RSS
Hamas Massacre and Gaza War Shows Technological Superiority Can’t Bring Peace
An Israeli soldier stands guard at moshav Netiv HaAsara which borders the Gaza Strip, in the aftermath of the deadly October 7 attack by terrorists from Palestinian Islamist antisemitic terror group Hamas, in southern Israel, November 19, 2023. Photo: REUTERS/Amir Cohen
Throughout the nearly two decades since the disengagement from Gaza, Israel has found itself embroiled in a protracted violent struggle against Hamas (which is supported by another terrorist organization based in the Gaza Strip — Palestinians Islamic Jihad).
Hamas has consistently focused its efforts on terrorizing Israeli civilians. For those living near the Gaza Strip in the area known as the “Gaza Envelope,” life has been unbearable for many years. Israel always responded to Hamas’ terror attacks on those communities with limited force, without ever achieving a decisive resolution.
Over the years, there have been 16 military operations or rounds of conflict in Gaza, averaging about one per year. In each case, the technological capabilities employed by the IDF became more advanced and sophisticated.
Iron Dome, an advanced short-range missile defense system developed in Israel, was put into operation in 2011 and has been highly successful at intercepting Hamas’ rockets. In 2021, the construction of a sophisticated technological barrier was completed that stretched approximately 65 kilometers along the entire length of the Gaza Strip. Israel invested three years and 3.5 billion shekels in this barrier, which was one of the most complex and advanced engineering projects ever conducted in the country. It involved a complex underground barrier with advanced sensing systems, an above-ground technological barrier with surveillance technologies, remote-controlled weapons systems integrated into an advanced detection system, maximum coverage cameras for the area, and command-and-control war rooms.
Yet on the morning of October 7, 2023, Hamas launched a massive, highly successful murderous attack on the southern IDF army bases and settlements bordering the Gaza Strip.
Using basic means of communication, such as handwritten messages and person-to-person oral contact, Hamas leadership managed to handle the entire operation’s communication channels and avoid early detection by Israel. By using simple measures, they successfully disrupted the advanced technological systems responsible for on-site detection and prevention, followed by partial interference with the IDF’s communication systems. These successes led to a mass infiltration by a large number of terrorists into the settlements and military bases, resulting in an unprecedented number of dead, injured, and hostages taken, including both civilians and IDF personnel.
The perception that technology alone can lead to military dominance reached its peak in the early 1990s with the emergence of the “Revolution in Military Affairs” (RMA) concept. This idea posits that military superiority relies on advanced technological solutions to address a wide range of threats and scenarios. It took root in American defense circles and influenced the strategies of several Western armies, including Israel’s.
From its inception, Israel has emphasized the acquisition of technological superiority as a means of countering numerical inferiority. Over the years, this strategy has become a cornerstone of Israel’s identity as a technologically advanced nation, earning it the nickname “Start-Up Nation.” It significantly affected Israel’s national security perception and its military. This perception is well reflected in the country’s innovative defense industry and the high number of Israeli technology start-ups in the defense sector.
One of the ultimate goals of advanced technological defense systems is to provide a real-time, comprehensive operational picture of the battlefield at any given moment. Efforts to achieve this goal involve the development of means that can “see” through walls or underground, advanced sensing systems capable of providing continuous battlefield coverage around the clock, improved data compression techniques, and more efficient transmission methods for large volumes of data. Additionally, it includes the utilization of artificial intelligence to assist in rapid decision-making, based on the large volume of data collected.
However, no matter how advanced technology becomes, it is highly unlikely to completely eliminate the “fog of war.” Moreover, the increasing reliance of advanced armies on technological systems creates a certain vulnerability. Alongside the advancement of information technology in recent decades, more significant points of weakness have become apparent. The most advanced tracking systems can be countered by simple measures, such as drones and explosive devices. Highly advanced sensors have limited capability to provide information about what is happening in underground bunkers and tunnels. Urban areas pose particular challenges as they contain large numbers of people and structures that all represent potential targets for tracking. In addition, there is the significant problem of the difficulty in distinguishing between non-combatants and adversaries.
A successful attack on Israel’s military information and communication networks can blind and silence its forces for significant periods, as indeed happened on October 7. The events of that day were the result of those limitations and serve as proof that even a modern military, armed with state-of-the-art equipment and technology, can be caught completely off-guard.
The conclusion of World War II heralded a change in the landscape of violent conflict worldwide. This change is reflected in the ascendance of asymmetrical conflict involving non-state actors, such as terrorist organizations, much like the conflict between Israel and Hamas. Asymmetrical conflicts are characterized by a growing involvement of the civilian population and a blurring of distinctions between the frontlines and the home front. These conflicts are often limited in scope, and traditional notions of victory in war or total defeat of the enemy are no longer valid.
One of the major components of asymmetric conflict is access to military technology. The more economically developed a country, the more advanced its military technology. This reality is clearly seen in the balance of military power between Israel and Hamas. By directing attacks against non-combatant civilians, the side in the conflict that holds the technological disadvantage — Hamas — aims to cancel out the asymmetry. As Israel holds such a clear technological advantage, Hamas cannot compete in a technological arms race, and it does not try. Instead, it resorts to simple and less advanced means that make it much more challenging for Israel to use its technological advantage.
An excellent example is Hamas’ use of incendiary balloons and kites, which it started launching towards Israel in April 2018 and which caused severe fires in the communities near the Gaza Strip. These simple means of warfare frightened residents and stirred public anger towards the IDF, which struggled to cope with them. As part of this trend, Hamas also began using cheap, readily available civilian drones with a wide range of applications, including military purposes such as intelligence-gathering and the carrying of explosive charges. Hamas has used drones like the DJI Matrice 600, which is capable of carrying a payload up to six kilograms and which can reach a maximum speed of about 65 km/h.
The primary battlefield on which the State of Israel combats terrorist organizations such as Hamas is an extremely dense and populated urban area, rife with enemy units that constantly try to hide from the IDF’s advanced sensor networks. They seek to inflict damage and quickly disappear into shelters or underground bunkers and tunnels.
Although technological supremacy is, and will probably remain, an important element of the IDF’s modus operandi, recent years’ experience teaches that the key to winning the war against terrorist organizations that employ the tactics discussed above will likely require full control of the territory. Though some degree of control can be achieved by means of technology, full control demands a substantial, sometimes massive, presence of “boots on the ground” — as the United States learned in its campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq. Even a technologically advanced military force will always remain vulnerable when facing such warfare, and it is unlikely that a miraculous technology will emerge to change that fundamental reality. Over-reliance on technology in conflicts of this nature can, in certain circumstances, act as a dangerous hindrance to achieving the desired outcome, as seen in the events of October 7, 2023.
Nir Reuven is a researcher at the BESA Center, an engineer, and a former officer in the Merkava development program (the main Israeli battle tank). He has held several management positions in the Israeli hi-tech industry and is an expert on technology. Currently he is co-manager of the Sapir College Innovation and Entrepreneurship Center and lectures at Bar-Ilan University. A version of this article was originally published by The BESA Center.
The post Hamas Massacre and Gaza War Shows Technological Superiority Can’t Bring Peace first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Rafael Lemkin’s Family Fights to Have Anti-Israel Group Stop Using Name of Famed Zionist Who Coined Term ‘Genocide’

Raphael Lemkin being interviewed on Feb. 13, 1949. Photo: Screenshot
The family of Raphael Lemkin — the Polish-born Jewish lawyer who coined the term “genocide” and helped draft the Genocide Convention after World War II — is taking legal action against a stridently anti-Israel group based in the US, accusing the nonprofit organization of corrupting his family name and legacy.
Joseph Lemkin, the cousin of Raphael Lemkin and closest living relative, confirmed to The Algemeiner that his family is initiating legal proceedings against the Pennsylvania-based Lemkin Institute for Genocide Prevention, with the support of the European Jewish Association (EJA), to stop the misuse of his family name.
“From our perspective, the Lemkin Institute has no right to use his name. Their actions are completely opposed to what he stood for,” Lemkin told The Algemeiner, referring to his cousin. “He was a passionate Zionist who dedicated all his efforts and resources to one cause: the adoption of the Genocide Convention.”
Lemkin’s father was Raphael Lemkin’s first cousin, and he said the two men had a close relationship.
First reported by The Algemeiner, the institute has used the Lemkin name to advance an agenda of extreme anti-Israel activism, which Lemkin’s family called a “shameful betrayal” of their legacy.
Initially registered in Pennsylvania as a nonprofit organization in 2021, the institute received US federal tax-exempt status two years later.
Since the Hamas-led invasion of and massacre across southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, the organization has shifted toward aggressive anti-Israel political advocacy, backing pro-Hamas campus protests and reaching millions on social media with posts that falsely accuse Israel of genocide.
Less than a week after the Oct. 7 atrocities, for example, the institute released a “genocide alert” calling the Palestinian terrorist group’s onslaught an “unprecedented military operation against Israel.”
Comparing Israel’s defensive military actions against Hamas to the Holocaust, the institute accused the Jewish state of carrying out a “genocide” against Palestinians — the very term Raphael Lemkin coined in 1943. Israel had not even launched its ground offensive in Gaza at the time of the social media posts.
Days later, the Lemkin Institute called on the International Criminal Court “to indict Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for the crime of #genocide in light of the siege and bombardment of #Gaza and the many expressions of genocidal intent.” Israel still had not initiated its ground campaign.
Since then, the organization’s vocal anti-Israel advocacy has continued unabated for the past two years, accusing the Jewish state of genocide and terrorism while largely staying silent about Hamas.
According to the Lemkin family, such statements distort history and undermine their legacy, but even more, they disrespect the memory of six million Jews.
“The institute has used this term to promote an inflammatory, antisemitic stance against Israel — completely contrary to the principles he stood for,” Joseph Lemkin told The Algemeiner, referring to his cousin.
“Astonishingly, they have even expressed support for Hezbollah and Hamas — both internationally designated terrorist organizations — while smearing Israel,” he continued.
Now, legal steps are underway to hold the institute accountable, stop it from exploiting the Lemkin name to raise money, and end its Holocaust comparisons.
After first sending letters demanding that the institute change its name, the Lemkin family is now awaiting a response — and if no voluntary action is taken or Pennsylvania officials fail to intervene, the matter will be taken to court, Lemkin told The Algemeiner.
Beyond its communications with the institute, the EJA legal team also sent letters to Gov. Josh Shapiro and Pennsylvania’s Bureau of Corporations and Charitable Organizations regarding this issue.
“The Lemkin Institute, through its very name, as well as its marketing and other materials, represents itself as an embodiment of Mr. Lemkin’s ideology. In reality, the Lemkin Institute’s policies, positions, activities, and publications are anathema to Mr. Lemkin’s belief system,” the letter reads.
“The Lemkin Institute is not authorized by Raphael Lemkin’s family, his estate, or any custodian of his legacy to rely upon his name for any purpose,” it continues. “The European Jewish Association and Mr. Lemkin’s family are outraged by the Lemkin Institute’s use of Mr. Lemkin’s name, especially in the context of the Lemkin Institute’s anti-Israel agenda.”
EJA Chairman Rabbi Menachem Margolin has sharply condemned the institute’s actions and statements, saying it has “weaponized a sacred legacy against the very people it was meant to protect.”
“The Lemkin Institute was established to prevent genocide — not to distort its definition or fuel antisemitic tropes,” Margolin said in a statement.
Raphael Lemkin was born in Poland in 1900 and eventually escaped the Nazis to the US, where he joined the War Department, documenting Nazi atrocities and preparing for the prosecution of Nazi crimes at the Nuremberg trials. He dedicated much of his life to making the world recognize the horrors of the Holocaust and designating mass murder as a crime which could be prosecuted through international law. Forty-nine members of his family, including his parents, were killed in the Holocaust. He died in 1959.
A 2017 article by James Loeffler, who now teaches at Johns Hopkins University, described what he called “the forgotten Zionism of Raphael Lemkin.” Loeffler noted that while “dead international lawyers rarely become celebrities,” Lemkin “has emerged as a potent symbol for activists and politicians across the world.”
Loeffler traced Lemkin’s work as an editor and columnist of a Jewish publication, Zionist World. “The task of the Jewish people is … [to become] a permanent national majority in its own national home,” Lemkin wrote in one such column.
“It is not enough to know Zionism,” Lemkin wrote in another column quoted by Loeffler. “One must imbibe its spirit, one must make Zionism a part of one’s very own ‘self,’ and be prepared to make sacrifices on its behalf.”
Elisa von Joeden-Forgey, founder and executive director of the Lemkin Institute, told the online news site EJewish Philanthropy that her organization was named after Lemkin to “bring his name back into public discourse” but “there was no clear person to contact” when naming the institute in 2021.
“We don’t want to cause unhappiness for anybody in the Lemkin family. We did ask to know what legal basis exists for the complaint, and we have not received any response to that specific question,” she added.
RSS
China Expands Influence Campaign Targeting Israel as Way to Hurt US, Study Finds

Chinese and US flags flutter outside the building of an American company in Beijing, China, April 8, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Tingshu Wang
China has increasingly used state media and covert campaigns to spread anti-Israel and antisemitic narratives in the United States, according to a new study.
The Institute for National Security Studies (INSS), an Israeli think tank, has released a report examining how China’s state media portrays Israel and the United States as solely responsible for the war in Gaza, depicting them as destabilizing actors while spreading anti-Israel and antisemitic messages.
“It is evident that China and its proxies play a significant role in the current wave of antisemitism and anti-Israel sentiment in the United States,” Ofir Dayan, a research associate in the Israel-China Policy Center at INSS, writes in the report.
According to Dayan, China’s dissemination of anti-Israel narratives is not intended to directly harm Israel but rather to undermine the US, while preserving its valuable diplomatic and economic ties with Jerusalem.
“Israel is used as a tool to advance Beijing’s claim that Washington destabilizes both the international system and the regions where it operates,” the report says.
While China’s primary aim is to target the United States, Israel ends up suffering “collateral damage” as a result, the study finds.
In advancing these objectives, INSS explains that China covertly conducts influence campaigns across the United States, promoting anti-Israel and antisemitic narratives, including conspiracy theories about “Jewish control” of politics, the economy, and the media.
On Monday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu accused China, along with Qatar, of orchestrating a campaign in Western media to “besiege” Israel by undermining its allies’ support.
There is “an effort to besiege — not isolate as much as besiege Israel — that is orchestrated by the same forces that supported Iran,” Netanyahu said, speaking to a delegation of 250 US state legislators at the Foreign Ministry in Jerusalem.
“One is China. And the other is Qatar. They are organizing an attack on Israel … [through] the social media of the Western world and the United States,” the Israeli leader continued. “We will have to counter it, and we will counter it with our own methods.”
According to the INSS report, China’s role in promoting anti-Israel activity in the United States is evident in the narratives it spreads — both publicly, through state-run media, and covertly, through targeted cyber operations.
For example, China Daily — the official news outlet of the Chinese Communist Party — has been openly critical of Israel since the start of the Gaza war, using its coverage to attack Washington and depict it as a destabilizing force fueling conflict worldwide.
The Chinese news outlet has also published articles contending that neither Israel nor the United States care about Gazans or Israeli hostages held by Hamas, accusing the US of instigating wars for domestic political gain, and attempting to create divisions in American society by portraying support for Israel as unpopular.
The study also explains how China exploited the wave of protests across US universities following the Hamas-led invasion of and massacre across southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, to deepen divisions within American society.
It portrayed anti-Israel protesters as calm and peaceful defenders of free expression, while depicting pro-Israel demonstrators as violent.
“Posts on heavily censored social media in China were even more blatant, and at times antisemitic, claiming that Israel controls the United States and drawing comparisons between Israel and Nazi Germany,” the report says.
“Some referred to Israel as a ‘terrorist organization,’ while describing Hamas as a resistance organization and spreading unfounded conspiracy theories,” it continues.
In the past, the US State Department has accused China of promoting conspiracy theories and antisemitism within the United States.
China also carries out covert influence campaigns through targeted cyber operations, aimed in part at shaping Israel’s image in the United States and undermining US-Israel relations.
According to the study, China-linked cyber campaigns have used troll networks to spread malicious content about Israel, disseminating antisemitic messages to American audiences that falsely claim Jewish and Israeli control over US politics.
RSS
US Lawmakers Slam Zohran Mamdani Over Pledge to Scrap IHRA Definition of Antisemitism

Candidate Zohran Mamdani speaks during a Democratic New York City mayoral primary debate, June 4, 2025, in New York, US. Photo: Yuki Iwamura/Pool via REUTERS
Two members of the US Congress on Wednesday slammed New York City Democratic mayoral nominee Zohran Mamdani after he pledged to abandon a widely used definition of antisemitism if elected.
Reps. Mike Lawler, a Republican from New York, and Josh Gottheimer, a Democrat from New Jersey, said in a joint statement that Mamdani’s plan to scrap the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism is “dangerous” and “shameful.” The IHRA definition — adopted by dozens of US states, dozens of countries, and hundreds of governing institutions, including the European Union and United Nations — has been a cornerstone of global efforts to monitor and combat antisemitic hate.
“Walking away from IHRA is not just reckless — it undermines the fight against antisemitism at a time when hate crimes are spiking,” Lawler said in his own statement. Gottheimer echoed that concern, arguing that dismantling the definition “sends exactly the wrong message to Jewish communities who feel under siege.”
The backlash followed Mamdani’s comments last week to Bloomberg News in which he vowed, if elected, to reverse New York City Mayor Eric Adams’ executive order in June adopting the IHRA standard. Mamdani, a democratic socialist and state assemblymember, argued that the IHRA definition blurs the line between antisemitism and political criticism of Israel and risks chilling free speech.
“I am someone who has supported and support BDS [the boycott, divestment, and sanctions movement against Israel] and nonviolent approaches to address Israeli state violence,” he said at the time.
The BDS movement seeks to isolate Israel from the international community as a step toward its eventual elimination. Leaders of the movement have repeatedly stated their goal is to destroy the world’s only Jewish state.
“Let’s be extremely clear: the BDS movement is antisemitic. Efforts to delegitimize Israel’s right to exist are antisemitic. And refusing to outright condemn the violent call to ‘globalize the intifada’ — offering only that you’d discourage its use — is indefensible,” Lawler and Gottheimer said in their joint statement, referring to Mamdani’s recent partial backtracking after his initial defense of the use of the phrase “globalize the intifada.”
“There are no two sides about the meaning of this slogan — it is hate speech, plain and simple,” the lawmakers continued. “Given the sharp spike in antisemitic violence, families across the Tri-State area should be alarmed. Leaders cannot equivocate when it comes to standing against antisemitism and the incitement of violence against Jews.”
IHRA — an intergovernmental organization comprising dozens of countries including the US and Israel — adopted the “working definition” of antisemitism in 2016. Since then, the definition has been widely accepted by Jewish groups and lawmakers across the political spectrum.
According to the definition, antisemitism “is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.” It provides 11 specific, contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere. Beyond classic antisemitic behavior associated with the likes of the medieval period and Nazi Germany, the examples include denial of the Holocaust and newer forms of antisemitism targeting Israel such as demonizing the Jewish state, denying its right to exist, and holding it to standards not expected of any other democratic state.
In a statement, the Mamdani campaign confirmed that the candidate would not use the IHRA definition of antisemitism, which major civil rights groups have said is essential for fighting an epidemic of anti-Jewish hatred sweeping across the US.
“A Mamdani administration will approach antisemitism in line with the Biden administration’s National Strategy to Counter Antisemitism — a strategy that emphasizes education, community engagement, and accountability to reverse the normalization of antisemitism and promote open dialogue,” Mamdani spokesperson Dora Pekec told the New York Post.
Lawler and Gottheimer’s pushback comes as Congress debates the Antisemitism Awareness Act, legislation that would codify IHRA’s definition into federal law. Advocacy groups such as the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) have urged lawmakers to back the measure, warning that antisemitic incidents have surged nationwide over the past two years and having a clear definition will better enable law enforcement and others to combat it.
For Mamdani, the controversy over the IHRA definition adds a new flashpoint to a mayoral campaign already drawing national attention.
A little-known politician before this year’s Democratic primary campaign, Mamdani is an outspoken supporter of the BDS movement. He has also repeatedly refused to recognize Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state, falsely suggesting the country does not offer “equal rights” for all its citizens, and promised to arrest Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu if he visits New York.
Mamdani especially came under fire during the summer when he initially defended the phrase “globalize the intifada”— which references previous periods of sustained Palestinian terrorism against Jews and Israels and has been widely interpreted as a call to expand political violence — by invoking the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising during World War II. However, Mamdani has since backpedaled on his support for the phrase, saying that he would discourage his supporters from using the slogan.