RSS
US Mediation With Israel and Lebanon Is Futile and Destructive
Israeli firefighters work following rocket attacks from Lebanon, amid ongoing cross-border hostilities between Hezbollah and Israeli forces, near the border on its Israeli side, June 13, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Avi Ohayon
The Biden administration maintains the illusion that the nine months of violence between the Lebanese militia Hezbollah and Israel can be de-escalated and defused. The President is keen on preventing the fighting between Hezbollah and Israel from escalating further and engulfing the Middle East in a war. But US planning and thinking about de-escalating and defusing the conflict is pointless and shortsighted.
The administration seeks to configure a new status quo between Israel and Lebanon that cannot be sustained. Future violence is inevitable. If Biden succeeds, the initiator of the conflict — Hezbollah — would go unpunished. The militia would remain unchecked. The reason for the violence at the border would go unaddressed. And by connecting the Hezbollah-Israel conflict to an outcome of the Hamas-Israel conflict, the administration would empower the Lebanese militia.
President Biden dispatched envoy Amos Hochstein to the Middle East after Hezbollah initiated the almost daily cycle of violence with Israel. Hochstein’s shuttle diplomacy has produced several measures to prevent future outbreaks of violence and create greater security for communities inhabiting the border region. A negotiated settlement would entail: 1) officially demarcating the shared Israeli-Lebanese land border with adjustments at 13 disputed locations; 2) deploying additional United Nations Interim Forces in Lebanon (UNIFIL) troops to areas between the Litani River and the Israeli-Lebanese border; 3) deploying the Lebanese army to the Lebanese-Israeli border; and 4) requiring the withdrawal of Hezbollah forces from the Israeli-Lebanese border and relocating them north of the Litani River in Lebanon.
The administration believes the realization of the aforementioned measures is connected to the cessation of violence in Gaza. Witness the words of US Secretary of State Antony Blinken on June 12: “Now, there’s no doubt in my mind that the best way to empower a diplomatic solution to the north, Lebanon, is a resolution of the conflict in Gaza and getting the ceasefire. That will take a tremendous amount of pressure out of the system. It will take away a justification that Hizballah has claimed for the attacks it’s engaged in, and, I think, open a pathway to actually resolve this diplomatically.”
Hochstein affirmed Blinken’s statement during his June 19 visit to Beirut.
But the measures and thinking of Hochstein and Blinken are plagued by problems and dangers.
Firstly, the initiator of the conflict at the Israeli-Lebanese border — Hezbollah — would not be a party to an Israeli-Lebanese settlement. As a non-signatory, the militia is not obliged to formally endorse the agreement or maintain adherence to it. Without making Hezbollah accountable to the agreement, future violence is likely.
Why?
History demonstrates that Hezbollah is indifferent to the concerns, interests, and decisions of the Lebanese state. Hezbollah’s agenda always trumps the state.
For example, the militia ignored the government’s policy of disassociation from the Syrian civil war and entered the conflict in 2012. Similar to what Lebanon is currently experiencing with Israeli retaliatory strikes, the country became a victim of violence because of Hezbollah’s self-interest. The militia’s intervention in Syria precipitated several ISIS suicide bombings perpetrated against the Lebanese public. There is no indication that Hezbollah has learned a lesson and would act differently following a Lebanese government decision to enter into a settlement with Israel.
History also demonstrates the inability or unwillingness of the Lebanese state to keep its word and enforce agreements. A notable example is the resolution to the 2006 33-day Israel-Hezbollah war. Despite endorsing UN Resolution 1701, the state failed to fully implement the resolution’s stipulations. Today’s nine-month conflict is a direct result of that failure.
Secondly, a negotiated Israeli-Lebanese settlement allows Hezbollah to effectively go unpunished for starting the conflict. The measures being discussed are not punishments — at best, they are temporary inconveniences. Hezbollah would be required to move its militia north of the Litani River in Lebanon (roughly 12 miles from the Israeli border), while the Lebanese army and more UNIFIL troops will stand between the militia and Israel.
A similar expectation was stipulated after the fighting in 2006. It never happened. Furthermore, if Hezbollah is convinced to relocate its militia, how can anyone guarantee that it will stay behind the Litani River? Or will Hezbollah just launch missiles and drones at Israel from behind the Litani River — over the heads of UNIFIL and the Lebanese army?
Going relatively unpunished also absolves the terrorist militia of responsibility for initiating the latest round of conflict, and leaves Hezbollah undeterred. An absolved and undeterred Hezbollah entails a more empowered militia. The question then becomes when, not if, future violence will occur.
Thirdly, the proposed settlement between Israel and Lebanon would ignore the reason for the latest round of violence. The diplomacy addresses a land dispute between two countries and the relocation of a militia. Neither are central to why violence erupted on October 8.
Hezbollah’s leadership stated that their October 8 and subsequent attacks on Israel are an act of solidarity with Hamas and the Palestinians of Gaza. Hezbollah maintains that it will not relent until the violence ends in Gaza. The militia is attempting to insert itself into the Israeli-Palestinian conflict by working to exact leverage or deterrence over fighting between Israel and the Palestinians. The goal is for the Israelis to think twice about responding to Palestinian terrorism and violence in the future because they will be forced to fight on a second front–southern Lebanon. The proposed Israeli-Lebanese settlement does nothing to prevent this new Hezbollah objective.
Lastly, the Biden administration’s pointless diplomacy also has the makings of becoming damaging. Instead of defusing the conflict, it would lay the foundation for future conflict. As demonstrated by Blinken and Hochstein’s words, they are linking the de-escalation of the Israeli-Hezbollah conflict to a ceasefire in Gaza. Linking the conflicts plays into the hands of Hezbollah. It empowers the militia by enabling it to claim a victory of sorts — it maintained its pressure on Israel until Israel conceded to a ceasefire. Linkage also enables future Hezbollah aggression against Israel for the sake of solidarity with Hamas and the Palestinians. For example, Hezbollah would be empowered to act if Israel launches a major operation in the West Bank.
US plans to de-escalate and defuse the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah would do little except make a bad situation worse. A US-mediated settlement between the Israeli and Lebanese governments does not prevent future conflict. It would allow Hezbollah, the initiator of the violence, to go unchecked and unpunished while failing to directly address the new objective of Hezbollah’s aggression. Compounding the predicament is their willingness to empower the militia by connecting the fighting between Israel and Hezbollah to a ceasefire in Gaza. The Biden administration’s mediation is proving to be futile and damaging.
Eric Bordenkircher, Ph.D., is a research fellow at UCLA’s Center for Middle East Development. He tweets at @UCLA_Eagle. The views represented in this piece are his own and do not necessarily represent the position of UCLA or the Center for Middle East Development.
The post US Mediation With Israel and Lebanon Is Futile and Destructive first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Kamala Harris Condemns ‘Abhorrent’ Pro-Hamas Protests in DC
US Vice President Kamala Harris speaks during an event with leaders of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) as part of the US-ASEAN Special Summit, in Washington, DC, May 13, 2022. Photo: REUTERS/Elizabeth Frantz
US Vice President Kamala Harris on Thursday rebuked the rampant anti-Israel protests that have erupted across Washington, DC in response to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s visit to the US capital city and speech to a joint session of Congress, calling the demonstrations “abhorrent.”
Outside of Union Station, rioters vandalized numerous statues and landmarks, and the phrase “Hamas is coming,” written in all capital letters, was spray-painted on a monument, along with an upside-down red triangle, a symbol used by the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas when attacking Israeli targets.
“F—k Israel” was also spray-painted at various spots in Washington, DC.
Meanwhile, video emerged on social media showing rioters attacking police officers and burning American flags. They also tore down the American flag in front of Union Station and replaced it with a Palestinian flag. They subsequently set the American flag on fire.
Harris, the presumptive 2024 Democratic presidential nominee, released a statement condemning the “despicable acts by unpatriotic protesters,” specifically referencing the demonstrations at Union Station.
“I condemn any individuals associating with the brutal terrorist organization Hamas, which has vowed to annihilate the State of Israel and kill Jews. Pro-Hamas graffiti and rhetoric is abhorrent and we must not tolerate it in our nation,” Harris said. “I condemn the burning of the American flag. That flag is a symbol of our highest ideals as a nation and represents the promise of America. It should never be desecrated in that way.”
Harris concluded, “I support the right to peacefully protest, but let’s be clear: Antisemitism, hate, and violence of any kind have no place in our nation.”
The statement came after Harris received criticism for not attend Netanyahu’s speech on Wednesday. Instead, the vice president agreed to deliver the keynote address for the national conference of a historically black sorority.
Earlier this month, Harris expressed sympathy for anti-Israel protesters on US university campuses. In an interview, Harris said that college students protesting Israel’s defensive military efforts against Hamas are “showing exactly what the human emotion should be.”
“There are things some of the protesters are saying that I absolutely reject, so I don’t mean to wholesale endorse their points,” she added. “But we have to navigate it. I understand the emotion behind it.”
Harris has previously criticized Israel’s ongoing military campaign against Hamas in Gaza. The vice president, for example, emphatically condemned Israel’s operations in the southern Gaza city of Rafah, insisting that she “studied the maps, there’s nowhere for [Palestinians] to go.” White House aides also reportedly forced Harris to tone down a speech that was highly critical of Israel earlier this year.
Beyond Harris, White House spokesperson Andrew Bates this week also lambasted the “disgraceful” anti-Israel demonstrators for openly endorsing terrorism and extremism. Bates rebuked the protests for their “antisemitism and violence.”
“Identifying with evil terrorist organizations like Hamas, burning the American flag, or forcibly removing the American flag and replacing it with another, is disgraceful,” he said in a statement. “Antisemitism and violence are never acceptable. Period. Every American has the right to peaceful protest. But shamefully, not everyone demonstrated peacefulness today.”
Anti-Israel protests have rocked the US in the months following Hamas’ massacre of over 1200 people in southern Israel on Oct. 7. Demonstrators have rallied across college campuses and rallied at synagogues and Jewish cultural spaces to express their disapproval of Israel. Many agitators at these protests have openly endorsed the Hamas, the terrorist group that runs Gaza, and have called for the complete destruction of Israel.
In response, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AK) on Wednesday unveiled new legislation to sanction non-citizens who participate in violent protests. The proposed “No Visas for Violent Criminals Act” would void visas for foreign nationals convicted for their conduct in protests and require their deportation within 60 days. Specifically, the legislation targets non-citizens arrested for obstructing traffic, defacing federal property, and participating in disruptive college campus demonstrations.
Many of the most vocal anti-Israel agitators on college campuses, in particular, have been foreign students.
“The Biden administration’s inaction against pro-Hamas mobs has only emboldened these extremists. Our legislation makes clear that a green card does not give individuals the right to break our laws in support of antisemitic views,” Cotton wrote in a statement.
The post Kamala Harris Condemns ‘Abhorrent’ Pro-Hamas Protests in DC first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Democrats, Republicans Divided on Netanyahu Congressional Speech as US Lawmakers Give Mixed Response
US House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) and Senate Foreign Relations Chair, US Sen. Ben Cardin (D-MD), listen as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addresses a joint meeting of Congress at the US Capitol in Washington, DC, July 24, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Craig Hudson
The reaction of US lawmakers to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s address to a joint session of Congress largely fell along partisan lines, with prominent Democrats condemning the speech and Republicans praising its message.
Netanyahu on Wednesday broadly outlined his vision for the future of Gaza after the Israel-Hamas war ends, emphasized the necessity of maintaining a strong US-Israel relationship, and proposed a new Middle Eastern security alliance in his address in Washington, DC. The Israeli premier also honored the victims of Hamas’ Oct. 7 terrorist attacks and thanked both US President Joe Biden and his White House predecessor, Donald Trump, for their support of the Jewish state.
Roughly half of House and Senate Democrats skipped the speech, with many making clear they were boycotting the event in protest of Israel’s prosecution of the war in Gaza. Some argued Netanyahu was meddling in US politics or using the speech to boost his own position at home, taking shots at the Israeli premier over social media.
“Netanyahu is not only a war criminal. He is a liar. All humanitarian organizations agree: Tens of thousands of children face starvation because his extremist government continues to block aid. Israelis want him out of office. So he came to Congress to campaign,” Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) wrote on X/Twitter.
Sanders did not provide evidence to substantiate his claim. A June report provided by the United Nations Famine Review Committee (FRC), a panel of experts in international food security and nutrition, found there was a lack of evidence to conclude that mass starvation has taken hold of Gaza.
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT), a member of the Foreign Relations Committee, lambasted Netanyahu’s speech for being political in nature, arguing that it serves as a “setback” in US-Israel relations.
“The speech was more a commentary of US politics, rather than a path forward for Israeli and US security. The suggestion that any American who objects to the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza is a Hamas sympathizer was way out of bound,” Murphy said on X/Twitter. “The downplaying of the humanitarian crisis was astonishing to hear. The truth is that the civilian deaths in Gaza will be bulletin board recruiting material for terrorists for years. That hurts Israel and the US.”
Israel says it has gone to unprecedented lengths to try and avoid civilian casualties, noting its efforts to allow tens of thousands of aid trucks into Gaza, evacuate areas before it targets them, and warn residents of impending military operations with leaflets, text messages, and other forms of communication. However, Hamas, which rules Gaza, has in many cases prevented people from leaving, according to the Israeli military,
Another challenge for Israel is Hamas’ widely recognized military strategy of embedding its terrorists within Gaza’s civilian population and commandeering civilian facilities like hospitals, schools, and mosques to run operations and direct attacks.
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), a former speaker of the House, skewered Netanyahu’s speech as “the worst presentation of any foreign dignitary invited and honored with the privilege of addressing the Congress of the United States.”
“Many of us who love Israel spent time today listening to Israeli citizens whose families have suffered in the wake of the October 7th Hamas terror attack and kidnappings. These families are asking for a ceasefire deal that will bring the hostages home — and we hope the Prime Minister would spend his time achieving that goal,” Pelosi wrote on X/Twitter.
Israel has been engaging in ongoing negotiations with Hamas — brokered by Egypt, Qatar, and the US — to reach a ceasefire deal to halt fighting in Gaza and release at least some of the Israeli hostages kidnapped by Hamas terrorists on Oct. 7. According to reports, the talks appear to be in their closing stages.
Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) accused Israel of committing “apartheid” and “genocide” against Palestinians. Tlaib, the first Palestinian American woman elected to Congress, expressed “solidarity” with protesters of Netanyahu’s speech.
“The apartheid government of Israel is committing genocide against Palestinians. Palestinians will not be erased. Solidarity with all those outside of these walls in the streets protesting and exercising their right to dissent,” Tlaib wrote.
The protests against Netanyahu in Washington, DC to which Tlaib referred included demonstrators who burned American flags; expressed support for Hamas, a US-designated terrorist organization; and defaced US monuments.
Some pro-Israel Democrats expressed support for Netanyahu’s speech despite the criticism from many in their party. Republicans in general were broadly more supportive.
Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AK) praised Netanyahu’s speech as “eloquent.”
“The Prime Minister spoke eloquently about the shared interests and values between our two nations. The American people continue to stand strongly with Israel,” Cotton said on X/Twitter.
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) compared Netanyahu to former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill and vowed to continue supporting the Jewish state to ensure it eradicates Hamas from Gaza.
“Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech to the joint session of Congress today was Churchillian. He understands the gravity of the war in Israel, the existential threat to our Israeli allies, and the staggering risks posed to American national security,” he posted on social media. “The same terrorists who hate Jews also hate Christians. I am proud to stand unequivocally with Israel — they have the right and indeed the obligation to defend their citizens. The US should support Israel as they utterly eradicate Hamas, for as long as it takes.”
Sen. John Thune (R-SD), the Senate Republican Whip, stated that it was a “privilege” to welcome Netanyahu to address Congress.
“In front of Congress today, Prime Minister Netanyahu emphasized the important bond between the United States and Israel and outlined the threats posed by Iran and other malign actors. It was a privilege to welcome the prime minister and stand beside our ally, Israel,” Thune posted on X/Twitter.
Iran is the chief international sponsor of Hamas, providing the Palestinian terrorist group with funding, weapons, and training.
The post Democrats, Republicans Divided on Netanyahu Congressional Speech as US Lawmakers Give Mixed Response first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Canada’s Jewish community wins court reprieve halting new federal kosher slaughter rules
Jewish advocacy leaders hope this will translate into lower prices on kosher meat.
The post Canada’s Jewish community wins court reprieve halting new federal kosher slaughter rules appeared first on The Canadian Jewish News.