RSS
Iran, Israel, and the Houthis: What’s Happening on the World’s Seas
Houthi military helicopter flies over the Galaxy Leader cargo ship in the Red Sea in this photo released Nov. 20, 2023. Photo: Houthi Military Media/Handout via REUTERS
The global maritime arena is undergoing a period of change and upheaval. This includes Iranian aggression and Houthi piracy, conflict in the Black Sea, maritime border disputes over energy deposits in the Mediterranean Sea, tensions in the South China Sea, Russian and Iranian shadow ships, drought in the Panama Canal, and new emissions standards for vessels, all of which are hindering global trade while adding to the cost of energy transit and insurance.
Nathan Bowditch’s American Practical Navigator is required reading. First published in 1802, the book remains a comprehensive guide to maritime navigation and is still studied at the top naval academies.
In the phrase “The seas are confused,” Bowditch describes a state in which waves come from multiple and sometimes unpredictable directions, often due to storms. He could have been describing the current state of global maritime affairs, which in recent years has faced challenges on many fronts. These include increased threats to critical maritime straits from Iranian and Houthi attacks; maritime conflict in the Black Sea between Russia and Ukraine; emerging major power competition and tensions in the South China Sea; maritime border disputes over energy deposits in the Mediterranean Sea; climate change and droughts affecting the Panama Canal; and the rise of new environmental standards and emissions quotas for vessels that affect their profitability.
Countries wishing to navigate these “confused seas” must develop a cohesive maritime strategy to adapt to the challenges and capitalize on the opportunities they create.
In recent months, Houthi attacks have been disruptive to global trade, emphasizing the need for global cooperation to ensure the security of critical maritime straits. Backed by Iran, the Houthis have intensified maritime provocations in the Red Sea and near the Bab-el-Mandeb Strait, conducting drone and missile attacks on both commercial and military ships and engaging in piracy.
The Houthis’ maritime campaign began on November 19, 2023, when their forces captured the commercial vessel M/V GALAXY LEADER, and they have since conducted dozens of similar attacks. These actions led major shipping companies to bypass the Red Sea by rerouting their vessels around the African continent, creating delays of 10-30 days to ongoing shipments.
US CENTCOM has labeled these hostile actions an overt menace to both international trade and maritime security, though trade has largely adjusted to them. Despite the attacks, global oil prices are now lower than they were before the war began. This is due primarily to predictions of decreased economic growth in China and the quick reaction of US oil producers, which set new records of production and exports to compensate for any loss.
The US, in collaboration with other countries, has been actively addressing the recent escalations in the Bab-el-Mandeb Strait; other maritime powers have shied away from direct conflict while hoping to profit from these events. The US, UK, and other coalition partners have conducted several strikes against Houthi positions. The intervention of the US and other coalition ships, including the USS CARNEY (DDG-64) and USS MASON (DDG-87), an American destroyer, limited the damage of potentially catastrophic Houthi missile and drone attacks. These strikes are unlikely to deter future Houthi aggression; rather, by destroying military targets used in attacking shipping, they are designed to degrade the Houthis’ ability to conduct future operations successfully.
The European Union has approved a naval mission to protect Red Sea shipping that will be in operation on February 19. The People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) People’s Liberation Army Navy, by contrast, has chosen a cautious path in the hope of avoiding conflict. The PRC is hoping the restricted use of the Suez Canal will translate into more traffic on its overland Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), which connects it with Europe through Russia, Pakistan, and the Central Asian states. The BRI initiative is one of the most extensive development programs in history but has been rife with corruption, human rights violations, and major cost overruns. So far, the BRI has forced the PRC to spend $104 billion in bailouts for the failed projects that comprise it. As such, the current Red Sea crisis, which is forcing trade to seek alternate routes, has been a boon to the PRC.
Iran’s activities near the Straits of Hormuz have also added to regional maritime tensions. Although Iran tends to use surrogates when being provocative, it is increasingly choosing direct action.
Last year, the M/V Suez Rajan (recently renamed the ST. NIKOLAS) was at the center of a sanctions violation incident in which it was illegally carrying crude oil from Iran to Turkey. The US intercepted the tanker and diverted it to Houston, Texas, where the oil was confiscated. On January 11, 2024, the vessel found itself in the midst of a retaliatory action by Iran in the Gulf of Oman. The Iranian navy took control of the ST. NIKOLAS, detaining the vessel along with its crew of 15 and escorting them to Iran. Like the GALAXY LEADER, the ST. NIKOLAS and her crew remain detained. The fact that Iran feels more emboldened to take such direct action is a red flag for US deterrence in the Arab Gulf region.
Away from the Middle East, the Russian invasion of Ukraine has created another volatile maritime arena in the Black Sea region. The Black Sea is a vital shipping route for Ukraine. The war has disrupted the country’s ability to export goods, including grain. The conflict has also introduced new maritime war technologies, such as unmanned “suicide” vessels. As these have proven very effective, they are likely to be a permanent feature of future maritime conflicts.
More ominously, the conflict has led to the deployment of naval mines, which pose a serious threat to people and shipping routes. The extent of mining operations remains unknown, but a recent article in the Guardian estimates that Russia has deployed an estimated 400 to 600 sea mines in the maritime areas of Ukraine. Chains moor some mines while others float free, though even the fixed mines can come free due to weather, adding to the danger. Mines are indiscriminate. They are designed to detonate upon contact with the hull of virtually any ship. Even if the conflict were to end soon, it would take years to de-mine the Black Sea.
The Russian invasion of Ukraine has also created a global “dark fleet” problem. One way Russia has been circumventing US and EU sanctions since 2020 has been to turn to a fleet of around 1,400 “shadow ships” that operate outside regulations. These merchant ships are old and inadequately insured, their true ownership is concealed, and their flags of registry are often swapped. These shadow ships are a hazard to themselves, other ships, and the environment. They are used in newly created alternative logistics networks by countries currently banned from the normal global system, including Russia, Iran, North Korea, and Venezuela.
Much of this dark fleet is made up of crude oil tankers. These ships are estimated to carry as much as 10% of the world’s crude oil trade. However, in addition to allowing the circumvention of oil sanctions, the dark fleet also enables an illicit arms trade and the transportation of equipment used in the development of nuclear technologies. The fact that this dark fleet may be carrying nuclear technologies to Iran, and that Iran itself has been employing such a fleet for its own oil exports, closely ties the Russia-Ukraine war to the growing Iranian threat to the maritime straits in the Middle East.
Adding to these new challenges are existing trends that have been exacerbated in recent years, such as the conflict over Taiwan and great power competition over the South China Sea, which remains a focal point of international tensions. These tensions are largely fueled by the PRC’s territorial claims and assertive maritime activities, which it views as vital to maintaining the security of its maritime trade routes and to the pushing away of competing claims by US-backed rivals.
The South China Sea region, which is known for its strategic maritime routes and significant untapped natural resources, has witnessed increased militarization and island-building efforts by the PRC. These efforts have challenged the sovereignty claims of neighboring Southeast Asian nations and prompted concerns over freedom of navigation. This assertiveness has led to frequent confrontations with the US and other global powers that conduct freedom of navigation operations (FONOPs) to challenge the PRC’s maritime claims as each side tests its rival’s red lines.
The relationship between the PRC and the Philippines has become particularly strained. Despite its relatively modest military capabilities, the Philippines has been vocal in opposing the PRC’s territorial assertions, especially around features like the Scarborough Shoal and the Spratly Islands. Incidents involving the harassment of Filipino fishermen by Chinese vessels, the presence of large fleets of Chinese maritime militia, and the PRC’s disregard for the 2016 arbitral tribunal ruling that invalidated China’s expansive claims under the “nine-dash line” theory have all contributed to the tensions.
US strategists fear that the PRC is using its conflict with the Philippines as a testing ground to improve its maritime capabilities and experience, as well as to send a message to larger powers. The oft-quoted Chinese idiom, “Kill the chicken to scare the monkey,” seems to apply to this strategy.
Other than great power politics, another source of increased maritime conflict that has fueled tensions in the South China Sea derives from the rise of cheaper and more efficient drilling and exploration technologies for oil and gas deposits in the deep sea. Over the past two decades, major deep-sea energy discoveries around the world have pushed countries to better define their previously neglected exclusive economic zones (EEZ) through maritime border delimitation 200 nautical miles from shore, creating overlaps and tensions with neighboring countries. Recent tensions between Turkey and Cyprus, Guyana and Venezuela, Ghana and the Ivory Coast, and in the South China Sea were exacerbated by the promise of rich offshore energy deposits. These tensions were also sharpened by weak definitions and even weaker enforcement of the UN Convention of the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) regarding how EEZ borders are set and who gets to set them. As a result, the concept of “international waters” is almost gone from the Mediterranean Sea, the South China Sea, or the Arctic Ocean, as each littoral country tries to lay claim to as much of its offshore area as possible.
Not all current maritime problems have arisen from conflicts. The Panama Canal is grappling with significant drought problems that are affecting its operational capacity and thus the global shipping industry. Drought has caused dire declines in water levels in the Alajuela and Gatun lakes, which play a crucial role in the canal’s function. The decrease in water reserves has necessitated reducing the number of ships passing through the canal. Additionally, the canal faces the challenge of balancing water usage between its operations and providing for local cities, including Panama City, as these lakes and rivers also serve as vital water sources for those areas.
The ongoing drought has also led to restrictions on the maximum ship depth allowed in the canal. Large vessels must now take alternative routes, like the Drake Passage or the Magellan Straits. Maersk Lines, one of the world’s largest shipping companies, has used a “land bridge” by moving containers from ships to trucks and trains that cross the isthmus instead of taking the longer shipping route. All this significantly adds to time, costs, and environmental impact.
The longer routes, necessary wartime insurance, and environmental compliance measures have all added to the likelihood of delays, disruptions, and costs. Vessel war insurance, which usually hovers around 0.02% of the cost of the vessel, has risen to 0.75% and, in some cases, as much as 1.0%. For a large container ship, the extra insurance can cost shippers an extra $1 million or more.
While climate change is creating challenges to international shipping, the solutions to climate change are also rife with challenges to the industry, especially when it comes to laws and regulations regarding emissions reduction. The United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) has called for “a just and equitable transition” to a decarbonized shipping industry and full decarbonization by 2050. Global shipping regulations like the International Maritime Organization’s (IMO) regulations from 2020 have been implemented to address this. IMO 2020 mandates a significant reduction in the sulfur content of marine fuels, from 3.5% to 0.5%, to decrease marine pollution and protect coastal communities.
Despite these efforts, UNCTAD’s recent review of maritime transportation says CO2 emissions caused by the shipping industry are getting worse, not better. UNCTAD points to the rising average ship age – just over 22 years – which adds to the pollution problem. These older ships cannot be retrofitted with emissions controls and remain profitable. Thus, the industry is relying on recapitalization (replacement of older fleets), which has added to demand and backlogs for builders.
The confluence of headwinds described above will likely raise transport costs and affect shippers throughout the coming year, but they will also help the current global shipping recession come to an end. CNBC reports that Vessel-Operating Common Carriers (VOCC) like Maersk, COSCO, and Evergreen are anticipating a rise in rates to levels not seen since before the COVID disruptions of 2021 and 2022. While it is true that the industry has been in a slump, with rates halved since the pandemic, industry experts forecast that current conflicts and other challenges will end the freight recession by the third quarter of 2024.
Regional provocations and environmental challenges mark the “confused seas” of the maritime landscape, but the international community’s collective action, the shipping industry’s resilience, and regional geopolitical responses to these challenges will determine the future of the global maritime commons.
CDR. David Levy, a retired US Navy Commander and former US diplomat, is a senior research fellow at the BESA Center. He was Director of Theater Security Cooperation for US Naval Forces Central Command and was US Air and Naval Attaché in Tunis. CDR. Levy is a former RAND Corp. Federal Executive Fellow and a Ph.D. candidate at Bar-Ilan University in the Politics Department.
Dr. Elai Rettig is an assistant professor in the Department of Political Studies and a senior research fellow at the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies at Bar-Ilan University. He specializes in energy geopolitics and national security. A version of this article was originally published by The BESA Center.
The post Iran, Israel, and the Houthis: What’s Happening on the World’s Seas first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Jewish Synagogue, Holocaust Memorial Vandalized in Poland After Politician Denies Holocaust
An antisemitic slur spray-painted on the ruins of a former synagogue in Dukla, Poland. Photo: World Jewish Restitution Organization
Two Jewish sites in Dukla, Poland, were vandalized over the weekend mere days after Polish member of the European Parliament (MEP) Grzegorz Braun claimed gas chambers at the former Auschwitz-Birkenau concentration camp were fake and repeated an antisemitic blood libel in a live radio interview.
Vandals spray-painted the word “F–k” followed by a Star of David on the ruins of a former synagogue that was destroyed by the Nazis during the Holocaust, and a memorial commemorating Holocaust victims located at the entrance of the Jewish cemetery in Dukla was defaced with a swastika and the word “Palestine,” according to the World Jewish Restitution Organization (WJRO). The memorial honors Jews of Dukla and the surrounding areas who were murdered by Nazis during the Holocaust.
The two Jewish sites in Dukla are cared for by the Foundation for the Preservation of Jewish Heritage in Poland (FODZ), which was established in 2002 by the Union of Jewish Communities in Poland and the WJRO to protect and commemorate Poland’s Jewish heritage sites.
“These hateful acts are not only antisemitic, but they are also attempts to erase Jewish history and desecrate memory,” said WJRO President Gideon Taylor in a released statement on Tuesday. “Polish authorities must take swift and serious action to identify the perpetrators and ensure the protection of Jewish heritage sites in Dukla and across the country.”
“The vandalism of Jewish sites in Dukla—with swastikas and anti-Israel slurs—is not an isolated act,” insisted Jack Simony, director general of the Auschwitz Jewish Center Foundation (AJCF), in a statement to The Algemeiner. The nonprofit focuses on preserving the memory of the Jewish community in Oświęcim (Auschwitz) and maintains the Auschwitz Jewish Center, the last remaining synagogue in town.
“While we cannot say definitively that it [the vandalism] was sparked by Grzegorz Braun’s Holocaust denial, his rhetoric contributes to an atmosphere where hatred is emboldened and truth is under assault,” added Simony. “Braun’s lies are not harmless — they are dangerous. Holocaust denial fuels antisemitism and, too often, violence. This is why Holocaust education matters … because when we fail to confront lies, we invite their consequences. Memory must be defended, not only for the sake of the past, but for the safety of our future.”
On July 10, a ceremony was held commemorating the 84th anniversary of the 1941 Jedwabne massacre, when hundreds of Polish Jews were massacred – mostly by their neighbors – in the northeastern town in German-occupied Poland. The ceremony was attended by dignitaries and faith leaders including Poland’s Chief Rabbi Michael Schudrich and Israeli Deputy Ambassador Bosmat Baruch. Groups of anti-Israel and far-right activists — including MEP Braun and his supporters – tried to disrupt the event by holding banners with antisemitic slogans and blocking the vehicles of the attendees, according to Polish radio.
Hours later, during a live radio broadcast, Braun falsely claimed the Auschwitz gas chambers were “a lie” and the Auschwitz-Birkenau Memorial and Museum was promoting “pseudo-history.” He also claimed that Jewish “ritual murder is a fact.” Polish prosecutors launched an investigation into Braun’s comments, they announced that same day. Under Article 55 of the Act on the Institute of National Remembrance (IPN), Holocaust denial is a criminal offense in Poland.
The Auschwitz-Birkenau Memorial and Museum issued a swift condemnation of Braun’s remarks and said it intents to pursue legal action. The Institute of National Remembrance — which is the largest research, educational and archival institution in Poland – also denounced Braun’s remarks, saying there is “well-documented” evidence supporting the existence of gas chambers. His comments were also condemned by the Embassy of Israel in Poland, Polish Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski and the US Embassy in Warsaw, which said that his actions “distort history, desecrate memory, or spread antisemitism.” AJCF called on the European Parliament to consider disciplinary measures against Braun, including potential censure or expulsion.
Auschwitz Jewish Center Director Tomek Kuncewicz said Braun’s comments are “an act of violence against truth, against survivors, and against the legacy of our shared humanity.” AJCF Chairman Simon Bergson called the politician’s remarks “blatant and baseless lies,” while Simony described them as “a calculated act of antisemitic incitement” that “must be met with legal consequences and universal moral condemnation.”
The post Jewish Synagogue, Holocaust Memorial Vandalized in Poland After Politician Denies Holocaust first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Coalition of 400 Jewish Orgs and Synagogues Urge Teachers Union to Reverse Decision Cutting Ties with ADL
Anti-Defamation League CEO Jonathan Greenblatt. Photo Credit: ADL.
Following a vote by the National Education Association (NEA) on July 6 to end its relationship with the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), 400 Jewish communal groups, education organizations, and religious institutions have come together to call for the influential teachers union to change course.
“We are writing to express our deep concerns about the growing level of antisemitic activity within teachers’ unions, particularly since the Hamas terrorist attacks in Israel on October 7, 2023,” the letter to NEA President Becky Pringle stated. “Passage of New Business Item (NBI) 39 at the National Education Association (NEA) Representative Assembly this past weekend, which shockingly calls for the boycott of the Anti-Defamation League, is just the latest example of open hostility toward Jewish educators, students and families coming from national and local teachers’ unions and their members.”
In addition to the ADL, signatories of the letter included American Jewish Committee (AJC), Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, Jewish Federations of North America, #EndJewHatred, American Jewish Congress, B’nai B’rith International, CAMERA (Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting & Analysis), Combat Antisemitism Movement, Democratic Majority for Israel, StandWithUs, Simon Wiesenthal Center, Zioness Movement, and Zionist Organization of America (ZOA).
The group told Pringle that “we have heard directly from NEA members who have shared their experiences ranging from explicit and implicit antisemitism within the union to a broader pattern of insensitivity toward legitimate concerns of Jewish members – including at the recently concluded Representative Assembly. We are also deeply troubled by a broader pattern of union activity over the past 20 months that has targeted or alienated Jewish members and the wider Jewish community.”
The letter to Pringle included an addendum providing examples of objectionable rhetoric. These named such incidents as the Oakland Education Association (OEA) putting out a statement calling for “an end to the occupation of Palestine” and the Massachusetts Teachers Association (MTA) accusing Israel of genocide.
The coalition of 400 organizations urged the NEA to “take immediate action” and suggested such steps as rejecting NBI 39, issuing a “strong condemnation” of antisemitism within the union, drafting a plan to counter ongoing antisemitism in affiliate chapters, and opposing “any effort to use an educator’s support for the existence of Israel as a means to attack their identity.”
ADL CEO and National Director Jonathan Greenblatt wrote on X that “Excluding @ADL’s educational resources from schools is not just an attack on our org, but on the entire Jewish community. We urge the @NEAToday Executive Committee to reverse this biased, fringe effort and reaffirm its commitment to supporting all Jewish students and educators.”
The post Coalition of 400 Jewish Orgs and Synagogues Urge Teachers Union to Reverse Decision Cutting Ties with ADL first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Zohran Mamdani Won’t Condemn Calls for Violence Against Jews; Why Are Jewish Leaders Supporting Him?
Zohran Mamdani. Photo: Ron Adar / SOPA Images via Reuters Connect
In the wake of Zohran Mamdani’s surge in New York City politics, a disturbing trend has emerged: prominent Jewish leaders are being urged to join “Jews for Zohran,” a newly formed effort to legitimize a candidate whose record and rhetoric are alarmingly out of step with Jewish communal values.
In a city that’s home to the largest Jewish population outside of Israel — and where antisemitic incidents are on the rise — this is a profound mistake.
Mamdani has refused to explicitly condemn the slogan “Globalize the Intifada,” which has been widely understood as a call to violence against Jews. His defenders insist it’s a symbolic plea for Palestinian rights. But nuance offers little comfort when the phrase glorifies violent uprisings, and is routinely chanted alongside calls for Israel’s destruction.
Institutions such as the US Holocaust Memorial Museum and watchdogs like StopAntisemitism.org have made it clear: attempts to sanitize violent language must be firmly rejected.
Mamdani’s vocal support for the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement is equally troubling. BDS does not merely critique Israeli policy; it seeks to economically isolate and politically delegitimize the Jewish state. When a candidate stands against the most visible symbol of Jewish survival — Israel — while brushing off violent slogans as misunderstood metaphors, we must ask what message this sends to our communities.
The answer should be clear. Jewish New Yorkers were the targets of over half the city’s reported hate crimes last year. From Crown Heights to Midtown, visible Jews have been harassed, assaulted, and mocked. Mamdani was flagged by national antisemitism monitors in December for promoting material that mocked Hanukkah. This is not abstract. This is personal, present, and dangerous.
Yes, Mamdani has pledged to increase hate crime funding from $3 million to $26 million. But that’s not enough. The Jewish community — especially now — needs more than budgetary gestures. We require moral clarity, as Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel powerfully stated: “Morally speaking, there is no limit to the concern one must feel for the suffering of human beings, that indifference to evil is worse than evil itself….”
Moral clarity demands more than financial promises, it requires principled rejection of rhetoric that endangers Jews. Belonging isn’t forged by slogans; it’s proven through sustained empathy, shared responsibility, and unwavering commitment to safety.
Calls for Jewish leaders to publicly support Mamdani, including those made to officials like Brad Lander and Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY), aim to provide political cover for a candidate whose worldview clashes with core Jewish values. These aren’t harmless endorsements. They’re symbols. And symbols matter.
Endorsing Mamdani sends a troubling signal: that political convenience or progressive branding outweighs communal safety and historical memory. When Jewish leaders align with someone who flirts with the delegitimization of Jewish statehood and refuses to condemn slogans rooted in violence, they are telling our adversaries that our moral lines are negotiable.
New York’s Jewish community has long been a moral compass in American politics. What happens here echoes across the nation. If our leaders can be cajoled into supporting a candidate like Mamdani, what message does that send to Jews in swing districts, smaller cities, and across college campuses? It normalizes equivocation. It emboldens the fringe. It tells the next generation that Jewish dignity is up for debate.
This is about more than Mamdani. It’s about whether Jewish pride and Jewish safety remain non-negotiable pillars of our political participation. Some have argued that this is simply politics as usual — that strategic alliances are part of coalition-building. But the Jewish people know better than most that what begins as a small compromise can metastasize into a much greater danger.
Former Democratic Councilman Rory Lancman said it best: “If ever there was a time to put principle over party, this is it.” He’s right. And that’s why this moment requires Jewish leaders to speak not just as political actors, but as moral stewards.
Jewish leaders are free to engage with any candidate they choose. But engagement is not endorsement. One can listen, challenge, and debate without aligning oneself publicly with a candidate whose positions cross communal red lines. Outreach does not require complicity.
If Jewish political figures join “Jews for Zohran,” they risk helping mainstream dangerous ideologies. They risk fracturing communal unity even further at a time when Jewish communal unity is our best defense. They risk allowing today’s ambiguity to become tomorrow’s regret.
Jewish history teaches us the cost of silence, of appeasement, and of looking away. We cannot afford those mistakes again — not in this city, not in this era; history is beginning to repeat itself and we cannot allow that to happen.
To every Jewish leader now weighing their public stance: choose principle. Choose safety. Choose the kind of moral leadership our tradition demands; reject the logic of “Jews for Zohran.” The stakes are too high — and the message matters.
Samuel J. Abrams is a professor of politics at Sarah Lawrence College and a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.
The post Zohran Mamdani Won’t Condemn Calls for Violence Against Jews; Why Are Jewish Leaders Supporting Him? first appeared on Algemeiner.com.