Genocidal War Versus Ethnic Cleansing War

There are two wars taking place in Gaza: one is a textbook definition of a genocidal war while the other is a reluctant war of ethnic cleansing.

While critics of the Jewish State hurl the term “genocide” as a weapon, a blood libel designed to strip Israel of its legitimacy, it is an inversion: it is Hamas and only Hamas that is engaged in a genocide.

Hamas’s 1988 foundational charter is not a vague political platform. It is an open call to murder Jews. Article 7 quotes an Islamic hadith that urges Muslims to kill Jews wherever they find them. Article 13 states that “initiatives and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement.” Peace is forbidden. Coexistence is a crime.

And the Palestinian people did not reject this vision; they embraced it. In 2005, they elected Mahmoud Abbas as president — a man who wrote his doctoral thesis denying the Holocaust. In 2006, they voted Hamas into power, giving the genocidal group 58% of the parliament. These were not fringe votes. These were popular, democratic choices made in full view of Hamas’s open ideology.

Then came October 7, 2023.

In the worst massacre of Jews since the Holocaust, Hamas — the ruling government of Gaza — unleashed its long-promised war of annihilation. They murdered 1,200 people, from babies in cribs to elderly women in wheelchairs. They burned families alive, filmed their atrocities, and broadcast their bloodlust to the world. The Palestinian street erupted in celebration. Polls showed 75% of Palestinian Arabs supporting the massacre of Jews.

This was not a surprise. This was fulfillment. A generation raised on genocidal propaganda in schools, mosques, and television carried out what they had been taught. They were not rebelling against Hamas — they were Hamas. Thousands of Gazans participated in the October 7 slaughter.

Polls from Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research

Israel, faced with an existential threat, responded. It had tried the diplomatic route. It had withdrawn from Gaza in 2005. It had allowed billions of dollars in humanitarian aid to flow into the Strip. It had mostly tolerated rocket fire and bus bombings and flaming kites with modest responses. But after October 7, there was no possibility of a tepid response with a group with an increasing capacity to carry out its genocidal intent.

Israel launched a war of necessity — a war to end the Hamas threat once and for all. The goal was not genocide, but defense. Not extermination, but eradication of a terrorist force.

But the nature of this war is highly complex. Hamas does not engage Israel’s army on an open battlefield but underneath hospitals, mosques and homes. It warehouses missiles in schools and launches them from playgrounds. There is no ability to eliminate the terrorists without severe destruction to dual-use civilian-military infrastructure and significant collateral damage.

And that looks a lot like ethnic cleansing.

Gaza ruins

Ethnic cleansing refers to the forced removal of an ethnic or religious group from a territory. And yes, it is possible that the outcome of Israel’s war will be a Gaza without many Palestinian Arabs. Gaza cannot be rebuilt atop terrorist tunnels and booby traps. The terrorist enclave that Gazans built since 2007 cannot remain nor be replicated.

It has long been a sign of instilled antisemitism that the United Nations has accused Israel of genocide, at least as far back as 2013, as a mask for Palestinian Arabs genocidal intentions. It is a classic form of the adage “the best defense is a good offense,” accusing Israel of the crimes of Palestinian Arabs, forcing Israel into a defensive posture, both militarily and politically.

But it is another level of tragic irony that in this defensive war, Israel is open to the accusation of ethnic cleansing.

No nation on earth has faced the choices Israel faces. No other country is expected to coexist with a neighbor whose elected leaders seek its annihilation. No one wants to see civilian suffering but Israel has tried every alternative — and the price has always been paid in Jewish blood.

The world is watching a premeditated war of genocide – which it enabled and encouraged through the United Nations’ statements and actions – be defeated by a small, determined country. The contours of that victory may appear to the casual viewer as ethnic cleansing, and will certainly be marketed as such by Israel haters, as a cruel collective punishment against civilians and so-called “refugees.”

The Global North will consider “ethnic cleansing” as the lesser charge relative to the smear of “genocide” long advanced by the Global South. Will the resulting actions encourage and enable the next genocidal war against the Jewish State remains to be seen.

Related:

There Is No ‘Genocide’ Against Infrastructure (January 2024)

Palestinian Mothers Engage In Grotesque Prostitution Of Their Children (August 2023)

Jews “In Any Part Of Palestine”

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.

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.

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 7s of 2001 and 2023: Global Jihad Against Infidels

On October 7, 2001, Osama bin Laden released a speech just hours after the United States began airstrikes in Afghanistan against the Taliban and al-Qaeda, in response to the September 11 terrorist attacks. The message wasn’t veiled nor political. It was explicitly religious: a jihad.

Bin Laden declared, “America struck by God Almighty in one of its vital organs, so that its greatest buildings are destroyed. Grace and gratitude to God,” praising Allah for the 9/11 attacks. He wasn’t waging war over oil, sanctions, or American foreign policy. He was answering what he believed was a divine command to wage jihad—to rid Muslim lands of infidels.

God has blessed a group of vanguard Muslims, the forefront of Islam, to destroy America. May God bless them and allot them a supreme place in heaven.”

Osama Bin Laden on October 7, 2001, praying for the Islamic terrorists who committed the 9/11 attacks on the United States

This was a war incumbent upon “every Muslim,” not Afghanis or Iraqis. It was a battle against “infidels,” not just Americans. Bin Laden cast western values as “paganism,” stoking a religious war. He was incensed about American troops in the “Peninsula of Muhammad” (Saudi Arabia) and Jews living in “Palestine.”

Osama Bin Laden speech on October 7, 2001, just after America began to respond to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001

Exactly 22 years later, on October 7, 2023, the radical Islamist group Hamas unleashed an unprovoked massacre against Israeli civilians, murdering babies, burning families alive, raping women, and taking hundreds hostage. The attack was ideological, theological, and genocidal. And the date was no coincidence. It marked a continuation of the same jihad that bin Laden declared in 2001—a war against Jews and the West, justified not by grievances, but by scripture.

The Global Jihad Doctrine

The doctrine of jihad—holy war in the path of Allah—is foundational to groups like al-Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Islamic State. It is not merely an internal spiritual struggle, as modern apologists in the West often portray it. For these groups, jihad is a call to arms against unbelievers, to expand the domain of Islam and purify it of non-Muslim presence.

Bin Laden was clear in 2001: the “world [is divided] into two camps, the camp of the faithful and the camp of infidels… Every Muslim must rise to defend his religion. The wind of faith is blowing and the wind of change is blowing to remove evil from the Peninsula of Muhammad, peace be upon him.”

It was an echo of Hamas’s foundational charter: “Israel, Judaism and Jews challenge Islam and the Moslem people (Article 28) and “the spread of vice on earth and the destruction of religious values… fight with the warmongering Jews.” (Article 32) Their twisted view of Islam is that a religious jihad is a clash of good Muslims versus evil non-Muslims that can only be resolved through violence: “There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time.” (Article 13)

On the anniversary of America’s war on terror, Hamas launched what it called the “Al-Aqsa Flood”, naming the massacre after an Islamic mosque in Jerusalem. The Arabs slaughtered civilians in their homes and at a music festival as an offering to Allah. Dead women were paraded through Gaza to the cheers of the crowd, a spectacle with no military purpose other than to rile up Gazans to scream “Allahu Akhbar” God is greater – than you.

Murdered Young woman paraded through streets of Gaza to cheering crowds which spat on her body on October 7, 2023.

The enemy, in their eyes, is not just Israeli or US policy—it is the very existence of Jews, Christians, and secularism in lands they define as Islamic.

The War the West Refuses to Recognize

Despite the clear intent, the West continues to deny the religious nature of this war. Politicians, academics, and media pundits try to cast Hamas as a localized “resistance movement,” or claim it’s a response to the Israeli government. But Hamas’s founding documents and speeches speak for themselves. Their goal is not statehood. It is the total eradication of the Jewish people from what they view as purely Islamic land, or as Bin Laden calls it, “dar al-Islam.”

Radical Islamists believe that Israel is a temporary entity, just as Russian and American presence in Afghanistan was short-lived. American troops fleeing Kabul in 2021 was a confirmation of their beliefs, much like Israel’s abandoning Gaza in 2005. Allah rewards perseverance. Time is on their side.

Jihadists in the Islamic Republic of Iran call America the “Big Satan” and Israel the “Little Satan.” Perhaps it is time to state the obvious inverse: Al Qaeda and the Taliban are the “Big Satans” and Hamas and Hezbollah are the “Little Satans.”

Until the West acknowledges that jihad is not a grievance but a theology, it will continue to lose the war it refuses to name. October 7 was not an aberration; it was a declaration. It is being repeated on western streets under the banner “globalize the Intifada,” and excused by radical politicians to secure power to defeat capitalism and Judeo-Christian values.

Unless the west answers with moral clarity, military resolve, and promotes moderate Muslims, the tidal wave of jihadists will drown us before long.

Related:

For The Love Of Jihad (June 2025)

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)

The DSA Is Systematically Coming For Zionist Jews (August 2023)

The Epicenters, Diameter and Echoes of 9/11 (September 2021)

I’m Offended, You’re Dead (February 2015)

Pick Your Jihad; Choose Your Infidel (September 2014)

Names and Narrative: “Two State Solution” Versus “Question of SAPs”

For decades, diplomats, academics, and international institutions have spoken in rote terms about a “two-state solution” to the Israeli-Palestinian Arab conflict. The problem is that such framing is intellectually dishonest and dangerously outdated.

There already is a state—Israel. It is not a hypothetical solution; it is a living reality. A sovereign nation with a vibrant democracy, a powerful military, a thriving economy, and a diverse citizenry, including over two million Arab citizens. Israel has fought for its survival, defended its borders, absorbed Jewish refugees from around the world, and became the most advanced and liberal society in the Middle East.

It is not a concept to be debated—it is a geopolitical fact.

Framing Israel as one part of a “two-state solution,” as if it were an idea or obstacle fundamentally misrepresents the situation. It inherently delegitimizes the struggle of millions of Israelis who sacrificed to build their nation since 1948 and casts their future into uncertainty.

We are not in 1947.

So let’s reframe the question. The only real debate is about the SAPs—the stateless Arab from Palestine. What is the just, secure, and realistic political future for them?

That opens multiple options—not a binary choice between creating “Palestine” or “occupation,” but a nuanced discussion based on facts on the ground and historical behavior. It reorients the discussion to the SAPs who seek an answer and thereby considers THEIR statements, sentiments, and actions rather than placing the scrutiny and opprobrium on Israel, which inherently strips SAPs of agency and responsibility.

Should the SAPs get a full sovereign state even after the dominant political party engaged in genocidal acts? Can SAPs be trusted with statehood and a military while state media glorifies terrorism and denies both Jewish history and Israel’s right to exist, and tramples on human rights?

Now, under the misguided focus on Israel as part of the “two-state solution,” the United Nations Human Rights Council has a standing item (Agenda 7) focused only on Israel. Similarly, UN Security Council passed Resolution 2334, which only reviews the actions of Israel. Nowhere does the UN focus on the actions and statements of SAPs and their leadership to consider the best course for their future. It’s a fatal flaw, one of many self-inflicted tragedies that the UN has instilled into the region.

The UN fails to comment and address:

  • The Palestinian Authority (PA) priority on paying salaries to the families of terrorists.
  • The barbaric attack of Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad on October 7, 2023, and overwhelming support it had amongst SAPs.
  • The vile antisemitic Hamas foundational charter which brought the party to 58% of parliament.
  • The ongoing failure of Palestinian parties to reconcile under a single governing entity.
  • The deeply corrupt and unpopular PA.
  • A deformity in local culture in which the majority of SAPs have always wanted to kill Jewish Israeli civilians.
  • A PA media and school system that promotes antisemitism and incites hatred.
  • A society with various armed groups which refuse to disarm that are more popular than the PA.

Instead, the UN focuses on misdirection towards Israel and masquerades the reality of SAPs. It gives the PA seats at UN panels and committees even though it has no power, support or authority, parading a fake caricature of the situation. This does nothing to help SAPs address the failure of its society nor hold it accountable for its actions.

For the UN, the answer to the question of SAPs is the creation of a new state for local Arabs which should be Jew-free. Remarkably, the global body cannot ponder that such goal is deeply antisemitic. Equally as pathetic, the failure to consider any other solution to statehood grants SAPs a free hand to commit any sort of atrocity.

The Question of SAPs must not have a forgone conclusion. That approach has failed for years at the price of thousands of lives.

Maybe SAPs can have a state-minus—something akin to post-WWII Japan: self-governance, civil services, education, cultural autonomy—but demilitarized, with security handled by an external guarantor to prevent further war and terror.

Or perhaps certain areas of the West Bank could be confederated with Jordan, whose population is majority SAPs already. Maybe Jordan itself should be divided whereby a section would be part of a Palestinian State together with parts of the West Bank.

The area east of the 1949 Armistice Lines (E49AL) might remain under Israeli sovereignty with SAPs having semi-autonomous status—akin to Native American reservations in the U.S., which have self-rule in many areas but rely on the larger state for defense, currency, and diplomacy. Or the areas get annexed and the residents get Israeli citizenship.

These are serious, legitimate proposals worthy of debate.

Buildings on both sides of Security barrier in Jerusalem (photo: First One Through)

But let’s be clear: any outcome is about solving the question of what to do with the SAPs. It is not about creating two states. Israel is already there.

The time has come to retire the “two-state solution” slogan. Not because peace is impossible—but because clarity and focus are essential.

Related:

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

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

“Two States For Two People” And An Arab “Right Of Return” Are Mutually Exclusive (September 2023)

France Hates “Foreign Interference” in France, Loves It For Israel

In November 2023, the French Parliamentary Delegation for Intelligence (DPR) identified Russia, China, Turkey and Iran as the primary countries involved in “omnipresent and lasting threat[s]” of foreign interference in France and Europe. The committee pointed to “fake news is a weapon of war against the West,” and noted that China has about 250,000 agents on the ground.

The DPR report chastised French society for not doing more, noting “the first vulnerability is naivety, which stems from a lack of awareness of the danger. This concerns public decision-makers (elected representatives and senior civil servants) as well as businesses and academic circles…. These foreign powers are also taking advantage of a form of naivety and denial that has long prevailed in Europe.”

The threat is more than “fake news.” Russia was accused of paying three Serbian nationals of anti-Jewish vandalism in France last week. This is similar to the October 2023 situation of Russians accused of paying Moldovan nationals of antisemitic vandalism.

The French government has not been unaware. In January 2023, France forced Russian-owned media RT to shut down to curtail its negative influence on French society. In October 2020, President Emmanuel Macron announced plans to deport 231 foreigners who held radical Islamic beliefs, two days after a Russian-born Islamist beheaded a teacher in France. The country has continued the policy, expelling a Tunisian imam in February 2024 who had “backward, intolerant, and violent conception of Islam, likely to encourage behaviors contrary to the values of the Republic, discrimination against women, identity retreat, tensions with the Jewish community, and jihadist radicalization.”

Macron announced plans to fight radical Islamism after beheading of a teacher who showed a picture of the Islamic prophet Mohammed, a year after calling Islam a “religion in crisis.”

In May 2025, the French government declassified a report titled “The Muslim Brotherhood and Political Islam in France.” The 73-page document describes how the organization is destabilizing French society through schools, mosques and community centers. The group is funded by foreign governments and has an estimated 100,000 members in France (about 0.15% of the population).

The French government knows of the dangers of radical Islam outside of the country as well. Hamas, the Palestinian arm of the Muslim Brotherhood, is a designated terrorist group by the European Union, and France stated in December 2023 that it would work with the EU to dry up the terrorist group’s funding. Yet France encourages “inter-Palestinian reconciliation” which would include Hamas in the Palestinian Authority government. France also backs UNRWA, the agency that seeks to move millions of Stateless Arabs from Palestine (SAPs) into Israel, despite them seeking the end of the Jewish State.

So despite France fighting the dangers of radical Islam and foreign influence inside France (which make up a miniscule percentage of the population), it seeks to use the June 2025 United Nations conference it will co-chair, to have several nations pressure Israel to embed radical jihadism inside the Jewish State.

According to Jewish Insider, French conservative intellectual Michel Gurfinkiel said that “the main point of the [French Muslim Brotherhood] report is not what it says about the Muslim Brotherhood. The real point is the conclusion that the French government should make efforts to bring French Muslims into the French fold, and that means … to recognize a state of Palestine. There is a kind of interplay here: the interior minister wanted to publish the report in order to give legitimacy to his own policy against Islamism in France. But it was published with the approval of President Macron … and obviously, the real goal of the president was to tell everybody, ‘I must recognize a State of Palestine because it is the only way for us to fight the Muslim Brotherhood.‘”

French President Emmanuel Macron and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu strained relationship over the Hamas war

Macron’s “France First” policy will attempt to sacrifice Israel to radical Islamism in an effort to buy a few years of peace with the small but growing Muslim Brotherhood in France. He may believe that such move will curtail attacks against the 450,000 Jews in the country as well, despite such maneuvers forcing Israel to continue to battle Hamas, yielding more global attacks against Jews.

There are constructive things that France can do with Saudi Arabia to fight foreign influence and radical jihadism, and it is not to recognize a Palestinian state:

  • France and Saudi Arabia should clearly state that they define all aspects of Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood to be terrorist organizations. It would be banned and a criminal offense for anyone to voice or express support or solidarity with those entities. Consequently, any Palestinian government that included Hamas would be isolated and not receive any funding or support. Both countries will encourage other countries to do the same.
  • The SAPs so-called “Right of Return” to homes where grandparents lived will only be settled via financial mechanisms, and no SAPs will have an “inalienable right” to move to Israel. Israel will be the sole party which decides who enters its borders, as every sovereign nation does.

These two steps lay the groundwork for SAPs to reorient their culture from the destruction of Israel towards building a new country. It would be the correct and consistent path for France to combat foreign influence and extremist Islamism, both in France and in Israel.

Related articles:

What Will France’s “Concrete” Steps Be To Advance A “Two State Solution”? (May 2025)

Does the UN Only Grant Inalienable Rights to Palestinians? (May 2021)

France’s Hypocrisy Expelling Radical Extremist Non-Citizens (November 2020)

The New Salman Abedi High School for Boys in England and the Mohamed Lahouaiej Bouhlel Soccer Tournament in France (May 2017)

At the UN, Protecting Hamas Trumps Aiding Gazans

The United Nations Security Council is comprised of five permanent members (P5) and ten elected members (E10) who try to pass resolutions to promote global and regional peace and cooperation. It fails repeatedly regarding the Arab-Israeli conflict as it prioritizes protecting the political-terrorist group Hamas above all else.

On June 4, 2025, E10 put forward a draft resolution which “demand[ed] an immediate, unconditional, and permanent ceasefire in Gaza; the immediate, dignified, and unconditional release of all hostages held by Hamas and other groups; and the immediate and unconditional lifting of all restrictions on the entry of humanitarian aid into the territory.”

The acting US Representative Dorothy Shea vetoed the draft resolution saying “US opposition to this resolution should come as no surprise – it is unacceptable for what it does say, it is unacceptable for what it does not say, and it is unacceptable for the manner in which it has been advanced. The United States has been clear: we would not support any measure that fails to condemn Hamas and does not call for Hamas to disarm and leave Gaza.” She added “We cannot allow the Security Council to award Hamas’ intransigence. Hamas and other terrorists must have no future in Gaza. As Secretary [Marco] Rubio has said: ‘If an ember survives, it will spark again into a fire’.”

Knowing that the United States would use its veto right to reject the resolution, one is left with two conclusions: the rest of the Security Council wanted the US to veto the resolution, or they care more about protecting Hamas than civilians in Gaza.

Perhaps the fourteen UNSC countries want Israel to continue the war but want to placate their pro-Palestinian constituents, appearing to support Gazans while knowing that no relief would happen until Hamas is defeated. Maybe the countries want Israel and the United States to both look isolated – the “little Satan” and “Big Satan” as the Islamic Republic of Iran calls them – hoping to curry favor among the Global South, with 80% of the world’s population.

Either way, the world cannot really believe there is a genocide happening in Gaza, if the path to a ceasefire was simply adding two lines calling for Hamas to surrender.

Related articles:

A Reminder That The UN Security Council Protects Hamas (April 2025)

UNSC Makes Slow Progress In Calling Out Hamas (March 2025)

United Nations Still Will Not Call For Hamas To Face Justice (October 2024)

Hold CAIR Accountable for Antisemitic Violence

Over the past several years, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) has attempted to build a public image as a civil rights organization. In reality, it has become a hub for dangerous rhetoric, particularly against Israel, Jews and their supporters — rhetoric that is no longer just hateful speech but contributing to real-world violence.

A Track Record of Hate

CAIR’s leaders have spent the last several years referring to Zionists as “enemies,” dismissed Israel’s right to self-defense, and objected to Jewish synagogues being protected. The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) has tracked dozens of examples where the leadership of CAIR representatives used inflammatory and dehumanizing language to describe Israel and those who support it.

These aren’t just policy critiques. This is language that paints Jews, Israelis, and their supporters as existential threats — language that demonizes Jews and encourages acts of extremism. When you call someone a colonizer, an oppressor, a baby-killer, or genocide supporter, you invite violence against them.

And now, we’re seeing the consequences.

From Words to Violence

In recent weeks, two Israelis were shot and killed in Washington, D.C. outside a Jewish cultural event, in what’s being investigated as a targeted hate crime. A few days ago, an Egyptian man firebombed Jewish civilians walking peacefully in Boulder, CO in support of hostages taken by Gazans from Israel.

CAIR was quick to issue a press release condemning the Boulder attack. But make no mistake: the climate that led to these incidents didn’t appear out of nowhere. It was built brick by brick, tweet by tweet, speech by speech — by organizations like CAIR that have spent years demonizing Israel and portraying supporters of Israel as evil, illegitimate, and dangerous.

The Debate And Inversion About Material Support For Genocide

Legally speaking, genocide requires intent to destroy a group “in whole or in part.” Hamas, the political-terrorist group which leads Gaza, is the very definition of a genocidal group. Hamas’s incredible support in Gaza and the West Bank and for the barbaric massacre it conducted in Israel on October 7, 2023, is a condemnation of the gross deformity in Palestinian culture today.

The Stateless Arabs from Palestine (SAPs) are providing material support to Hamas. They elected it to 58% of parliament in 2006, stand as sentries over their terrorist tunnels in Gaza and continue to want Hamas to survive to destroy Israel, even after being pummeled in the war it initiated over 600 days ago.

SAP support for the October 7 “offensive” has declined to 50% in May 2025 from 72% in December 2023 according to PCPSR polls, remaining popular

CAIR’s support for the SAPs and their war to destroy Israel has been unwavering. It supported the October 7 attacks while Hamas was still burning families alive, making then President Biden remove CAIR from the taskforce to combat antisemitism. CAIR continues to support SAPs in the war, and calls Gazans’ failure to commit a genocide of Jews, a genocide perpetrated by Israel, in an attempted absolution via inversion.

Leader of CAIR on October 7, 2023 supporting Palestinians massacre of civilians in Israel

CAIR has been careful to avoid direct financial support for Hamas, and has seemingly kept its activities on a vocal level. It had been caught in the past being linked to the terrorist group Holy Land Foundation, which provided material support to Hamas, and is attempting to avoid becoming a banned entity.

To all appearances, to make up for its inability to materially back the antisemitic horde in Gaza, CAIR has ratcheted the language it uses for Israel and its supporters. In doing so, it has created a toxic swamp of Jew hatred in the United States.

Leader of CAIR San Francisco speaking at American Muslims For Palestine event November 2021

Has CAIR provided material support of a genocide of Jews in Israel? It has probably avoided that in a court of law. But abetting a genocide of Jews in the United States? It seems clear that it is doing so, despite the veneer of its condemnation of the Boulder attack. Sanctifying the burning of Jews alive in Israel endorses the burning of Jews in Boulder, despite the wink to the press.

Home of Israeli family burned by Gazans during October 7, 2023 massacre

Just a few months before Gazans launched its war of extermination, United Nations Secretary General Antonio Guterres delivered remarks for the anniversary of the 1994 Rwanda genocide against the Tutsi. He flagged hate speech as the “key indicator of the risk of genocide.”

How easily hate speech — a key indicator of the risk of genocide — turns to hate crime.  How complacency in the face of atrocity is complicity.  And how no place, and no time is immune to danger — including our own.

UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres

CAIR’s vilification of Jewish groups caught the attention of The Investigative Project on Terrorism back in December 2021. The vitriol from the CAIR has only increased since the October 7 attack.

Why This Matters for America

The attacks in Boulder and Washington aren’t isolated incidents — they’re part of a pattern. Jewish Americans are the most targeted group for hate crimes per capita in the United States – far above Blacks or members of the LGBT community. Yet groups like CAIR continue to push rhetoric that fuels that fire while pretending to stand for peace.

Enough is enough.

We can — and must — defend free speech. But we must also hold public figures and organizations accountable for the real-world consequences of their words. That starts by demanding that CAIR and others stop using anti-Zionism as a cover for antisemitism, stop dehumanizing Israelis and their supporters, and start owning up to the damage they’ve done. Their Diaspora Intifada is killing Jews here in America.

Jews have every right to safety and dignity. If CAIR can’t accept that, then maybe it’s time the rest of us stop accepting CAIR as a legitimate voice in our public discourse.

Related articles:

Colorful Antisemitic Manifestos Are At Your Lips (May 2025)

The Diaspora Intifada (September 2024)

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

CAIR On October 7 Sadistic Massacre (December 2023)

End the War: Ban Hamas, Permanently

As the war from Gaza continues to take its devastating toll on everyone involved, the road to peace remains blocked by a singular, stubborn obstacle: Hamas. The group’s leadership refuses to accept ceasefires not out of strength, but from the conviction that they can endure, rearm, and fight again. The violence will not end as long as Hamas is allowed to believe it has a future.

It is time for the international community – particularly Western democracies – to take an unambiguous stand. Hamas must be permanently banned—not just its military wing, but its entire structure. There can be no meaningful peace, no rebuilding of Gaza, and no credible peaceful future while Hamas continues to hold power and wield influence.

Despite the mounting civilian cost, Hamas has shown no intention of disarming. The group openly positions itself as a perpetual “resistance force” rather than a governing body accountable to and respecting the people of Gaza. Its survival strategy is predicated on suffering—banking on civilian casualties to inflame global opinion while preserving its own arsenal in tunnels and bunkers. This is not governance. This is terrorism dressed in political clothing.

Hamas official boasts of sacrificing his own civilian population to slaughter Jewish civilians, shortly after the October 7, 2023 massacre in Israel (source: MEMRI)

Yet in Europe, the designation of Hamas as a terrorist organization remains inconsistent. Some countries distinguish between its so-called “military” and “political” wings, an artificial and dangerous separation. This division gives cover to operatives, fundraising networks, and propaganda arms that prolong the conflict and contribute to ongoing suffering.

Now, there is growing concern in the United Kingdom, where a legal effort is underway to challenge Hamas’s terrorist designation. This must not be allowed to succeed. On the contrary, the UK should lead Europe in reaffirming that Hamas is a terrorist entity in its entirety. Such a stance must be echoed by Germany, France, the Netherlands, and the rest of the EU. It must happen in Canada and Australia and throughout the Global North.

UK lawyers are fighting to get Hamas removed from the list of terrorist groups

Riverway Law submitted a 106-page filing in the UK which argued that Hamas is a local “resistance movement… which has won the only free and fair election in the occupied Palestinian territories” and it “poses no threat to the UK people.” The submission argued that “the legitimacy of the struggle of the Palestinian people for independence, territorial integrity, national unity and liberation from colonial and alien domination and foreign occupation by all available means, including armed struggle, is moral [and] legitimate.”

Lost in this filing is that the legal definition of terrorism is about targeting civilians for political aims. That is the core mission of Hamas. Its stated purpose and actions on, before and after October 7, 2023 is to attack Jewish civilians inside Israel and around the world.

To wit, in April 2022, Yahya Sinwar, the Hamas leader who would later spearhead the October 2023 massacre in Israel said “Whoever makes the decision to repeat this desecration of the Al-Aqsa Mosque will be making a decision to desecrate thousands of synagogues and Jewish temples all over the world,” explicitly saying that actions done by the Israeli government would be reason to take actions against Jews around the world, including in the UK.

The invective is a grisly echo of the 1988 foundational Hamas Charter which explicitly cites the antisemitic forgery Protocols of the Elder of Zion about the supposed vile nature of Jews everywhere. It claims that Jews conspire to control the world and “Islamic groupings all over the Arab world should… fight with the warmongering Jews (Article 32).” The Hamas charter uses the word “world” twenty-five times. “Globe” is used twice. “Jew” – not “Zionist” – is used twelve times, including stating “Israel, Judaism and Jews challenge Islam and the Moslem people, (Article 28)” targeting Jews everywhere and the religion itself as a permanent offense to 1.9 billion Muslims.

It was with this antisemitic genocidal charter that Palestinians voted Hamas to the majority of parliament in 2006. That this vile party won elections – like the Nazi party in Germany – is not a defense of its legitimacy but a condemnation of the “deformity in Palestinian culture,” to quote James Zogby, President of the Arab American Institute comment at the United Nations Security Council on June 27, 2023.

Banning Hamas is not only a matter of principle, but of practical necessity. No group that openly glorifies violence and opposes basic coexistence can have any legitimate role in governance.

Ghazi Hamad of the Hamas political bureau said in an October 24, 2023 show on LBC TV (Lebanon) that Hamas is prepared to repeat the October 7 “Al-Aqsa Flood” Operation time and again until Israel is annihilated. (source: MEMRI)

A political party that glorifies the death of its own population with public declarations “we are called a nation of martyrs, and we are proud to sacrifice martyrs,” shows no value for the lives of its own civilians, let alone of others. The Global North must lead with moral clarity and urge the Arab League to follow suit.

When people on the streets and campuses in the Global North yell “Free Palestine,” they are doing so under the banner of Hamas in a call to eradicate the only Jewish State and to attack Jews globally. If people want to make the argument that the statement is for coexistence, then fight to end Hamas, argue for a Free Israel and to Create Palestine, and condemn the heinous attacks on Jews happening all over the world.

To end this war, we must end Hamas. Ban them—politically, financially, and globally. Only then can people talk about “the day after,” and the longer future.

ACTION ITEMS

Contact members of the British parliament to keep Hamas on the list of terrorist groups.

Contact the French office of foreign affairs to explicitly push to ban Hamas’s existence.

Related articles:

A Reminder That The UN Security Council Protects Hamas (April 2025)

United Nations Still Will Not Call For Hamas To Face Justice (October 2024)

Stop Genocide. Destroy Hamas (May 2024)

The Only Way The Conflict Can End (November 2023)

Say Its Name: ‘Hamas’ (October 2023)

Hamas And Harvard Proudly Declare Their Anti-Semitism And Anti-Zionism (May 2022)

Hamas’s Willing Executioners (July 2021)

The West Definitively Concludes Hamas is a Terrorist Group (June 2021)

A Proper UN Security Council Resolution on Israel and HAMAS (May 2021)

Considering Nazis and Radical Islam on the 75th Anniversary of D-Day (June 2019)

UN’s Guterres Only Hates Israeli Jews, Not Diplomats

United Nations Secretary General Antonio Guterres is first and foremost a politician, not a human being. What else can be the reasons behind his ignoring the slaughter of 1,200 people in Israel, burning entire towns, raping women and kidnapping 250 people, other than serving his constituents of the Global South whom he has learned are rabid antisemites?

When a radical socialist-jihadi gunned down two young Israeli diplomats outside a Jewish event in Washington, D.C. in May 2025, Guterres immediately issued a statement condemning the murders. It was something he did not do after the massacre in Israel on October 7, 2023. Or October 8. Or October 9. Or October 10.

But he rose to the occasion in May 2025 after the targeted killing of the Israeli couple by a lunatic yelling “Free, free Palestine,” as if he were surrounded by fantom college campus agitators. Perhaps anticipating blowback from the anti-Israel horde he leads (read serves), Guterres explained this statement “reiterat[ing] his consistent condemnation of attacks against diplomatic officials.”

THIS particular antisemitic murderer should be “brought to justice” because he killed diplomats, a Bozo no-no. In this circumstance, the UN “extends sympathies to the Government of Israel,” because members of the sacred circle of high brow governmental officials were gunned down, not Jews having breakfast with their kids in their kitchens.

The thousands of butchered and injured people in Israel by over 3,000 Gazans in October 2023 were just Jews and therefore deserved no sympathy from the United Nations. Guterres could not offer any words of condemnation or consolation to the Jewish State for such barbarity; he has been so trained by the Global South. His office would not demand that thousands of Gazans “be brought to justice”; they are the UN’s protected wards.

When the head of the United Nations explained to the world that he decided to quickly condemn the murder of two Israelis when he ignored the butchering of 1,200, because of unity among diplomats, he further exposed the profound inhumanity of the cancerous global institution.

Related:

Killing 26 Hindus in Kashmir Is Much Worse Than Butchering 1,200 Jews In Israel. For The UN. (April 2025)

The Global South Is Coming For The UN Security Council (March 2025)

Fire United Nations Secretary General Antonio Guterres (January 2024)

UN Secretary General Guterres is Losing the Confidence of Decent People (September 2017)

What Will France’s “Concrete” Steps Be To Advance A “Two State Solution”?

On May 23, 2025, France said it is “determined to advance the implementation of the two state solution.” The June conference in New York that it will chair with Saudi Arabia titled “the International Conference for the Peaceful Settlement of the Palestinian Question and the Implementation of the Two-State Solution” is designed to focus on IMPLEMENTATION. France made clear that it expects “Irreversible steps and concrete measures for its implementation” to make the future a reality.

The combined effort of a western country and the dominant force in the Arab world to spearhead the effort, might lead to a balanced consensus that can help the parties forward. To be successful, the team must be realistic about the goals and constraints of both Israel and Palestinian society, and move on a realistic timeframe. Most importantly, it must work on an ENDURING peace that will last, not simply getting to an agreement.

Here are seven constructive steps that could lead to a stable two-state solution:


1. Disarm All Palestinian Militias

Peace starts with law and order. The Palestinian Authority has no monopoly on violence in the territories it claims to govern. Hamas and Islamic Jihad still run Gaza. In the West Bank, terrorist groups like Lion’s Den and the Jenin Brigades run wild with guns and explosives.

France needs to lead an international push to fully disarm all terrorist militias, not just generic phrases of “condemning violence.” All arms must be placed under the control of the Palestinian Authority (PA), or there’s no point in talking about sovereignty. No state — and certainly not Israel — can accept a terror enclave as its neighbor, as has existed in Gaza since 2007.


2. Elections With Rules

The last Palestinian elections were held when Justin Beiber became legally allowed to drink alcohol. Mahmoud Abbas was elected in 2005… for a 4-year term. He’s now on year 20.

New elections must be held, but not every group gets to play. Hamas — a terrorist organization by U.S., EU, and Israeli designations — should not be allowed to run, just like Nazis weren’t allowed to run in post-war Germany. The party should be outlawed.

France and Saudi Arabia should insist on clear criteria: no party that promotes violence, antisemitism, or the destruction of Israel gets a seat at the table. There is no pathway to an enduring peace if there is an underlying state of war.


3. Reform Education — Stop Teaching Hate

An Enduring Peace isn’t signed on paper; it’s taught in classrooms and instilled in society.

As part of de-Hamasification of Palestinian society, schools — especially and including those run by UNRWA — a complete overhaul of Palestinian education, with international oversight to remove antisemitic and violent content. IMPACT-SE has written about this problem for years, and concrete steps must be taken to allow a future of coexistence.


4. Stop Treating Jews Like Foreigners in Their Homeland

Palestinian schools aren’t the only problem. The United Nations is rank with Jew-hatred and one cannot expect Palestinians to be less anti-Israeli Jews than the global body.

UN Security Council Resolution 2334 outrageously declared that Jews living in eastern Jerusalem and east of the 1949 Armistice Lines with Jordan (E49AL) are somehow illegal — a modern form of antisemitism dressed up in legalese. UNSC 2334 should be renounced and rescinded as part of the steps towards an enduring peace.

France must reject the idea that Jews should be banned from parts of their ancestral homeland. At the same time, to facilitate compromise, a cap on Jewish residents east of the 1949 lines — say 15% of the overall population — could be introduced to avoid major demographic shifts in a future Palestinian state.


5. End the So-Called “Right of Return”

The Palestinian demand that millions of descendants of refugees be allowed into Israel is not about peace — it’s about destroying Israel demographically. It’s a fantasy rooted in grievance, not reality.

France must take the lead in declaring the Palestinian “right of return” over. In its place, a compensation fund should be set up — funded by Israel, Arab countries that started the 1948 war, and international donors. A similar fund should be set up for the descendants of Jews from Arab countries which were expelled in the decades after 1948. Work should begin now to compile a list of the properties which were lost and the related descendants who will collect associated reparations.


6. tighten the border framework, including jerusalem

The Saudi Peace Plan of 2002 suggested that Israel retreat to the 1949 Armistice Lines — a temporary ceasefire line, not a border. That’s not a starting point. That’s a non-starter.

France and its partners should endorse a realistic territorial framework: borders will fall somewhere between the current Israeli security barrier and the 1949 lines, through mutual negotiations. Land swaps are fine — as long as they reflect demographic realities and security needs.

In regards to Jerusalem, no country divides its capital city and no country places its capital on a border. Jerusalem should remain the capital of Israel, as it has uniquely afforded freedoms for all religions. Saudi Arabia should take over the administration of the Temple Mount from the Jordanian Waqf as part of advancing peace in the Middle East.


7. Shut Down UNRWA — Gradually, Responsibly

UNRWA, the UN agency that was supposed to help refugees, has become a sprawling, corrupt bureaucracy that perpetuates dependency and fuels incitement. Its existence undermines the Palestinian Authority and entrenches the myth of perpetual refugee status.

France and Saudi Arabia should lead the call for a phased shutdown of UNRWA, starting in Gaza and the West Bank. Services should be handed over to the PA — and resettlement should begin for Palestinians in Lebanon, Syria, and Jordan, with annual caps to avoid regional overload.

UNRWA offices in Jerusalem (photo: First One Through)

Bottom Line

France says it wants permanent changes on the ground. Good. The Middle East has had enough of circular negotiations, terrorism-as-usual, and international hypocrisy.

If France is ready to be honest, clear-eyed, and courageous, it can help move the region toward peace. But if it sticks to the same old script — blaming Israel, indulging Palestinian rejectionism, and hiding behind the UN — then we’ll just keep getting the same instability, bloodshed, and failure.

Peace will not be achieved overnight and “concrete” steps must be phased with reality. France and Germany gradually became allies after World War II with the benefit of the deNazification of Germany. Germany even made peace with the Jewish State over time once it was committed to avoid the hatred of its past. An overhaul of the Palestinian mindset and rejection of radical jihadism and goal of eliminating the Jewish State, under the sheepherding of Saudi Arabia can help map a better course for the region.

France must internalize the needed overhaul of the “deformity in Palestinian culture,” to quote James Zogby, President of the Arab American Institute who spoke to the UN in June 2023. Saudi Arabia must overlay the Abraham Accords on top of its 2002 Peace Plan to refine it to account for the reality of the last several years.

The emphasis of the France-Saudi chaired conference must be on the direction, not on the permanence of “concrete” and “irreversible” steps, to find a less violent and just future for the region.

Related articles:

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

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

Jerusalem Population Facts (May 2021)

When You Understand Israel’s May 1948 Borders, You Understand There is No “Occupation” (July 2019)

Ending Apartheid in Jerusalem (June 2018)

Arabs in Jerusalem (January 2016)

The Israeli Peace Process versus the Palestinian Divorce Proceedings (June 2015)

The Arguments over Jerusalem (May 2015)