RSS
Despite Hostile Public, Egypt Won’t Destroy Israel Relations
Egyptian President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi. Photo: Russian Presidential Press and Information Office.
JNS.org – Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi is confronting a complex array of challenges along the country’s northeastern border with Gaza.
With approximately 1.4 million Palestinians amassed in Rafah on the Gaza-Egypt border, el-Sisi is engaged in negotiations for the release of Israeli hostages held by Hamas and simultaneously attempting to keep diplomatic ties with Israel intact.
However, amid these diplomatic efforts, he faces domestic issues compounded by strong anti-Israel sentiment among the Egyptian public, who perceive him as being too closely aligned with the United States and Israel.
Speculation has arisen regarding the potential dissolution of Egypt’s 45-year peace treaty with Israel in the event of an Israel Defense Forces incursion into Rafah. Israel asserts that the city serves as a stronghold for the last four Hamas battalions, which must be eliminated in order to win the war.
However, according to Jacob Olidort, director of research at the Washington-based Jewish Institute for National Security of America, it is “unlikely” Egypt would end its peace treaty with Israel if the IDF enters Rafah.
“Although this appeared to be a real concern following el-Sisi’s remarks several weeks ago, the [Egyptian] foreign minister’s statements in recent days made it clear that Egypt’s cancellation of its peace treaty with Israel is highly unlikely,” he told JNS.
Speaking at a press conference in Slovenia on Feb. 12, Egyptian Foreign Minister Sameh Shoukry said, “There is a peace agreement between Egypt and Israel, which has been in effect for the past 40 years and will continue to be,” according to Asharq Al-Awsat.
Egypt would adhere to the 1979 peace treaty as long as it remains reciprocal, he said, adding, “Therefore, I will rule out any comments that have been made on this matter.”
Olidort emphasized that canceling the treaty “would mean ending the deep cooperation between the Egyptian and Israeli militaries in fighting Islamic State in the Sinai, as well as U.S. military assistance.”
Eran Lerman, vice president of the Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security, believes el-Sisi has greater worries and “will not compound his country’s woes unless he absolutely has to.”
In Lerman’s view, el-Sisi would not take the extraordinary step of cutting ties with Israel unless Israel expelled the Palestinians to Sinai or some other action, military or otherwise, that would lead to a massive breach of the fences.
According to Lerman, this is something Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is “committed to avoid.”
Haisam Hassanein, an adjunct fellow at the Washington-based Foundation for Defense of Democracies, told JNS he doesn’t believe Israel and Egypt would get into a conflict or cancel the peace treaty because of Hamas.
However, he said, Egypt “worries about a spillover to its territory, which could liquidate the Palestinian issue or open the door for Hamas and jihadi operatives to infiltrate its border by posing as refugees.”
“Previous bloody clashes between Palestinian militias in their host nations, such as Lebanon and Jordan, don’t inspire confidence in Cairo,” he added. Moreover, “If they attack Israel from Sinai, it could strain Egypt-Israel relations,” he noted.
This concern over a spillover has reportedly prompted Egypt to begin building a containment area for Palestinian refugees in Northern Sinai on the Gaza border as a precaution.
In addition to Israel’s war against Hamas, Egypt is currently dealing with a multitude of other issues. As Lerman recently wrote, “the Egyptian pound is in free fall; investors and business leaders are leaving; essentials are in short supply; tourism is in decline; and now, attacks on Red Sea shipping have led to a plunge in Suez Canal income, and the failure of talks with Ethiopia on the filling of the Renaissance Dam has cast a shadow on Egypt’s vital water supply.”
In addition, a civil war is raging in neighboring Sudan and Libya remains unstable.
All this places Egypt in a precarious position, and the need to demonstrate it is siding with the Palestinians seemingly clashes with its need to cooperate with Israel.
Olidort noted however that Egyptian public opinion is important, as are the “optics of how the government appears in relation to Israel and its operation in Gaza.”
He said Egypt’s position with regard to the Palestinians in Gaza “has less to do with shouldering the economic burden of caring for them or the security burden of fighting Hamas—there is, rest assured, no love lost between the Sisi government and Hamas or the Muslim Brotherhood—and a great deal to do with the public opinion pressure to not appear to side with either Israel or, militarily, with the United States.”
Egypt’s domestic challenges, and particularly its mounting economic woes, are very real, said Olidort. “But there is a clear recognition that compromising its regional reputation could make matters worse,” he added.
According to Olidort, the concerns of a spillover from Gaza as the IDF turns its focus on Rafah “are just as much about optics as about security; just as threatening, in the Egyptian view, as a porous border is the political blowback caused by a public narrative that Egypt is helping Israel push Palestinians from their land.”
At the same time, according to Lerman, Israel is “eager to preserve a highly valuable strategic relationship, even if the Egyptian public domain is still quite poisonous.”
As Israel moves forward with plans to invade Rafah and root out the Hamas terrorists there, including the group’s leader Yahya Sinwar, much of the international community and media have condemned Israel’s plans.
For instance, the South African government has gone as far as submitting an “urgent request” to the International Court of Justice in The Hague to consider whether Israel’s planned offensive in Rafah constitutes a “further imminent breach of the rights of Palestinians in Gaza.”
In a statement released on Friday, the ICJ declined to take additional measures.
British Foreign Secretary David Cameron called on Israel to restrain itself in Rafah. “Many of the people in Rafah have already moved three, four or five times. It is not possible for them to move again,” he said on Tuesday. “That is why it is so important that the Israelis stop and think before going ahead with any operations in Rafah.”
But Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been pushing back against these warnings, telling ABC News in an interview on Sunday: “Those who say that under no circumstances should we enter Rafah are basically saying lose the war.”
“Victory is within reach. We’re going to do it. We’re going to get the remaining Hamas terrorist battalions in Rafah, which is the last bastion, but we’re going to do it,” Netanyahu said.
Israel’s position has been that only military pressure will secure the hostages’ release.
The daring commando operation in Rafah earlier this week that saw the rescue of Israeli hostages Fernando Simon Marman and Norberto Louis Har from Rafah only strengthens this position.
Luckily for Israel, Hamas’s affiliation with the Muslim Brotherhood, el-Sisi’s sworn enemies, means he needs to support Israel in its fight to defeat Hamas.
“At the end of the day, Egypt has as much an interest in the defeat of rabid Islamism as we do,” said Lerman.
The post Despite Hostile Public, Egypt Won’t Destroy Israel Relations first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Miriam Libicki illustrates her experience being banned by the Vancouver Comic Arts Festival
This cartoon originally appeared in the Fall 2024 issue of the quarterly magazine published by The Canadian Jewish News.
The post Miriam Libicki illustrates her experience being banned by the Vancouver Comic Arts Festival appeared first on The Canadian Jewish News.
RSS
Justice Department Charges Afghan Citizen With Plotting To Commit Terror Attack on Election Day
An American flag waves outside the US Department of Justice Building in Washington, US, Dec. 2, 2020. Photo: REUTERS/Tom Brenner
The US Department of Justice (DOJ) has issued charges against an Afghan citizen allegedly plotting to execute a terrorist attack during Election Day at the behest of Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS).
Nasir Ahmad Tawhedi, a 27-year old resident of Oklahoma City, schemed to help ISIS commit an act of terrorism on American soil through the acquisition of firearms and ammunition, according to the federal officials. Tawhedi allegedly sold many of his assets and moved several family members out of the United States as part of his preparations for the terrorist attack.
“As charged, the Justice Department foiled the defendant’s plot to acquire semi-automatic weapons and commit a violent attack in the name of ISIS on U.S. soil on Election Day,” said U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland, “We will continue to combat the ongoing threat that ISIS and its supporters pose to America’s national security, and we will identify, investigate, and prosecute the individuals who seek to terrorize the American people.”
“This defendant, motivated by ISIS, allegedly conspired to commit a violent attack, on Election Day, here on our homeland,” said FBI Director Christopher Wray.
While investigating Tawhedi, the FBI surfaced messages between Tawhedi and an ISIS-connected individual “who facilitated recruitment, training, and indoctrination of persons who expressed interest in terrorist activity.” In addition, the Justice Department report alleges that Tawhedi obtained, viewed, and saved ISIS propaganda on his digital devices. He also sent messages in a Telegram account affiliated with ISIS and sent money to sham “charity organizations” which fundraise for the terrorist group.
While Tawhedi and an alleged partner, who is a minor, were in the process of selling his assets in advance of the planned terrorist attack, an individual connected with the FBI contacted him under the guise of purchasing a computer. During their communications, the individual informed Tawhedi that they were in the process of launching a new gun business.
Tawhedi and his partner eventually met up with the FBI-connected individual in rural Oklahoma on Oct. 7 with the goal of purchasing firearms to carry out the terrorist attack. The duo successfully bought and took possession of “two AK-47 assault rifles, ten magazines, and 500 rounds of ammunition.”
The agency slapped Tawhedi charges of “conspiring and attempting to provide material support to ISIS,” and “receiving a firearm to be used to commit a felony or a federal crime of terrorism.”
In recent months, the DOJ has been busy holding foreign extremists accountable for planning or committing acts of terrorism on American soil. In September, the agency announced charges against several top leaders of the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas for orchestrating the Oct. 7 massacre across southern Israel. That same month, the agency thwarted a planned shooting against New York Jews by a Pakistani national.
The post Justice Department Charges Afghan Citizen With Plotting To Commit Terror Attack on Election Day first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Brown University Rejects BDS Proposal
More than 200 Brown University students gathered outside University Hall where roughly 40 students sat inside demanding the school divest from weapons manufacturers amid the Israel-Hamas war. Photo: Amy Russo / USA TODAY NETWORK via Reuters Connect
The Brown University Corporation has voted down a proposal — muscled onto the agenda of its annual meeting by an anti-Zionist group which held the university hostage with threats of illegal demonstrations and other misconduct — to divest from ten companies linked to Israel, according to an announcement from the University.
According to the university, the Corporation heeded the counsel of the Advisory Committee on University Resources Management (ACURM), which witnessed earlier this semester a presentation — delivered by the pro-Hamas group Brown Divest Coalition (BDC) — in support of divestment and recommended that it be turned down. Brown University president Christina Paxson concealed ACURM’s opinion from the public, ostensibly to shield it from political pressure, but the decision had the effect of fueling speculation that the body, which once recommended divestment several years ago, had done so again.
“The Corporation also discussed the broader issue of whether taking a stance on a geopolitical issue through divestment is consistent with Brown’s mission of education and scholarship. The Corporation reaffirmed that Brown’s mission is to discover, communicate, and preserve knowledge. It is not to adjudicate or resolve global conflicts,” president Paxson and Brown Corporation chancellor Brian T. Moynihan said on Wednesday in a letter commenting on the vote.
They continued, “The manner in which our community now reflects on this decision creates an opportunity. Throughout our history, Brown as a community has been guided, even when we disagree with each other, by a deeply held campus culture characterized by mutual respect, support for each other, empathy, understanding of differences and, importantly, a willingness to engage in constructive dialogue regarding these differences. Whether you support, oppose or have no opinion on the decision of the Corporation, we hope you will do so with a commitment to sustaining, nurturing, and strengthening the principles that have long been at the core of our teaching and learning community.”
Brooke Verschleiser, a third-year Brown University student and biochemistry major who helped lead the effort of Jewish students to oppose divestment, told The Algemeiner on Wednesday that she commends the Corporation’s prudence.
“We are pleased that ACURM followed its charge and that the Corporation made its decision based on the facts and appropriate guidelines,” Verschleiser said. ” We echo President Paxson’s hope that the community will uphold its culture of ‘mutual respect, support for each other, empathy, understanding of differences, and, importantly, a willingness to engage in constructive dialogue.”
The Brown Corporation’s mere consideration of the divestment proposal, which many argued would descend the university into the paranoia and hatred of antisemitic conspiracy, set off waves of opposition over the past several weeks.
Last month, Joseph Edelman, a trustee of the Corporation has resigned from his position, condemning the vote as a betrayal of the Jewish community.
“I disagree with the upcoming divestment vote on Israel,” Edelman, a hedge fund manager, wrote in an op-ed explaining his decision. “I am concerned about what Brown’s willingness to hold such a vote suggests about the university’s attitude toward rising antisemitism on campus and a growing political movement that seeks the destruction of the state of Israel.”
Others, including 24 attorneys general, warned that conceding to the demands of a group which endorses mass casualty events inspired by Islamist extremism would have “immediate and profound legal consequences” — potentially divestment from Brown mandated by “laws in nearly three-fourths of states prohibiting states and their instrumentalities from contracting with, investing in, or otherwise doing business with entities that discriminate against Israel, Israelis, or those who do business with either.”
Meanwhile, an investment network, JLens, published a study which found that adopting divestment — a core tenet of the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement — may compromise Brown’s financial health. According to the study which measured the havoc BDS would wreak on university investment portfolios, divestment from Israel would incinerate over $300 million in returns for the Brown’s endowment in the just the next decade.
News of Corporation’s decision was greeted with invective and abusive language, as the pro-Hamas group which proposed divestment took to social media to lodge expletives and other offensive insults at Christina Paxson, who withstood sharp criticism for agreeing to negotiate with its members.
“F— you CPax. F—You Brown Corp,” the Brown Divest Coalition said in a statement on Wednesday. “Free Palestine.”
American universities are largely rejecting demands to divest from Israel and entities linked to the Jewish state, delivering further blows to the pro-Hamas protest movement, which students and faculty pushed with dozens of illegal demonstrations to coerce officials into enacting the policy.
In August, Oberlin College’s Board of Trustees voted against BDS after reviewing a proposal submitted by “Students for a Free Palestine,” a spin-off of Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP), which has been linked to Islamist terrorist organizations. The following month, University of Minnesota and Chapman University also rejected BDS, citing similar reasons, including “fiduciary duty” and the importance of insulating investment decisions from the caprices of political opinion.
Oberlin explained that divestment would undermine its mission to create a space in which students “express contested views,” adding that adopting the divestment proposal “would be taking a clear institutional stand on one side of a fraught and contested issue that divides the Oberlin community.” It continued, “The board believes that doing so could constrain critical thinking, discourse, and debate on the subject, which would jeopardize the college’s mission.”
Christina Paxson and Brian Moynihan expressed similar views in Wednesday’s statement.
“Brown’s Public Statements Policy is already clear that the university does not make institutional statements on social, political, or policy matters unrelated to the university’s operations in advancing education, scholarship and discovery,” they said. “Brown’s standards for divestment should be reviewed to ensure that they are aligned with this policy…for now, it is clear that the endowment should not and will not be used to take a stance on the contested geopolitical issues in the Middle East.”
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
The post Brown University Rejects BDS Proposal first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login