RSS
Enough Is Enough: NATO Must Suspend Cooperation With Turkey
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan addressing the congress of the ruling Islamist AKP Party in March 2021. Photo: Reuters/Umit Bektas.
JNS.org – I don’t know the word for “chutzpah” in Turkish, but whatever it is, it applies in spades to recent comments from Fatih Ceylan, Turkey’s former Ambassador to NATO.
Speaking to Al-Monitor about the security implications of Turkey’s full-throated support for Hamas, Ceylan poured cold water on the proposition that Israel might carry out targeted killings of Hamas and allied terrorists based there, as it has done with spectacular success in Lebanon and Iran over the last week. After dismissing the likelihood of similar operations on Turkish soil, Ceylan added that were one to happen, “[I]n such a case, Turkey will certainly take this move to NATO.”
When it comes to NATO, Turkey—under the brutally authoritarian rule of its diehard Islamist president, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan—has stood out as the alliance’s greatest liability. Indeed, had Turkey not joined NATO in 1952, when it was ruled by a secular, Western-oriented government, there’s no question that it would even be a candidate for membership in the present day. What Erdoğan has done is to leverage Turkey’s membership to undermine the alliance from within, functioning almost as a fifth column.
In Syria, for example, Turkish forces have carried out strikes against the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), who are, in turn, backed by the United States—Ankara’s ostensible ally and the most powerful of NATO’s 32 members. In October 2023, the situation was so bad that the United States was compelled to shoot down a Turkish drone—one NATO member taking military action against another.
Erdoğan’s relationship with Vladimir Putin’s regime in Russia is just as disturbing. Ankara was booted out of the US F-35 fighter jet program in 2019 after it purchased S-400 missiles from the Russians. In the wake of Putin’s aggression against democratic Ukraine, Turkey has actively participated in busting the international sanctions on Moscow and aided corrupt Russian oligarchs in moving funds through Turkish banks.
Turkey has also been actively hostile to other NATO members, especially Greece. Half of the island of Cyprus has been illegally occupied by the Turks since 1974; earlier this year, Erdoğan showed up there to celebrate the 50th anniversary of that invasion. It has tried to stem NATO’s expansion, holding up Sweden’s application for membership, which was finally approved only last March. As my colleague at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, Sinan Ciddi, memorably put it: “Pick your theater of vital security interests for the NATO alliance, and you’ll discover a Turkish connection that actively undermines it.”
So when Ceyhan breezily says that Turkey will raise any Israeli operations on its territory with NATO—hoping, no doubt, that doing so will trigger Article 5 of the NATO Treaty, which enshrines the principle that an attack on one member is an attack on all—one might reasonably expect, given this woeful record, that the other NATO members will proffer a middle finger in Ankara’s direction.
Right now, the Middle East is in the most febrile state arguably since the State of Israel’s creation in 1948. As we sit on the cusp of a regional war that would pose an unmistakable existential threat to Israel, Turkey is doing everything it can to stoke the flames. Erdoğan is already known for his vicious rhetorical attacks on the Jewish state, laced with the crudest antisemitism. Since Hamas’s pogrom of Oct. 7, that has only gotten worse, with Erdoğan claiming that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is “worse than Hitler” and depicting Israel as a reincarnation of the Third Reich. Additionally, the Turkish president has taken special delight in feting the rapists of Hamas on his home turf, among them the late, unlamented Ismail Haniyeh, who was eliminated on July 31 with wonderful symbolism in Tehran. Haniyeh’s assassination unleashed another foul Erdoğan tirade, along with an announcement of a national day of mourning over the loss of his “brother.” To cap it all, he even threatened at the end of July to invade Israel, boasting: “Just as we entered Nagorno-Karabakh, just as we entered Libya, we might do the same to them. There is nothing we can’t do.”
As a result, Israeli Foreign Minister Israel Katz aptly compared Erdoğan to the late Iraqi tyrant Saddam Hussein as he called on NATO to boot Turkey from its ranks. The problem with that proposal, however, is that there is no procedure within the alliance to expel a member—even when, as in Turkey’s case, said member makes an active mockery of NATO’s commitment to democratic values and the defense of open societies.
For that reason, NATO has to think honestly, bravely and creatively about Turkey’s future status. Honestly, because it is now painfully clear that Turkey’s stance undermines and contradicts NATO’s core purpose, and that needs to be said out loud. Bravely, because one or more states need to summon the guts to publicly question Turkey’s value to the alliance and get the United States on board—something that might be easier to achieve with a Republican, rather than a Democratic, administration. Creatively, because the absence of an expulsion mechanism means that member states need to figure out another way to get Turkey out of NATO.
That could mean refusing to take part in military exercises with Turkey; ending intelligence sharing with Ankara’s security services; shunning meetings with Turkish military officers; and providing usable intelligence to Israel about Turkey’s support for Hamas and Hezbollah. Erdoğan should also be challenged for his hypocrisy in not exiting NATO voluntarily. If he is the great Islamic leader that he claims to be, if he is aligning himself more and more with Iranian interests, if the murderers and marauders in Lebanon, Gaza, the West Bank, Yemen, Syria and Iraq are his new best friends, then what on earth is he doing in NATO? Turkish NATO membership doesn’t serve his goals. Neither does it serve ours.
NATO has faced a few external tests since its formation, but Turkey is the biggest internal one since French President Charles de Gaulle withdrew from NATO’s command structure in 1966. It is also more dangerous since de Gaulle’s objections to US domination of NATO didn’t drive France into the hands of the Soviets. To protect themselves and what the alliance stands for, NATO members have only one option: suspend cooperation with Turkey and do all they can to secure Turkey’s departure from an alliance that it only disgraces.
The post Enough Is Enough: NATO Must Suspend Cooperation With Turkey first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
As Gaza War Continues, Hamas Calls for Global Protests While Israel Marks Breakthroughs in Medical Innovation
A pro-Hamas march in London, United Kingdom, Feb. 17, 2024. Photo: Chrissa Giannakoudi via Reuters Connect
As the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas calls for global protests amid stalled Gaza ceasefire talks, Israel has broken new ground despite the ongoing conflict, achieving a major medical breakthrough in synthetic human kidney development.
The contrast illustrates a stark contrast between the priorities of Hamas, an international designated terrorist group that has ruled Gaza for nearly two decades, and Israel, the lone democracy in the Middle East that has long been a leader in tech and medical innovation.
On Wednesday, Hamas urged worldwide protests in support of Palestinians, calling on the international community “to denounce Israel’s genocidal war and starvation policy in Gaza.”
“We call for continuing and escalating the popular pressure in all cities and squares on Friday, Saturday, and Sunday … through rallies, demonstrations and sit-ins outside the embassies of the Israeli regime and its allies, particularly in the US,” the statement read.
The Palestinian terrorist group also called to expose what it described as “the terrorism of the Zio-Nazi occupation against defenseless civilians.”
Hamas’s latest move against Israel comes amid stalled indirect negotiations over a proposed 60-day ceasefire and hostage release deal, which collapsed last month after the group vowed it would not disarm unless an independent Palestinian state is established — rejecting a key Israeli demand to end the war in Gaza.
In its statement, Hamas demanded the opening of all border crossings to allow immediate aid into the war-torn enclave and urged a global condemnation of “the international community’s inaction on the Israeli crimes.”
Amid mounting international pressure to address the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, Israel announced new measures to facilitate the delivery of aid, including temporary pauses in fighting in certain areas and the creation of protected routes for aid convoys.
Israeli officials have previously accused Hamas of diverting aid for terrorist activities and selling supplies at inflated prices to civilians, while also blaming the United Nations and other foreign organizations for enabling this diversion.
Hamas’s statement also emphasized that the “global resistance movement must continue until Israeli aggression on Gaza ends and the siege on the coastal strip is lifted.”
Meanwhile, as Israel faces escalating hostilities and the heavy toll of war, the Jewish state continues to push the boundaries of innovation and resilience, achieving new medical breakthroughs while confronting ongoing challenges.
In a major medical breakthrough, scientists at Sheba Medical Center and Tel Aviv University have successfully grown a synthetic 3D miniature human kidney in a lab using specialized stem cells derived from kidney tissue — one of the most promising advances in regenerative medicine.
Dr. Dror Harats, chairman of Sheba’s Research Authority, described this achievement as a reflection of Israel’s leading role in global medical innovation.
“Despite growing efforts to isolate Israel from international science, breakthroughs like this prove our impact is both lasting and essential,” he said.
In a landmark study, a team from Sheba’s Safra Children’s Hospital and Tel Aviv University’s Sagol Center for Regenerative Medicine created synthetic kidney organs that matured and remained stable for 34 weeks — the longest-lasting and most refined kidney organoids developed to date.
Nearly a decade ago, the research team became the first to successfully isolate human kidney tissue stem cells — the cells responsible for the organ’s development and growth.
Previous attempts to grow kidneys in a lab using general-purpose stem cells were short-lived, typically lasting only a few weeks and often producing unwanted cell types that compromised research accuracy.
However, this Israeli research team used stem cells taken directly from kidney tissue — cells that naturally develop into kidney parts — allowing them to create a much purer and more stable model with key features found in real kidneys.
This medical breakthrough could have far-reaching implications, redefining the current understanding of kidney diseases and advancing the development of innovative treatments.
Researchers believe the model could help assess how medications impact fetal kidneys during pregnancy and move science closer to repairing or replacing damaged kidney tissue with lab-grown cells.
The discovery came days after researchers from Hebrew University of Jerusalem and international partners discovered a way to boost the immune system’s cancer-fighting ability by reprogramming how T cells, which are white blood cells critical to the immune system, produce energy.
The researchers explained in a study published in the peer-reviewed Nature Communications that disabling a protein known as Ant2 in T cells greatly enhances their effectiveness against tumors.
“By disabling Ant2, we triggered a complete shift in how T cells produce and use energy,” Prof. Michael Berger of Hebrew University’s Faculty of Medicine, who co-led the study with doctorate student Omri Yosef, told the Tazpit Press Service. “This reprogramming made them significantly better at recognizing and killing cancer cells.”
RSS
Netherlands to Push EU to Suspend Israel Trade Deal but Won’t Recognize Palestinian State ‘At This Time’
Netherlands Foreign Affairs Minister Caspar Veldkamp addresses a press conference, in New Delhi on April 1, 2025. Photo: ANI Photo/Sanjay Sharma via Reuters Connect
The Netherlands is spearheading efforts to suspend the European Union-Israel trade agreement amid rising EU criticism of Israel’s actions in Gaza, while simultaneously refusing to recognize a Palestinian state, contrasting with other member states as international pressure mounts.
On Thursday, Dutch Foreign Minister Caspar Veldkamp announced that the Netherlands will push the EU to suspend the trade component of the EU-Israel Association Agreement — a pact governing the EU’s political and economic ties with the Jewish state.
This latest anti-Israel initiative follows a recent EU-commissioned report accusing Israel of committing “indiscriminate attacks … starvation … torture … [and] apartheid” against Palestinians in Gaza during its military campaign against Hamas, an internationally designated terrorist group.
Following calls from a majority of EU member states for a formal investigation, this report built on Belgium’s recent decision to review Israel’s compliance with the trade agreement, a process initiated by the Netherlands and led by EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Kaja Kallas.
According to the report, “there are indications that Israel would be in breach of its human rights obligations” under the 25-year-old EU-Israel Association Agreement.
While the document acknowledges the reality of violence by Hamas, it states that this issue lies outside its scope — failing to address the Palestinian terrorist group’s role in sparking the current war with its bloody rampage across southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023.
Israeli officials have slammed the report as factually incorrect and morally flawed, noting that Hamas embeds its military infrastructure within civilian targets and Israel’s army takes extensive precautions to try and avoid civilian casualties.
In a Dutch parliamentary debate on Gaza on Thursday, Veldkamp also announced that the government would not recognize a Palestinian state for now — a position that stands in sharp contrast to the recent moves by several other EU member states to extend recognition.
“The Netherlands is not planning to recognize a Palestinian state at this time,” the Dutch diplomat said.
“This war has ceased to be a just war and is now leading to the erosion of Israel’s own security and identity,” he continued.
This latest decision goes against the position of several EU member states, including France, which has committed to recognizing Palestinian statehood in September.
The United Kingdom has likewise indicated it will do so unless Israel acts to ease the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and agrees to a ceasefire.
For its part, Germany said it was not planning to recognize a Palestinian state in the short term, and Italy argued that recognition must occur simultaneously with the recognition of Israel by the new entity.
Spain, Norway, Ireland, and Slovenia all recognized a Palestinian state last year.
Israel has been facing growing pressure from several EU member states seeking to undermine its defensive campaign against the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas in Gaza.
On Thursday, European Commission Vice President Teresa Ribera strongly condemned Israel’s actions in the war-torn enclave, describing the situation as a “grave violation of human dignity.”
“What we are seeing is a concrete population being targeted, killed and condemned to starve to death,” Ribera told Politico. “If it is not genocide, it looks very much like the definition used to express its meaning.”
Until now, the European Commission has refrained from accusing Israel of genocide, but Ribera’s comments mark one of the strongest European condemnations since the outbreak of the war in Gaza.
She also called on the EU to take decisive action by considering the suspension of its trade agreement with Israel and the implementation of sanctions, while emphasizing that such measures would require unanimous approval from all member states.
RSS
Graduate Student Unions Promoting Antisemitism, Reform Group Says
Students listen to a speech at a protest encampment at Stanford University in Stanford, California US, on April 26, 2024. Photo: Carlos Barria via Reuters Connect.
Higher-education-based unions controlled by United Electrical, Radio, and Machine Workers of America (UE) are rife with antisemitism and anti-Zionist discrimination, according to a new letter imploring the US Congress’s House Committee on Education and the Workforce to address the matter.
“Tracing its roots to communism in the 1930s, the UE is a radical, pro-Hamas labor union that has a long history of antisemitism,” the National Right to Work Foundation (NRTW), one of the US’s leading labor reform groups, wrote on July 30 in a message obtained by The Algemeiner. “The UE openly supports the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement, which is designed to cripple and destroy Israel economically. Today, the UE furthers its antisemitic agenda by unionizing graduate students on college campuses and using its exclusive representation powers to create a hostile environment for Jewish students. The hostile environment includes demanding compulsory dues to fund the UE’s abhorrent activities.”
NRTW went on to describe a litany of alleged injustices to which UE members subject Jewish student-employees in the US’s most prestigious institutions of higher education, from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) to Cornell University. At MIT, the letter said, “union officers” aided a riotous group which illegally occupied a section of campus with a “Gaza Solidarity Encampment,” participating in the demonstration and even denying access to campus buildings. UE members at Stanford University, meanwhile, allegedly denied religious accommodations to Jewish students who requested exemption from union dues over that branch’s supporting the BDS movement. And Cornell University UE was accused of denying religious exemptions in several cases as well and followed up the rejection with an intrusive “questionnaire” which probed Jewish students for “legally-irrelevant information.”
The situation requires federal oversight and intervention, NRTW said, including Congress’s possibly clarifying that student-employees are not traditional employees and are therefore afforded protections under sections of the Civil Rights Act which apply to the campus.
“These continuing patterns of antisemitism are illegal, immoral, and must be stopped,” the letter continued. “We encourage you to do all that is in your power to investigate and help bring an end to the UE and its affiliates’ nonstop harassment and intimidation of Jewish students … The Trump administration can also use tools available to it under Title VI and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act against colleges who work with unions to create a hostile environment for Jewish students.”
July’s letter is not the first time NRTW has publicized alleged antisemitic abuse in unions representing higher education employees.
In 2024, it represented a group of six City University of New York (CUNY) professors, five of whom are Jewish, who sued to be “freed” from CUNY’s Professional Staff Congress (PSC-CUNY) over its passing a resolution during Israel’s May 2021 war with Hamas which declared solidarity with Palestinians and accused the Jewish state of ethnic cleansing, apartheid, and crimes against humanity. The group contested New York State’s “Taylor Law,” which it said chained the professors to the union’s “bargaining unit” and denied their right to freedom of speech and association by forcing them to be represented in negotiations by an organization they claim holds antisemitic views.
That same year, NRTW prevailed in a discrimination suit filed to exempt another cohort of Jewish MIT students from paying dues to the Graduate Student Union (GSU). The students had attempted to resist financially supporting GSU’s anti-Zionism, but the union bosses attempted to coerce their compliance, telling them that “no principles, teachings, or tenets of Judaism prohibit membership in or the payment of dues or fees” to the union.
“All Americans should have a right to protect their money from going to union bosses they don’t support, whether those objections are based on religion, politics, or any other reason,” NRTW said at the time.
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.