Connect with us

RSS

Cancel or condemn? Jewish groups decrying UPenn’s ‘Palestine Writes’ festival are split on ideal response.

(JTA) –  A number of Jewish organizations have condemned an upcoming conference on Palestinian culture, taking place at the University of Pennsylvania, that includes speakers accused of antisemitism. But the groups decrying the conference disagree about what the school should do about it.

The biggest name speaking at the “Palestine Writes” festival taking place next weekend, from Friday, Sept. 22 to the afternoon of Sunday, Sept. 24, is that of Roger Waters, the former Pink Floyd frontman who uses Holocaust imagery to bash Israel during his concerts. Other speakers at the conference, the Jewish organizations say, have used language that condones or encourages Israel’s destruction.

Jewish organizational responses have ranged from a call on the university to condemn the conference — which it did last week, albeit in terms that critics called inadequate — to a demand that the university shut the conference down or face legal consequences.

The disparate response point to a divide within the pro-Israel ecosystem over how universities should handle anti-Israel and arguably antisemitic speech on campus. While both sides of the discussion abhor such statements, one cohort of activists believes that federal law requires the university to quash the offensive speech, while the other says the dictates of academic freedom demand that even repugnant speech be allowed, though they say it should be condemned.  

Miriam Elman, executive director of the Academic Engagement Network, which works to counter antisemitic and anti-Israel activity on campus, told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency that her group would not demand the conference be canceled “unless there is a case of imminent threat, or bodily harm.” She added, “Our system of academic freedom and campus free expression is that: Offensive speech? Meet it with better speech.”

That approach contrasts with the demand issued by the Zionist Organization of America, which has urged its activists to tell the university to cancel the conference. If the university fails to do so, a recent ZOA action alert said, the right-wing pro-Israel group “may have a moral obligation to file a complaint under Title VI if this conference takes place.” Title VI refers to a section of the Civil Rights Act that bars discrimination in any institution that receives federal funds. Although the University of Pennsylvania is a private university, it receives federal research grants.

Palestine Writes has organized the annual festival since 2020, saying on its website that its founding was born from the pervasive exclusion from or tokenization of Palestinian voices in mainstream literary institutions.”

Susan Abulhawa, the executive director of “Palestine Writes,” said in an email that most of the festival was about Palestinians, and not Israel, but that naturally there would be expressions of criticism of the country.

“We have a glorious and rich heritage that is either being erased or appropriated by a 20th-century colonial enterprise that has worked overtime to denigrate us where they cannot fully erase us,” she told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency. “It’s disappointing, though unsurprising, that the university could not muster the courage to defend an indigenous people’s moral and necessary struggle against Israeli colonial fascism.”

A festival spokesperson clarified that the event ends several hours before the beginning of the Jewish High Holiday of Yom Kippur, which starts on the evening of Sept. 24. The conference ends at 1 p.m.

Josh Gottheimer, a Jewish New Jersey Democratic congressman and Penn graduate, said in a letter to the university leadership that the university should at least disinvite Waters as well as Marc Lamont Hill, a Temple University professor and commentator fired from CNN in 2018 for calling for a free Palestine ”from the river to the sea” — a phrase many interpret as calling for the elimination of Israel. Hill said at the time that he was unaware of the phrase’s origins and that he was calling for a single binational Israeli-Palestinian state.

Abraham Foxman, the ADL’s former national director, told JTA that the event should trigger an inquiry by the Biden administration as part of its new plan to combat antisemitism. He also said Jewish alumni should organize to stop donating to the university. “The time has come for alumni to be more active,” he said, not just at Penn but on other campuses that have accommodated vehement critics of Israel.

After complaints from Jewish groups, the university made a statement acknowledging that the conference includes “several speakers who have a documented and troubling history of engaging in antisemitism by speaking and acting in ways that denigrate Jewish people. We unequivocally — and emphatically — condemn antisemitism as antithetical to our institutional values.”

Elman’s group and the Anti-Defamation League each told JTA that they hoped the university’s condemnation would be more robust. 

For Jewish and pro-Israel groups criticizing the conference, the most objectionable speaker is Waters, who is scheduled to speak on a Friday evening panel about the costs incurred by those who speak out on behalf of Palestinians. Rogers has used Holocaust imagery to criticize Israel, a practice watchdogs have called antisemitic because it trivializes the Holocaust and implies that Jews are now perpetrating its horrors on another people.

A number of other speakers have also been singled out by pro-Israel groups for their praise for members of designated terrorist groups or because they have used incendiary language to implicate all Israelis, not just their government’s policies. 

The university’s statement, which was signed by Penn President Elizabeth Magill and two other senior officials, noted that the festival is not organized by the university, although a number of university-affiliated entities — such as the Wolf Humanities Center — are cosponsors.  

“As a university, we also fiercely support the free exchange of ideas as central to our educational mission,” the statement said. “This includes the expression of views that are controversial and even those that are incompatible with our institutional values.”

Some critics said that Penn’s leadership had a duty to condemn university-affiliated cosponsors of the conference. 

“Universities can definitely express disappointment, chagrin, dismay in faculty choices,” Elman said. “They can say ‘this is terrible judgment.’”

Jonathan Greenblatt, the CEO of the Anti-Defamation League, said in an email to JTA, “Supporting academic freedom and the free exchange of ideas on campus, which ADL joins Penn in supporting, does not abdicate Penn leadership from taking a position.” 

According to Jewish Insider, the ADL, along with the Jewish Federation of Greater Philadelphia, led a weeks-long effort to get the university to make a statement. The ADL recently released an analysis showing a sharp uptick in what it called “anti-Israel events” on college campuses.

“If Penn truly wants to show real support for the Jewish community, it must stop equivocating and start speaking out and taking action to stand with the Jewish community in an unequivocal, unambiguous manner,” Greenblatt said. The Jewish federation did not return a request for comment.

Elman and ZOA both noted a difference in the treatment the university has accorded the festival and a Jewish law professor, Amy Wax, who has made incendiary comments about Black and Asian students on the campus. Wax is embroiled in disciplinary hearings, which has spurred criticism of Penn by free speech advocates.

The university’s caution with “Palestine Speaks” may stem in part from a reluctance to wade into another battle over academic freedom. The controversy comes as Wax has invited a white supremacist, Jared Taylor, to campus for a second time. His presence at a 2021 event at Penn stirred protests. The Philadelphia Inquirer quoted students who believe Wax invited Taylor in order to portray the university as an institution that represses free expression.

Michal Cotler-Wunsch, who this week was named as Israel’s envoy to combat antisemitism, told JTA that the university’s commitment to diversity, equity and inclusion demanded a tougher response.

“Held in a DEI campus reality proclaiming commitment to provide and ensure equal access, safety and security to all students and faculty members, [the conference] must be measured with the same yardstick as any other group, recognizing that double standards in the application of any principle or rule undermines it,” she said.


The post Cancel or condemn? Jewish groups decrying UPenn’s ‘Palestine Writes’ festival are split on ideal response. appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.

Continue Reading

RSS

Polio Vaccination Campaign Gives Lie to Claims of Israeli ‘Genocide’

Dr. Jonas Salk, an American virologist and medical researcher who developed one of the first successful polio vaccines. Photo: WIkimedia Commons.

JNS.orgStates that commit genocide do not make distinctions between military personnel and civilian populations. They don’t agree to pauses in their military campaigns to allow the delivery of humanitarian relief. They seek to obstruct, rather than cooperate with, international agencies dealing with the emergency housing and medical needs of the targeted population. Should fatal diseases break out among the displaced and dispossessed, as is often the case, they seek to cover these up, instead of acknowledging and countering them.

All of which means one of two things. In the Gaza Strip, Israel is either waging the strangest genocide in the ghastly history of that phenomenon, or it isn’t waging one at all.

Over the last week, Israel has helped the World Health Organization and UNICEF, the U.N. children’s fund, roll out a major vaccination campaign in Gaza against polio following the first case of the virus there in 25 years. More than 1.25 million doses of the vaccine arrived in Gaza on Aug. 25, facilitated by Israel through its Kerem Shalom crossing into the coastal enclave. On Aug. 31, COGAT—the Israeli Ministry of Defense unit responsible for the humanitarian situation in Gaza—formally announced the start of the vaccination campaign aimed at Gaza’s children, specifying both times and locations where the vaccine could be obtained. Israel also transferred cooling equipment into Gaza to preserve the vaccines.

The goal is to inoculate 640,000 Gazan children against the disease. A statement from WHO on Sept. 4 confirmed that in the first phase of the inoculation campaign, in central Gaza, 187,000 children had received the vaccine, exceeding the target for that area by 30,000.

“It has been extremely encouraging to see thousands of children being able to access polio vaccines, with the support of their resilient families and courageous health workers, despite the deplorable conditions they have braved over the last 11 months. All parties respected the humanitarian pause and we hope to see this positive momentum continue,” commented Richard Peeperkorn, WHO’s representative for Gaza, which is probably the closest Israel will get to receiving a vote of thanks from this agency, which is not exactly known for its warmth towards the Jewish state. The campaign has now moved to southern Gaza, where crowds of Palestinian families gathered to receive the vaccines, before being completed in the northern part of the strip in its final phase.

It’s hard to think of another state, particularly one enveloped in a war of survival, which would go to such lengths to protect children in the combat zone from this devastating illness that can paralyze parts of the body. Russia, which has been kidnapping children in Ukraine, certainly wouldn’t do the same. Nor would Turkey, which has sent its armed forces into neighboring Syria and continues its genocidal campaign against its Kurdish minority. Ditto for China, Burma/Myanmar, Sudan and all the other countries where real genocides are underway, prosecuted by political and military leaders whose aim is for the victims they are targeting to die as rapidly and in as great a number as possible.

As befits a movement that places its hands over its ears whenever inconvenient facts crop up, the global pro-Hamas mob has either been silent on the vaccine campaign or promoted ridiculous conspiracy theories accusing Israel of planting the virus and then rolling out a fake vaccine. Ironically, most Palestinians do not seem to share this perspective. When Bisan Owda, a Gazan social-media influencer, warned that the emergence of polio was the consequence of an anti-Palestinian conspiracy, she received short shrift from Nour Alsaqa—another Gazan influencer and hardly a friend of Israel—who pointed out that the first polio case was registered and publicized by the Hamas-run Health Ministry! Alsaqa pointedly asked Owda why her video denouncing the vaccination effort was posted in English “when the targeted population is Gazans who speak Arabic.” She concluded that Owda was simply “seeking attention online … again.” I am not going to disagree with that assessment.

To be crystal clear, I’m not arguing that the vaccination campaign means that Gaza’s Palestinian population suddenly views its Israeli neighbors through rose-colored spectacles. What I am saying is that the vaccine drive, which absolutely would not have been possible without Israel’s consent and practical assistance, is important evidence in countering the monstrous lie that Israel’s goal is to exterminate every last Palestinian. If this was a war on civilians, there would be no vaccine. But it isn’t. It’s a war against Hamas, the terrorist organization that sparked this conflict in the first place with its Oct. 7 pogrom and whose actions have caused misery for the people they claim they want to liberate.

Yet one can hardly expect the Israel-hating protesters on American and European campuses to show some humility when too many of their governments are bolstering the view that Israel is a rogue state deliberately committing war crimes and crimes against humanity. I’m not talking here about Iran or Turkey or Qatar—states whose leaders have fawned over the Hamas rapists for almost a year now. I’m talking about ostensible allies of Israel (and the United States) who have tried to tie Israel’s hands militarily, by unilaterally recognizing Palestinian statehood and cutting off supplies of weapons to the Israel Defense Forces.

The latest example of this shameful behavior involves the newly elected Labour government in the United Kingdom, whose foreign secretary, David Lammy, announced on Sept. 2 that 30 of 350 arms export licenses to Israel had been suspended out of concern that the Jewish state would use this materiel in violation of international humanitarian law. Lammy made the announcement as Israeli troops discovered the bodies of six hostages, including Israeli-American Hersh Goldberg-Polin, after they were brutally executed by their Hamas captors in Gaza, as well as in the wake of Israel’s announcement that it was transferring the polio vaccines as a matter of urgency. Hiding this shabby political maneuvering behind the excuse of impartial legal advice, both Lammy and Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer have distinguished themselves by rounding on Israel in a moment of excruciating pain for the entire nation. Israelis are unlikely to forget that insult for a long time, if at all.

The United Kingdom, which happily supplies weapons to abusers like Turkey and China without worrying about legal advice, has joined a list of other countries that have implemented similar restrictions, among them Spain, the Netherlands and Canada. None of this will have much impact on Israel’s fighting capabilities since more than 90% of the IDF’s imported weaponry comes from the United States and Germany. The threat these measures represent is political, encouraging neutral observers to draw an equivalence between the IDF and Hamas, and to reinforce the view that while Israel may theoretically have the right to defend itself, in practical terms it doesn’t. At the same time, such measures suggest to Israel’s implacable enemies that their positions are essentially correct and that the power of the “Zionist lobby” is what prevents their governments from endorsing their line wholesale. That Israel rises above the fray and makes the right decisions regardless is to its eternal credit.

The post Polio Vaccination Campaign Gives Lie to Claims of Israeli ‘Genocide’ first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

RSS

The Philadelphi Conundrum

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stands before a map of the Gaza Strip, telling viewers that Israel must retain control over the “Philadelphi corridor,” a strategic area along the territory’s border with Egypt, during a news conference in Jerusalem, Sept. 2, 2024. Photo: Ohad Zwigenberg/Pool via REUTERS

JNS.orgIsraeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, visibly frustrated and at times even rightfully furious, addressed a hostile foreign press Wednesday evening, condemning defeatist elements who advocate for Israel’s withdrawal from the Philadelphi Corridor—a move demanded by Hamas, the international community, some of the prominent leftist representatives in Israel’s political and defense establishments, and a minority of Israeli civilians.

Clearly under pressure from the international community to leave the corridor, Netanyahu warned repeatedly during the press conference that such a retreat would enable Hamas to maintain power and smuggle in weapons, preventing the demilitarization of Gaza and posing a grave threat to Israel’s security.

National Unity Party leader Benny Gantz and Knesset member Gadi Eisenkot held their own press conference on Tuesday evening, accusing Netanyahu of obstructing a potential hostage deal with Hamas. They also disputed his stance that Israel should maintain control of the Philadelphi Corridor.

But many Israelis believe this type of thinking is misguided and part of the failed “conceptzia” (governing assumptions) that preceded the Oct. 7 attacks.

As Gallant, Gantz and Eisenkot, as well as opposition leader Yair Lapid, have demonstrated in recent days, they and other high-ranking political and military figures still hold on to these defeatist views.

According to Enia Krivine, senior director for the Foundation for Defense of Democracies’ Israel Programs and National Security Network, “Since day one of the war there has been tension between two of the primary war goals—to bring the hostages back and dismantle Hamas.”

Some in Israel’s political and military echelon, said Krivine, “have decided that bringing the hostages home alive has become the paramount war goal and that this moral imperative supersedes the other two goals,” she said.

Thousands of Israelis siding with this view are currently demonstrating against Netanyahu, accusing him of obstructing a hostage deal.

Netanyahu has been criticized by Israelis on the right for not entering Rafah sooner and taking control of the Philadelphi Corridor immediately after the initial military invasion of Gaza on Oct. 27.

Now that Israeli forces are there, Israelis on the left want Netanyahu to withdraw them to facilitate a deal to get more hostages released.

But many experts, including Krivine and former Israeli National Security Adviser Meir Ben-Shabbat, agree with Netanyahu that contrary to what some Israeli defense officials believe, Israel will not be able to easily return to the corridor once it withdraws, as the international community will place heavy pressure on Jerusalem to keep it from doing so.

“There are those who believe that we can temporarily relinquish control—for 42 days—until the first phase of the deal is completed, and then, if the deal does not progress, return and regain control of the area,” said Ben-Shabbat.

“Of course, the IDF has the ability, operationally, [to] reoccupy this corridor even after 42 days, but it’s not just a matter of military capability,” he added. “Everyone understands that once we leave, Israel will face immense diplomatic pressure from the U.S. and other countries not to return.”

Ben-Shabbat, now the head of the Misgav Institute for Zionist Strategy & National Security, in Jerusalem, warned that since we are in the final stretch before the U.S. elections, the expected American pressure “will be extremely heavy.”

“The legitimacy Israel had to occupy this corridor following Oct. 7 will not exist after we leave it,” he said.

Krivine agreed, saying Israel “would [not] have the legitimacy or the support necessary to accomplish this; not from the United States, not from Egypt and not from the international community.”

Part of the reason for Israel’s insistence, she told JNS, is because the third primary goal of the war is “to make sure that Hamas can no longer pose a threat to Israel.”

Part of the confusion leading up to the press conference was that Netanyahu seems to now be saying he does not intend to withdraw from the Philadelphi Corridor, but media outlets had reported that he had agreed to withdraw from parts of the corridor that are heavily populated, in the second phase of a proposed ceasefire deal.

Netanyahu clarified on Wednesday that Israel would be willing to withdraw if a suitable foreign entity is found that is able to properly monitor the border and prevent smuggling there.

It is worth mentioning that the European Union Border Assistance Mission (EUBAM) was supposed to monitor the Rafah border after Israel’s disengagement from Gaza, but in 2007, after Hamas took over, EUBAM officials simply ran away, fearing for their own security.

Israel is not interested in, nor can it afford, a repeat of such a scenario.

The Philadelphi Corridor was problematic from the very beginning

When Israel pulled out of Gaza in 2005, then-U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice overrode strong Israeli objections to giving up control over the Philadelphi Corridor.

Israel knew that without effective control of this strip of land, it would become a conduit for smuggling weapons into Gaza. But heavy pressure from the Bush administration, and Rice specifically, forced Israel to pull its forces from the area.

Rice urged Israel to vacate the corridor as a “peaceful gesture” to the Palestinians. Unfortunately, Israel’s leader at the time, Ariel Sharon, caved to this dangerous request.

While today Egypt denies it has allowed the smuggling of weapons into Gaza, we know this is not true.

Already in 2008, Rice said Cairo must improve border patrol efforts after Israeli officials complained that Egypt was doing a “terrible” job on the Gaza border, failing to stop smuggling of weapons and ammunition into Gaza through tunnels under the Philadelphi Corridor.

“We think that Egypt has to do more. Those tunnels need to be dealt with,” Rice said at the time.

Israeli officials said they had sent a video to Washington showing Egyptian security forces helping Hamas terrorists smuggle arms across the border into Gaza.

Egypt responded that it was “doing its best” with the number of personnel it was allowed to deploy at the border under the 1979 peace treaty and a subsequent agreement with Israel.

When Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi came to power in 2013, he allegedly moved to destroy many of the tunnels.

But having uncovered and blocked off 150 smuggling tunnels so far in just the past few months, the IDF has proven that Egypt cannot be trusted and Israel cannot again leave the corridor since Hamas, or other terror organizations, will swiftly return to building new ones.

That decision by the Americans—the type of thinking that continues to pervade the U.S. State Department through the present day—directly led to the tragic events of Oct. 7, the ensuing war over these last 11 months and the continuing tragedy of the hostages in Gaza.

This thinking is the reason Israel was forced to pause fighting for three months earlier in the war, was behind the American pressure on Israel not to enter Rafah and is the leading reason the Americans insist the war “must end now.”

Demonstrating more common sense, Israel’s Security Cabinet voted last Thursday night in favor of maintaining a continued IDF presence in the corridor, even at the cost of a hostage deal.

Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant voted against the decision, while National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir abstained.

Following news of the execution by Hamas of six hostages, whose bodies were found on Saturday in a Rafah tunnel, Gallant on Sunday called for the Cabinet to reverse its decision, claiming that the corridor is one of the biggest obstacles to a ceasefire deal.

U.S. President Joe Biden expressed his shock and anger over the hostages’ murders and said Hamas leaders must be held accountable.

However, when asked if he felt Netanyahu had done enough to get the hostages released, Biden said “no.”

During a local press conference on Monday, Netanyahu dismissed reports that Biden had criticized him for not doing enough to secure a ceasefire deal, saying he “does not believe Biden said that” in light of the murders.

“What message does this send Hamas?” said Netanyahu.

“I don’t believe that either President Biden or anyone else serious about achieving peace and achieving [the hostages’] release would seriously ask Israel to make these concessions. We’ve already made them. Hamas has to make the concessions,” he added.

What if Israel withdraws?

Ben-Shabbat told JNS that relinquishing control of the Philadelphi Corridor “would encourage Hamas, signal to the residents of Gaza that the terror organization will continue to be the dominant force in the Strip and might even embolden the ‘resistance axis,’ particularly Hezbollah, to take a harder stance against Israel.”

He added: “If, after Oct. 7, and after seeing the implications of military buildup, we don’t insist on this, then it essentially means Israel can be forced to fold on any issue.”

Ben-Shabbat went on to say that “past experience does not allow us to rely on the goodwill of others, especially after what happened to us on Oct. 7.”

He recalled what happened in January 2009 on the eve of the conclusion of “Operation Cast Lead,” when then-Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni signed an agreement with the United States and NATO for joint efforts to counter the smuggling threat.

“This agreement did not prevent even a gram of gunpowder from being smuggled into Gaza,” he said.

While some argue that it’s not wise to occupy the corridor because it’s a narrow strip of land, and staying there would expose Israeli forces, Ben-Shabbat told JNS that “now is precisely the time for the IDF to carry out all the necessary engineering work in the area to improve conditions for the safety of our forces,” adding, “Who said we have to settle for a 14-meter-wide strip?”

Ensuring the security of Israeli forces “justifies making the necessary changes to the terrain, and the width of the corridor should be determined accordingly,” he said.

In Krivine’s view, Israel may eventually be able to allow the Egyptians or Americans physical control of the corridor, but it would be irresponsible to do so today.

“There is no way to prevent arms getting in—or terrorists and potentially hostages—being smuggled out of the enclave without a credible inspections regime in the corridor both below ground and above ground,” she said. “Until there is a credible inspections regime established that deprives Hamas the ability to rearm, the Philadelphi corridor must remain in the hands of the IDF.”

[Hamas leader] Yahya Sinwar “understands that the hostages are his only remaining leverage over the government of Israel,” she said, adding that Sinwar’s “wicked decision” to execute the hostages when IDF forces were so close to rescuing them “was a ploy to create a wedge in Israeli society and pressure Netanyahu into making tough concessions at the negotiating table.”

Sinwar, she said, “knows that Israel’s Achilles heel is its deep valuing of human life, and he understands how to drive a stake into the heart of Israeli society.”

According to Krivine, giving in to Hamas’s demands means that the terror group survives and begins the process of rebuilding.

“There is no third party—not the P.A. and not the moderate Arab states—that will step into the void unless the IDF can ensure that Hamas is unable to regroup and rearm,” she said.

Israel’s path forward

Brian Carter of the American Enterprise Institute seems to agree.

He told JNS that “either Israel or another capable entity must control the Philadelphi Corridor for Israel to prevent Hamas from rebuilding its capabilities to the same level the group reached by Oct. 7.”

Otherwise, he warned, “Hamas will gradually rebuild itself and undo the progress Israel has made toward defeating the group.”

Any outcome that results in a rebuilt Hamas is “unacceptable and would constitute an Israeli defeat,” he said.

According to Carter, the way forward is to find a party that is capable of and willing to control the Philadelphi Corridor.

He believes it is “unlikely” that any force could prevent smuggling under the corridor without a presence on the corridor.

Ben-Shabbat told JNS that Israel can take more steps to ensure it achieves its objectives in this war.

First, Israel must “completely deprive Hamas of control over the supplies entering the Strip,” he said. “This is its lifeline and the main means of maintaining its governance.”

Second, Israel should “divide Gaza into more sections, beyond what currently exists.”

Third, as another former head of the Israeli National Security Council, Giora Eiland, proposed, Israel should launch a “broad operation” in northern Gaza. This means evacuating Gaza City and the northern Strip, closing it off as a military zone, cutting off supplies to the area, and then conducting a thorough military operation to destroy terrorists.

“In my opinion, it is a good option,” Ben-Shabbat told JNS.

“The plan does have its drawbacks though as Israel can expect resistance from the United States and the international community, and the fact that it involves returning many IDF forces to the Gaza Strip,” he noted.

Finally, Ben-Shabbat suggested Israel could “take action” against Hamas leaders abroad.

The post The Philadelphi Conundrum first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

RSS

Yemen’s Houthis Say They Shot Down US MQ-9 Drone over Marib Governorate

Newly recruited fighters who joined a Houthi military force intended to be sent to fight in support of the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, march during a parade in Sanaa, Yemen, Dec. 2, 2023. Photo: REUTERS/Khaled Abdullah

i24 NewsYemen’s Houthi jihadists claimed Saturday night that they successfully ambushed and downed an American MQ-9 drone in Yemen.

“The Yemeni air defenses shot down an American MQ-9 aircraft while it was carrying out hostile activities in the airspace of Ma’rib Governorate,” said the jihadist group’s spokesman Yahya Saree. “This is the eighth plane of its type that the Yemeni Armed Forces have succeeded in shooting down during the Battle of the Promised Victory and the Holy Jihad in support of Gaza.”

“The Yemeni Armed Forces continue to perform their jihadist duties in solidarity with the oppressed Palestinian people and in defense of beloved Yemen,” he went on.

“And with the help of Allah Almighty, they are in the process of strengthening their defensive capabilities to confront and respond to the American-British aggression by targeting its hostile military movements in the naval operations zone.”

The post Yemen’s Houthis Say They Shot Down US MQ-9 Drone over Marib Governorate first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News