Chinese Deal to Take Over Key Israeli Port May Threaten U.S. Naval Operations, Critics Say | Newsweek

USS Iwo Jima moored at Haifa

A Chinese company is planning to take over management of Israel’s Haifa port as Beijing continues to advance its global influence in the form of economic projects and big commercial deals.

The Haifa port sits close to the hub of the Israeli navy base that is reportedly home to the country’s nuclear-capable submarine force, according to The Times of Israel. Israeli critics are calling for an investigation into potential security issues posed by the Chinese presence along the country’s Mediterranean coast.

At the University of Haifa’s Workshop on Future of Maritime Security in the Eastern Mediterranean conference at the end of August, Shaul Chorev, reservist brigadier general of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), former navy chief of staff, and chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission, said a new mechanism was required to keep an eye on Chinese investments in Israel.

Read more

University of Michigan ‘Disappointed’ After Professor Refuses to Write Recommendation Letter for Student Studying Abroad in Israel | Algemeiner

John Cheney-Lippold

The University of Michigan (U-M) said it was disappointed after a professor refused to write a letter of recommendation for a student who sought to study abroad at Tel Aviv University, in an expression of support for the academic boycott of Israel.

In an email sent on September 5, Professor John Cheney-Lippold told the student, who had taken a course with him during the Spring 2018 semester, that he would have to rescind an earlier offer to write a letter of recommendation due to “politics.”

“I am very sorry, but I only scanned your first email a couple weeks ago and missed out on a key detail,” wrote Cheney-Lippold, who teaches in the Department of American Culture’s Digital Studies program.

“As you may know, many university departments have pledged an academic boycott against Israel in support of Palestinians living in Palestine,” he said in reference to the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) campaign against Israel.

Read more

Trump administration orders closure of Palestinian office | NZ Herald

Donald Trump

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration ordered the closure of the Palestinian diplomatic mission in Washington on Monday and threatened sanctions against the International Criminal Court if it pursues investigations against the U.S., Israel, or other allies. The moves are likely to harden Palestinian resistance to the U.S. role as a peace broker.

The administration cited the refusal of Palestinian leaders to enter into peace talks with Israel as the reason for closing the Palestinian Liberation Organization office, although the U.S. has yet to present its plan to resolve the Israel-Palestinian conflict. The Palestinians accused the administration of dismantling decades of U.S. engagement with them.

Read more

The west’s antisemitism crisis | MelaniePhillips.com

Melanie Phillips

Antisemitism is now a major issue in the West.

In Britain, there are continuing convulsions over rampant antisemitism in the Labour Party. In America, there was outrage over the presence of the virulent Jew-hater Louis Farrakhan at Aretha Franklin’s funeral. In France and other European countries, Jews are under siege from violent Muslims.

The really disturbing thing, though, is that so many are not outraged by this. For a troubling number of people, antisemitism is no longer considered a big deal. Either it is denied or minimized, as in Europe, or it is relegated down the pecking order of prejudices.

Consider. The past few months have produced an apparently unstoppable stream of poisonous bigotry among Labour Party members and supporters directed at both Israel and Jewish people.

The party’s far-left leader, Jeremy Corbyn, has himself been revealed time and again as not only supporting Israel’s terrorist attackers, but defaming Israel as wanton killers and racists. He also championed an obscene mural depicting hook-nosed Jews manipulating the world’s finances on the backs of the exploited poor.

Read more

Palestinians file war crimes claim over West Bank hamlet | NZ Herald

Mahmoud Abbas

RAMALLAH, West Bank (AP) — A top official said Tuesday the Palestinians have filed a new complaint against Israel with the International Criminal Court, after the United States said it would resort to any means to protect its allies against such actions at the international war crimes body.

The move comes a day after the U.S. closed the Palestinian de facto embassy in Washington because of its leaders’ refusal to enter peace talks with Israel. National security adviser John Bolton also lashed out at the Palestinians for their attempts to have Israel prosecuted at the ICC, denouncing the court’s legitimacy and threatening sanctions if it targeted Israel and others.

But at a press conference in Ramallah, Saeb Erekat doubled down by saying the Palestinians have asked the ICC to investigate Israel’s planned demolition of the Palestinian Bedouin village of Khan al Ahmar in the West Bank. He also indicated the Palestinians plan to join other international bodies.

Read more

Bordering on disaster? | AIR

Bashar al Assad
President of Syria

In recent weeks, as the Syrian regime prepared and launched a major military operation to regain control of southwest Syria, this area has become a significant issue in international and regional diplomacy. It was, among others, the focus of discussions between Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Jordanian King Abdullah in Amman (June 18), Jordanian and Russian foreign ministers in Moscow (July 4), Netanyahu and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow (July 12) and recent phone calls between Netanyahu and US President Donald Trump. Finally, it made its way into the July 16 Helsinki summit between Putin and Trump.

In the last year and a half, the Syrian regime has regained control over nearly two thirds of the country, apart from the southwest and southeast, the province of Idlib adjacent to the Turkish border, and the north-east, which is under the control of the Kurdish-dominated SDF. Having won the battle in the eastern suburbs of Damascus (Eastern Ghouta, the Yarmouk refugee camp and other areas east of Damascus), the Syrian regime decided to focus on the south, up to the borders with Jordan and Israel. This area includes the provinces of Dara’a (with the city of Dara’a, considered the “capital” of the south); Quneitra, which borders the Israeli-controlled Golan Heights; and Suweida’ further to the east, which is home to a large Druze community. In recent years, Dara’a and Quneitra have been mostly controlled by rebel groups.

The regime’s assault in the south essentially put an end to the de-escalation agreement – established in the three southwest provinces in the summer of 2017 by a Russian-US-Jordanian agreement (and first announced by presidents Trump and Putin in July 2017). The agreement excluded the jihadi groups – ISIS, which controls the Yarmouk basin (on the border triangle between Syria, Jordan and Israel) and Hay’at Tahrir a-Sha’m (HTS, formerly Jabhat al-Nusra).

The Syrian-Russian strategy and its implementation on the ground

The Syrian regime’s move towards the south was decided upon and implemented in close coordination with Russia. It incorporated and synchronised military moves, Russian diplomatic efforts vis-à-vis Israel, Jordan and the US, and Syrian regime negotiations with rebel groups and villages on the ground. The Assad regime first amassed troops in the area, sent warnings to rebels and started quiet negotiations with them about laying down their arms. Then, both Russia and Syria began airstrikes in the south followed by a Syrian ground offensive focused on the area of Dara’a – occasionally halting to give a chance to translating the military pressure to deals with the rebels. Simultaneously, Russia was conducting talks with both Jordan and Israel to make sure neither, especially Israel, opposed the Syrian offensive and would be undermining it in any way.

This strategy appears to have been by and large successful. At the time of publication, the Syrian regime has already taken over almost all of the province of Dara’a, including the city (where the uprising in Syria was sparked in 2011), the border area with Jordan and the Nassib Crossing, the main border crossing with Jordan. This constitutes a practical and symbolic victory shutting the door to potential support for the rebels from Jordan. The regime is now fighting to take over the province of Quneitra, adjacent to Israel’s border, and has already reconquered the strategic hilltop of Tel al-Harrah, some 10 kilometres from Israel’s border.

Read more

Jewish NGO condemns ‘wholesale misappropriation’ of Holocaust amid outcry over US border policy | JNS

The Simon Wiesenthal Centre, a Jewish human rights NGO that teaches the lessons of the Nazi Holocaust, has denounced the “wholesale misappropriation” of the Holocaust amid on the ongoing outcry over the Trump administration’s “zero tolerance” policy of separating children from migrant parents at the U.S.-Mexico border…writes Sean Savage/JNS.

“To be sure, like millions of Americans on both sides of the political divide, we want our leaders to solve the humanitarian crisis at hand. No matter what the divisions are over immigration policies, it is unacceptable to separate little children from their parents. That isn’t what America stands for. Those are not our values,” Rabbis Marvin Hier and Abraham Cooper, dean and founder, and associate dean and director of global social action of the Simon Wiesenthal Centre, respectively, said in a statement.

“We urge immediate steps to ameliorate this situation, and for the administration and Congress to finally take the necessary steps to end this problem long-range,” they continued. “But we denounce the alarming wholesale misappropriation of the the Nazi Holocaust by critics of current policies.”

Last weekend, Michael Hayden, a retired four-star general and former director of the CIA and NSA, tweeted an image of the Auschwitz-Birkenau concentration camp with the caption of “other governments have separated mothers and children.”

Hayden later backtracked and issued an apology for the tweet, telling CNN that “if I overachieved [sic] by comparing it to Birkenau, I apologize to anyone who may have felt offended.”

MSNBC morning host and former Republican politician Joe Scarborough similarly invoked the Holocaust, comparing border-patrol agents to “Nazis,” which drew a strong White House condemnation.

“It is appalling that Joe Scarborough would compare sworn federal law-enforcement officers, who put their lives on the line every day to keep American people safe,  to Nazis,” White House deputy press secretary Hogan Gidley said in a statement. “This is the type of inflammatory and unacceptable rhetoric that puts a target on the backs of our great law enforcement.”

Cooper told JNS that the statements by Scarborough and Hayden, as well as comparisons to Nazi Germany on social media, are “very damaging to collective memory.”

“I think it winds up dulling people to suffering,” he said. “If you can’t tell the difference between what was done to 1.5 million Jewish children during the Holocaust, and what is going on today with the horrible situation on the border, then you have no reason to be in a position of leadership.”

Cooper added that he feels this type of imagery will only push people on both sides further apart on the issue.

“Deployment cynically of this type of imagery delays and deflects from getting us closer to consensus on how to fix this [in the] short term and long term,” he said. “We have to learn lessons from the past, but one of the fundamental lessons is that not everything is an Auschwitz—and that’s the whole point.”

Last week, more than two-dozen Jewish religious and communal organizations issued a joint letter condemning the Trump administration’s policies along the U.S.-Mexico border.

The letter, which included groups such as the American Jewish Committee, the Anti-Defamation League, the Orthodox Union, United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism and the Union  for Reform Judaism, said that the Trump administration’s policy of separating children from their migrant parents “undermines the values of our nation, and jeopardises the safety and well-being of thousands of people.”

“Our own people’s history as ‘strangers’ reminds us of the many struggles faced by immigrants today and compels our commitment to an immigration system in this country that is compassionate and just,” the joint letter read.

Source

US announces it will leave UN human rights council | Stuff

Nikki Haley, US Ambassador to the UN

The Obama administration sought a seat only in 2009 in an effort to showcase how human rights were an important aspect of US foreign policy.

Before the United States joined, half the country-specific votes condemned Israel.

During the first six years the United States was a member, resolutions critical of Israel dropped to one-fifth. US membership also led to a sharp decrease in the number of special sessions that focused exclusively on Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians.

“It’s true, the Human Rights Council continues to disproportionately focus on Israel,” said Peter Yeo, an official with the United Nations Foundation that connects the organisation with private and nongovernmental groups and foundations.

“But with US leadership, the attention Israel brought has dropped significantly. US leadership matters. We’re still the only ones with credibility on human rights on the world stage.”

The Trump administration’s irritation with the council makeup and its agenda has been telegraphed with drumbeat regularity by Haley.

A year ago, she denigrated it as a “forum for politics, hypocrisy and evasion,” and threatened a US exit if the council did not kick out abusive regimes and remove Item 7, the standing resolution critical of Israel’s treatment of Palestinians.

She repeated her ultimatum two weeks ago.

Few dispute the underlying reasons for the administration’s frustration with the council.

Read more

The “Trump Doctrine” for the Middle East | Gatestone Institute

Whatever you may say about Trump’s ethics and style, here is a remarkably constructive interpretation to his Middle East actions and policies to date:

  • Trump has shown the strength of the United States and restored its credibility in a region where strength and force determine credibility.
  • Trump more broadly laid the foundation for a new alliance of the United States with the Sunni Arab world, but he put two conditions on it: a cessation of all Sunni Arab support for Islamic terrorism and an openness to the prospect of a regional peace that included Israel.
  • Secretary of State Pompeo spoke of the “Palestinians”, not of the Palestinian Authority, as in Iran, possibly to emphasize the distinction between the people and their leadership, and that the leadership in both situations, may no longer be part of the solution. Hamas, for the US, is clearly not part of any solution.
  • Netanyahu rightly said that Palestinian leaders, whoever they may be, do not want peace with Israel, but “peace without Israel”. What instead could take place would be peace without the Palestinian leaders. What could also take place would be peace without the Iranian mullahs.

After three successive American Presidents had used a six-month waiver to defer moving the US Embassy to Jerusalem for more than two decades, President Donald J. Trump decided not to wait any longer. On December 7, 2017, he declared that the United States recognizes Jerusalem as the capital of Israel; the official embassy transfer took place on May 14th, the day of Israel’s 70th anniversary.

From the moment of Trump’s declaration, leaders of the Muslim world expressed anger and announced major trouble. An Islamic summit conference was convened in Istanbul a week later, and ended with statements about a “crime against Palestine”. Western European leaders followed suit. Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel said that President Trump’s decision was a “serious mistake” and could have huge “consequences”. French President Emmanuel Macron, going further, declared that the decision could provoke a “war”.

Despite these ominous predictions, trouble remained largely absent. The Istanbul statement remained a statement. The “war” anticipated by Macron did not break out.

The Islamic terrorist organization Hamas sent masses of rioters from Gaza to tear down Israel’s border fence and cross over, to force Israeli soldiers to fire, thereby allowing Hamas to have bodies of “martyrs” to show to the cameras. So far, Hamas has sent 62 of its own people to their death. Fifty of them were, by Hamas’s own admission, members of Hamas.

Palestinian terrorist groups fired rockets into southern Israel; Israeli jets retaliated with airstrikes. Hamas sent kites, attached to incendiary devices and explosives, over the border to Israel. So far, 200 of the fire-kites that Hamas sent have destroyed 6,200 acres of Israeli forests and farmland.

Pundits who predicted more violent reactions have been surprised by the relatively quiet reaction of the Palestinian and Muslim communities. The reason might be called the “Trump Doctrine for the Middle East”.

One element of it consisted of crushing the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq. President Trump had promised quickly to clear the world of what had become a main backbone of Islamic terrorism. He kept his promise in less than a year, and without a massive deployment of American troops. Trump has shown the strength of the United States and restored its credibility in a region where strength and force determine credibility.

Another element of it was put in place during President Trump’s trip to Saudi Arabia in May 2017. President Trump renewed ties which had seriously deteriorated during the previous 8 years. Trump more broadly laid the foundation for a new alliance of the United States with the Sunni Arab world, but he put two conditions on it: a cessation of all Sunni Arab support for Islamic terrorism and an openness to the prospect of a regional peace that included Israel.

Both conditions are being gradually fulfilled. In June 2017, Saudi Arabia’s King Salman chose his son Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) as heir to the throne. MBS started an internal revolution to impose new directions on the kingdom. The Islamic Military Counter Terrorism Coalition, created on December 15, 2015, was endorsed by the United States; it held its inaugural meeting on November 26, 2017. In addition, links between Israeli and Saudi security services were strengthened and coordination between the Israeli and Egyptian militaries intensified.

An alliance between Israel and the main countries of the Sunni Arab world to contain Iran also slowly and unofficially began taking shape. MBS, calling called Hamas a terrorist organization, saying that it must “be destroyed”. He told representatives of Jewish organizations in New York that Palestinian leaders need to “take the [American] proposals or shut up.”

Pictured: President Donald Trump hosts Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman at the White House on March 20, 2018, in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Kevin Dietsch-Pool/Getty Images)

Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas was summoned to Riyadh twice — in November and December 2017; and it appears he was “asked” to keep quiet. Never has the distance between Palestinian organizations, and Saudi Arabia and the Sunni Arab world, seemed so far. The only Sunni Arab country to have maintained ties with Hamas is Qatar, but the current Emir of Qatar, Sheikh Tamim ben Hamad Al Thani, has been under pressure to change his stance.

Immediately after President Trump left Riyadh, a third element emerged. The US presidential plane went directly from Riyadh to Israel: for the first time, a direct flight between Saudi Arabia and Israel took place. President Trump went to Jerusalem, where he became the first sitting US President to visit the Western Wall, the only historical remains of a retaining wall from the ancient Temple of King Solomon. During his campaign, Trump had referred to Jerusalem as “the eternal capital of the Jewish people”, implicitly acknowledging that the Jews have had their roots there for 3,000 years.

After his visit to the Wall, President Trump went to Bethlehem and told Mahmoud Abbas what no American President had ever said: that Abbas is a liar and that he is personally responsible for the incitement to violence and terror. In the days that followed, the US Congress demanded that the Palestinian Authority renounce incentivizing terrorism by paying cash to imprisoned Palestinian terrorists and families of terrorists killed while carrying out attacks. President Trump’s Middle East negotiators, Jared Kushner and Jason Greenblatt made it clear to Palestinian leaders that US aid to the Palestinian Authority could end if the US demand was not met. Nikki Haley told the United Nations that the US could stop funding UNWRA if Palestinian leaders refused to negotiate and accept what the US is asking for. Since it was founded in 1994, the Palestinian Authority has never been subjected to such intense American pressure.

The fourth element was President Trump’s decision to leave the Iran nuclear deal. President Trump immediately announced he would restore “the harshest, strongest, most stringent sanctions” to suffocate the mullahs’ regime. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has since presented to Iran a list of 12 “basic requirements” for a new agreement.

President Trump’s decision came in a context where the Iran regime has just suffered a series of heavy blows: the Israeli Mossad’s seizure in Tehran of highly confidential documents showing that Iran has not ceased to lie about its nuclear program; the revelation by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of the Mossad operation, and the Israeli army’s decisive response to an Iranian rocket barrage launched from Syrian territory. By it, Israel showed its determination not to allow Russia to support Iran when Iran uses its bases to attack Israel.

Netanyahu was invited by Russian President Vladimir Putin to Moscow on May 9 to commemorate the Soviet victory over Germany in 1945; during that visit, Putin seems to have promised Netanyahu neutrality if Israel were attacked by Iranian forces in Syria. Putin, eager to preserve his Russian bases in Syria, clearly views Israel as a force for stability in the Middle East and Iran as a force for instability — too big a risk for Russian support.

In recent months, the Iranian regime has become, along with Erdogan’s Turkey, one of the main financial supporters of the “Palestinian cause” and Hamas’s main backer. It seems that Iran asked Hamas to organize the marches and riots along the Gaza-Israel border. When the violence from Gaza became more intense, Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh was summoned to Cairo by Egypt’s intelligence chief, who told him that if violence does not stop, the Israel military would carry out drastic actions, and Egypt would be silent. It could become difficult for Iran to incite Palestinian organizations to widespread violence in the near future.

It could become extremely difficult for Iran to continue financially to support the “Palestinian cause” in the coming months. It could soon become financially unbearable for Iran to maintain its presence in Syria and provide sophisticated weapons to Hezbollah. Turkish President Erdogan speaks loudly, but he seems to know what lines not to cross.

Protests in Iran have become less intense since January, but the discontent and frustrations of the population persist and could get worse.

The Trump administration undoubtedly realizes that the Iranian regime will not accept the requirements presented by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and that the harsh new sanctions might lead to new major uprisings in Iran, and the fall of the regime. Ambassador John Bolton, now National Security Advisor, mentioned in January that the “strategic interest of the United States” is to see the regime overthrown.

Referring recently to the situation in the Middle East and the need to achieve peace, Pompeo spoke of the “Palestinians”, not of the Palestinian Authority, as in Iran, possibly to emphasize the distinction between the people and their leadership, and that the leadership in both situations, may no longer be part of the solution. Hamas, for the US, is clearly not part of any solution.

No one knows exactly what the peace plan to be presented by the Trump administration will contain, but it seems certain that it will not include the “right of return” of so-called “Palestinian refugees” and will not propose East Jerusalem as the “capital of a Palestinian state”. The plan will no doubt be rejected by both the Palestinian Authority and Hamas; it already has been, sight unseen.

Netanyahu rightly said that Palestinian leaders, whoever they may be, do not want peace with Israel, but “peace without Israel”. What instead could take place would be peace without the Palestinian leaders. What could also take place would be peace without the Iran’s mullahs.

It should be noted that on December 7, 2017, when Donald Trump announced the transfer of the United States Embassy to Jerusalem, the leaders of the Muslim world who protested were mostly Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Iran’s Hassan Rouhani. Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates and Oman did not send representatives to the Islamic summit conference in Istanbul. When the US embassy in Jerusalem opened its doors on May 14, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the Gulf emirates were quiet.

On that day, Angela Merkel and Emmanuel Macron repeated what they had said on December 7, 2017: that the embassies of Germany and France in Israel would remain in Tel Aviv. Macron condemned the “heinous acts” committed by the Israeli military on the Gaza border but not aggression of Hamas in urging its people, and even paying them, to storm Gaza’s border with Israel.

If current trends continue, Macron and Merkel could be among the last supporters of the “Palestinian cause.” They sound as if they will do just about anything to save the corrupt Palestinian Authority.

They are also doing everything to save the moribund Iran “nuclear deal,” and are deferential to the mullahs’ regime. During a European summit held in Sofia, Bulgaria, on May 16, the Trump administration was harshly criticized by the European heads of state who argued that Europe will “find a way around” US sanctions and “resist” President Trump. European companies are already leaving Iran in droves, evidently convinced that they will be better off cutting their losses and keeping good relations with the United States.

On June 3-5, Benjamin Netanyahu went to Europe to try to persuade Merkel, Macron and British Prime Minister Theresa May to give up backing the Iran nuclear deal. He failed, predictably, but at least had the opportunity to explain the Iranian danger to Europeans and the need to act.

As Iran’s nuclear ties to North Korea have intensified in the last two years — Iran seems to have relied on North Korea to advance its own nuclear projects — the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula that might have begun with the Donald Trump-Kim Jong-Un meeting in Singapore on June 12, clearly will not strengthen the Iranian position.

European leaders seem not to want to see that a page is turning in the Middle East. They seem not to want to see that, regardless of their mercenary immorality, of their behavior staying on the page of yesterday, is only preventing them from understanding the future.

Dr. Guy Millière, a professor at the University of Paris, is the author of 27 books on France and Europe.

Source

Will the World Finally Turn Off the UNRWA Spigot? | Algemeiner

UNRWA employees protest against a US withdrawal of funding

It’s been a rough few months for UNRWA — the UN agency dedicated to providing care for more than five million Palestinians in Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Gaza, and the West Bank. And the worst may be yet to come when UNRWA’s principal donors meet in Amman in June.

According to sources close to events, the discussions may touch on the agency’s future.

Portents of bad news arrived in December, with the results of Lebanon’s first-ever census of Palestinian residents. The count showed the number of Palestinians living in Lebanon was only one third of the number on UNRWA’s official rolls — 174,422 people instead of 449,987.

The discrepancy of 272,565 people who either never existed or relocated was waved away by UNWRA spokeswoman Huda Samra, who stated that UNRWA doesn’t count anyway. “UNRWA does not have a headcount of Palestinian refugees in Lebanon,” she said. “What we have are official registration records for the number of registered Palestine refugees in Lebanon. If someone registered with UNRWA in Lebanon decided to live outside Lebanon, they don’t notify us.”

Yet a drop of 66% in numbers has significant implications for UNRWA’s funding stream.

Read more