Is War Coming to the Golan?

Syrian Regime forces fired three missiles into the Golan Heights on Saturday.  Israel immediately destroyed the artillery unit responsible for the fire. Although the official response from the IDF was that the projectiles were merily just stray missiles that spilled over from the Syrian Civil War, experts in the military indicate that these three missiles were very different and seemingly fired intentionally, which according to sources would be a first in the Syrian Civil War.

The intentional firing of missiles represents a turning point in the Syrian Civil War as the regime now feels emboldened by its gains in beginning closure on what had been a near defeat of Assad before Russia entered the war. Iran’s occupation of Kirkuk, a Kurdish city in Iraq has also showed Assad that nothing seems to be able to stop the Iran-Syria alliance.

Syria’s goal is to make it clear that the regime has outlived Ehud Barak, Israel’s former Prim Minister’s statement when he predicted that Assad was close to falling numerous times. In a sense, the three missiles were meant for him and most of Israel’s security establishment who counted on Assad fading and a more pro-Israel leader taking over.

These three missiles may in fact be the beginning of something much larger.  The coming conflict will set the region ablaze by pitting Iran, Hezbollah, and Syria against their neighbors. Their goal is to take the Golan and Tiberius. The missile attack is a warning that it in fact can already happen.

 

ANOUSIM RISING: From Darkness Comes Light

Yosef Ortega

“Such is the way of creation: First comes darkness, then light.” – Talmud Shabbat 77b

Peeking in through the door and staring into the darkness came the familiar sound of a match striking. The light filling the room for an instance while dimming down slowly, I saw my grandmother with her head covered leaning down to light some candles. This act was not unusual. But when I saw that she drew in this Holy light while passionately devoting herself in Holy words to G-d, I knew I was witnessing something that would forever change the course of my life.

Each and every day and growing with great endurance, people are making their way back to Torah Judaism and the heritage of the Jewish people. Still widely unknown to most of Jewish communities, prophecy is being fulfilled on the world stage regarding this mostly forgotten group. Who are these people? They are known as the B’nei Anousim (Children of the Coerced), and many of their stories began like mine… a light in the darkness.

My​ ​personal​ ​journey​ ​back​ ​to​ ​Judaism

At a young age, my mother passed away. After my father remarried, I was raised in the Catholic church. Though I was too young to comprehend the implications of my feelings, my life felt like I was in exile. I was lost and disconnected from my Jewish identity. It wasn’t hidden from me by my parents, it was stolen from me long before I was born.

In my early 20’s I met and married my Beshert (soul mate). Both, of us had a deep longing to know G-d but had no idea how. So, what better place to start than inside to walls of the Catholic church…right? I quickly became excited about the idea of knowing G-d. We threw ourselves into the ministry of the the church. All seemed to be going well. That is, until the spring of 2007.

Always having this looming question in our hearts about the Jewish people, my wife and I decided to try a Passover seder. Sure, all of the children fell asleep as we struggled to read through the entire seder. Yes, the word ‘amature’ was being thoroughly revealed in the light of the full moon. And yet, something unknown was being unveiled to me that I already knew in my bones. This was a feeling I will never forget.

“If you are going to pursue this, it can not be done at THIS church”, our pastor told us after we shared with him this newfound excitement about Passover. Instead of being drawn in, we were being pushed away. We were at a crossroads. This was painful because we had many close friends connected with the church. However, this pain was necessary for use to begin our journey back to Judaism. The crossroads was now the road less traveled. And that road brought us to Denver, Colorado.

A horse of a different color is still a horse. A church of a different name is still a church. Things seemed to somewhat fit into the mold of Judaism as we found ourselves in walls of Messianic Judaism. Within these walls we learned a lot about Judaism. But, the more we learned about Judaism, the more we saw just how far outside of Judaism we were. Something was just not right. These walls felt as though they were closing in, keeping us inside for years before realizing just how much of a counterfeit we were partaking in.

Connection​ ​to​ ​the​ ​Sephardic​ ​Anousim

During the later part of 2009, my wife and I were invited to hear a guest speaker, Dr. Dell Sanchez. He had come to Denver to speak on the history of the Crypto Jews or the Bnei Anousim. I remember sitting in my seat following the lecture. Flipping through a book I just purchased, I stumbled upon a section listing Sephardic Jewish surnames. Among these names I saw “Ortega”, then “Herrera” (both from my grandfather), then “Navarro” ( my grandmother whom I mentioned earlier) Just then I remembered something that Dr. Sanchez had shared during the lecture about various hidden customs of the Anousim. He shared about separating meat from dairy, covering mirrors after the death of loved ones, salting meat, not eating pork, and women lighting candles on Friday night. I instantly remembered this from my grandmother.

Although, I only had this small memory of her, it was a spark that had remained with me. In the coming years I would research more about the Anousim and places in where they lived and traveled. I found many similarities between these findings and my research into my family. I even did a DNA test to find further evidence of my broken past. I discovered that my DNA matched many of the Sephardic Anousim as well as several DNA matches linking to the priestly tribe of Levi.

This was exciting! But, even with all this excitement, I still felt that I needed to make a much deeper connection to the Jewish people. DNA, surnames, and some possible family evidences would only (as Everette from “O, Brother Where Art Thou” stated) “Arouse my appetite without bedding it back down.” It was at this time that my family and I decided, if we really are possibly Jewish, we needed to embrace all that is Jewish and make our formal return. While we had already been studying for years, we knew that we needed the help of the Jewish community to
do things right. So, we left the Messianic church and went to the synagogue.

Passover has been an interesting time for us. It was during Passover that we left Christianity in 2007. It was during Passover in 2016 when we left all Judeo-Christian/Messianic leanings and had our first meeting with an Orthodox Beit Din (House of Judgement). Our conversion process had officially begun.

During this time, I got in contact with Yaffah Batya DaCosta, founder of Ezra L’Anousim (Helpers of the Anousim). I volunteered to help with several projects within the organization. My first project working with Ezra L’Anousim was to help with organizing and promoting the first of the Ezra L’Anousim pro Israel global rallies. Collaborating with a good friend of mine, we produced two short promotional videos called “We are Jews” and “Chazon Ovadiah” (Prophecy of Ovadiah) to help with bring awareness for the Bnei Anousim.Like Yaffah Batya DaCosta, I am a firm believer in activism for bringing Jews closer to Judaism, specifically the Bnei Anousim.

He used to say: It is not your responsibility to finish the work, but neither are you free to desist
from it- Pirkei avot 2:16

I also believe that the ones assisting Hashem in helping the Anousim will ultimately be other Anousim. This is not only because we share a very special connection, but we understand very well the darkness of our exile and all hope to see things change in a positive way. Not only for the Bnei Anousim, but for all of Klal Yisrael.

“There is no power in the world that can stand against us when we feel a part of our history, part of our people and part of this historic struggle.”- Natan Sharansky, Chairman of The Jewish Agency for Israel and former Prisoner of Zion

Our​ ​conversion​ ​and​ ​current​ ​activism

In the month of Elul 27 in the year 5777 (September 18, 2017) my family and I completed our conversion to Orthodox Judaism! Baruch Hashem it has been the connection that we have been longing for many years.

Recently, I was also appointed to the role of ‘Director of Media’ for Ezra L Anousim and so now both the passion and the vessel to help other Bnei Anousim has been united. Our first task is in launching the newly designed website for Ezra L’Anousim (www.bneianousim.org), we plan to release documentary about the emerging Bnei Anousim communities. Our media company, Kavod Media, is currently seeking collaboration with other film production agencies to reach this lofty goal as well as other future projects.

My life to this point has been a long and fulfilling journey. I have had many trials, victories, failures, peaks, and valleys, but I feel like this is just a beginning. I am still in exile. However, now, it is only physical. I pray that this exile will shortly come to an end and that this Passover we all together can say and truly mean, “Next year in Jerusalem”.

“It shall come to be on that day that the Lord will once again show His hand… And He will gather in the dispersed ones of Judah from the four corners of the earth.” – Isaiah 11:11-12

FINAL WAR BEGINNING: The UN is Coming…Again

In what appears to be a major move by the UN, the international organization sent 150 Israelis companies a warning letter that they risked losing international business due to their dealings with companies that worked out of Judea and Samaria. UN human rights chief Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein personally sent the letters two weeks ago and has already received two responses that affirmed their break in doing business with companies from Israel’s Biblical Heartland.

The Arab countries and their supporters have had a solid hold on the UN  Human Rights Council (UNHRC) for some time, but the move by the organization is literally unprecedented and seemingly part of a wider diplomatic war against Israel .  With UNESCO already erasing the Jewish connection to its holiest sites and cities, the UNHRC move seems natural.

All of this appears to be crossing into dangerous ground as the UN is laying a deeper trap for the Jewish State.  Ultimately, by disregarding the Jewish connection to the Land of Israel as well as a firm campaign backing the BDS movement, the UN seeks to ultimately weaken Israel as its enemies gather against it.

An unnamed western diplomat told Haaretz that more than half of the companies that received the warning letter were Israeli, about 30 were from the US and the remainder from countries including Germany, Norway and South Korea. The diplomat added that Hussein also sent copies of the letter to foreign ministries of several countries who are home to companies which may be added to the blacklist.

According to the report Israeli companies on the list include pharmaceutical giant Teva, the national phone company Bezeq, bus company Egged, the national water company Mekorot and the country’s two largest banks, Hapoalim and Leumi.

The US has threatened to withdraw from the council if the entire list is published.

Before one assumes the worst, Israel was in far worse shape at the time of the Six Days War and we all know how that ended.  With that in mind, reality is how one perceives it.  The UNHRC has very little teeth, yet its bite still has power.  At the end of the day, Israel’s market is small and businesses can make the calculus that it is far better to stay away from the political intrigue than pull in some extra money from Israel.

Once again the aim here is to weaken and divide the State of Israel as it contends to deal with a plethora of unprecedented security challenges. The focus for Israelis should not be to despair, but rather know that with deep faith and a yearning to survive they will make it past this as well.

As Rebbe Nachman says: “There is no despair at all.”

After all, if we’ve made it this far then the rest should be within our grasp as well.  No outside force can move the will of the Creator.

After 70 Years Jews Return to Sheikh Jarrah Property in “East” Jerusalem

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Jewish residents of Jerusalem with the help Israel Land Fund’s Councilman Aryeh King moved into a newly reacquired property in Jerusalem’s Shimon HaTzadik/Nachalat Shimon (Sheikh Jarrah) neigborhood Monday morning. After a tense  and sometimes violent morning with Arabs throwing rocks and firebombs on the new residents , the area calmed down.  The Arab family who had lived in the residence were pulled out after an Israeli court saw clear evidence they were in fact squatting in what was a Jewish property before the Jordanian army chased the home owners away in 1948.

Rabbi Ben Packer of the Jerusalem Heritage House said the following about the new property and court decision:

“The recent reclaiming is a very positive step but way overdue. Its time for the Israeli Government to allow real development in Shimon HaTzadik/Nachalat Shimon for the rightful Jewish owners, as they have for the Arab owners. That’s real Israeli sovereignty and basic fairness.”

Until 1948, west of the road linking Sheikh Jarrah, the American Colony and Mt. Scopus, was  the neighborhood of Nahlat Shimon. The name is a reminder of its closeness to the Cave of Shimon HaTzadik. The neighborhood was founded in 1891 and was home to hundreds of Jewish families. Just before the British Mandate ended in 1948, security in Nahlat Shimon deteriorated considerably and its residents were evacuated to the Israeli side of Jerusalem. The Jordanians took control of the neighborhood and settled “Palestinian” Arab refugees there.

With one house now firmly back in Jewish hands, the many more houses stolen from their original Jewish owners may find themselves returned as well.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_gallery type=”image_grid” images=”6016,6017,6018,6019,6020,6021,6022″ img_size=”150×75″][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Has Israel Reached the End of its Detente with Russia?

Iran Attack Israel

There had been signs for months that the “special” understandings reached between Putin and Bibi Netanyahu were fraying.  Afterall, Israel never chose to have Russia interject itself into the Syrian civil war, but once it had done so, Israel had no choice but to try to tame the Russian Bear.  The understandings reached allowed Israel a level of continued independence to strike out against Syrian convoys heading towards Lebanon.  When Iran started moving closer, Israel was allowed to hit sensitive figures.

Despite all of this, there was always the need to ask for permission and reestablish the understandings, which according to reports have contantly changed.

With Trump and Putin reaching an understanding at the G20 that allowed Russia to man the borders of Israel and Jordan in order to supposedly “enforce” a ceasefire, the understandings between Israel and Russia broke apart.

Israel can handle a Russia farther North from the Golan who is focused more on creating stability for its Mediteranean port at Latkia, but a Russia intensely involved with allowing Iranian troops and the militia it supports to reach the Golan border is completely unacceptable.

When Bibi travelled to Sochi over ten days ago, the prevailing assumption was that he would be able to convince Putin that it is in Russia’s best interest to hold back Iran and in failing to do so Israel would have no choice but to attack the Iranian forces.




Russia would have none of it and has since pushed back strongly against Israel’s verbage and protests against the Iranian presence on its border.

Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said the following about Israel’s concerns that Iran is building up strength in the Golan to attack Israel:

 “We do not have any information that someone is preparing an attack on Israel. Whatever area of cooperation between Iran and Syria, my position is that if their cooperation in whichever field does not violate the basic provisions of international law, it should not be cause for question,” Lavrov said.

So the proverbial goal posts of past understandings between Israel and Russia have once again been moved, but in the direction of the Israeli border.  Where at one time Russia acquiesced to Israel’s concerns about Iran’s proximity to their Northeastern border, today they just have to “behave” and all is well.

The emerging crisis on Israel’s border with Syria is no small matter.  Under Russian protection Iranian troops can operate freely and this being the case, Iranian agents can always lay the groundwork to be ready when Russia changes the rules again.

Bibi Netanyahu has a huge choice to make.  He can either keep the facade that Russia is an honest broker between the Jewish state and Iran and therefore allow Israel to become fully surrounded and in a sense dependent on Russia for holding back Iran or he can drop the facade and take out the Iranian forces quickly establishing themselves in the Syrian Golan.

His choice will determine the costs involved when the war in Israel’s North begins.

 

Amichai, Replacement Community for Amona Receives Funding From the Government

In blow after blow to the assumption that Arab “Palestine” will replace Judea and Samaria as an independent state, the Israeli cabinet approved the budget for the first Jewish community to be built in Judea and Samaria in the last 25 years.

Amichai is the replacement community offered to the evacuees of Amona in order for their community to leave their homes quietly.  Amichai will be built next to Shilo, the site of the Biblical Tabernacle, and religious center for Israel until King David established Jerusalem.

Amichai Israel
Amichai, just East of Shilo marked in blue

With the Trump administration seemingly not interested in getting involved with internal Israeli matters, the Netanyahu government has been laying the groundwork for establishing some sort of extended Israeli sovereignty in Judea and Samaria.

Last week, the government upgraded the status of Jewish Hebron to a municipal council at the same time Netanyahu stated clearly that “Israel will remain in Judea and Samaria forever.” With Amichai going forward and 300 more homes to be built in Bet El, the unfolding strategy does not involve Palestine or at least not Palestine located on Israel’s Biblical Heartland.

By going ahead and building in the Shilo block, the government sends three messages.  The first is that whenever the left tries to tear down a community using the courts, a new legal one will be built. The second is that Area C (where a majority of Jews live in Judea and Samaria) is and will be Israeli.  The third is, Oslo is dead.

With an American veto guaranteed, the Trump administration too distracted domestically, and a region in chaos, Israel is finaly free to develop its country the way it sees fit.  So where does that leave the Abbas clan and its vehicle for corruption called the Palestinian Authority?  Heading towards the dumpster.

HEBRON RISING: Israel Elevates Status of Biblical City’s Ancient Jewish Community

Hebron’s upgrade will have a direct and almost immediate effect on the “peace process.” The message is clear: Judea and Samaria will not be handed over to the Palestinian Authority.

Seemingly in conjunction with Prime Minister Netanyahu’s comments last night that “Judea and Samaria will be Israel’s forever,” Defense Minister Avigdor Liberman elevated the official status of the ancient Hebron community to that of a separate municipality from their Palestinian Authority counterparts.

The move is significant for the simple fact that all Jewish neighborhoods will be united under one municpal board. This board will have the independent right to buy property in Hebron, essentially pushing forward private avenues to redeem more of the city and continue to return it to Jewish hands.

Yishai Fleisher, Official Spokesman for Hebron said the following:

“The City of the Patriarchs is also the city of the Sons: We want to thank the Justice Minister, Defense Minister and his Deputy, the Attorney General and the Legal Advisor for the Judea and Samaria Area for their hard work, which has led to the regulation of normal life and municipal services for the Jewish community in Hebron.”

This status change essentially opens up Hebron for development in a way that it never has had before.  Seen as a place of extreme conflict between Jews and Arabs, the Hebron Jewish community has worked hard to open the ancient city and grave site of the Jewish people’s Patriarchs and Matriarchs to a wider array of Jews and Israelis.

Liberman’s announcement can be seen as a quiet game changer for Hebron and Israel’s permanent control of its historic Biblical Heartland.

Rabbi Ben Packer’s lecture titled the Tipping Point, filmed two years ago which can be viewed below is an important road map to why decisions like the upgrade for Hebron are game changers.

Both Bibi Netanyahu’s statement yesterday and Liberman’s announcement today appear to be born from the realization on the part of the White House that the Palestinian Authority has all but torpedoed “Peace” negotiations with Israel.

Whether or not Trump gave his approval is perhaps secondary. What is important to note is that Israel appears to be moving forward in holding onto Judea and Samaria for good.

 

New Israel Fund Loses Millions: Donations Plummet $6 Million in 2016

Im Tirtzu CEO Matan Peleg: “Sole purpose of the NIF is to harm the State of Israel and its sovereignty”

Donations to the New Israel Fund (NIF) have dropped nearly 20% in the past year from $33,062,783 in 2015 to $27,064,945 in 2016, according to the annual financial statement recently released by the organization. This marks a six-year low in donations received by the US-based organization.

The NIF has also cut its overall funding to Israeli groups by some 35% over the past several years, providing $20,176,422 worth of donations in 2008 but only $13,541,427 in 2016.

According to its website, the NIF aims to advance liberal democracy and to fight injustice in Israel and has donated over $300 million to over 900 organizations since its establishment in 1979.

In recent years, the NIF has faced sharp criticism from pro-Israel groups over its funding of NGOs that are vocally critical of Israeli policy.

In December 2015, Zionist NGO Im Tirtzu conducted a high-profile campaign exposing what it dubbed “foreign agent” organizations funded by the New Israel Fund and foreign governments. In 2010, the NIF was accused of funding the majority of NGOs that gave testimony to the United Nations-commissioned Goldstone Report, which accused Israel of committing war crimes during 2009’s Operation Cast Lead in Gaza.

Prominent recipients of NIF funding include Breaking the Silence and B’Tselem, which promote international pressure on Israel and have accused the IDF of perpetrating war crimes. According to its financial statement, the NIF donated $438,766 to Breaking the Silence in 2016, a 300% increase from 2015. B’Tselem has also received increased funding from the NIF, receiving $360,659 in 2016, a 40% increase from 2015.

Matan Peleg, CEO of Im Tirtzu that has been one of the NIF’s most prominent critics, welcomed the findings. “The New Israel Fund has lost its legitimacy among the vast majority of Israeli citizens long ago,” said Peleg, “and it is good to see that its US donors are beginning to comprehend that the sole purpose of this organization is to harm the State of Israel and its sovereignty.”

“We are glad to see that our ‘foreign agent’ campaign succeeded in shedding light on the destructive activities of the New Israel Fund and the NGOs it supports,” added Peleg.

Bibi’s Support for Kurdistan Becomes Critical Before the Upcoming Kurdish Referendum

According to the Jersualem Post, Prime Minister Netanyahu expressed his support for an indepependent Kurdistan to a group of 33 visiting US congressmen.

Israel’s support for an independent Kurdistan is no secret, yet it has been relegated until recently to covert relations. As Iraqi Kurdistan votes on a referendum supporting independence on September 25th, Israel’s support is critical due to the fact that the US government continues to waver on whether or not the Kurds should hold the referendum.

Just recently US Seceretary of State Rex Tillerson urged Kurdish Regional Government (KRG) to hold off on going forward with the referendum.  Despite the pressure the KRG insisits it is going forward with the referendum.

“The date is standing, Sept 25, no change,” said Hoshyar Zebari, a close adviser to Kurdistan Regional Government President Massoud Barzani, after US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson asked Barzani to postpone the referendum.

Despite the rheotric from both the US and the KRG, American aid and direct development of the Kurdish autonomous area has continued, leading some to believe that the US and KRG are actually in agreement when it comes to the referendum.  When it passes the US, like Israel will forcefully recognize and support and independent Kurdish state.

According to my sources on the ground in Erbil, the US now directly controls one-third of Erbil’s international airport.  The US government has also resumed direct arms shipments to the Kurds as opposed to Obama’s policy which saw weapons transferred through Bagdhad to Kurdistan. This meant that many of the weapons were transferred to Iran instead of the Kurdish Peshmerga.

Why Does Israel’s Support Matter?

Bibi’s clear support for Kurdistan is not only on the governmental level, but is a reflection of how Israeli society as a whole views Kurdistan.  More than this, an indpendent Kurdistan would reshape the region by giving another moderate indigenous nation their own homeland.

While America wavers on Kurdistan due to the need to placate its Arab partners, Israel is able to speak its mind and show support for Kurdistan.  Israel’s support for Kurdistan runs deep and after September 25th this support may very well bear fruits by way of a truly moderate neighbor in the Middle East.

 

The Humanitarian Paradigm – Hobson’s Choice for Israel (Part II)

y rigorous process of elimination, we are left with the Humanitarian Paradigm, as the only possible policy prescription able to adequately address the imperatives needed to preserve Israel as the nation state of Jews.

O, who can hold a fire in his hand; By thinking on the frosty Caucasus?

Or cloy the hungry edge of appetite; By bare imagination of a feast?

Or wallow naked in December snow; By thinking on fantastic summer’s heat?

– William Shakespeare,  in Richard II, Act1 Scene 3, on the futility of self-deception

There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact. Sherlock Holmes, “The Boscombe Valley Mystery

Last week I began  a two-part analysis of the policy paradigms that have emerged in the public discourse for dealing with the more-than-century old dispute between Jews and Arabs over control of the Holy Land as the conflict approaches its third post-Oslo decade.

In it, I identified four such archetypical paradigms for its resolution—and one for its “management” (a.k.a. its perpetuation). Moreover, I undertook to demonstrate that only one of these alternatives, the Humanitarian Paradigm, advocating funded emigration of the Arab residents of Judea-Samaria (and eventually Gaza)—is consistent with the long-term survival of Israel as the nation-state of the Jews. Accordingly, for those dedicated to the preservation of the Zionist ideal, it is nothing less than “Hobson’s choice”.

To recap briefly

Readers will recall that I confined the analysis last week to those policy proposals that eschew full or partial Israeli annexation of territory, deferring analysis of those that endorse such annexation for this week’s discussion.

To recap briefly: In the aforementioned prior analysis I dealt with the (a) idea of “managing the conflict” and (b) the two-state formula.

As for the former, it was shown to reflect disregard for the fact that, without appropriate decisive proactive initiatives, Israel is facing a growing threat and decreasing freedom to deal with it.   Accordingly, “managing the conflict” is little more than a pretext for backing away from confrontations in which Israel can prevail, while backing into a confrontation in which Israel might not prevail—or do so only at ruinous cost.

As for the latter, it has shown to be a fatally flawed formula, devoid of any sound theoretical foundation or empirical evidence on which to base its naïve prognoses for resolving the conflict by means of Palestinian statehood. Indeed, given the past precedents, there is little reason to believe—and  two-state proponents have never provided one—that any future Palestinian state will not rapidly become a mega-Gaza on the fringes of Greater Tel Aviv, precipitating all the harrowing realities, wrought on the hapless residents of the South on those of the coastal megalopolis.

So having dealt with the policy paradigms that eschew annexation– whether full or partial–it is now time to assess those that endorse it.

One-state: Lebanonization of Israeli society

Some pundits on the Israeli “Right,” keenly aware of the infeasibility of the two-state paradigm, have in large measure adopted—albeit for very different reasons—a prescription very similar to that touted by their radical Left-wing adversaries—that of a single state stretching from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea.

According to this proposal, Israel should extend its sovereignty over the entire area of Judea-Samaria and offer immediate permanent residency to all its Palestinian-Arab residents, as well as the right to apply for citizenship at some undefined date, via some undefined process to ascertain loyalty—or at least the absence of disloyalty—to Israel as the Jewish nation state.  

The rationale, allegedly underpinning this ill-conceived proposal, is the new, optimistic demographic assessments suggesting that even if Israel were to enfranchise the Muslim population of Judea-Samaria, it would still retain a more than 60% Jewish majority.

Even conceding that this may be true, such a measure is likely to herald disaster for the Zionist enterprise and the future of Israel as the nation-state of the Jews. For the initial electoral arithmetic is hardly the defining factor in assessing the prudence of this approach, but rather the devastating effect it will have on the socio-economic fabric of the country and the impact this will have on preserving Israel as a desired/desirable place of residence for Jews inside and outside the country.

It would take considerable—and unsubstantiated—faith to entertain the belief that Israel could sustain itself as a Jewish nation-state with a massive Muslim minority of almost 40% – as the societal havoc that far smaller proportions have wrought in Europe indicate.

Indeed this is a clear recipe for the Lebanonization of Israeli society with all the inter-ethnic strife that tore Israel’s unfortunate northern neighbor apart.

Lebanonization of Israel (cont.)

Any forlorn hope that life under Israeli sovereignty will somehow “domesticate” the Palestinian-Arabs into reconciling themselves to life in the Jewish nation-state should have been well and truly dashed by the behavior of Israel’s Arab citizens.

After all, despite living (and prospering) for seven decades under Israeli sovereignty—and more than  a half-century after military rule over the Arab population was abolished—they not only voted, almost en-bloc, for the vehemently anti-Zionist “Joint List” in the 2015 elections, but displayed great empathy in a mass funeral for the terrorists, from the Israeli town of Um-al Fahm, who murdered two Israeli police officers on the Temple Mount.

Once the Arab population of Judea-Samaria becomes incorporated into Israel’s permanent population, at least two crucial elements of national life are almost certain to be dramatically—and in Zionist-compliant terms, negatively –impacted.  The one is the distribution of national resources; the other is population flows into, and out of, the country.
 
With regard to the former, clearly once the Arab residents of Judea and Samaria—whether enfranchised or not—become incorporated into the country’s permanent population, Israel will not be able to afford the kind of socio-economic disparities that prevail between the pre- and post-annexation segments of the population.

Accordingly, huge budget resources will have to be diverted to reduce these disparities – siphoning off funds currently spent on the Jewish population (and Israeli Arabs) in terms of welfare, medical care, infrastructure, education and so on.

Indeed, if enfranchisement (eventual or immediate) is envisaged, the electoral potential of the Arab sector is liable to be elevated from its current 13-15 seats in parliament to 25-30.  This will not only hugely bolster its ability to demand enhanced budgetary allotments, but also make it virtually impossible to form a governing coalition without their endorsement.

Moreover, collaboration   on various ad hoc parliamentary initiatives with radical Jewish left-wing factions is likely to nullify any formal calculations of an ostensible “Jewish majority”, and lead to legislative enterprises that ultra-Zionist proponents of annexation would strongly oppose – in an ironic manifestation of unintended consequences.

Partial Annexation: The Balkanization of Israel

Thus, while full annexation of Judea-Samaria will almost inevitably result in the Lebanonization of Israel—i.e.  create a single society, so fractured by interethnic strife that it would be untenable as the nation- state of the Jewish people; proposals for the partial annexation of Judea-Samaria will result in the Balkanization of Israel –  (i.e. dividing the territory up into disconnected autonomous enclaves, which will be recalcitrant, rivalrous and rejectionist, creating an ungovernable reality for Israel.)

Proposals for partial annexation appear to be fueled by (a) concern that total annexation would be too drastic a step for the international community to “swallow”, and (b) a sense that some semblance of self-rule must be facilitated for the Arabs resident in Judea and Samaria. As will be shown, partial annexation will address neither of these issues effectively. Indeed quite the opposite is true.

Proposals for partial annexation are commonly of two types:  Those that prescribe including  selected areas of Judea-Samaria under Israeli sovereignty   (such as Area C as advanced by Education Minister Naftali Bennett) ; and those that prescribe excluding certain selected areas from Israeli sovereignty such as the large urban centers in  Judea-Samaria (such as advanced by Dr. Mordechai Kedar in his “Emirates” plan)

Sadly, neither of these paradigms will solve any of the diplomatic or security problems Israel faces today, and will in fact exacerbate many.

The Balkanization of Israel (cont)

It is hardly necessary to go into the intricate details of the individual proposals for partial annexation to grasp how impractical they really are.

For whatever the configuration of the un-annexed areas left to Arab administration –whether the disconnected enclaves of Areas A and B, or the micro-mini “city states”—they will leave the sovereign territory of Israel with dauntingly long and contorted frontiers, making it almost impossible to delineate and secure. Clearly if one cannot effectively demarcate and secure one’s sovereign territory, there is little meaning to one’s sovereign authority over that territory.  

Although Haaretz is not my preferred source of reference, I find it difficult to disagree with the following assessment of Bennett’s plan for annexing Area C:

“… Bennett’s plan is groundless from the security, diplomatic, legal and, especially, physical angles. It’s easy to discern that, contrary to what was presented in a video produced by Bennett’s…party recently, Areas A and B in the West Bank are not contiguous blocs, spreading over 40 percent of the West Bank. Instead, they consist of no less than 169 Palestinian blocs and communities, cut off from one another by innumerable Israeli corridors and unused IDF firing zones that are together defined as Area C”.

It correctly pointed out: “… in fact, Bennett is proposing to increase the length of the Israeli border from 313 kilometers to 1,800 kilometers (194 to 1,118 miles). If [one] believe[s] Bennett, he will doubtless back the dismantling of the security barrier that Israel has built to the tune of 15 billion shekels ($3.9 billion), but [one] will have to accept that annexing Area C means Israel will have to build a barrier along the new border at the cost of 27 billion shekels and allocate another 4 billion shekels per year for maintenance purposes.”

Partial Annexation: Full political price

Similar criticism can be leveled at Kedar’s proposal for setting up an array of up to eight micro-mini “emirates” or city states.  It is not difficult to envisage the problems of future expansion beyond the highly constricted confines of disconnected enclaves, and of the need to severely curtail the authority of the local administration to deal with cross border issues such as pollution (particularly the carcinogenic emissions of the wide spread charcoal industry), sewage, pollution  from  industrial effluents, agricultural run-off, transmissible diseases and so on.   

Of course, any hopes that partial annexation, which entails extending Israeli sovereignty over about 65-75% of the territory, leaving the Palestinian-Arabs with an emasculated  25-30%, in a quilted patchwork of disconnected enclaves and corridors, will in any way diminish  international censure, are utterly unfounded. The political “pain” involved in such schemes would be no less than annexing 100% of the territory—without having to deal with the attendant chronic problems associated with partial annexation (as detailed above).   

Fanciful suggestions  that Nablus and Hebron might flourish into entities like Monaco and Luxembourg are as risible as those which, in the heady days of Oslo, predicted that Gaza would become the Hong Kong of the Mid East—and would be rightfully rejected as such.

Humanitarian Paradigm: Hobson’s choice

Even from the far-from-exhaustive analysis conducted over the last two weeks, it should be clear that an indisputable picture emerges as to the Zionist-compliant feasibility of the various policy paradigms proposed for dealing with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Thus:

– The attempt to manage the conflict is little more than a formula for backing away from confrontations in which Israel can prevail, while backing into a confrontation in which Israel might not prevail—or may do so only at ruinous cost.

– The two-state paradigm will almost inevitably result in the establishment of a yet another homophobic, misogynistic, Muslim-majority tyranny, which will rapidly become a mega-Gaza on the fringes of Greater Tel Aviv, menacing the socio-economic routine in the commercial hub of the country.

-Full annexation of Judea-Samaria together with the Arab population will result in the Lebanonization of Israeli society and thrust the country into ruinous inter-ethnic strife that will imperil it status as the nation-state of the Jewish people.

– Partial annexation of Judea-Samaria will result in the Balkanization of Israel, dividing the territory up into disconnected, rivalrous, recalcitrant and unsustainable autonomous enclaves, which will create an ungovernable reality for Israel.

Thus, by a rigorous process of deductive elimination we are left with the Humanitarian Paradigm, advocating funded emigration for non-belligerent Palestinian-Arabs to third party countries, as the only possible paradigm that can adequately address both the geographic and demographic imperatives needed to preserve Israel as the nation state of Jews.

As such, for Zionists, it is Hobson’s choice. Anything else is self-deception.