Ernest Bevin on February 18, 1947 about the Palestine Mandate

Bevin would go on to state the position of Zionists who wanted an independent state, in line with the mandate which called for Jews “reconstituting their national home in that country.”

Again, he made the position clear that “for the Arabs, the essential point of principle is to resist to the last the establishment of Jewish sovereignty in any part of Palestine.” He saw “no prospect of resolving this conflict by [negotiated] settlement,” consequentially leading to persistent violence. The competing demands of the Arabs and Jews made the situation “irreconcilable.”

Remarks by FM Ernest Bevin on February 18, 1947 about the Palestine Mandate

Willie Gallacher (1881-1965), a communist who had opposed Britain’s involvement in WWII asked during the back-and-forth whether the UK’s “Balfour Declaration is recognised to be utterly unrealistic,” giving priority to Arab claims. He failed to comprehend that the declaration served as the very basis for which Britain had been handed the mandate for Palestine. The members therefore concluded that the matter should go to the United Nations General Assembly to decide how to reconcile the irreconcilable.

The discussion proved prophetic. Even today (“to the last”), the majority of the Stateless Arabs from Palestine (SAPs) refuse to accept a Jewish State “in any part of Palestine.” They continue to fight it by any means at their disposal, including war, terrorism and boycotts. Their actions do not only make life difficult for Jews in Israel but for Americans. The US embassy in Israel issued “travel advisories” suggesting people reconsider travel to Israel and the West Bank and to not go to Gaza because of the activities of various Palestinian Arab terrorist groups.

US embassy in Israel travel advisory of July 1, 2025

The SAPs are fighting Jews on two fronts, via the Palestinian Authority (PA) and Hamas. The PA is fighting for a Palestinian State without a single Jew living in it. It has the United Nations endorsement, with the passing of UN Security Council Resolution 2334 in December 2016. Hamas and other terrorist groups are fighting to ensure no Jewish State exists “in any part of Palestine.”

Other jihadists – countries and groups – also rallied to fight a Jewish State “in any part of Palestine.” From 1948 to the 1970s, the Arab world routed 850,000 Jews from their nations. Most still refuse to recognize Israel. Many boycott Israel and do not allow Israelis to enter their country. Islamic countries which are not Arab – foremost Iran and Turkey – actively support Hamas. Turkish President Recep Erdogan said right after the October 7 massacre that “Hamas is not a terrorist organization, it is a liberation group, ‘mujahideen’ waging a battle to protect its lands and people.”

Jihadi groups like al Qaeda rally radical Muslims to attack “Americans and Jews” around the world because of Israel, and attack tourists and fellow Muslims in Egypt and Jordan because those countries struck peace agreements with the Jewish State. The presence of Jewish sovereignty in Palestine has generated a call to history of 1,000 years ago, with the “World Islamic Front for the Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders.“

The conflict is cast in western circles as a local conflict over land between Jews and Arabs which can find compromise, but radical Islamists see it as a global religious matter between Muslims and Jews. The violent extremists cannot accept Jewish sovereignty “in any part of Palestine” as an “essential point of principle.” Current efforts to “Globalize the Intifada” is their rallying call to end the Jewish State in its entirety, with Jews and Christians (“Crusaders”) fair marks for attack.

Related:

Globalize The Intifada With Socialists (May 2024)

The Normalization Deformity: No To Zionism and Peace; Yes To Massacres and Terrorism In a Global Intifada (January 2024)

Hamas’s Willing Executioners (July 2021)

Losing Rights (October 2017)

The Original Nakba: The Division of “TransJordan” (August 2017)

October 7: The First Pogrom from the Global South In the Modern Era

Posted on by
Reply

For centuries, antisemitic violence has been a grotesque feature of Jewish history—pogroms in Tsarist Russia, inquisitions in Catholic Europe, and, ultimately, the Holocaust engineered by Nazi Germany. These atrocities were largely confined to the Global North, where much of world Jewry lived and where the modern tools of mass murder were industrialized.

Global North in blue, Global South in red

But on October 7, 2023, the locus of mass antisemitic violence shifted decisively. The massacre orchestrated by Hamas, the ruling authority of Gaza, against Israeli civilians was not merely another terror attack—it was the first state-sponsored pogrom to originate from the Global South on the Global North in centuries. It marked a turning point in the nature of antisemitic violence: no longer the work of loosely organized mobs in the South or repressive imperial regimes of the North, but the deliberate, systematic assault by a democratically-elected government in the Muslim world, targeting Jews as Jews, and Jews and “colonizers.”

A Historic Shift

Historically, Jews living under Muslim rule experienced discrimination and periodic violence, but the scale of the bloodshed never approached that of Christian Europe. Pogroms in places like Fez (1912), Constantine (1934) and Baghdad (1941), were undeniably horrific, but they typically resulted in the deaths of dozens, not thousands. In most cases, these events were local eruptions of violence, not centrally planned exterminations.

That changed dramatically in the 1950s. The rise of Arab nationalism, fused with pan-Islamic identity and antisemitic European ideologies, led to the near-total ethnic cleansing of Jews from the Muslim world. From Iraq to Egypt, from Yemen to Libya, ancient Jewish communities were uprooted. Between the late 1940s and 1970s, over 850,000 Jews were forced to flee Muslim-majority countries. They resettled primarily in Israel, France, and North America. But while the Jews left, the hatred remained. For Jews, and for Western “imperialism.”

Hamas and the Theology of Erasure

Hamas is not just a terrorist organization; it is the elected governing body of Gaza, a polity not recognized by much of the Global North but very much embraced within the Global South. Its 1988 charter is steeped in genocidal antisemitism. It doesn’t distinguish between Israeli combatants and civilians. It doesn’t merely call for “resistance” against Israeli policy—it calls for the annihilation of Jews in the land, whom it labels foreign interlopers and infidels contaminating Muslim soil.

On October 7, 2023, this ideology became mass action. Roughly 1,200 Israelis were slaughtered—women, children, the elderly—tortured, raped, and mutilated in their homes and at a music festival, and 250 people were taken captive. The violence wasn’t spontaneous. It was premeditated, coordinated, and state-executed. It echoed the darkest moments of European Jewish history, but this time the origin was a Muslim-ruled territory in the developing world.

Hamas had launched many wars against Israel since it took over Gaza in 2007, most notably in 2008, 2012, 2014 and 2021. But it never did a mass coordinated invasion of Israel. It never took hundreds of hostages. It never counted on regional allies of Houthis in Yemen, Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Islamic Republic of Iran to join the jihad.

While Muslims are a minority in the Global North, they are the plurality on the Global South

A Government Pogrom

What separates October 7 from prior attacks is its nature: it was not a riot nor mob action. It was not a fringe group operating in defiance of authorities. It was the government. Hamas planned the massacre for years. It diverted foreign aid and resources meant for schools and hospitals to build tunnels, train fighters, and manufacture weapons. And then it unleashed them— on civilians.

The western world has been slow to reckon with this fact. The idea of a pogrom—an antisemitic mass killing—carried out by a government of the Global South against the Global North challenges dominant narratives in international politics, which often frame power dynamics as North exploiting South, not the other way around. But facts do not bend to ideology.

The Silence and the Hypocrisy

Western voices that once said “Never Again” have hesitated to name October 7 for what it was. Some have even rationalized it as “resistance,” blurring the line between anti-Zionism and rank Jew hatred. But no cause justifies the butchery of innocents. No political grievance legitimizes the burning of children or the beheading of elderly Holocaust survivors.

October 7 was a pogrom. Not the first in Jewish history, but the first of its kind, launched from the Global South by a sitting government, acting with genocidal intent against a Jewish population it deems foreign and expendable.

It will not be the last. Members of the Global South have been moving to the Global North post de-colonization. The numbers have ramped considerably over the past decade, as the poorly named “Arab Spring” and civil wars launched tens of thousands of people from the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) into Europe and North America.

The First Pogrom from the Global South was greeted in western city streets with chants to “Globalize the Intifada,” because this war of annihilation is infused with radical Islamism and nationalism. The first battle is against the perceived island of the Global North inside the Muslim Global South: Israel. Europe and the United States are to follow.

Antisemitism is not bound by geography or ideology; it infects the right and left around the world. But the Muslim Crusade of colonizing the Global North is very much a function of region and philosophy. It is coming for a broad redistribution of power and wealth from North to South, and indoctrination of Islamic principles from South to North. It will achieve its aims through force of arms and diplomatic cover of an altered United Nations.

“the Jewish people suffering the worst and most murderous pogrom since the Holocaust.

–UK Foreign Secretary David Cameron

Thinking of October 7 in terms of the worst slaughter of Jews since the European Holocaust blinds people to the tectonic earthquake that is taking place. History is not simply repeating itself in killing Jews. A new chapter of crusades is upon us in which Jews are the first victims but will not be the last.

Related:

Global South’s Beachhead On American Universities (March 2025)

Globalize The Intifada With Socialists (May 2024)

Most Palestinians Are For Hamas. Most Israelis Are Not European Jews. (April 2022)

The New York Times Thinks that the Jews from Arab Countries Simply “Immigrated” (October 2016)

Double Standards: Reporters Without Borders (RSF)

Posted on by
1

Over twenty years ago, Jewish Russian-Israeli Natan Sharansky coined the “3D Test of Anti-Semitism: Demonization, Double Standards, Delegitimization.” Each one comes for Jews in their own unique way: demonization actively incites hatred; delegitimization undermines support structures over time; and double standards drips slowly into society, barely noticed and acknowledged.

Consider the assassination of noted terrorist Osama Bin Laden by the United States. World leaders applauded the American attack, thousands of miles from its shores, as justice served. Yet when Israel eliminated the terrorist Sheik Ahmed Yassin, the founder of Hamas, the world lined up to condemn Israel. Hypocrisy masked by time, place and protagonists concealed the rank Jew-hatred.

It happens to Israel frequently.

Reporters Without Borders (RSF) is a non-governmental organization (NGO) based in France which attempts to get information out to the world regardless of frontiers, and to protect journalists. Its tagline does not clarify that it does this selectively, such as toeing the line with the French government, and persistently coming for Israel.

For years, RSF pushed to get Russia Today (RT) off the air and internet in France. RSF claimed RT was “Russia’s war propaganda machine,” and successfully got Channel One Russia off the air which it labeled “an important part of the state’s disinformation arsenal in Russia, where TV continues to be a very influential medium.”

RSF worked to ban media outlet RT because it claimed it is a disinformation outlet

Yet when Israel banned Qatar-owned Al Jazeera from Israel in May 2024, which had long served as an open propaganda outlet for the political-terrorist group Hamas, RSF went nuts. The group’s Middle East leader said “The Israeli parliament’s vote to censor Al Jazeera, and Benjamin Netanyahu’s defamatory remarks about its journalists are unacceptable. RSF demands that the Israeli authorities end their aggressive harassment of Al Jazeera. Such censorship legislation, under the guise of democratic regulation, implicitly targeting a specific media outlet, creates a precedent fraught with dangers for journalism in Israel.”

RSF didn’t only object to Israel’s ban of Hamas’s propaganda arm of Al Jazeera but accused Israel of “persecution”

RSF did not only defend the Hamas mouthpiece headquartered in Qatar, its entire framework of the Gaza war completely sides with Hamas. Examples of Hamas simply being annoying while Israel is the source of violence include: “Journalists suspected of collaborating with Israel are hampered in their work by Hamas and the Islamic Jihad, while also enduring the violence of the Israeli blockade on the territory,” and blaming Israel for starting the latest war with “Press freedom, media plurality and editorial independence have been increasingly restricted in Israel since the start of the war in Gaza, launched by Israel on 7 October 2023 following the deadly Hamas attack,” which would be like blaming the U.S.A. for starting a war with Japan after the Pearl Harbor attack.

In January 2025, the Palestinian Authority also shut down Al Jazeera in the parts of the West Bank it controls, stating the company’s websites have “inciting material and reports that were deceiving and stirring strife.” Israel went further and accused several Al Jazeera journalists of participating in the October 7 massacre. Whether causing “strife” or participating in lynchings, the media outlet has been blamed by both sides in fueling the war.

The double standards of Reporters Without Borders attempting to protect the Hamas propaganda outlet of Al Jazeera during the terrorist group’s horrific war but pushing to ban Russian media in Europe is appalling. It also raises questions about the NGO’s biases.

This isn’t a defense of censorship but a demand for consistency. If Al Jazeera’s ability to operate is sacred, then so is Russia Today’s. If RT can be banned for spreading propaganda and fueling war, then so can Al Jazeera. RSF’s double standard is damning.

The reality of today is there is no neutral and completely fact-based press. Government-owned media like Russia Today and Al Jazeera should fall under a single bucket of treatment. Ban them or air them with wrappers that identify them as foreign propaganda outlets so viewers understand the nature of the content.

Freedom of the press is not a weapon to be wielded selectively. But for groups like Reporters Without Borders, it increasingly is. And that should concern everyone who actually believes in a free and honest media.

Related articles:

Banning Qatar’s Al Jazeera Is Only News Sometimes (December 2024)

US Hypocrisy On Terrorist Media (April 2024)

The Scary Growth of Terrorist Propaganda (November 2021)

Nexus of Terrorism Hypocrisy: UN, Qatar and Hamas (June 2021)

Al Jazeera’s Lies Call for Jihad Against the Jewish State (November 2017)

Journalists Killed in 2016 #AlternativeFacts (January 2017)

Liberal Hypocrisy on Foreign Government Intervention (October 2016)

An Easy Boycott: Al Jazeera (Qatar) (April 2015)

What The World Sees In Gaza

Posted on by
1

The world sees Gaza through the lens of curated sympathy – smoke trails from missile strikes, wounded children, crumbled buildings – rendered by the media and United Nations. The headlines scream “siege” and “occupation,” and the images are carefully framed to elicit tears, not questions. For them, Gaza is a tragedy.

But Israelis? They see something very different.

They see a terrorist enclave. A society ruled by Hamas – not just tolerated but elected – with a charter calling for genocide against Jews. They see neighbors who have fired over 30,000 rockets at them since Israel left Gaza in 2005, and who used humanitarian aid to dig terror tunnels and stockpile weapons.

Israelis are haunted by October 7, 2023 – the day when 1,200 of their people were butchered. Burned alive. Shot in their homes. Raped in front of their families. And they remember what came next: polls showing 75% of Gazans supported the massacre. The popularity of other Palestinian Arab terrorist groups skyrocketed as well, including Islamic Jihad, al Aqsa Brigade and al Qassam. This wasn’t some fringe radical cell that commited the vile pogrom – this was public approval for mass murder. It was the fulfillment of their long-standing desire to attack Jewish civilians inside of Israel since 2000.

They also see something deeper: three-quarters of Gazans consider themselves “refugees” living in temporary homes. Not because of displacement from this war but because they believe they’re entitled to homes inside Israel. They don’t see Gaza as their future – they see Tel Aviv.

To the United Nations, Gaza is a moral play where Israel is always cast as the villain. They see Gaza not as a failure of Palestinian leadership, not as a society hijacked by jihad, but as a tragedy authored entirely by Israel. Why? Because Israel won’t allow these “refugees” to move into the homes of Israeli Jews – the very homes where grandparents fled in 1948 after five Arab armies attacked the new Jewish state.

The world has condemned Israel for responding “disproportionately” to the October 7 massacre. The UN saw Israeli counterstrikes as war crimes, not defense. They ignored the slaughter of Israeli children and focused on fuel shortages in Gaza. They accused Israel of starvation, ignoring the trucks of aid Israel itself let in, even while its soldiers were under fire. They paid scant lip service to Israeli hostages kept in tunnels by Hamas, viewing them as collateral to Israel’s ongoing “Nakba”.

The Arab and Muslim world is not fooled but is not helping. They don’t see Gazans as brothers and sisters in need of refuge. They see them as Palestinians – a distinct, useful political weapon. If Gazans were Syrians, they would’ve been taken in by now. But they’re not. They’re left to fester – a long-term tool to weaken and delegitimize the Jewish state.

Even in America, Gaza has become a kind of geopolitical Rorschach test. Leaders like Donald Trump and Jared Kushner see opportunity: beachfront real estate with the potential to be the Singapore of the Middle East. A future riviera. But that future depends on changing a mentality – one that for decades has been more obsessed with destroying Israel than building Gaza.

Because this is the reality: Gaza could have been Dubai. It had the backing of the international community, billions in aid, and a chance to chart its own path. Instead, it chose jihad. It chose hate. It chose martyrdom over medicine, tunnels over technology, indoctrination over innovation.

The world sees rubble. Death. Tragedy. Not on both sides; for Palestinians.

They can’t see the Israeli hostages through their clouded moral lenses. They don’t see the Jewish parents still waiting for their children. They don’t see the decades of restraint Israel exercised before finally saying “enough”. They are caught in an empathy swamp and have mentally baptised Gazans as martyrs instead of genocidal jihadists.

The Global South sees Gaza not just as another flashpoint – but as a pawn in a bigger game. The narrative is not just about “liberation” but “redistribution.” From peace talks to class war. Israel, to them, is just the first domino in toppling the Western-led world order.

Gaza isn’t just a local issue anymore. It’s global. It’s ideological. And for Israelis, the stakes couldn’t be higher.

In this backdrop of viewpoints, an international conference at the U.N. headquarters in New York will take place from June 17 to 20 co-chaired by France and Saudi Arabia. The Global North will join the Global South in trying to find near-term and longer-term solutions to the 100-year Arab-Israeli conflict.

In this Coliseum, the General Assembly serves as the unruly crowd seeking the torture of the Jewish State, while the Security Council acts as caesar empowered with the pen to draft international law. Will the United States protect Israel in such forum on the heels of Trump’s visit to the Gulf? Will Trump seek to trade an unwinding of U.N. Security Council Resolution 2334 to get Israel to agree to short-term and longer term movements towards a permanent divorce between local Jews and Arabs?

Israel was blind to the October 7 attack. Does it see what the world sees in Gaza now and the positions being orchestrated for the June U.N. conference? Will the modern blind Samson bring down the house if it only hears calls for its demise and cannot see a path to live in peace?

Related articles:

The Distant Fantasy Of Two States Living Side By Side In Today’s Reality (August 2024)

The Three “Two-State Solution”s (December 2023)

The Asynchronous Audience At Jihadists’ Auto-da-Fe (November 2023)

Palestinians Utterly Fail Two Tests: Oslo Accords And Gaza Disengagement (August 2023)

The Mirrored Key Of The Jewish Temple

Posted on by
Reply

Across Western cities, “Nakba” protests fill the streets in May, marking what Stateless Arabs from Palestine (SAPs) call the “catastrophe” of Israel’s founding. Protesters chant slogans of “liberation,” wave Palestinian flags, and brandish large symbolic keys—representing homes lost in the Arab-Israeli 1948 War, and a longed-for return.

In London, British actor Khalid Abdalla holds a key symbolising the supposed Palestinian “right of return” (photo: Middle East Eye)

To the casual observer, these demonstrations appear to be non-violent expressions of secular nationalism: a displaced people demanding justice and return. The rhetoric is packaged in the language of “anti-colonialism,” a phrase from the Global South marketed at western universities.

The terminology is secular and political but the facts on the ground tell a different story.

The actual war against Israel is not being led by nationalists. It is driven by radical Islamist groups including Hamas and Islamic Jihad. The attack launched on October 7, 2023, was not called the “Nakba Response” or “Operation Liberation.” It was named “Al-Aqsa Flood”—a title soaked in religious meaning, not national aspiration. It invoked Islam’s third-holiest site which sits atop Judaism’s holiest site.

The strategic use of “Nakba” language in western cities is a deliberate effort to mask a religious war in secular terms. It is designed to resonate with Western leftists who are comfortable championing national self-determination but uneasy with theocratic zeal. It reframes an Islamic holy war as a freedom struggle, making it seem modern, rational, and even “progressive.”

But the religious reality will not remain buried forever.

Because just as SAPs speak of return, so do Jews. If Jews are forced to lose their sovereignty, perhaps diluted in a binational state, it will likely not lead to secular coexistence—it may unleash something far older and deeper: the demand for rebuilding the Third Jewish Temple.

Today, the Temple Mount is controlled administratively by the Jordanian Waqf, which bans Jewish prayer. Since the Second Temple was destroyed in 70AD, Jews have dreamed of rebuilding it, and while that has remained marginal in the modern secular Jewish state, it may surge forward in a post-Zionist situation in which Jews are compelled to relinquish so much.

If Israel is converted to a binational state in which everyone has equal rights, Jews would obviously insist on the same rights as Muslims enjoy today, to pray openly by the thousands on the Temple Mount. The demand to rebuild the Jewish Temple could move from the fringe to the center. The so-called “liberation” of Palestine would be matched by calls to liberate the Mount—from Islamic control.

In that light, the pro-Palestinian protest chants of “liberation” are a double-edged sword. They echo with reciprocal cries: not just the return of SAPs to Jaffa but the return of Jews to the Temple Mount. The religious war launched by Gazans wrapped in secular “Nakba” terminology in the west would be laid bare for what it is.

Muslims and Jews hold keys for places that don’t exist in the holy land anymore – for homes and a Temple. Should one side pursue a “right of return” to create a future-past, the mirrored key will do no less.

Related articles:

More Muslims Visit The Jewish Temple Mount / Al Aqsa Mosque On Single Day Than All Jews Over The Past Year (March 2025)

There Is No Basis For A Palestinian “Right of Return” (July 2024)

Holocaust Survivors At The 2024 Israeli Day Parade In New York City (June 2024)

Israel, Ceuta and Melilla: Third World Escape Hatches (November 2023)

Delivery of the Fictional Palestinian Keys (May 2015)

Jew Not Jew

Posted on by
Reply

Let’s state something openly and clearly: “Anti-Zionism” deserves to be in quotation marks. Israel exists. It is not a theory. Being “anti-Zionism” is anti-Israel, so be clear.

Under this framework of anti-Israel feelings and behavior, “anti-Zionists” claim they are just against the government of Israel or policies of the government of Israel. That’s fine. Many people dislike their own government and some policies. However, it is a curious thing to be consumed by hatred of government policies far away from your own shores, flagging something deeper like a potential hatred of Jews, but let’s just put a pin in that observation for now.

The ongoing deliberate mislabelling of Jews as something other than Jews – say “colonists” or “settlers” – is part of a vilification campaign and clearly antisemitic.

It is true on college campuses, in the media, at the United Nations and of course, from the Palestinian Authority itself.

When Jews – whether from Israel, east of the 1949 Armistice Lines (E49AL), or around the world – visit the Jewish Temple Mount during regular visiting hours, it should not be news. Yet it is for the supposedly moderate Palestinian Authority.

Wafa, the official media of the PA, repeatedly stated that a handful of Jews were “colonists” because they dared to step over the 1949 Armistice Lines. Walking around the Temple Mount was called “storming Al- Aqsa compound.” Their presence disturbed “Palestinian worshippers,” a.k.a. Muslims.

The blatant antisemitism was marketed under a political struggle. Jews were transformed into a combative illegal horde under a political monicker. The PA is not antisemitic, just anti-colonists. It is a mere coincidence that all Jews are considered colonists (Israeli Arabs are called Palestinian citizens of Israel to shed them of potentially being called “settlers.”)

Concealing the word “Jew” does not hide the antisemitism. They are not illegal people and they are not doing anything nefarious. The veneer of United Nations-sanctioned political obfuscation does not wash the religious animus nor absolve the antisemitic hatred.

The “al aqsa flood” being waged by the popular jihadi extremists of Hamas is being vanquished by the Israeli army. It is time to terminate the political and libelous “al aqsa storm” fought by Fatah and the PA, by all people of good conscience.

Related articles:

The Dangerous ‘Settlers Storming Al Aqsa’ Fiction (October 2023)

Palestinian Authority Continues To Incite Violence Against Jews On Temple Mount (May 2023)

The Noxious Anti-Semitism Of “European Settler Colonialism” (September 2022)

“Settlers” Now Means Jews Stepping Over The Green Line (July 2021)

Replacing the Jordanian Waqf on The Temple Mount (July 2020)

Visitor Rights on the Temple Mount (October 2015)

The Global South Is Coming For The UN Security Council

Posted on by
3

The United Nations has 193 countries in the General Assembly, and 134, roughly 70%, are located in what is generally called the “Global South”, a term that has emerged to replace “third world” and “developing economies.” The region accounts for about 80% of the global population, with the difference in figures mostly due to the two largest populations – India and China – being located in the region.

The UN has many committees and agencies. Of all of them, the UN Security Council is the most significant, being the sole entity that can pass international laws. It has five permanent members – China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the USA – and ten non-permanent members which serve two year terms. More than 50 members of the UN have never served on the UNSC, including Israel.

The current UN Secretary General, Antonio Guterres, thinks that the current UNSC needs to be refashioned for the modern world. He bemoans the fact that no African country has a permanent seat on the council, and the ability for the five permanent members to veto resolutions has allowed some wars – like in Ukraine and Gaza – to continue for too long. He also believes that capitalism as dictated by the Global North has kept the Global South in poverty by charging higher rates of interest and not forgiving debt.

US President Joe Biden favored allowing two African countries to become permanent members of the UNSC but objected to their obtaining veto powers. He thought that the current system of veto rights already made the committee unproductive and adding more members with such rights would impede it further. Others countered that it was time to remove all veto rights. Still others like India, the world’s most populous country, demanded a seat on the committee as well. Arab countries took the opportunity to demand the same.

Negotiations will play out over 2025, with a new US administration under Donald Trump who is much more weary of multilateralism and the United Nations generally. The discussions will mainly focus on Africa, where most of the global growth in population is occurring.

China has invested heavily in Africa, accounting for roughly one-third of the infrastructure projects, and now has global trade of $282 billion with the continent. Its actions helped it surpass the United States in terms of popularity (58% to 56%). The US must consider how it interacts with the African continent directly and what steps it takes at the UN as it fights its shadow war with China.

Those who spend their lives focused on the UN and global politics have been debating which two countries should join the UNSC. If the seats go to the countries with the largest economies, it would favor South Africa ($373 billion) and Egypt ($347 billion). If it is awarded based on population, it would go to Nigeria (232 million) and Ethiopia (132 million). Others consider the Democratic Republic of Congo (109 million and one of the fastest growing population at +3.3% in 2024) which has been decimated by ongoing violence. Including a country which has longed for peace might make sense at the Security Council.

For people who focus on another country which has dreamed of calm – the Jewish State of Israel – the changes to the UNSC are extremely important.

Overall, the Global South is much more anti-Israel than the Global North. All 28 countries that refuse to recognize the State of Israel are located there. Almost every country in the Global South recognizes Palestine while a minority of the Global North recognizes such entity.

Since the Iranian Proxies War on Israel, South Africa has led the charge against Israel at the International Court of Justice, claiming Israel’s defensive war was a “genocide.” Those joining South Africa were almost all from the Global South, with the exceptions of Belgium, Ireland and Spain from Europe.

The dynamic of a change at the UNSC will not only impact Israel but possibly Jews around the world as witnessed by the spike of global antisemitic attacks since the October 7 massacre. In the United States, the majority of international students at universities come from the Global South, and an empowerment of their voices at the Security Council may exacerbate Jew hatred everywhere.

While people are focused on the genocidal jihad that brought violence against Jews in Israel and the United States watching movies like October 8, attention must include the impending harm that may come to Jews everywhere with changes at the United Nations Security Council.

ACTION ITEM

Write the White House to share your concerns of changes to the United Nations Security Council

Related articles:

Global South’s Beachhead On American Universities (March 2025)

Van Hollen Is Grossly Ignorant About Zionism And The Indignity Of UNSC 2334 (January 2025)

Jews Are A Minority-Minority (November 2023)

Global South’s Beachhead On American Universities

Posted on by
12

American universities are in trouble.

Fewer people are going to college and graduate schools. Some of the drop-off relates to people having fewer children so the absolute number of people going to school has been declining. But the percentage of students going from high school to advanced degrees has also fallen considerably. Even in the years before the pandemic, the decline in high schoolers going to college dropped from 70% in 2016 to 63% in 2020. The figure dropped to 61.4% in 2023, with men being the most likely to skip college with only 57.6% opting for that education. The rates for Whites and Blacks were roughly the same at 59.9% and 59.6%, respectively, with Hispanics being lower at 51.8% and Asians surpassing every group at 84.7%. The overall impact can be seen in 2010 college enrollment of 10.2 million women and 7.8 million men, dropping to 8.9 million (-12.7%) and 6.5 million (-16.7%), respectively in 2021.

The reasons that most Americans are skipping college include a strong job market paying good wages, the desire to avoid college debt, people pursuing jobs that don’t require advanced degrees, and the ability to learn many skills online.

To address the declining enrollment, universities are taking many more international students. In the 2023/24 academic year, U.S. universities had over 1.1 million foreign students, a record. These students mostly came from the “Global South,” the emerging, principally non-White economies. The majority of students came from southeast Asia including India (331k), China (277k), Nepal, Vietnam, Bangladesh and Taiwan. No European country was in the top ten. The only countries in the top ten which are part of the Global North were South Korea and Canada. The countries with the largest spike in students over the past year were all from the Global South including Ghana (+45%), Bangladesh (+26%), India (+23%), Iran (+15%) and Nigeria (+13%).

Global North in blue and Global South in red

The student exchange is not reciprocal. Only 280,000 Americans studied abroad and the majority (64%) went to Europe, with Italy, the United Kingdom, Spain, and France dominating the destinations. Two-thirds of those students identified as White.

The Americans abroad tended to go during their undergraduate years, spending just a few months away (only 2.4% went for a year). They tended to be women (67%), and studied business and management (20%) and social sciences (18%). This is in sharp contrast to international students coming to the United States who were typically graduate students pursuing a degree in STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) at 56%.

The international students are older and come for longer periods of time. They often marry and have kids while pursuing their degrees, establishing a foothold in America, while Americans-in-Europe simply have a quick experience away from home.

The universities are very happy to have these paying students fill their classrooms which are being abandoned by Americans. In 2019 and 2020, 49% of all STEM master’s degrees and 57% of all STEM doctorate degrees were conferred to international students. The economics of running courses and an institution without half the students would have required eliminating courses and teachers, and perhaps shutting whole departments.

Technology companies want and need these skilled students as future employees. Google, Apple and Microsoft count on new STEM graduates to fill their ranks each year and lobby the government accordingly. Open Doors estimates that these international students contribute roughly $50 billion to the U.S. economy, or about $5,000 per student.

The U.S. government plays a heavy hand in all of this, not only seeking to salvage American university programs and building feeders to the American technology landscape, but on a political level as well.

Two situations highlight U.S. politics driving international students to these shores: Saudi Arabia and Israel.

As the United States ramped up pressure on the Islamic Republic of Iran regarding its nuclear program from 2007 to 2015, the U.S. sought to reassure its ally, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia which is a foe of Iran. During those years, the number of Saudi students in American universities climbed from just a few thousand to over 61,000. The Saudi students learned courses like petroleum engineering to better extract and process oil, as well as nuclear physics to be able to build nuclear power on their own. Just after the nuclear agreement was signed, the number of Saudi students dropped significantly, down to under 15,000 in the 2023/24 academic year.

To highlight the insanity of the figures above, consider that there are roughly 5.5 million Saudis between the ages of 15 and 24. That means that the 61,287 Saudi students in American colleges in 2015/6 equalled one out of every 90 young Saudis studying in America. By comparison, the same calculation yields one out of 4,400 young people from Bangladesh and one out of 700 young Vietnamese studying in the U.S. Clearly the U.S. was trying to allay Saudi fears by delivering American technological know-how.

American politics playing out for international students from Israel is more explicit, and targets high school students, as long as they are Arabs.

On September 12, 2023, the U.S. embassy in Israel posted an advertisement that the U.S. State Department “is seeking a group of Arab citizens of Israel secondary school students to participate in a Study- in-the-USA initiative for high school students during the 2024-2025 school year.” (bold in original) It is backed by the YES Program Scholarship which gives “many countries with significant Muslim population an opportunity to study at American high schools and live with American host families for one academic year,” funding “all expenses in connection with the study tour including airfare, room and board, pocket money and most other costs.” It is part of the broad U.S. policy to make amends for the “War on Terror,” and selected only non-Jews from the Jewish State to learn in America.

The cherry-picking of certain types of international students demands a deeper exploration of the segments of the Global South that are in American schools.

The Global South has two principal regions as it relates to American immigrants: Latin America and everywhere else.

The United States was primarily populated by European migration from 1840 to 1920. World War I, the Great Depression and World War II stemmed immigration for several decades before it picked up with the 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act. Since that time, 49% of immigrants have come from Latin America and 27% from Asia. These groups are very different. The typical immigrant from Latin America had little formalized education (only 9% of Mexicans in the US in 2022 had a college degree). That compared to those from South Asia where 72% had a college degree, 55% from Central Asia and 49% from East and Southeast Asia.

Those coming from Latin America typically came for jobs not requiring a college degree while those coming from Asia came with degrees or obtained them at American universities.

The demographics between Latin America and Asia are also very different regarding religion.

About 50 million Muslims live in the Global North which has a population of roughly 1.6 billion, or about 3% of the population. It is even lower in Latin America which has roughly 4 million Muslims out of a population of 665 million, or about 0.6%. That is is sharp contrast to roughly 1.8 billion Muslims living in the Global South with a population of 6.4 billion, or roughly 28%, or 31% x-Latin America. If one were to exclude China as well which has around 25 million Muslims, the Global South is over 41% Muslim (x-China and x-Latin America).

While China does not resemble much of the Global South in both religious demographics and not having a history of European countries on its soil, it is now in an aggressive competitive battle against the Global North for power. As such, China is leveraging its regional position alongside the Global South to wage a cultural and economic war against the West.

China and the Global South have advanced efforts to promote anarchy in the United States alongside far-left non-White movements like Justice Democrats. The calls to Defund the Police and Abolish ICE were designed to tear down walls of protection and flood the United States with people from the Global South. The chants to “Globalize the Intifada” on American campuses and streets are calls to dismantle Western civilization’s capitalism and support for the Jewish State, with a broad redistribution of wealth and power to the preferred people in the Global South.

“Intifada” protest at Columbia University streets

When people in the Global North hear the chants of “Intifada,” they recognize the vile terrorism of Palestinian Arabs blowing up buses and pizza stores in the Second Intifada. However, the Global South considers it an Arabic term meaning “shaking off” the colonialism and imperialism of the West. The South’s overriding desire of taking on western civilization overwhelms the facts that Jews are indigenous to the land of Israel and that the Intifada is a premeditated violent attack on civilians. The Islamist Global South rallies to its coreligionists.

Banner with “Intifada” hung outside Columbia University

The population on America’s campuses does not resemble the rest of America. The disproportionate number of Asians and Muslims enrolled at America’s universities come from regions which are in active competition with the West, and embrace the Stateless Arabs from Palestine’s (SAPs) jihadi war against the Jews. The universities which enroll the international students of the Global South, attempt to tie them with American minority groups whose ancestors originated from those regions. Remarkably, a cause like Black Lives Matter which has nothing to do with the Global South, becomes hitched to the Israeli Defense Forces.

These international students principally come to a few states led by California, New York, Texas, Massachusetts, Illinois and Pennsylvania. It is not a coincidence that Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights is launching an investigation against 60 colleges and universities which principally are located in those states.

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) on hearing about antisemitism at universities showcasing “Intifada”

The declining enrollment at American universities has led to them being taken over by international students from Asia and Africa. This has led directly to antisemitism on campuses and in the streets. It was true before the October 7 massacre and has only accelerated since then.

New York City march to “Globalize the Intifada” in September 2021, two years before the October 7 massacre by Gazans

Americans and the Global North are watching the initial battles of the Global South on the beachheads of American universities and are dumbstruck. The West would be well served to reevaluate those international students admitted to study here, and use this time to prepare for the battles to come.

ACTION ITEM

Contact the White House to vet international students coming to study at American universities, trimming the numbers coming from the Global South and making their visas conditional to peaceful behavior.

The Global South in downtown New York City taunting Jews and Israelis attending an exhibition about music lovers slaughtered by Gazans on October 7, 2023

Related articles:

Globalize The Intifada With Socialists (May 2024)

Hamas, CAIR, DSA, Within Our Lifetime, SJP Are All Gunning For Jews (May 2024)

The Normalization Deformity: No To Zionism and Peace; Yes To Massacres and Terrorism In a Global Intifada (January 2024)

Considering Campus Antisemitism (November 2023)

The Problem With Antisemitism On College Campuses Stems From Where Jews And Arabs Focused Their Donations (October 2023)

Biden Enables Anti-Semitism On College Campuses (July 2022)

The Wide Scope of Foreign Interference (November 2020)

Does Gaza Fall Outside Humanitarian Laws?

Posted on by
2

International humanitarian law (IHL) has been established for decades, and many are principally designed to protect civilians during armed conflict. In the case of the Gaza war against Israel, it is questionable whether the laws can be applied to Israel’s actions in the war, not whether Israel is abusing such laws.

Principle of Distinction

The driving themes of IHL surrounds mitigating the harm to non-combatants during hostilities. The first driver is, therefore, to distinguish between combatants and non-combatants. In most battles, this is easy to accomplish: during a clash on a battlefield, the only participants are soldiers. In urban warfare, this is much more difficult.

In the dense Gaza strip, this is virtually impossible.

The various military groups in Gaza are embedded and underneath almost every building and road. Hamas, the popular political-terrorist group that rules Gaza, built an entire infrastructure underneath the city with a maze of 500 kilometers of tunnels and storerooms. The hundreds of exit shafts for much of this infrastructure is located in houses and schools.

Hamas soldiers in Gaza tunnels

Additionally, Gazan combatants dress in civilian clothing and are members of groups which are touted to be neutral including the United Nations, the press and hospital staff.

UNRWA employees and Hamas militants

If civilians and related infrastructure are enmeshed by premeditated design with an active military, then the civilians have become integrated into the war effort and renounced protections of distinction.

Principles of Proportionality and Precaution

IHL’s Principle of Proportionality is designed to minimize collateral damage to civilians when attacking legitimate military targets. It calls for a review of the situation and reducing armaments to make any incidental civilian harm be aligned to the relative military gain achieved. The related Precaution principle is one step further, to try to prevent any military action, if possible.

Israel has taken many actions to limit the harm to civilians – which have been harshly criticized, nevertheless.

  • Withholding electricity and other aid. Israel has attempted to pressure Hamas and other militant groups – which seize all goods into Gaza – by withholding basic items like electricity so Israel would not have to use military force in the region. For those efforts, Israel is accused of causing a humanitarian catastrophe, rather than adhering to the Principles of Precaution
  • Move civilians out of the field of battle. Israel has moved and continues to urge civilians to leave “hot” areas, only to be accused of “ethnic cleansing”
  • Using ground forces. Israel could minimize its own casualties by only using air power against the terrorist enclave. Instead, it seeks a more targeted effort to eliminate combatants and protect civilians, for which it is criticized.

The vast majority of Gazans are in favor of killing Israeli civilians, voted for Hamas with its antisemitic genocidal charter, and supported the October 7 massacre. Gazans are part of the Hamas machinery, and the United Nations defends Hamas and demands that Israel not seek justice for its murdered civilians.

While Gazan authorities threaten to commit the October 7 barbarity over and again, Israel attempts to adhere to international law yet is criticized for it. Even though Israel left Gaza in 2005, and put in place a blockade only when Hamas took full control of the strip in 2007 to follow the Principle of Precaution, it is laughingly accused by international “human rights” groups of a “belligerent occupation.”

The terrorist enclave of Gaza has removed distinctions between civilians and militants, aid workers and terrorists, state and non-state actors, locals and international operators, and civilian infrastructure and military bases in a toxic brew. It defecates on all humanitarian norms while pointing both armaments and accusing fingers at Israel.

As the United Nations and Gazans have themselves destroyed all distinctions between combatants and non-combatants, and declared that Israel can never meet the standards of international humanitarian law, there is no basis to criticize Israel’s handling of its defensive war on such basis.

Related articles:

First Time In History, People Under ‘Genocide’ Reject Ceasefire. Repeatedly. (December 2024)

Palestinians Publicly Go Full Genocidal Jihadi (August 2024)

Ban Ki Moon Defecates on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (December 2016)

UN’s Confusion on the Legality of Israel’s Blockade of Gaza (July 2015)

Mirroring “Illegal” Designations: UNSC 2334 And UNRWA

Posted on by
Reply

The United Nations created a temporary agency in 1949 to care for Palestinian Arabs who left Israel during Israel’s founding. It’s called UNRWA, the United Nations Work and Relief Agency. The staff of over 30,000 people are almost all descendants of those Palestinian Arab “refugees” with a few White Europeans sprinkled on the leadership to make the organization appear as an international aid group, rather than an employment agency.

UNRWA has long abused its mandate, extending services to hundreds of thousands of people who are not descendants of “refugees”, essentially becoming a bank in distributing loans to local Arabs, and teaching millions of its Arab wards to hate Israeli Jews and that they will get to move into Israel with UNRWA’s help.

After years of perpetuating the conflict, Israel decided to ban UNRWA from operating in Israel as of January 30, 2025, as many of its members took part in the October 7 massacre and others worked for terrorist groups outside of Gaza, including in Lebanon. As UNRWA only operates in conjunction with the host country of operations, keeping operations in Jerusalem open after Israel declared it illegal would not just make it operating against Israeli law but its own principles.

Yet UNRWA is continuing to operate in Jerusalem.

Freed Israeli hostages said that they were held in UNRWA facilities while in captivity.

Yet UNRWA still contends that it is “essential” and “critical.“

So UNRWA acts defiantly, even though in knows full well that it is doing so illegally.

It is reminiscent of UN Security Council Resolution 2334 which made it illegal for Israeli Jews to live east of the 1949 Armistice Lines with Jordan (E49AL), including the Old City of Jerusalem. It is a patently antisemitic law, enshrined after nearly three-quarters of a million Jews already live in the area, so Israel ignores it and allows Jews to continue to buy and build homes in the area.

The press often labels Jews who live in E49AL as “settlers,” whether they live in new settlements or large cities. The term “settlement” is a wandering noun which travels with antisemites who label Jews as illegal trespassers. Media compounds the narrative, often appending language “which most of the world considers illegal” whenever discussing a “settlement.”

Will that same media now label UNRWA’s operations in Gaza and the “West Bank” as illegal? Or will it prefer to mock Israeli law, quite the opposite of its christening antisemitic UNSC Res. 2334.

Will members of the UN Security Council consider trading Israel’s ban of UNRWA with rescinding the antisemitic UNSC Resolution 2334 to facilitate aid to Gaza and promote coexistence? It has never been the modus operandi of the United Nations, but the times, they are a changin’.

Related articles:

After UNRWA (February 2024)

The Only Way The Conflict Can End (November 2023)

“Land Belonging to Palestinians Before the 1967 War” (November 2021)

Trump Reverses the Carter and Obama Anti-Israel UN Resolutions (November 2019)

Time to Dissolve Key Principles of the “Inalienable Rights of Palestinians” (December 2017)

The Legal Israeli Settlements (December 2014)