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.

Making sense of Israel’s election results is difficult, even for Israelis.  Israelis certainly find it bewildering and they’ve lived with the process their entire lives.  American outsiders looking in find it inscrutable.  Despite their difference in appearance, Israeli and American democracy share the same goals: to reflect the voices of the people, but to restrain the majority from trampling the rights of the minority.

Israel is a parliamentary democracy.  When a citizen votes in Israel he or she casts a ballot for a party, not a person.  Every time a party gets enough votes, it gets another seat in the Knesset—Israel’s legislature.  In the United States citizens vote for a specific politician in their region—the party is less important than the person running for office.  Before each election parties publish lists all of their members who are ranked from the leader on down.  So ballots are cast and parties are allocated seats in the new session of the Knesset.  In this election, Benjamin Netanyahu’s party, Likud, won 31 seats (out of 120) in the Knesset.  That means that his party won roughly a quarter of all votes.  Even with just over a quarter of seats in the Knesset, Likud is the largest single party.  How can anyone get anything done in this situation?

This works because Israel’s executive is not one person, it’s a cabinet composed of leaders from several parties.  It has to be, because the only way laws can be passed is if a majority of the Knesset votes for it and that means that the members of the cabinet have to be party leaders.

Israel has a president, but the president’s executive powers are intentionally limited.  The president’s job is to ensure stability and serve as a check on the Knesset.  Real executive power resides in the Knesset.  The opposite is true in America where the legislature (Congress) makes laws and the executive (the President) enforces them.  Not so in Israel.  The cabinet is a group of ministers whose job it is to oversee particular government duties.  So, there is a Foreign Ministry, a Treasury, etc.  The United States has a cabinet appointed by the President, approved by the Senate, and responsible to the President alone.  The American cabinet cannot have legislators and they are only supposed to enforce the President’s will.  Israel’s cabinet, unlike the United States, is composed of legislators.  These legislators are always leaders or important figures in their political parties.

Israel’s cabinet is particularly important then.  Nothing can be done without consensus in the cabinet, because if the cabinet does not agree, then it is unlikely that there will be enough votes in the Knesset to pass a new law.  How do you get several political parties to agree?  Well, the first thing you do is to divide up the responsibilities of the cabinet.  The largest party typically gets the post of Prime Minister, plus one or two plum positions.  The next largest party might get the Foreign Ministry or Treasury—two very important positions.  Everyone knows that when a party gets a ministry it has a responsibility to follow through on its promises as much as it can within that ministry.  So, to get your party’s agenda passed you have to play well with others.  It’s the ultimate in leadership by consensus.  And reaching consensus takes time.

The post Democracy is Difficult and Wonderful appeared first on Act for Israel.

Clearly, this is a fraught time in Israel-Palestinian relations.  A third intifada may not happen, but violence is increasing.  Abbas– unable to achieve his goals despite grandstanding at the UN– is threatening to resign and let the Palestinian Authority fall apart (or fall to Hamas).  Many blame Israeli intransigence.  Settlements are the issue, some say.  Others say that Palestinian grievances rightfully go back to 1947.  The realist, though, cannot deny that, in the end, Israel is here to stay.  Muslims, Jews, Druze, and Christians all prefer living in Israel to the possibility of living under the Palestinian Authority or any of their Arab neighbors.  Even if one accepts that the UN’s creation of a Jewish state was wrongheaded (and that is not a view we endorse), it is without doubt that eradicating Israel would only compound the injustice.  A realist, then, says that the Arab states must accept Israel.  The Palestinians must accept Israel.  All must move on with what they have and try to make the best of it.

It is unfortunate that Islamists are not realists.  Their dedication to Israel’s destruction betrays their deep-seated anti-Semitism and their hatred of Western culture and values.  Lacking military power, Islamist groups have sought other outlets to score points over Israel.  Craven cultural relativists allow them a place in the UN and a hearing in the world’s media.  This, in turn, gives the Islamists sympathetic defenders when organizations like Hamas fire rockets into Israel or Hezbollah blows up buses full of children.  When Israel commits itself to battle with these terrorists it does exceptionally well in the military sphere, but has trouble with the PR battle.  When Israel treats with these terrorist groups it finds that for every concession it makes the terrorists up the ante.  Israel cannot achieve peace, because the terrorists don’t want peace.  Again, a realist looks at this situation and shakes his head in wonder: can’t the Islamists see that they are dying and achieving nothing?  Why not take a deal?

They’re not taking a deal because we’ve taught them that it’s not worth their while.  They’ve lived on handouts for so long that they cannot make the hard choices that come with responsibility.  In this case it’s much easier to keep a war going than it is to opt for peace, because during war you can always blame your opponents for your own failures.

It’s worth taking a moment to note: we do not mean that individual Arabs or Muslims are incapable of being responsible citizens.  There are millions of responsible Arabs and Muslims in both Israel and the United States who vote, exercise their freedoms while respecting others’ freedoms, and are good citizens all around.  We are talking here about the organizations who eschew meaningful dialogue and opt instead for violence out of ideological blindness or because they cannot exist any other way.

Take, for example, the Palestinian Authority.  The Palestinian Authority has lived off the largesse of international donors and Israel for years.  The PA was intended to be a stepping-stone to self-government.  Fatah, as a part of the Oslo Accords, even publicly renounced the destruction of Israel as a goal.  It sounds admirable, but in practice not much changed.  Fatah worked with Israel, but its leaders siphoned international aid into their own pockets.  When Palestinians asked why their life had not improved, it was blamed on Israel.  Violence continued with the Second Intifada.  International money– when it has found its way to the Palestinian Authority– has been used to build up a police state where Freedom of Speech has no meaning.  Journalists who report on dissent are jailed or exiled.  The Palestinian Authority refuses to pay for the electric power it gets from Israel and even forgives its residents’ power bills to buy their loyalty.  For years it has known that if Israel cuts off power the PA can blame Israel and avoid any responsibility for its own malfeasance.

Hamas is a similar matter.  Though Hamas has far less international legitimacy than the Palestinian Authority, it nevertheless subsists on handouts from the international community.  Millions of dollars are channeled into UN schools run by Hamas.  Though those schools exist and function, they are also money-laundering operations that channel UN money to less savory activities.  Refugee camps throughout the Middle East have kept Palestinians reliant on the international dole for three generations.

And what has all this led to?  It has shattered old family and tribal networks that may have formed the basis of good government.  It has created ecologically unsustainable concentrations of people in places like Gaza, which can produce practically nothing on its own, but exists because that’s where the handouts are.  The leadership in Gaza and the West Bank are uninterested in peace, because peace would mean admitting that they are uninterested in actual statesmanship.  Fatah, Hamas, and its ilk are only interested in power.  To maintain themselves in power they hold their own people hostage.  They do that by attacking Israel.  Any response by Israel, no matter how muted, is ratcheted up into an international sensation.  To keep the peace, the international community buys the terrorists off with money and verbal declarations of support.  Rather than encouraging peace, it has only encouraged war.  And we have been fools for playing along.

The post “Who’s the more foolish? The fool, or the fool who follows him?” appeared first on Act for Israel.

Much is being made of Al-Jazeera’s purchase of Al Gore’s television channel, Current TV. Current TV was created by Gore and businessman friend Joel Hyatt. The channel was unabashedly progressive and specifically aimed at a young market. Though it was intended to revolutionize television, Current TV not only failed to change television, but it also failed to make much money. Current TV was, simply put, unpopular. There was nothing that it provided that other channels didn’t do better. Its intended progressive market niche was already occupied by MSNBC and Jon Stewart. In the last several years it has transformed from a sort of rotisserie news network to one featuring original programming to one featuring television simulcasts of popular radio shows. These format changes alienated an already small audience and failed to gain them any additional viewers.

Current TV does not have many viewers and it doesn’t make much money. So why is Al-Jazeera buying it?

At first glance, Current TV does have one asset: access. Its cable partners broadcast Current TV into sixty million households. Right now, Al-Jazeera only reaches 4.7 million households. For Al-Jazeera this is an opportunity to reach beyond Washington D.C. and New York City and into “middle America.” There is a catch, however. Time-Warner Cable, the second largest television provider in the United States, is determined to dump Current TV even though it is being remade into Al-Jazeera America. Even though this will significantly cut into Al-Jazeera America’s potential reach, it’s still a huge step up in exposure for the Qatar-based television network.

Bully for Al-Jazeera, bad for the U.S.

Al-Jazeera promotes itself as an earnest and honest news network that provides a different perspective: instead of Westerners reporting on the Middle East, it is Arabs reporting on events in their region. Let us not be fooled, though. While a claim might be made that Western news outlets like CNN or SkyNews are biased, they are beholden to a huge number of sponsors, cable outlets, and television viewers. They simply cannot afford to be a propaganda organ. Al-Jazeera has no such restriction.

Al-Jazeera is responsible to one person only: the Emir of Qatar. There are no restrictions on the Emir’s power. His government (such as it is) is highly personalized and idiosyncratic (the Emir’s cousin runs Al-Jazeera). He is also extraordinarily wealthy. Al-Jazeera cannot survive without his patronage, much less expand and thrive. Al-Jazeera and all of its employees have every reason to toe the Emir’s line. This means suppressing news that casts Qatar in a bad light. This means always taking the Palestinian side, even when Israel is clearly in the right. It means misrepresenting the Arab Spring so as not to undermine the Emir’s absolute power. It means ignoring the very real existence of slavery in the country. How can anyone expect a news organization to be reliable or honest when it is essentially a propaganda service for a despot?

Current TV– which aimed to be a transformative news network for a new generation– is shutting its doors and being replaced by a Qatari propaganda organ. And what do the former owners of Current TV get out of this? Money. Current TV barely made a profit and was never able to leverage its viewership into a successful IPO. For Al-Jazeera, Current TV fills a need that makes the investment worthwhile. And finally, after years of struggling, Current TV’s original investors are finally seeing a payoff. It’s just too bad that they are selling out their purported values at the same time.

The post Tools of the Sheikh appeared first on Act for Israel.

What a year!

What a terrible, wonderful, violent, peaceful year!

Parts of the world are moving in slow motion, while other parts are moving too fast for us to grasp.  Israel’s neighbors are caught in a maelstrom of change.  The Arab Spring is a poisoned pill for Israel: the fall of the old despots held the promise of democracy, but that has not brought peace.  Instead it has brought Islamic radicalism.  Islamist militants have used the opportunity to export war to Mali, Syria, Lebanon, and Mali.

It is a struggle for Americans, Europeans, and Israelis to have to accept that Middle Eastern democracy can bring with it something so oppressive.  Westerners look to their own countries and ask, “how did they pervert the process that worked so well for us?”

This brings along with it much navel gazing for the West.  How can Western democracies (and we’re including Israel among them) avoid sliding into theocratic rule?  How have they managed to remain liberal democracies for so long?  It’s not that Westerners are less religious than their Arabic counterparts.  No one can claim that American politics is not suffused with religion.  Israeli Jews are no less fervent believers than Christians or Muslims.  So, what gives?

Minority rights.  That’s what gives.

Political philosophers too often talk about Rousseau and his contributions to the ideas of democracy while forgetting the contributions of earlier thinkers like Locke.  Rousseau spoke about elections and the necessity of majority rule.  Locke spoke about the necessity of natural rights.  That is, that individuals have certain inalienable rights.  There are disagreements on what these rights are, but across the West there is widespread agreement that such rights exist.  To protect these rights, Western governments– from the very beginning of their modern incarnations– have structured themselves to protect their citizens’ rights.

Democracy will inevitably slide into despotism or theocracy without these checks on government.  Israel has not.  A respect for natural rights is why Israel’s large Arabic, Muslim, and Christian populations keep voting.  It is why, for all of the violence that Israel has suffered this year, she remains a vibrant beacon of hope.  This may make other Arab countries blanch, but Israel is a symbol of the promise of democracy.

That’s something that we cannot forget.

The post A Terrible, Wonderful, Violent, Peaceful Year appeared first on Act for Israel.

It is time for action!

The time has come to stand tall and fight for Israel!  In the past year, 157 different anti-Semitic and anti-Israeli organizations have joined forces to intimidate Israel’s friends in the United States and throughout the world.  They have used social media to organize high profile campaigns dedicated to tarring Israel and anyone who associates with her.  We must respond to this and show the world that we stand with Israel!

Please sign the petition and add your voice to the growing movement. Together, we will work to ensure that the discriminatory boycott campaign will fail.

Our community must stand united.  Sign the petition, then let us know that you did on Twitter and Facebook by using the hashtag #BDSfail!  Make sure that your voice is heard!

Sign the petition here: www.WeStandForIsrael.com

The post Enough is Enough! 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 post 15 Seconds appeared first on Act for Israel.

If you’re in Los Angeles, come out to support Israel this weekend!

The post Rally to Support Israel! appeared first on Act for Israel.