RSS
Despite the ‘Lebanonization’ of Hezbollah, It Still Wants to Destroy Israel
Lebanon’s Hezbollah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah addresses his supporters through a screen during a rally commemorating the annual Hezbollah Martyrs’ Day, in Beirut’s southern suburbs. Photo: Reuters/Aziz Taher
Hezbollah began in 1982 as an Islamist organization founded and shaped according to the ideological model of the Islamic Republic of Iran. The organization was founded to establish an Islamist regime in Lebanon and conduct a jihadist war against the enemies of Islam: the West and Israel. Hezbollah gradually “Lebanonized,” meaning it claimed to limit the military struggle to Lebanese territory, integrated into the Lebanese political system, and established an extensive civil infrastructure. This transformation was accompanied by a new discourse stressing its role as defender of Lebanon.
But Hezbollah’s Lebanonization has not in any way diluted or moderated its conception of Israel, with which it believes itself to be in a doomsday war. Hezbollah’s military empowerment since the withdrawal of the IDF in 2000 does not correspond with its discourse about defending Lebanon. Hezbollah’s involvement in the fighting since October 8 is not mere lip service, but a demonstration of its total commitment to what it perceives as its deterministic conflict with Israel.
Hezbollah’s enduring enmity towards Israel reflects the ideological concepts on which it was founded. The organization was established by the Islamic Republic of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards Corps, and its establishment might be considered Iran’s only successful exporting of its revolution. The establishment of Hezbollah would also not have been possible had it not been for Baathist Syria, which allowed Iran to operate in Lebanon’s Beqaa Valley. Hafez Assad’s Syria enabled this as part of the “extensions” strategy it adopted after Operation Peace for Galilee, with the clear aim of exhausting the IDF and bringing about its withdrawal from Lebanon.
Iranian patronage has always been a pillar of strength for Hezbollah, but the most significant patronage it enjoyed was that of Syria. Damascus extended its protection to Hezbollah and guaranteed its continued existence as a military organization within the framework of the Ṭaif Agreement of 1989, which brought an end to the second Lebanese civil war. Syria has served for decades as a conduit for the supply of weapons to Hezbollah.
Since the 1980s, as the alliance with Syria tightened, Hezbollah underwent the process of “Lebanonization.” This process had three main elements. The first was the purported limiting of the armed struggle to within Lebanon’s geography, especially against the IDF’s continued presence in southern Lebanon. The second was the establishment of an extensive civilian arm that focused on providing for the needs of Lebanon’s Shiite community. The third was politicization, meaning the establishment of a political branch and integration into Lebanon’s parliamentary system.
Lebanonization did not, however, cause Hezbollah to forget its dual mission, anchored in its Islamist political and religious worldview: the establishment of an Islamist regime according to the model of the Islamic Republic in Iran on the one hand, and the continuation of the armed struggle against Israel on the other.
Hezbollah’s adherence to Islamist ideology, which in this case is distinctly anti-establishment, means striving to replace the sectarian regime with an Islamist one and perpetually bolstering its weapons supplies to support the armed struggle against Israel. Hezbollah made sure to present the IDF’s unilateral withdrawal from southern Lebanon as a military achievement of the “Islamic resistance in Lebanon” and not as the result of internal considerations by Israeli society. Following the withdrawal, Hezbollah had to place greater emphasis on the Lebanese dimension of its military struggle, and its discourse changed accordingly.
Until the IDF withdrawal, Hezbollah claimed that its military existence was in the name of liberating the soil of an occupied homeland. After the withdrawal, the organization began to stress the doctrine of defense of the homeland against “Israeli aggression,” with its military power aimed at creating a balance of terror between it and Israel.
As a result, Hezbollah engaged in a Lebanese political-national discourse that ostensibly placed its military existence at the heart of the Lebanese national consensus. This was summed up in three words: people, army, and resistance. The concept reflected the deepening of the Lebanonization trend and a real attempt on Hezbollah’s part to endear itself to Lebanese nationals under the pretense that its weapons were intended solely for defense of the Lebanese homeland.
Since May 2000, the doctrine of defense of the Lebanese homeland has been the common discourse among Hezbollah and its supporters in Lebanon. The adoption of this doctrine coincided with a political reorganization and a more prominent integration within the Lebanese political and public spheres. This was reflected in political alliances with Lebanese political parties and movements, especially among Maronite Christians, and the publication of a second political document in 2009 that for the first time declared Hezbollah’s renunciation of its mission to establish an Islamist regime in Lebanon.
As a military organization and a political movement, Hezbollah represents a totalitarian ideological-religious movement whose worldview is the bedrock of its existence. Whatever it may have said during the Lebanonization process, it is still as committed as it ever was to its two overarching original goals: the establishment of an Islamist regime in Lebanon and the continuation of an endless struggle against Israel. Giving up these goals would mean erasing its ideology, which would amount to destroying its existential essence as a totalitarian movement.
By claiming to have renounced its desire for the establishment of an Islamist regime in Lebanon and redefining its formidable arsenal of weapons as intended for defensive purposes, Hezbollah is conducting a sophisticated pragmatic campaign. Its object is first and foremost to neutralize internal opponents who fear a theocracy and to justify the continued possession of a vast store of weapons outside the state’s authority.
The strategy of balance that has characterized Hezbollah since the end of the second civil war remains a powerful statement of the movement’s adherence to its goals. The balance between maintaining the existence of the Lebanese state and continuing to possess an enormous supply of weapons is a practical formula that produces chronic crisis but does not constitute a renunciation of the struggle against Israel. Similarly, the omission of the demand for the establishment of an Islamist regime in Lebanon in no way implies that Hezbollah has renounced its Islamist ideology, as such a move would contradict its very soul.
Hezbollah joined the Israel-Hamas war one day after the Black Sabbath of October 7. Its participation, even on a local scale, so soon after the barbaric attack by the Hamas criminal terrorist organization on Israel, an attack that was conducted primarily against Israeli civilians and without any provocation on Israel’s part, puts Hezbollah’s doctrine of homeland defense into question. Its limited participation in the current fighting against Israel proves that Hezbollah remains faithful to its worldview and the indoctrination that has accompanied it for four decades. Its support of Hamas in its war against Israel shows that the amendment of a founding document or political-pragmatic discourse that takes circumstances into account does not reflect moderation or a fundamental change.
Indeed, Hezbollah’s joining of the fighting proves its adherence to its primary ideology of eternal struggle against Israel. Hezbollah’s secretary-general, Hassan Nasrallah, said in his first speech after October 7 that while the time is not yet ripe for an all-out confrontation, he is convinced that day will come. It is highly doubtful that the huge arsenal of weapons Hezbollah has amassed over the past two decades is intended solely for defensive purposes. While it has adapted its discourse to the needs of time and circumstance, no one should be deceived into believing it has lost sight of its ideological totalitarianism.
Hezbollah retains a conviction that it is capable of delivering a crushing blow to Israel. Following the American withdrawal from Afghanistan, and the scenes of Afghan citizens being crushed under the wheels of airplanes, Nasrallah assured his supporters that such scenes would be repeated at Ben-Gurion Airport in Tel Aviv. Hezbollah is preparing, as it always has, for the doomsday battle with Israel. Its involvement in the fighting right now, however limited, proves that it remains committed to fulfilling its messianic mission to inflict a decisive defeat on Israel.
The process of Lebanonization has created a deceptive smokescreen of moderation that is entirely lacking in Hezbollah. Instead of trusting in false interpretations of Lebanonization, Israel should focus on Hezbollah’s obsession with military power and unwavering determination to destroy the Jewish State.
Dr. Yusri Khazran is senior lecturer in the Department of Middle Eastern and Islamic Studies at Shalem College and a research fellow at the Harry S. Truman Institute for the Advancement of Peace at the Hebrew University. He received his Ph.D. from Hebrew University, after which he was awarded a Fulbright Fellowship at Harvard University. Dr. Hazran is the author of The Druze Community and the Lebanese State: Between Resistance and Reconciliation (Routledge, 2014). A version of this article was originally published by The BESA Center.
The post Despite the ‘Lebanonization’ of Hezbollah, It Still Wants to Destroy Israel first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
‘Dirty Jew, This Is What You Deserve’: Elderly French Jewish Woman Assaulted in Paris Suburb
Sign reading “+1000% of Antisemitic Acts: These Are Not Just Numbers” during a march against antisemitism, in Lyon, France, June 25, 2024. Photo: Romain Costaseca / Hans Lucas via Reuters Connect
An 88-year-old woman was assaulted outside Paris by two assailants who pushed her to the ground, kicked her, and called her “a dirty Jew” as tensions over surging antisemitism continue to boil in France.
The attack occurred last week, and the woman filed a complaint to local police on Monday, according to the French newspaper Le Figaro. Law enforcement is investigating the attack, which occurred in Val-d’Oise, just north of Paris.
The elderly woman recounted that she was on her way to a medical appointment when two assailants attacked her from behind. They punched her in the face, pushed her to the ground, and kicked her while hurling antisemitic slurs, including “dirty Jew, this is what you deserve.”
According to the complaint, the elderly woman was wearing a Star of David necklace, allowing the attackers to identify her as Jewish. “I think they saw my necklace; otherwise they would not have known,” she said.
The 88-year-old victim suffered a broken tooth, back and wrist pain, as well as mental anguish including nightmares.
Israeli opposition lawmaker Sharren Haskel reportedly said on Thursday that the victim was her grandmother and described the attackers as two “Arab thugs.”
“She tried to hide it from my family because she was embarrassed and ashamed, but she couldn’t,” Haskel told JNS. “It could have ended far worse. Today, she went to the hospital to be examined as part of her filing a complaint with the police.”
In a post on X/Twitter, Haskel wrote that she has “no hope in the French authorities, arguing that the government “allows blood libels to be spread against Israel, and as a result, the Jewish community suffers from violence, rape, murder.”
Haskel called on the Israeli government to “lead the fight against the explosion of antisemitism,” adding that Jewish communities around the world are “inseparable” from Israel.
“I call upon the Diaspora Jews like my grandmother to come to their national, cultural and historical home,” she concluded.
The attack in Val-d’Oise came amid a spike in antisemitism to record levels across France.
In an especially egregious attack that has garnered international headlines, a 12-year-old Jewish girl was raped by three Muslim boys in a Paris suburb on June 15, according to the French authorities. The child told investigators that the assailants called her a “dirty Jew” and hurled other antisemitic comments at her during the attack.
The three alleged attackers were arrested by French police two days after the rape. Two of them were indicted for gang rape, death threats, antisemitic violence, attempted extortion, and invasion of privacy. The third boy was charged as a witness.
After the attack, French President Emmanuel Macron “denounced the scourge of antisemitism” overtaking French society and spoke of the need to combat hatred of Jews in schools.
The incident sparked national outrage as massive protests against antisemitism erupted in France.
The French Jewish representative body Crif condemned the two recent attacks, noting Jews have not been spared from violence even if they are children or elderly.
“This despicable act highlights the reality of antisemitism in France, where victims aged 12 to 88 are attacked daily because of their Jewish identity,” Crif tweeted.
France has experienced a record surge of antisemitism in the wake of the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas’ Oct. 7 massacre across southern Israel. Antisemitic outrages rose by over 1,000 percent in the final three months of 2023 compared with the previous year, with over 1,200 incidents reported — greater than the total number of incidents in France for the previous three years combined.
Last month, an Israeli family visiting Paris was denied service at a hotel after an attendant noticed their Israeli passports
In April, a Jewish woman was beaten and raped in a suburb of Paris as “vengeance for Palestine.”
The post ‘Dirty Jew, This Is What You Deserve’: Elderly French Jewish Woman Assaulted in Paris Suburb first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
US Jews Shouldn’t Give Up on America
Supporters of Israel gather in solidarity with Israel and protest against antisemitism, amid the ongoing conflict between Israel and the Palestinian terror group Hamas, during a rally on the National Mall in Washington, DC, Nov. 14, 2023. Photo: REUTERS/Leah Millis
In recent weeks, a growing chorus of prominent pro-Israel advocates have been urging Jewish Americans to leave the US and immigrate to Israel. Since the October 7 massacre, a surge in antisemitic attacks — coupled with shocking scenes of packed protests in US cities calling for violence against Jews — has heralded a discussion on the fate of Jewish Americans, and whether the era of prosperity and safety under which Jews have flourished has come to an end.
The well-intentioned efforts of those telegraphing the dangers associated with staying in America represent a justified concern, steeped in public scenes and statistics confirming the cultural, political, and academic corrosion infecting American institutions.
While encouraging a return to our ancestral homeland will remain a cornerstone of the Jewish American project, particularly in Modern Orthodox communities, approaching aliyah through the prism of fleeing antisemitism in America rather than fulfilling the ultimate mitzvah of living in the Holy Land discounts the importance of having a robust Diaspora, and dismisses the established idea that upholding western civilization rests on preserving US exceptionalism.
Eric Cohen, Executive Director of the Tikvah Fund, addressed some of these sentiments in an interview last month. Indeed, Cohen correctly notes, “As goes America, so goes the West and arguably the world,” and further cites that US Jews hold a unique role in restoring America to its place as protector of Western interests and values.
Historically, Jewish Americans, both individually and collectively, have been crucial to advancing US support for Israel, and explaining to Americans why a democratic Israel benefits the United States. More than 75 years after the US officially recognized Israel, stories surrounding US Jewish businessman Eddie Jacobson talking to his old friend, President Harry Truman, and having him agree to meet Chaim Weizmann upon the Zionist leader’s visit to America, was the beginning of this bond.
Last month, mobilization efforts in New York’s 16th Congressional District helped unseat, albeit belatedly, antisemitic Squad Rep. Jamaal Bowman — both for his assault on Israel, Jews, and many other values antithetical to those of his constituents. Another radical progressive, Congresswoman Cori Bush (D-MO), may soon find a similar fate in her primary race next month, as polls show the lawmaker trailing the more moderate Democrat, St. Louis County prosecuting attorney Wesley Bell.
In both cases, Jewish voters helped lead grassroots campaigns and devoted critical resources to assist in centering the far-left lurch of the Democratic Party. Last fall’s slaughter in Israel and domestic developments here in the US have reawakened a segment of the Jewish population who are looking more seriously at the positions of politicians, with many concluding that the anti-Jewish animus that they have long tied only to the far-right is wedded to outdated assumptions.
At the same time, blue-state metropolises such as New York and Los Angeles have become epicenters where steady drumbeats of pro-Hamas sympathizers chanting for the destruction of Israel — and violence against Jews — are prompting some US Jews to make their home in other parts of the country.
Prescriptive approaches to conserving America’s future may entail retooling Jewish sensibilities to meet existing challenges. That areas where Jews face the most significant threats from the political left are primarily governed by elected officials who resist punishing antisemitic perpetrators suggests that the US Jewish center of gravity could soon shift from left-wing bastions such as Brooklyn to more conservative neighborhoods like Boca Raton.
Moreover, a strong America stands to benefit the security of the entire free world — including in Israel, and for Jews in other parts of the Diaspora.
Maintaining Israel’s qualitative military edge is rooted in the US retaining its strategic footprint in the region and assisting Israel in deterring its detractors. A diminished US security posture that rejects Israel may also compel the countries in the region to form alliances with unsavory actors, such as China and Russia. Jewish Americans have a responsibility to revive America out of its decline and abet in stemming the inevitable terror such descent spreads to Jews in Israel.
My daughter, who graduated high school in June, recently remarked that should the US become uninhabitable for Jews, America ceases being America. Defending US exceptionalism is inextricably linked to preserving the security of our allies across the globe, including Israel. Jewish Americans must assert their energies and unite in repelling the destructive ideologies that seek to destroy the foundational Judeo-Christian tenets upon which our country was founded. Perpetuating a narrative that embraces America’s irreparable doom ignores the country’s indispensable role as a bulwark for liberty that stretches beyond our borders and demotes much of the good that remains at the core of the American spirit.
Irit Tratt is an American and pro-Israel advocate residing in New York. Follow her on X @Irit_Tratt.
The post US Jews Shouldn’t Give Up on America first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Columbia University Jewish Alumni Say Administrators Are ‘Main Culprit’ of Campus Antisemitism
The “Gaza Solidarity Encampment” at Columbia University, located in the Manhattan borough of New York City, on April 25, 2024. Photo: Reuters Connect
Columbia University’s Jewish Alumni Association blasted school officials as the “main culprit” of antisemitism on campus after newly released text messages showed administrators sneering at testimonies of anti-Jewish discrimination.
While in the audience of a May 31 alumni event, Columbia University Associate Deans Josef Sorett, Susan Chang-Kim, Matthew Patashnick, and Cristen Kromm exchanged text messages mocking and dismissing concerns of Jewish students. The messages, which called Jewish students “privileged” and “difficult to listen to,” have intensified discussions over whether the Ivy League campus has become a hotbed of antisemitism.
The newly released batch of text messages, which were publicized by the US House Committee on Education and the Workforce, incensed the Columbia Jewish Alumni Association. The organization stated that the university needs a “cultural shift” to create a safe environment for Jewish students.
“The further this unfortunate saga unfolds, the more it is clear that antisemitism runs deeper at Columbia than protests and encampments. When faculty talk, students listen,” the Columbia Jewish Alumni Association wrote in a statement.
“We know that administrators and professors are the primary culprits of Jewish students feeling threatened at Morningside Heights [the location of the school’s New York City campus] and that reality will not change until those responsible for this crisis are held accountable,” the alumni continued. “Columbia’s epidemic of antisemitism requires a cultural shift to fix it, one that involves honest conversations around how this crisis came to be, who perpetuated it, and what needs to change to ensure that the events of last spring are not repeated in the fall semester.”
On June 12, the Washington Free Beacon first reported that Columbia administrators belittled Jewish students and alumni in a group chat. The report set off a firestorm of outrage, resulting in the House Education and Workforce Committee demanding Columbia administrators hand over the entirety of the message exchanges. On Tuesday, the committee released the full chat log to the public.
While listening to the panel of Jewish alumni and students speak, Chang-Kim stated that their testimonies were “difficult to listen to” but that she was “trying to be open minded to understand but the doors are closing.” Chang-Kim referred to one speaker as a “problem!!!” for “painting [Columbia] students as dangerous.”
The deans then disparaged a testimony from Brian Cohen, head of Columbia Hillel. Cohen stated that many Jewish students at Columbia felt safer spending time in the Kraft Center for Jewish Life than their own dorms following Hamas’ Oct. 7 terrorist attacks on Israel, after which antisemitism on college campuses spiked to unprecedented levels.
Patashnick stated that Cohen was “taking full advantage of the moment” and that he saw the “huge fundraising potential” in the midst of the controversy over campus antisemitism. Signaling her agreement, Kromm gave Patasnick’s text a like and responded, “You named it.” Pataschnick continued, saying that Cohen was “laying the case to case to expand physical space!” and “[Jewish students] will have their own dorm soon.”
Columbia University offers residential living arrangements for African American, Latino, and LGBT+, students, according to its official website. The university has also offered special graduation ceremonies for various racial and sexual minority groups.
Chang-Kim continued, dismissing Jewish students as “privileged.” Kromm agreed, expressing concern over the well-being of Jewish students who do not support Israel.
“Comes from such a place of privilege … hard to hear the woe is me, we need to huddle at the Kraft center. Huh??” Chang-Kim wrote.
“Yup. Blind to the idea that non-Israel supporting Jews have no place to come together,” Kromm wrote.
The Kraft Center for Jewish Student Life is a hub for Jewish students on Columbia’s campus. Its namesake, Robert Kraft, ceased his financial support for Columbia University in April, citing “virulent hate” against the Jewish community on campus.
Kromm continued, stating that Jewish students have more “support” than other groups at Columbia, despite widely reported antisemitic incidents rocking the campus since Oct. 7.
“If only every identity group had these resources and support,” Kromm said, adding that Jewish students need to “share resources!!!”
Kromm fired off a pair of vomit emojis as speakers described an op-ed published by Columbia campus rabbi Yonah Hain lamenting the growing support for Hamas on campus.
Chang-Kim then wrote, “I’m going to throw up.” The timestamp on these texts align with the testimony of the daughter of a Holocaust survivor who shared how her own daughter was “hiding in plain sight” on Columbia’s campus following the Oct. 7 attacks on Israel.
“Amazing what $$$$ can do,” Kromm wrote in response.
Columbia University has become a poster child for antisemitism in higher education following the Oct. 7 slaughters by Hamas in southern Israel. Jewish students and alumni have expressed outrage, accusing the administration of showing cold indifference to antisemitic incidents on campus. Anti-Israel activists have disrupted Columbia’s classes and held unsanctioned protests on campus. Several Columbia student groups have outright banned “Zionist” students, a mandate that would exclude the vast majority of Jewish people.
In April, activists commandeered a central portion of Columbia’s campus and erected a “Gaza solidarity encampment.” The encampment featured signs which explicitly endorsed Hamas and called for the eradication of Israel. Several ultra-rich Columbia alumni pulled back their donations to the university in response to the growing and palpable anti-Israel sentiment on campus.
The post Columbia University Jewish Alumni Say Administrators Are ‘Main Culprit’ of Campus Antisemitism first appeared on Algemeiner.com.