Syria- more specifically the al-Assad regime- has long been an Iranian ally, as evidenced by their mutual and public hatred for the United States and Israel.  The civil war has done little to change this relationship.  The Iranian government is shipping weapons to the Syrian regime to shift the tide of battle against the rebels.  The flights are, remarkably, passing unchallenged over Iraqi airspace and the Iranian Air Force.  The support isn’t restricted to hardware though.  In mid-February Syrian rebels killed Iranian Revolutionary Guard commander Hessam Khoshnevis inside Syria.  The Iranian government has claimed he was engaged in non-military reconstruction work, and their ambassador to Beruit stated cryptically “Assassinating this dear martyr is a clear sign that the Zionist enemy does not accept his successful work”- as if Israel has a hand in the assassination.  Iran’s proxy in Lebanon, the terrorist group Hezbollah has also been caught aiding the al-Assad regime.  Just this week Syrian Rebels claimed to have killed Hezbollah number two Naim Qassem near the border with Lebanon; early in February two Hezbollah fighters were killed on the border; October of 2012 saw the death of a Hezbollah commander in Syria.  The evidence is overwhelming and obvious that Iran has played a major role in the Syrian conflict.

The Syrian rebels are not without their own benefactors.  The rebels are armed with Belgian made assault rifles and Ukrainian ammunition courtesy of the Saudi Arabian government.  Weapons from the former Yugoslavian conflicts are also flooding into Syria.  The military hardware is being purchased from the Croatian government by the Saudis and transported into Syria via Jordan.  The Saudi Arabian government would like to see Assad fall, mostly so that Iran loses a proxy in their contest for regional supremacy.  Also, though, it gives them an opportunity to court whoever or whatever fills the power vacuum left by Assad’s departure and expand their influence in an area where Iran controls Hamas, Hezbollah and Syria.  While the Saudis and United Arab Emirates are paying for arms, Israel has remained neutral and uninvolved in the conflict, breaking this pledge only once to provide medical aid to wounded Syrians. The United States has opted to supply the rebels with $60 million in nonmilitary aid.  The United States, tacitly, sympathizes with those struggling for freedom in the face of a dictatorial regime.  Strategically, America wants to see Iran’s power base in the region weakened, in favor of their longtime ally in Saudi Arabia.

However, with the $60 million in American aid comes a healthy dose of skepticism and a refusal provide direct military support or weapons.  The Free Syrian Army has been documented for its human rights abuses right alongside the Assad regime.  More troubling for America and Israel is the influx of foreign jihadists into the fray.  Al-Qaeda affiliated Jabhat al-Nusra has been an effective fighting force on the ground in Syria.  They’re well organized and funded, and have proven themselves adaptable in combat.  Jabhat al-Nusra has also shown adept at utilizing suicide attacks.

If the fallout from the Libyan civil war (and its poorly executed Western intervention) are any indication, Israel in particular needs to be prepared for serious spillover from the conflict.  Already, Israel has been forced to launch an aistrike in Syria, when Assad tried to smuggle weapons to Hezbollah.  The Iraqi military was forced to close a border checkpoint and return fire into Syria.

When Assad falls, what comes next?  There’s a likelihood that the well-organized and ruthless Jabhat al-Nusra will attempt to fill the power vacuum left in the wake.  Some speculate success in Syria may spark more ambitious attempts at Jihad; perhaps targeting Israel.  In what hands will the Saudi Arabian funded weapons land?  And more importantly, what has become of Assad’s chemical weapons?  The Syrian civil war has implications far beyond the borders of Syria, and the consequences could be terrifying for America and Israel, not to mention the continued suffering of the Syrian people.

The post Syria’s Grim Future appeared first on Act for Israel.

Farfour and His 72 Virgins

For the last few years I’ve had the privilege and tremendous responsibility of working in civic education.  Teaching involves more than just facts or formulas, but an effort to shape the intellect and work to better the soul of one’s students.  My goal was never to foist my views, but to challenge students on their understanding of the very foundations of the United States and to introduce them to concepts they may never have heard before.

August of 2012 saw a horrific attack on a young Palestinian teenager in Jerusalem that resulted in the boy being hospitalized with a coma.  As an educator I, along with others from around the globe, was outraged at the atrocity.  While it is tragic that circumstances have reached such a culmination, Israeli politicians and citizens took this as an opportunity to seriously examine the violence in their society and the attitudes held by Israeli youth towards Palestinians.  This is the sort of deep consideration that does and should occur in free societies: Israeli society must confront the fact that there is noticeable shift in attitudes contrary to the principles that society holds.  Israel values respect and dignity for human life, the rule of law, and a civil society without violent racism or religious persecution.  While the need for a reflective response to this tragic and criminal act is needed to stem violence among youth, it is disturbing that Hamas and Hezbollah take the opposite tack and intentionally target their youth for an education in hate and violence towards Israelis.

Last summer, Hezbollah finished construction and opened a museum dedicated to glorifying martyrdom against Israel.  This twisted attraction features machine guns, destroyed Israeli tanks, rocket propelled grenades, barbed wire, and other weapons of war.  One of the more disturbing and disrespectful displays features Israeli gravestones turned on their sides.  The intended message here is clear; the death of Israelis is to be celebrated and those who do the killing are to be lauded heroes.  This is not a museum of military history, but rather a source of propaganda for a worldview that precludes the existence of a Jewish state or the adoption of the ideals both America and Israel share.  That such an attraction targets children highlights that Hezbollah does not seek peace rather that they seek to pass their conflict on to new generations.

Hamas lacks such a museum, but instead, opts for more direct approaches of targeting children in spoon-feeding them hatred and the glorification of.  Opposition to Israel is evident in textbooks that have been used in classrooms.  An example of the sentiment can be found in an assignment in Our Arabic Language for Fifth Grade, “Know, my son, that Palestine is your country . . . that its pure soil is drenched with the blood of Martyrs. . . . Answer this: Why must we fight the Jews and drive them out of our land?”  To this end Hamas schools have begun teaching Hebrew—not to facilitate understanding, but to facilitate infiltration and murder.  This goes beyond the classroom.  Gaza has a children’s television show “Tomorrow’s Pioneers” which contained a Mickey Mouse look-a-like named Farfour.  Farfour espoused radical views and was eventually depicted being murdered by an Israeli that wanted to steal his land.  Farfour was replaced by a giant talking bee, then a Bugs Bunny clone, both of whom had deaths attributed to Israel.

Those who watched Farfour as children should be heading into their teenage years about now.

This all has a tremendous bearing on the behavior of young people both among Israelis and Palestinians.  A recent study from the University of Michigan links exposure to violence as likely to increase the potential for both Jewish and Arab Israeli children, and Palestinian children, to grow up to be more aggressive and violent.  Hamas and Hezbollah need to follow this model of inward reflection over violent acts; until this happens there will be no shortage of violence and no future for their children.

The post Teaching Hate and Seeing Violence is no Recipe for Peace appeared first on Act for Israel.

This Thursday, Palestine hopes to achieve non-member observer state status in the United Nations General assembly.  It is likely that they will succeed. This recognition continues a trend of what can be described as at best, cold, and at worst, hostile, relations between the United Nations and Israel.

Throughout the United Nation’s history, Israel has been an unwelcomed participant.  Israel should sit in the Asia Regional group, but membership was blocked by Arab nations.  This prevented Israel from participating in a variety of activities and from serving in various UN agencies.  It was not until 2000 that Israel was allowed to sit with the Western Europe and Others Group (WEOG), and was given a permanent renewal to the group in 2004.  The Palestinian Liberation Organization was invited to become an observer in 1974, and has sat as a full member in the Asia Regional Group since 1986.

In November of 1975, the United Nations General Assembly passed Resolution 3379, which declared Zionism to be a form of racism. The stated goal was to eliminate Zionism to end discrimination globally, grouping the idea of a Jewish state in the Holy Land with apartheid and colonialism.  Resolution 3379 was not repealed until the early 1990s.  In contrast, the United Nations did not pass a resolution condemning anti-Semitism until 1998.  Then Secretary General Kofi Annan said he hoped the resolution marked “a new era of relations between Israel and the United Nations.”  Unfortunately, Mr. Annan was wrong.

Israel has faced disproportionate criticism in the United Nations. One glaring example is the Goldstone Report.  In 2009, the Goldstone Report was released as the conclusions of an investigation into Operation Cast Lead.  While the report was an indictment of both sides and a testament to the ferocity of the conflict, one of the more remarkable findings was that the IDF intentionally targeted civilians.  In its rush draw politically correct conclusions and find a “bad guy” the report missed the truth.  Justice Goldstone later recognized that “civilians were not intentionally targeted as a matter of policy.”  Without question, civilians were killed, but that is the tragic reality of war.  Israel, like any civilized nation, works tirelessly to minimize civilian deaths.  Much to his credit, Mr. Goldstone recognizes this and credits Israel for their own investigations and condemns Hamas for its intentional targeting of civilians and lack of investigation or prosecution of terrorists.

Mr. Goldstone is a far cry from Professor Richard Falk, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in the Palestinian Territories.  Over the course of his tenure, Mr. Falk has faced varying accusations of anti-Semitism.  This is an easy ad hominem attack and should be taken with skepticism.  What cannot be over looked is that he wrote the introduction to a conspiracy theory book implicating the involvement of the United States government in the September 11 terror attacks.  More recently, Mr. Falk wrote an op-ed for Al-Jazeera condemning Israel for the latest conflict in Gaza, Operation Pillar of Defense.  In his piece, Professor Falk criticizes Hamas’ rocket attacks on civilians, but continuously downplays the threat posed to Israel.  “Without minimising the reality of a threat… some rockets fired from Gaza fell harmlessly…” In the next paragraph, Mr. Falk writes, “the low number of casualties caused and the minor damage caused, needs to be assessed in the overall context of massive violence inflicted on the Palestinians.”  The UN Special Rapporteur ignores the reality that Iran continuously supplies Hamas and other terrorist groups with more and more sophisticated weapons.  If Hamas had better weaponry, they would use it!  They don’t so they continue to engage in terrorist attacks and asymmetrical warfare.  Falk lambastes the Gaza blockade, but ignores that it exists since Palestinian terrorist organizations continue to seek material for war, regardless of the harm inflicted on the Palestinian people by the embargo.  Mr. Falk continues to cite the significance of international law, of military proportionality, but ignores that Hamas executes suspected spies—Palestinian civilians—and dragged a corpse through the streets.  Mr. Falk may be an outlier, but it is clear that the United Nations has not been a friend to Israel.

Mahmoud Abbas is the leader of Palestinian Authority, but his write does not extend beyond the West Bank.  In Gaza Hamas calls the shots.  When the United Nations recognizes Palestine on Thursday, who are they actually acknowledging?  A duly elected, but obviously weak leader in Mr. Abbas, or a terrorist organization that uses Palestinian civilians, their own flesh and blood, as human shields and includes the destruction of Jews as a mission in their charter?  When you call for the destruction of an entire people, that’s genocide, and that is what the UN was created to try and prevent.

The post The UN is No Friend to Israel appeared first on Act for Israel.

The roots of success are found in a civil society and the rule of law.  In America and Israel, hateful speech is met not with violence, but with counter arguments, moral suasion, and sanction. Anecdotally, when swastikas began to trend on twitter, the Times of Israel held a public debate on the matter in which one of the commentators said that she was “definitely not happy with the idea of banning the [swastika] hashtag because … dealing with things we don’t like by banning them is more a Nazi thing than a free world thing.”  Ultimately, the Times of Israel agreed and called for users to display the Star of David in reply.

Both America and Israel see freedom to speak one’s mind as a natural right, and that the best cure for hatred and ignorance is sunlight.

This manifests in several ways.  This sunlight means that the government cannot arbitrarily seize private property.  America and Israel allow people to profit from their labor and to keep what they’ve earned.  This is a cornerstone to America’s wealth, and more than that, it is a moral good.  As Lincoln said in opposition to slavery “…in her natural right to eat the bread she earns with her own hands without asking leave of any one else, she is my equal, and the equal of all others;” all people have a right to work hard, succeed if they can, and enjoy the fruit of their labors.

Israel has a long tradition of entrepreneurship, a word intimately tied to the American dream.  Entrepreneurs employ others and embody the ethos of being one’s own boss, seizing success, and caring for one’s family.  Israel recently was named one of the top places in the world for research by The Scientist magazine.  More than prosperity, Israeli scientists are working to improve the world by researching cancer treatments and converting waste into recyclable material.  Entrepreneurs in both Israel and America pursue not just wealth or acclaim, but are working to make the world a better place for all people to live.

The post The Dream of Success: How Israel and the United States Make it Happen, Part II appeared first on Act for Israel.

Israel and America are not mirror images.  To think so is naïve, but just as the United States has the “American Dream,” so too does Israel have the “Israeli Dream.”  These “Dreams” are the promise that with some blood, sweat, and tears, a person can make him or herself into a success.  That both countries have a history of individual success is due in no small part to their shared adherence to the rule of law and vibrant civil societies.

America has a storied and at times tumultuous political tradition, but despite occasionally violent and vile rhetoric, the United States is unique in that it continues the world’s longest running peaceful exchanges of power: lost elections are not met with coups, but with promises of continuity.  George Washington began this tradition by retiring from government to his home, Mount Vernon.  It has continued ever since.  Israel’s founding was no less turbulent than the United States’ and it too has held to a tradition of peaceful transfers of power.

This week, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called for new elections.  As in America, there will be no assassinations and no party purges.  Both nations embody an ancient idea: that the only just government is one in which the citizens choose their leaders.  When political tensions are high and government ceases to function properly, the Prime Minister can call for elections, as is his or her prerogative in a parliamentary system.  Whatever the outcome, Israel’s citizens know that their vote will be respected and counted.  In any case, both nations will witness one of the most inspiring and—until recently—rare transfers of power: a peaceful one.

The importance of the peaceful transfer of power cannot be understated.  We can look to the deaths and the wars that the Arab Spring has wrought to understand this.  In nearly all cases the Arab Spring was a popular revolt against autocratic regimes.  That is a good thing, we think, but none of these revolts were painless: people died.  Had the Arab World subscribed to the same principles as the United States and Israel the Arab Spring would have been unnecessary.

The post The Dream of Success: How Israel and the United States Make it Happen, Part I appeared first on Act for Israel.

For what is hopefully the last time, the leaders of the world at the United Nations General Assembly were unfairly forced to endure another vitriolic speech from the “President” of Iran.  I use the term President loosely, for the Iranian people suffer under Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s rule, despite his claims of service to the noble people of Iran.  The man took stage and—to the surprise of many—soft-pedaled his speech: no loud declarations of the need to wipe Israel off the map, no vocal denial of the Holocaust.  The lack of flash was made up for in substance and was no less hateful.

The United States and Israel were obviously the hegemonic (and Zionist) powers President Ahmadinejad referred to vaguely throughout his rambling speech.  He claimed that America and Israel have “entrusted themselves to the devil;” that they have conspired and forced poverty upon the world.  What Mr. Ahmadinejad ignores is that it has been his actions—and those of his government—that have brought poverty to the people of Iran.  Their repressive regime has been a boot on neck of the Iranian people.  His regime’s insistence on pursuing nuclear weapons—for what ends we can only imagine and fear—has led to strict economic sanctions that have harmed his people.  Mr. Ahmadinejad speaks of “continued threats by the uncivilized Zionists,” as he pursues nuclear weapons, denies the Holocaust, and refers to Israel as a “false regime.”

Critics may contend that Iran is merely reacting to the military threats from the United States and Israel.  They contend that Iran’s response is in fact rational.  This is an ahistorical view of relations in the region that ignores the many attacks into Israeli territory.  It ignores the Iranian role of propping up the dictatorial Assad regime in Syria, known to be committing atrocities against its own citizens using Iranian provided weaponry.  It ignores Iran’s patronage of Hezbollah and their campaign of suicide and rocket attacks on civilians.  It ignores the death of Neda Agha-Soltan.

President Ahmadinejad calls for the destruction of the state of Israel.  He denies the right of Israel to exist and calls it a false regime with no basis in history.  He then appears at the United Nations and claims to seek peace?

As American President Barrack Obama and Prime Minister Netanyahu know and have affirmed this week, until there is agreement that Israel has a right to exist, there cannot be capitulation to tyrants.  Iran’s quest for nuclear weapons remains a threat to the very existence of Israel and the stability of the region.

We must stand with the people of Israel in the face of aggression and existential threat. The United States and Israel do not want war, only to live in security with a guarantee that Israel has a right to exist.  If Iran does not want war, they need to abandon their nuclear program and end their quest to see the elimination of the Israeli state. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu most eloquently responded to Iran when he said, “The Jewish people have come home and [they] will never be uprooted again.”  Ahmadinejad denies the Children of Abraham’s place in history; this is not the first time there has been an attempt to eradicate the Jews.  And, as before, it will not succeed.

The post The Substance of Hate appeared first on Act for Israel.

Countries with higher levels of political freedom and economic freedom, that is, the ability to choose rulers, protest, practice your faith, the ability to start your own business, freely contract, and to make something of yourself through hard work and perseverance, tend NOT to produce terrorists.  In nations like Israel and America, there are fewer instances of homegrown terrorists because their governments protect citizens rights, they create a public sphere to air grievances, so citizens can critique and change their government.  Peoples that are political oppressed, like those who live under Hamas and Hezbollah, do not have such recourse.  Violence, and projection onto an external enemy, become the path to change.

When we look at data from organizations like Freedom House, we see this borne out.  With a 1 being “most free” and 7 being “least free,” Israel ranks a 2 for Civil Liberties and a 1 for Political Rights, similarly, the United States earns a 1 in both Civil Liberties and Political Rights.  Compare this with the Hamas controlled Gaza Strip, which scores a 6 for both Civil Liberties and Political Rights.  The West Bank fares only slightly better, earning a 5 for Civil Liberties and a 6 for Political Rights.  Lebanon, where Hezbollah resides, does somewhat better on Freedom House’s index.  The nation scores a 3 on Civil Liberties, but an abysmal 5 on Political Rights.

Hamas and Hezbollah spend a great deal of time condemning Israel and her allies for some perceived oppression, for some grand conspiracy to keep their people down.  They need to do this to convince their populations that the repression is outward, before the people wake up and realize that their leaders have turned their states into pariahs through the murder of Israeli civilians and abhorrent record on political and human rights.

The post The Harsh Reflections in the Mirror appeared first on Act for Israel.

The most common—and politically correct—answer is that they’re poor … or uneducated … or they lack economic opportunity.  Some even claim that they’re sexually deprived, with no prospect for marriage or a family.  Such an outlook fails to account for the poor and uneducated from around the world who do not radicalize.  Social scientists, including Claude Berrebi of Rand, Marc Sageman of the Foreign Policy Research Institute, and Alan Krueger of Princeton have found that, to the contrary, the majority of suicide bombers come from middle class backgrounds and are educated.  This does not rule out poverty as a motivating factor, but it is clear that terrorists do not act out of desperation.

What makes people kill innocent civilians?  Why are people with prospects willing to kill themselves and others?  Simply put, they are exposed to—and adopt—a worldview that places them on the side of the angels: they are defenders of the poor and marginalized or defenders of the faith.  This sometimes occurs in school at a young age.  It uses a religion or an ideology that justifies attacking civilians to accomplish a goal.  Individuals may have their own motivations for seeking out such an ideology: a sense of humiliation, a desire to belong, the wish to correct a perceived wrong.  They may not even seek it out, but grow up in a hate-filled environment.  But this does not alter the fact that they have taken a worldview that rules out the idea of a peaceful discussion.

What’s more is that there is an economic reason for terrorist organizations to recruit the educated and intelligent: they are less likely to fail through incompetence.  These are not brainwashed drones, but individuals that believe so firmly in their worldview that they will stop at nothing to see it achieved.  This is what makes achieving peace in the Middle East so difficult.  Terrorist organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah are impossible to reach precisely because their worldviews proscribe coexistence.  A terrorist often sees himself as engaged in an existential struggle with his target.  This raises the frightening possibility that so long as Western values like freedom of religion, speech, and equality before the law are rejected the Middle East will see no peace.

The post Terrorists Are Made, Not Born appeared first on Act for Israel.