Connect with us

RSS

Could Israeli Disunity Lead to More Hamas Executions?

Illustrative: Israeli protesters chant in front of a burning fire at a demonstration against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his nationalist coalition government’s plan for judicial overhaul, in Tel Aviv, Israel, March 27, 2023. REUTERS/Itai Ron

The bodies of six Israeli and American hostages held by Hamas were retrieved from a 65 foot deep tunnel in the Rafah area of Gaza and returned to Israel on Saturday. They are Ori Danino, Alex Lobanov, Hersh Goldberg-Polin, Almog Sarusi, Eden Yerushalmi, and Carmel Gat.

In previous cases where the IDF returned bodies, the victims had typically been deceased for some time, some even as far back as October 7. This weekend was different: Israel has confirmed that Hamas had executed all six of these hostages in recent days by means of a gunshot to the head.

This is deeply heartbreaking to the Israeli people and all people of conscience. For months, we’ve known these names and seen these hostages on posters in every corner of every city and town. We are all struck to the core as if we knew each hostage personally — as if they were our family.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu apologized to one of the hostage’s families, a rarity for him, and in a separate statement asserted that “Anyone who murders hostages does not want a deal,” while adding that he is shocked to the depths of his soul, and that the blood of the hostages is on Hamas’ hands.

At the same time, a number of parents of the hostages as well as Israeli leaders and civilians are fiercely blaming the Israeli government in general, and Netanyahu in particular, for failing to bring our loved ones home sooner. Hundreds of thousands protested on Sunday evening in locations throughout the country with a particular focus on blaming the government and calling for an immediate ceasefire. Most of Israel’s unionized workers have gone on a symbolic one day strike beginning Monday morning.

It is almost impossible to fully comprehend the grief and anger of the families who have lost loved ones after 11 months of emotional torture. But it is also critical at this tragic moment that we perform a reality check.

The anti-government position held by many Israelis presumes that there was some kind of deal on the table that would have brought all the hostages home safely, if only “Bibi” and his government would have simply accepted it. This is, in fact, not the case: there is not, and there never has been, any such offer.

At no point following last November’s temporary ceasefire has Hamas accepted a proposal that would return anything more than a small portion of the hostages at any given time. For example the “three stage” deal proposed by the United States last February (which Hamas in any case rejected) would have brought home only a small number of hostages in the first stage. As Hamas habitually violates ceasefire agreements, Israeli experts widely believe that multi-stage deals will most likely not proceed to completion, leaving large numbers of hostages in captivity indefinitely.

Having rejected the American proposal last February, Hamas went on to reject a version of its own three-stage proposal in March. Just two weeks ago, the United States announced that Israel had accepted America’s latest so-called “Bridging Proposal,” and that the world was now waiting on Hamas, which subsequently rejected the deal and then boycotted further negotiations in Cairo. This is only the latest of dozens of Hamas rejections.

A common refrain by a large, vocal minority of Israelis has been that Israel’s top priority must be the return of the hostages, and not dismantling Hamas. This logic is based on two flawed assumptions: that there is a deal on the table that would bring back all the hostages (there is not) and that the IDF can simply return to fighting in Gaza at any time in the future, even if doing so means violating the terms of a binding agreement.

Yet Hamas is quite sophisticated with respect to this issue: throughout the ceasefire talks, a key Hamas demand has been not only that the terror organization remain in power in Gaza, but also that international guarantees be put in place to tie the IDF’s hands against further military action.

Numerous UN resolutions and international court actions, as well as delays and even “soft embargoes” of needed military supplies by the US and other allies, send a clear message to Israel: that re-entering Gaza in violation of an agreement would be difficult or even impossible.

This pressure also sends a message to Hamas: that given time, Israel’s allies might not stand firm, thus encouraging Hamas to harden its bargaining position and play for additional time.

Given the above realities, one can still hold a reasonable, and even passionate disagreement as to what price Israel should pay to return the hostages alive, whether Hamas should be removed from power, or how far the IDF should go to secure Gaza against future attacks.

Yet to accuse the Israeli government or its leadership of murder, does not make logical sense. One might have placed some portion of the responsibility on the Israeli government if there was a deal on the table that Israel should have, or even could have, accepted. Yet the painful truth is that there was never any such option available.

The decision to murder six Israeli hostages was made completely by Hamas: not by Israel, its leaders or its people. The question now is whether Hamas will see these murders as a strategic win that bears repeating, or as a colossal blunder to be avoided in the future.

If Hamas sees that executing hostages increases pressure on Israel, both internally and externally, then the terror organization might conclude that doing so provides a strategic advantage.

Hamas might even conclude that such executions can bring the terror group closer to its immediate goal of retaining power in Gaza, as well as its long term goal of mounting further October 7 style massacres.

Despite being one of the most prominent voices pressuring Israel to make a ceasefire deal, Vice President Kamala Harris said in her statement yesterday that Hamas must be “eliminated” and cannot be allowed to remain in power in Gaza; but that is what Hamas has been insisting on, and has long been a significant sticking point in negotiations.

Many Israelis agree: the current protests are, at their core, an expression of deep emotional connections, and a symbol of how Israeli families feel one another’s pain. Yet actual opinions in Israel are more nuanced: even though Israelis nearly unanimously support a deal that would end the war and return the hostages, only 49% would support a deal that involves the IDF leaving the critical Philadelphi corridor which gives Hamas access to Egypt, with 32% opposed, and 19% uncertain.

It is impossible to know how any of us might feel if our own family members were held captive in Gaza: we might be willing to sacrifice anything and everything to bring them home. Yet there are other families in Israel as well, including parents who are concerned for the safety of their children in a possible future massacre, should Israel make the wrong decisions at this critical time.

The deaths of Ori, Alex, Hersh, Almog, Eden, and Carmel are beyond heartbreaking, and today Israelis feel that pain as if it were personal to each and every one of us; but nine million more Israelis will face future kidnappings or Oct.7-like massacres if Hamas is not properly deterred and prevented from committing such atrocities.

Today Israelis are expressing pain and anger toward those we trusted to protect us. Yet we are also aware of a fundamental truth: that Hamas murdered civilians in cold blood, while international negotiations were ongoing to save them — and that’s a message the world needs to hear.

Netanyahu and his government are fair subject for criticism — to do so is the imperative of any free democracy. But even the most passionate disagreements demand a basis in factual reality: the supposed deal for which some Israelis advocate never actually existed. In truth, Israel’s current reality is as impossible as it is heartbreaking.

Daniel Pomerantz is the CEO of RealityCheck, an organization dedicated to deepening public conversation through robust research studies and public speaking.

The post Could Israeli Disunity Lead to More Hamas Executions? first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

RSS

Is Justin Trudeau’s Resignation Good News for Israel?

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau holds a press conference on the sidelines of the UNGA in New York, US, Sept. 21, 2023. Photo: REUTERS/Mike Segar

Canada, once a symbol of justice and democracy, has lost its moral standing. Under Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, the nation has not only distanced itself from Israel, but also compromised its own integrity. This is more than a mere policy shift — it is a fundamental collapse of democratic values, leaving Canada’s global reputation in question.

Canada’s support for Israel has always been inconsistent. Unlike other Western nations that swiftly recognized Israel in 1948, Canada abstained from the first attempt at Israel’s admission into the United Nations, contributing to its denial. Canada only granted full recognition after Israel successfully joined in 1949. This pattern of uncertainty continued over the decades, with frequent mixed signals and wavering commitments.

During critical moments, such as the First Intifada, Canada remained indecisive. While then-Prime Minister Brian Mulroney defended Israel, External Affairs Minister Joe Clark condemned its actions, accusing Israel of using excessive force. This back-and-forth approach became a trademark of Canadian foreign policy: some support, lots of criticism, little consistency.

Some former Canadian leaders, like Stephen Harper, broke the cycle and demonstrated strong support for Israel. These instances, however, were rare. Under Trudeau, the relationship deteriorated further, shifting from lukewarm support to outright antagonism.

The Canada-Israel relationship arguably hit its lowest point following the horrific Hamas attacks on October 7, 2023. 

Instead of offering unwavering support for Israel, Trudeau’s government condemned Hamas’ attacks but also urged Israel to exercise restraint. While recognizing Israel’s right to self-defense, his administration expressed concern over civilian casualties and questioned aspects of its military response. 

To make matters worse, Canada supported a United Nations resolution calling for a ceasefire without explicitly condemning Hamas.

For Israelis, this was more than a diplomatic failure — it was a betrayal. Trudeau’s response sent a clear message: Israel, as well as Jewish lives, were secondary to political expediency and the benefit of others.

Trudeau’s approach was not accidental; it reflected a strategic effort to balance competing political pressures in Canada and abroad. 

Internationally, he sought to position Canada as a mediator in the Middle East, even at the risk of straining its relationship with Israel. Domestically, his stance aimed to increase Canadian support, particularly of those Canadians critical of Israel’s actions. 

This approach has consequences. Canada-Israel trade, while still significant, has shown little growth in recent years. Security and defense cooperation have not advanced as they once did, while Israel has increasingly prioritized strategic partnerships with nations like India. 

In Canada, antisemitism has surged, and Trudeau’s government has done little to counter it. Since October 7th, hate crimes against Jews have skyrocketed by 670%. Synagogues, schools, and community centers have been targeted. Though Jews make up just 1.4% of Canada’s population, they are the targets of 70% of religious hate crimes.

The ultimate insult came when Canada signaled support for the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) move to arrest Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The ICC selectively prosecutes Israel — but disregards human rights abuses in totalitarian regions like Iran and North Korea. The ICC’s actions reveal a blatant double standard, and by aligning with this hypocrisy, Trudeau positioned Canada on the wrong side of history.

Trudeau’s abandonment of Israel is part of a broader global shift, prioritizing political convenience over long-term alliances, a trend seen by leaders like French President Emmanuel Macron. This dangerous trend weakens the West at a time when authoritarian powers like China and Russia are expanding their influence in the Middle East.

Rebuilding trust will not be easy. Canada requires more than a policy adjustment; it needs a fundamental shift in leadership. The next prime minister must prioritize genuine partnerships based on shared values rather than political gain. Until then, the damage to Canada’s reputation remains.

With Trudeau stepping down, Canada has a rare opportunity to reset its foreign policy. The question now is whether the next leader will seize this chance, or allow the damage to deepen. Time will tell, but the stakes could not be higher.

The writer is a high school student from Great Neck, New York, passionate about advocacy and government. Through his writing and activism, he engages others in meaningful conversations about US politics, international relations, and Israel’s significance as both a homeland for the Jewish people and a key ally of the United States.

The post Is Justin Trudeau’s Resignation Good News for Israel? first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

RSS

The Future of Syria Is Uncertain; Here’s What Israel Should Be Doing (PART ONE)

Saudi Arabia’s Defense Minister Prince Khalid bin Salman meets Syria’s newly appointed Foreign Minister Asaad Hassan al-Shibani, in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, Jan. 2, 2025. Photo: Saudi Press Agency/Handout via REUTERS

The main lesson of the surprise attack on the Assad regime by the rebels in Syria begins with an overall view of the strategic logic that drives the Middle East region. The lesson that many in the West refuse to accept is that the region is a perpetually unstable ecosystem.

An ecosystem is sensitive to any small change. The conceptual opposite of an ecosystem is a sophisticated railway system. In the railways, operational stability is planned and managed according to a linear engineering design. In an ecosystem, conversely, stability is the result of systemic equilibrium and is always both temporary and sensitive to changes.

Western culture, which aspires to establish a reality of sustainable stability in the region, finds it difficult to accept that the Middle East — which contains clans, tribes, and radical terrorist organizations — is a system that operates according to the dynamics of an ecological system.

The achievements of the Israeli war against Hezbollah in Lebanon and against Hamas in the Gaza Strip created new conditions that marked an opportunity for the Sunni rebels in Syria. They took their chance and attacked the Assad army and the Iranian Shiite militias, toppling the Assad regime in less than two weeks.

The constant search by many Middle East actors for new fighting opportunities lies in their fundamental perception of all situations of calm, even prolonged periods of apparent peace, as temporary.

The Turks dream of returning to the expanses of the Ottoman Empire. Aleppo once played a central economic and symbolic role in connection with the cities of the Harran Valley in Turkey, including the city of Shelly-Orfa. After Napoleon’s retreat from Egypt and the Land of Israel, Muhammad Ali, the ruler of Egypt, sought to extend his control from Israel to Aleppo. In the years 1839-1841, the Second Egyptian-Ottoman War took place in the region. With the help of a British expeditionary force, the Ottomans defeated the Egyptian army and pushed it from the Aleppo region to the outskirts of Sinai. Greater Syria, which extended to the Land of Israel, returned to Ottoman control. Turkey aspires to restore this regional order. From their perspective, the struggle began in Aleppo with the pursuit of Damascus, which contains important Sunni mosques.

There is much more involved here than a longing for the past. The past in this region drives religious and national struggles. I learned this during a visit to the Iranian pavilion at the Shanghai Expo. Opposite the visitors’ entrance, a map of the Persian Empire from the time of Darius was displayed across the entire wall. This was a kind of declaration that Iran aspires to return to that glorious past.

This kind of thinking is the driving force in the region — even for borders that have gained international validity, such as the Sykes-Picot borders. In the Middle East, nothing outweighs religious and national dreams. Those dreams never fade; they rather await the right opportunity.

For Americans who continue to seek a stable and sustainable regional order, it is worth suggesting that they treat the Middle East as if it were prone to hurricanes that erupt from the oceans and strike the region from a system of forces beyond human control.

This is not to say that no capabilities exist with which to restrain and delay conflicts in the regional chaos that characterizes the Middle East. But even arrangements that seem to promise a degree of stability and calm must be sensitive to the possibility of unexpected factors arising within the system.

Tactical note

The rebel offensive in Syria also teaches an important tactical lesson about the characteristics of the new war. As on October 7, we saw the outbreak of rapid battle movement involving civilian vehicles, including motorcycles, SUVs and vans, in mobile and agile groups.

No one who promises a demilitarized Palestinian state will be able to stop the Palestinians from purchasing motorcycles and SUVs. Israelis should give thought to the image of a raiding party on motorcycles and jeeps breaking into Israel by surprise from Tulkarem-Qalqilya to cut through the coastal strip. They must understand that the IDF, with all its strength, cannot guarantee overwhelming superiority in any possible context.

The IDF’s operations in Syria

Even the best intelligence experts had difficulty predicting the tsunami of the rebel assault that so swiftly toppled the Syrian government and its army.

There is a great lesson here in recognizing the limitations of human knowledge. We cannot pretend to know or be able to control events that occur suddenly and unpredictably. Precisely for this reason, the speedy organization by the Israeli leadership and the IDF of a proper response to the Syrian rebel surprise deserves special appreciation.

The IDF’s rapid operational response to developments in Syria was guided by three objectives:

  • To strengthen the defense effort on the Golan Heights. It is worth noting that preparations for strengthening and expanding Israel’s defense systems in the Golan — through proactive operations east of the border fence — began in the Golan Division, with the support of the Northern Command, several months ago. These preparations enabled a rapid response to expand Israel’s defensive hold on vital areas in the buffer zone defined in the 1974 Separation of Forces Agreement between Israel and Syria. The IDF also took control of the peaks of the Hermon Range in a location that allows for influence deep inside Syria and southern Lebanon.
  • To destroy the numerous weapons left behind by the Syrian army in Syria. In an unprecedented attack by the Israeli Air Force and Navy, weapons systems were destroyed that, had they remained operational, could have been used against the State of Israel. This effort was carried out with rapid momentum and precise management.
  • To project power in the face of the chaos and make clear that the State of Israel has a security-strategic interest in the developing trends in Syria and will not be content to passively look on. Prime Minister Netanyahu wisely emphasized that Israel will try not to interfere in the institutionalization of the new order being organized in Syria. However, Israel has an interest in influencing developments in southern Syria in the Yarmouk Basin, where, until recently, Shiite militias took part in efforts to smuggle weapons to the Palestinian Authority and towards the Kingdom of Jordan. Looking north from the Hermon area, Israel has a primary interest in preserving Hezbollah’s isolation in Lebanon and preventing any possibility of reinforcements or new weapons arriving via Syria.

The first two objectives have been achieved in an astonishing manner. The third is complex and will require dynamic monitoring combined with an international effort emphasizing Israeli interests.

The situation in Syria continues to be unprecedented in its uncertainty.

Maj. Gen. (res.) Gershon Hacohen is a senior research fellow at the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies. He served in the IDF for 42 years. He commanded troops in battles with Egypt and Syria. He was formerly a corps commander and commander of the IDF Military Colleges. A version of this article was originally published by The BESA Center.

The post The Future of Syria Is Uncertain; Here’s What Israel Should Be Doing (PART ONE) first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

RSS

Palestinian Authority: Munich Massacre of Israeli Athletes was a ‘Quality Operation’

An image of one of the Palestinian terrorists who took part in the 1972 Munich Olympics massacre. Photo: Wikimedia Commons.

Forty-six years after the death of Ali Hassan Salameh, who planned the murder of 11 Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympics in 1972, the Palestinian Authority (PA) continues to tout Salameh as a hero.

The official PA news agency, WAFA, praised Salameh, who was the commander of operations of the Black September terror organization, saying his “name was associated with many quality operations” — a reference to the Olympics Massacre:

Headline: “46 years since the death as a Martyr of leader Ali Hassan Salameh”

“On Jan. 22, 1979, the Israeli Mossad (Israeli Secret Intelligence Service) assassinated leader Ali Hassan Salameh ‘The Red Prince’, who was the founder of the PLO leadership security force (later Force 17) [parentheses in source]

… As soon as he moved to Beirut, he was assigned to oversee the special operations against the Israeli occupation worldwide. His name was associated with many quality operations.” [emphasis added]

[WAFA, official PA news agency, Jan. 22, 2025]

A week earlier, the PA and Fatah marked the 34th anniversary of the assassination of two other terror leaders: Salah Khalaf “Abu Iyad,” who was the head of Black September, and “fighter Fakhri Al-Omari ‘Abu Muhammad,’” a co-founder of Black September and “one of the close associates of Abu Iyad in the united [PA] Security Forces.”

The official PA daily praised the terrorists as follows:

With their deaths as Martyrs, the PLO, the Palestinian revolution, and Fatah lost [two] of their most committed and skilled leaders, whose record is filled with sacrifice and struggle against the Israeli occupation…”

[Official PA daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Jan. 15, 2025]

Fatah vowed … to continue the struggle and the resistance to the occupation [i.e., Israel] and its aggressive machinery, and to protect our people’s achievements that were painted with the blood of the Martyrs until defeating the occupation and achieving our people’s freedom and independence.” [emphasis added]

[Official PA daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Jan. 15, 2025]

Black September was a secret branch of Fatah, and today’s Fatah didn’t miss the opportunity to join in glorifying terrorist mastermind Salameh.

Fatah marked Salameh’s “death as a Martyr” by posting the image above with the following text:

Text: “46 years since the death as a Martyr of commander Ali Hassan Salameh”

[Fatah Commission of Information and Culture, Facebook page, Jan. 22, 2025]

The PA and Fatah’s infatuation with Salameh and fellow terrorist murderers from Black September is not new. For decades, Palestinian Media Watch has exposed the glorification of the Munich Olympics attack and its perpetrators and planners.

In fact, this past summer, the PA chose to name its largest summer camp, which hosted 150 children aged 7-13, after terrorist Salah Khalaf, “Abu Iyad.”

On the 50th anniversary of the massacre, Palestinian Media Watch exposed that what has become a dark stain on the Olympics and has settled in the collective global memory as an illustration of the horrors of terrorism, is actually a symbol of glory and honor for the PA.

The author is a senior analyst at Palestinian Media Watch, where a version of this article was originally published.

The post Palestinian Authority: Munich Massacre of Israeli Athletes was a ‘Quality Operation’ first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News