RSS
Iran’s Dominos Are Falling; Why Are We Pulling Back?
Members of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) march during a parade to commemorate the anniversary of the Iran-Iraq war (1980-88), in Tehran on Sep. 22, 2010. Photo: Reuters/Morteza Nikoubazl/File photo
Iran’s rapidly weakening deck of cards in Syria and across the region provides an opportunity for the United States to push the momentum against Iran and its proxies. However, at this critical juncture, the United States is drawing down its regional troop presence, limiting its ability to effectively counter Iran’s regional aggression.
The Biden administration announced on September 27 that the current US-led military mission in Iraq will come to an end by September 2025, followed by US troops operating in some fashion in Iraq through 2026. Despite American officials’ claim that this move is not a withdrawal, it certainly bears all the hallmarks of one.
Key US facilities at Al-Asad Air Base and Baghdad International Airport will be shuttered within months. After 2026, few, if any, US troops would remain in the strategically vital country, at a time of growing regional escalation, impeding our ability to impact events on the ground in both Iraq and Syria.
The ramifications of departing Iraq will be significant — in Iraq and beyond.
A minimized US presence in Iraq would increase Iranian influence there, strengthen and embolden Iranian-backed Iraqi militias, and limit the United States’ ability to sustain forces in Syria. This would pave the way for Iran to accelerate its transfer of weapons, cash, and terror operatives to its proxies in Syria and Lebanon via Iraq. Not only might this save Bashar al-Asad in Syria, but it could also pave the way for Hezbollah — currently on its back heels — to be rearmed and revitalized.
In Iraq, the US presence has had a cooling effect on Iran’s ring of fire proxy strategy. By comparison, Iran has provided an abundance of sophisticated ballistic missiles to its Houthi proxies in Yemen, enabling them to wreak havoc on global shipping in the Red Sea. Buffeted by America’s presence in Iraq, though, Iran has provided only short-range rockets and drones to its Iraq-based terror proxies and, fearing reprisals, has privately urged caution to avoid provoking Washington.
Without this security buffer, Iran’s ability to expand its footprint in Iraq will only grow — which is likely why some Iraqi officials reportedly oppose a US withdrawal.
A reduced US force posture in Iraq would also jeopardize America’s presence in Syria — providing a major boon to Tehran. An Iraq draw-down would impede the ability to sustain the nearly 1,000 US service members in the northeast of Syria, since they depend on access via Iraq for basic logistics such as food and fuel. American troops in Iraq also serve to retaliate against attacks on US forces in Syria.
A draw-down in Iraq would, therefore, likely lead to a withdrawal from Syria as well — creating further vacuums for Iran to exploit. At least one US base in eastern Syria is reportedly near a key Iranian-Hezbollah smuggling axis across the Syria-Iraq border. Another US base, Al-Tanf, blocks what would otherwise be the shortest and fastest land smuggling route from Iran to Iraq, then Syria and Lebanon.
With a greater footprint in Iraq and freer access to Syria, Iran could beat back the current threat to Assad’s hold on power, and expand its weapons shipments to Hezbollah, as it has already sought to do in recent days. A Hezbollah rejuvenated by newfound arms pipelines risks scaling back the considerable Israeli successes against the terror group, enabling it to again threaten Israel and other US partners.
Regardless of the merits of a troop scale-down in Iraq, timing matters. The message such a move would send to both friends and allies, amid a staggering 207 Iran-backed attacks on US personnel in the region in the last year alone, would itself be counterproductive to America’s interests. Withdrawing from Iraq at a time of spiraling regional escalation risks sending a message to Iran that imposing sufficient costs on the United States will result in concessions.
This signal would only ring louder in Tehran, given that Iran’s proxy network used Iraq as a staging ground to launch the deadliest attack on American soldiers in the region in years. In January, an Iraq-based Iranian proxy used an Iranian-made drone to kill three US servicemembers and injure more than 30 troops stationed in Jordan along the Iraqi border.
Withdrawal from Iraq at a time of intensifying regional conflict, particularly in neighboring Syria, would also send a disheartening message to our allies and partners. Without American leadership and assets, the nearly 80 countries participating in the US-led counter-ISIL mission in Iraq would be significantly hamstrung, just as ISIL is showing signs of resurgence. In addition, Iranian proxies in Iraq have also directly attacked Israel over 40 times this year — an escalating threat to a key US partner, which demands more, not less, attention and engagement.
Past US withdrawals attest to the problems that come with timeline-based, rather than conditions-based, withdrawals.
As part of the 2008 US-Iraq Status of Forces Agreement, the United States committed to withdraw its troops from Iraq by the end of 2011. In the following months, insurgent violence escalated across the country, and within three years, the rise of the Islamic State led to US troops returning to Iraq.
In Afghanistan, against the advice of a bipartisan Congressionally-appointed panel and top US military leaders, the administration pursued a timeline-based withdrawal, which led to the Taliban seizing control of the country in short order. As then-head of US Central Command, General Frank McKenzie, USMC (ret.), said in a recent Jewish Institute for National Security of America webinar, the US decision to pursue a timeline-based withdrawal was at the heart of the botched pull-out.
Scaling down America’s presence in Iraq at the current moment will telegraph to Iran and other adversaries worldwide that the United States can be pushed out when attacked, inviting more attempts.
Lieutenant General Richard Mills, USMC (ret.) served as Commander of the First Marine Division, Deputy Commandant for Combat Development and Integration, and Commander of NATO’s Regional Command Southwest in Afghanistan. He was a participant in the 2019 Generals and Admirals Program with the Jewish Institute for National Security of America.
Yoni Tobin is a policy analyst at the Jewish Institute for National Security of America.
The post Iran’s Dominos Are Falling; Why Are We Pulling Back? first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Trump’s Middle East Envoy in Diplomatic Push to Help Reach Gaza Ceasefire Before Inauguration
Steve Witkoff, founder of the Witkoff Group, gestures during a rally for Donald Trump at Madison Square Garden, in New York, US, Oct. 27, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Andrew Kelly
Donald Trump’s Middle East envoy has traveled to Qatar and Israel to kick-start the US president-elect’s diplomatic push to help reach a Gaza ceasefire and hostage release deal before he takes office on Jan. 20, a source briefed on the talks told Reuters.
Steve Witkoff, who will officially take up the position under Trump’s administration, met separately in late November with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Qatar’s Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani, the source said.
Witkoff’s conversations appear aimed at building on nearly 14 months of unsuccessful diplomacy by the Biden administration, Qatar, and Egypt aimed at a lasting ceasefire between Israel and Palestinian terrorist group Hamas in Gaza and the release of dozens of Israeli hostages held in the enclave.
The meetings also signal that the Gulf state of Qatar has resumed as a key mediator after suspending its role last month, the source said.
The source added that Hamas negotiators would likely return to the Qatari capital Doha for more talks soon.
BIDEN’S EFFORTS
Biden’s aides have been aware of Witkoff’s contacts with Israeli, Qatari, and other Middle East officials and understand that Trump’s envoy supports a Gaza deal along the lines the administration has been pursuing, a US official said.
The Biden administration, rather than Witkoff, retains the US lead in efforts to revive negotiations towards a ceasefire in Gaza. Hamas leaders held talks with Egyptian security officials in Cairo on Sunday.
President Joe Biden’s team has kept the Trump camp updated, but the two sides have not worked together directly, the US official told Reuters, speaking on condition of anonymity.
The Biden administration does not see a need to coordinate with Witkoff because it regards his discussions with regional players as largely an effort to learn the issues rather than negotiations, the official said.
Trump’s transition team and representatives for Witkoff did not immediately respond to a request for comment about the meetings.
Trump warned on Monday there would be “hell to pay” in the Middle East if hostages held in the Gaza Strip were not released prior to his Jan. 20 inauguration.
WITKOFF’S REGIONAL TALKS
Witkoff is a real estate investor and Trump campaign donor with business ties to Qatar and other Gulf states, but he has no prior diplomatic experience.
He met Sheikh Mohammed, who also serves as foreign minister, in Doha on Nov 22.
“Both agreed a Gaza ceasefire is needed before Trump’s inauguration so that once the Trump administration takes office it can move onto other issues, like stabilizing Gaza and the region,” said the source, who was briefed on Witkoff’s meetings and spoke on the condition of anonymity.
Witkoff met Netanyahu in Israel on Nov 23.
Qatar’s foreign ministry and the Israeli prime minister’s office did not respond to Reuters’ request for comment.
Witkoff also met families of Israeli hostages, an Israeli official told Reuters.
He “spoke with them about Team Trump’s efforts to try and broker the deal before inauguration,” the official said.
Sheikh Mohammed traveled to Vienna on Nov. 24 to meet the director of Israel‘s Mossad spy agency David Barnea, who has led Israel‘s talks with Qatar over the last 14 months.
“There are plans for a subsequent round of indirect talks between Israel and Hamas to take place potentially in Doha soon, but no specific date has been set,” the source said.
Hamas’ negotiating team left Doha in recent weeks, Qatari officials said, after Washington objected to their presence. That followed Hamas’ rejection of a short-term ceasefire proposal after talks in mid-October.
The source said the Hamas’ negotiators were likely to return to Doha for new talks.
TRUMP’S WARNING
Speaking about Trump’s warning on Monday there would be “hell to pay” if hostages in Gaza were not released by his inauguration, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken told Reuters on Wednesday his comment was a “powerful reflection” of the urgency for a ceasefire and hostage deal among both Trump’s Republicans and Biden’s Democrats.
“We’re going to pursue every avenue we can in the time that we have left to try to get the hostages back and to get a ceasefire. And I think the president-elect’s statement reinforces that,” Blinken said.
The post Trump’s Middle East Envoy in Diplomatic Push to Help Reach Gaza Ceasefire Before Inauguration first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Wikipedia’s Quiet Revolution: How a Coordinated Group of Editors Reshaped the Israeli-Palestinian Narrative
Anti-Israel demonstrators rally amid the ongoing conflict between Israel and the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas, outside the White House in Washington, US, Nov. 4, 2023. Photo: REUTERS/Elizabeth Frantz
In an era dominated by search engines and instant information, Wikipedia holds an outsized influence. For millions of users, it is often the first — and sometimes the only — source of information on global events and historical contexts. Yet, as investigative journalist Ashley Rindsberg revealed in an explosive report, a quiet yet coordinated operation has taken root among the online encyclopedia’s editors, monumentally reshaping the way the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is perceived.
In a conversation with The Algemeiner this week, Rindsberg asserted that the campaign has “actually changed what appears to be the face of not just the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but of the entire justification for Israel’s right to exist and legitimacy, which is the real aim.”
In a detailed exposé published by the American media company Pirate Wires in October, Rindsberg outlined a coalition of approximately 40 Wikipedia editors that has systematically altered thousands of articles to tilt public opinion against Israel. These individuals, acting in concert, have executed around 850,000 edits on nearly 10,000 articles on the conflict, Rindsberg said, subtly shifting the ideological foundation of content related to Israel, the Palestinians, and even broader Middle Eastern geopolitics.
Ideological Subversion at Scale
“What we’ve seen with the Palestine-Israel articles topic area on Wikipedia is a wholesale shift in the ideological underpinning of those articles,” Rindsberg said.
The report cited one prominent example:
These efforts are remarkably successful. Type “Zionism” into Wikipedia’s search box and, aside from the main article on Zionism (and a disambiguation page), the auto-fill returns: “Zionism as settler colonialism,” “Zionism in the Age of the Dictators” (a book by a pro-Palestinian Trotskyite), “Zionism from the Standpoint of its Victims,” and “Racism in Israel.”
This is one of the most intensive, important pieces I’ve reported.
It shows how a powerful group of pro-Palestine Wikipedia editors have hijacked the Israel-Plaestine discourse. But it a template for how radical ideas get milled into the mainstream by the open encyclopedia. https://t.co/0d2EbaCZkf
— Ashley Rindsberg (@AshleyRindsberg) October 24, 2024
The edits in question range from minor tweaks — removing ties between Jewish history and the land of Israel — to major alterations, such as the omission of references to the atrocities committed during the Hamas-led attack across southern Israel last Oct. 7, including, most egregiously, references of rape and other acts of sexual violence.
The group has also reportedly sanitized articles on controversial historical figures, including those with ties to Nazi Germany such as the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem Haj Amin al-Husseini, as well as diluting mentions of human rights abuses by the Iranian regime.
In an article on “Jews,” for example, an editor removed the phrase “Land of Israel” from a key sentence on the origin of Jewish people. The article’s short description (that appears on search results) was changed from “Ethnoreligious group and nation from the Levant” to “Ethnoreligious group and cultural community.”
“Though subtle, the implication is significant: unlike nations, ‘cultural communities’ don’t require, or warrant, their own states,” Rindsberg wrote in his report.
The Role of Tech for Palestine
The operation has been bolstered by Tech for Palestine, a pro-Palestinian tech advocacy group. According to Rindsberg’s investigation, the group works in tandem with expert Wikipedia editors to execute coordinated editing campaigns. Editors then work in pairs or trios in a bid to evade detection, Rindsberg said in his report.
Tech for Palestine established a dedicated Wikipedia Collaboration channel designed to streamline their efforts. The initiative involved recruiting volunteers, guiding them through structured orientation sessions, and addressing challenges. The channel’s welcome message highlighted its strategic intent with a pointed question: “Why Wikipedia? It is a widely accessed resource, and its content influences public perception.”
A veteran editor known as Ïvana, whose username prominently features the anti-Israel red triangle often used to identify and target Jews, was appointed as the channel’s resident Wikipedia expert.
The editing group’s influence extends beyond conflict-related articles to include profiles of celebrities, aiming to amplify sympathetic narratives while muting criticisms of terrorist organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah.
Millions of readers are impacted. As Wikipedia articles frequently dominate search engine results, especially those of Google, the changes effectively dictate how global audiences understand the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
“Millions and millions of people are being fed information that has been essentially produced by a group of 40 pro-Palestine editors acting in a coordinated fashion,” Rindsberg told The Algemeiner.
The ramifications are vast. Wikipedia’s model of open, community-driven editing is predicated on the assumption of good faith. By altering historical narratives and omitting key details, they are not merely influencing opinion but actively reshaping reality for an unwitting global audience, and in this case, Rindsberg said, “completely altering the way the world sees the conflict as well as the region.”
After Rindsberg’s report was published, Ïvana was “summoned” — in her words — by Wikipedia’s Arbitration Committee and is reportedly facing a potential lifetime ban from the platform. Rindsberg told The Algemeiner that other investigations have also been launched as a result of the article.
The exposé was published weeks after Wikipedia editors decided that the article “Allegations of genocide in the 2023 Israeli attack on Gaza” should be renamed “Gaza genocide,” a change that appears to outwardly accuse Israel of committing genocide in the Palestinian enclave during its military campaign against Hamas terrorists.
In June, 43 Jewish organizations signed a letter sent to the Wikimedia Foundation lambasting Wikipedia’s conclusion that the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) is not a credible source for information about antisemitism and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
The post Wikipedia’s Quiet Revolution: How a Coordinated Group of Editors Reshaped the Israeli-Palestinian Narrative first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Jewish, Israeli Americans Face ‘Substantial Discrimination’ in US Job Market, New ADL Study Shows
Anti-Defamation League (ADL) CEO Jonathan Greenblatt speaks during the organization’s “Never Is Now” summit at the Jacob Javits Convention Center in Manhattan in New York City, US, Nov. 10, 2022. Photo: REUTERS/Jeenah Moon
Jewish and Israeli Americans are facing “substantial discrimination” in the US job market, being filtered out of hiring pools by recruiters who identify their heritage through their last names and resumes, a groundbreaking new study commissioned by the Anti-Defamation League’s (ADL) Center for Antisemitism Research has found.
Conducted by California State University Channel Islands economics professor Dr. Bryan Tomlin, the study, titled “Jewish and Israeli Americans Face Discrimination in the Job Market,” found that job seekers with names that “sound” Jewish and resumes that “signal” a likely Jewish background needed to send 24.2 percent more inquiries to potential employers to gain an equal number of positive responses as non-Jews. For Israelis, the number was higher, with 39 percent more inquiries required for receiving equal responses.
“Without the benefit of a study of this kind, it is difficult, if not impossible, to prove adverse treatment in the labor market based on one’s religion or cultural identity,” Tomlin said in a press release. “This study shows that Jewish and Israeli Americans may be missing out on job opportunities just because of their identity, not their qualifications, and it provides a start toward quantifying some of these more subtle but still harmful symptoms of antisemitism.”
Tomlin amassed his data by sending 3,000 “email inquiries” to companies across the US which posted job listings on Craigslist.org between May 2024 and October 2024. He wrote as a “Kristen Miller” — a traditional Western European name which functioned as the control— or Rebecca Cohen and Lia Avraham, signaling Jewish and Israeli origin, respectively, or what Tomlin described as “the Jewish and Israeli treatments.” Each applicant was given similar qualifications and other indicators of merit, including a bachelors degree in literature, fluency in foreign languages, and relevant job experiences.
However, their job experiences and academic concentrations differed. For example, the Western European control, “Kristen,” reported emphasizing English literature in her undergraduate studies, while the latter two reported studying Jewish and Israeli literature. Additionally, Kristen listed a “Martinelli’s Italian Diner and Deli” as a “previous restaurant experience,” while Rebecca and Lia listed an “Eli’s Jewish Diner and Deli” and “Zev’s Israeli Diner and Deli.” Similar cultural markers were included in other categories.
The results were striking. The Israeli and Jewish treatments “experienced a decrease in positive response rates relative to the control,” resulting in the study’s main finding that “to receive the same number of positive responses as the Western European Treatment, the Jewish Treatment must send 24.2 percent more inquiries, and the Israeli Treatment must send 39.0 percent more inquiries.”
It continued, “The results of this analysis suggest that antisemitism is not limited to the readily identifiable verbal/physical space as identified by the ADL and the FBI, but also exists within the labor market, as well. However, because this study focused on the market for administrators, the extent to which these results can be applied to other markets is not known, and it would be helpful if future research were to test for antisemitism in other industries as well. Moreover, given the results of this study, further investigation of potential adverse treatment of these protected groups in other markets (non-labor) is warranted as well.”
“This is groundbreaking evidence of serious antisemitic discrimination in the labor market,” Greenblatt said in a statement. “On top of increasing antisemitic incidents and growing antisemitic beliefs, this landmark study illustrates the very real need for employers to take anti-Jewish and anti-Israeli prejudice more seriously to have a workplace that works for everyone.”
Founded in 1913, the Anti-Defamation League is among world’s best known Jewish civil rights organizations.
In October, the ADL issued a report describing the punishing wave of over 10,000 antisemitic incidents that hit the American Jewish community in the year following Hamas’s Oct. 7 massacre across southern Israel. Having tracked antisemitic incidents that occurred over the next 12 months, the report showed a 200 percent increase from the previous year, noting that 30 percent of them took place on college campuses and another 12 percent happened during anti-Israel protests. Another 20 percent targeted Jewish institutions, including nonprofit organizations and houses of worship. Of these, 50 percent were bomb threats.
The last quarter of the year proved most injurious, the ADL noted, explaining that after Hamas’s Oct. 7 onslaught, 5,204 antisemitic incidents rocked the Jewish community. Across the political spectrum, from white supremacists on the far right to ostensibly left-wing Ivy League universities, antisemites emerged to express solidarity with the Hamas terror group, spread antisemitic tropes and blood libels, and openly call for a genocide of the Jewish people in Israel.
Such incidents occurred throughout the US. In California, an elderly Jewish man was killed when an anti-Zionist professor employed by a local community college allegedly pushed him during an argument. At Cornell University in upstate New York, a student threatened to rape and kill Jewish female students and “shoot up” the campus’ Hillel center. In a suburb outside Cleveland, Ohio, a group of vandals desecrated graves at a Jewish cemetery. At Harvard University, America’s oldest and, arguably, most prestigious university, a faculty group shared an antisemitic cartoon depicting a left-hand tattooed with a Star of David dangling two men of color from a noose.
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
The post Jewish, Israeli Americans Face ‘Substantial Discrimination’ in US Job Market, New ADL Study Shows first appeared on Algemeiner.com.