RSS
Nuclear War in the Middle East
Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei visits the Iranian centrifuges in Tehran, Iran, June 11, 2023. Photo: Office of the Iranian Supreme Leader/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via REUTERS
Contrary to conventional wisdom, Israel’s “Iran nuclear problem” is not principally about enemy leaders who might go mad. The more worrisome existential problem for Israel is sane, rational enemies who experience miscalculation, poor reasoning or mechanical/electrical/computer malfunction. Other nuclear hazards that could coincide with Iranian sanity and rationality include accidental firing, unauthorized launch and coup d’état.
While it is true that decisions made by a mad Iranian nuclear adversary could have catastrophic consequences for Israel (even, indeed, by a mad pre-nuclear Iran), the likelihood of such decisions is lower than what could be expected of a sane and rational Iranian enemy. Because a nuclear war would be a unique event, such a likelihood cannot be expressed numerically or statistically but is still supportable by analytic argument.
Logic-based calculations suggest that the dispersion of nuclear dangers among multiple Iranian decisionmakers would be more perilous for Israel than the threat posed by a single authoritative Iranian leader who is mad or irrational. Here, madness and irrationality would include Iranian decisionmakers driven by jihadist theologies and principles.
In all circumstances, whether the greater danger to Israel is Iranian decisional madness or Iranian decisional sanity, Jerusalem must stay mindful of a possible “black swan” event. This need will be much greater if Iran is allowed to become a nuclear weapons state. Even at this late date, Israel should remain preemption-ready.
For Jerusalem, there are also time-urgent geopolitical considerations. Iran is approaching nuclear weapons capability concurrently with the acceleration by its jihadist proxies – Hezbollah, Hamas, the Houthis, Islamic Jihad and Fatah – of terrorist crimes against Israel. Iran, which is steadily expanding its ties with Russia, China and North Korea, repeatedly declares its genocidal intentions toward Israel. And Israel is a state with no “strategic depth.”
Prima facie, Middle Eastern geopolitics are a system. Potentially related scenarios of superpower conflict may be dense or even opaque, but they remain relevant. Among other things, the continuously changing iterations of “Cold War II” could embrace international conflicts that involve Israel with North Korea, China, India or Pakistan. Such a dangerous embrace could be sudden or incremental.
For Israel to proceed purposefully, some primary and subsidiary distinctions need further clarification. One concerns the vital differences between a deliberate or intentional nuclear war and a nuclear war that is unintentional or inadvertent. Without considering this distinction, little of value can be determined about the likelihood of a nuclear conflict.
The greatest dangers of an unintentional nuclear war are decision-making errors, underestimations or overestimations of enemy intent, or simple miscalculations. As classical military theorist Carl von Clausewitz observed, “Everything is very simple in war, but even the simplest thing is difficult.”
There are other nuances to be considered. With regard to growing nuclear war risks in the Middle East, no concept could prove more clarifying than “synergy”. Synergistic interactions are those wherein the whole of nuclear war risk effects is greater than the sum of its parts. Unless such interactions are accurately assessed and evaluated in time, Israeli leaders could either underestimate or overestimate the cumulative impact of superpower competition on risk-taking. This suggests circumstances in which Russia and the United States (and perhaps China) struggle for escalation dominance in extremis – that is, during high-value crisis situations.
In the United States, allegedly reliable safeguards have been incorporated from the beginning into all operational nuclear command/control decisions. These safeguards do not apply, however, at the presidential level. In 1976, to gather informed policy clarifications regarding madness, irrationality and nuclear war, I reached out to retired General Maxwell D. Taylor, a former Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff. General Taylor sent a handwritten reply in which he concluded: “As to those dangers arising from an irrational American president, the only protection is not to elect one.”
In today’s convulsive world order, General Taylor’s succinct 1976 warning takes on even greater meaning. Based on both ascertainable facts and logic-based derivations, it is reasonable to assume that if an American president were to exhibit signs of emotional instability, irrationality or “mad” behavior, he/she could still lawfully order the use of American nuclear weapons. More worrisome, an American, Russian or Chinese president could become emotionally unstable, irrational or delusional, but not conspicuously exhibit such liabilities.
In all matters concerning nuclear war in the Middle East, there exist no histories from which to draw inferences. This is a fortunate absence, of course, but it still stands in the way of rendering reliable conflict predictions. The irony of this situation is obvious and problematic. Still, whatever the science-based obstacles to reliable prediction in this explosive region, Israel should approach the problem as an intellectual rather than a political challenge.
It must always be remembered that a nuclear war in the Middle East could occur as a spillover effect of nuclear war in Europe. To protect Israel’s survival, an American president should avoid strategic postures that neglect potential synergies with Russian, Chinese and/or North Korean postures. North Korea is a nuclear ally of Iran that built a nuclear reactor for Syria – the Al Kibar reactor, which was destroyed by Israel’s Operation Orchard on September 6, 2007. In law, that operation was a permissible act of anticipatory self-defense.
Strategist Herman Kahn wrote in the early 1960s that in the aftermath of a nuclear conflict, “survivors might envy the dead”. This is true whether the catastrophe was intentional or unintentional – in other words, whether it was spawned by base motives or by miscalculation, computer error, hacking, or a weapon system or infrastructure accident. Whatever else can be determined by Israel’s national security decisionmakers, they should understand that nuclear strategy is ultimately a high-stakes struggle between intentionality, uncertainty and calamity. Even if both Israel and a newly nuclear Iran were to undertake “sane” risk-taking measures during a crisis, the cumulative effect could still be mutually unwanted and “mad.”
For Israel, the only successful outcome of protracted military conflict with Iran would be a tangible reduction of Iran’s nuclear war-fighting capabilities and intentions. Optimally, this point will be understood and operationalized while Iran is still pre-nuclear.
Once it is at war with either a nuclear Iran or a pre-nuclear Iran with a willing nuclear proxy (e.g., North Korea), Israel could be mortally wounded by rational decisions made by sane enemy leaders. Even now, though Iran is not yet nuclear, it could use radiation dispersal weapons against the Jewish State and/or launch non-nuclear missiles at Israel’s Dimona nuclear reactor.
In world politics, the most significant risks of nuclear war are not those of madness or irrationality. They are the cumulatively catastrophic risks of sane and rational decisions. For Israel, this means the worst-case Iranian nuclear war scenario is not the popular narrative of mad leadership in Tehran, but one of sane adversaries operating in opposition to sane adversaries in Jerusalem.
In this bewildering world order, the accumulated risks of a mutually sane search for escalation dominance could include nuclear war. Israeli leaders should be wary of mad or prospectively mad Iranian leaders, but even more wary of the nuclear consequences posed by sane and rational Iranian decision-makers.
Prof. Louis René Beres was educated at Princeton (Ph.D., 1971) and is the author of many books and scholarly articles dealing with international law, nuclear strategy, nuclear war, and terrorism. In Israel, Prof. Beres was Chair of Project Daniel (PM Sharon). His 12th and latest book is Surviving Amid Chaos: Israel’s Nuclear Strategy (Rowman & Littlefield, 2016; 2nd ed., 2018). A version of this article was originally published by The BESA Center.
The post Nuclear War in the Middle East first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Pro-Hamas Groups Planting Seeds of Domestic Terrorism in US, New Report Says
Pro-Hamas activists gather in Washington Square Park for a rally following a protest march held in response to an NYPD sweep of an anti-Israel encampment at New York University in Manhattan, May 3, 2024. Photo: Matthew Rodier/Sipa USA via Reuters Connect
Domestic terrorism may be the end game for the over 150 pro-Hamas groups operating on colleges campuses and elsewhere across the US to foster anti-Israel demonstrations, according to a new report by the Capital Research Center (CRC) think tank.
“The movement contains militant elements pushing it toward a wider, more severe campaign focused on property destruction and violence properly described as domestic terrorism,” researcher Ryan Mauro wrote in the report, titled “Marching Toward Violence: The Domestic Anti-Israeli Protest Movement,” which was published last week. “It demands the ‘dismantlement’ of America’s ‘colonialist,’ ‘imperialist,’ or ‘capitalist,’ system, often calling for the US to be abolished as a country.”
He continued, “These revolutionary goals are held by the two different factions of the anti-Israel extremist groups. The first faction combines Islamists, communists/Marxists, and anarchists. The second faction consists of groups with white supremacist/nationalist ideologies. They share Jew-hatred, anti-Americanism, and the goal of sparking a revolutionary uprising.”
The group that is most responsible for the anti-Israel protest movement is Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP), according to the report.
Drawing on statements issued and actions taken by SJP and their collaborators, Mauro made the case that toolkits published by SJP herald Hamas for perpetrating mass casualties of civilians; SJP has endorsed Iran’s attacks on Israel as well as its stated intention to overturn the US-led world order; and other groups under its umbrella have called on followers to “Bring the Intifada Home.” Such activities, the report explained, accelerated after Hamas’s massacre across southern Israel last Oct. 7, which pro-Hamas groups perceived as an inflection point in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and an opportunity. By flooding the internet and college campuses with agitprop and staging activities — protests or vandalisms — they hoped to manufacture a critical mass of youth support for their ideas, thus creating an army of revolutionaries willing to adopt Hamas’s aims as their own.
The result has been a series of the kinds of incidents seen in academia during fall semester.
Last month, when Jews around the world mourned on the anniversary of Oct. 7, a Harvard University student group called on pro-Hamas activists to “Bring the war home” and proceeded to vandalize a campus administrative building. The group members, who described themselves as “anonymous,” later said in a statement, “We are committed to bringing the war home and answering the call to open up a new front here in the belly of the beast.”
On the same day, the Harvard Palestine Solidarity Committee (PSC) issued a similar statement, saying “now is the time to escalate,” adding, “Harvard’s insistence on funding slaughter only strengthens our moral imperative and commitment to our demands.”
More recently, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) student wrote a journal article which argued that violence is a legitimate method of effecting political change and, moreover, advancing the pro-Palestinian movement.
In September, during Columbia University’s convocation ceremony, Columbia University Apartheid Divest (CUAD), a group which recently split due to racial tensions between Arabs and non-Arabs, distributed a pamphlet which called on students to join Hamas.
“This booklet is part of a coordinated and intentional effort to uphold the principles of the thawabit and the Palestinian resistance movement overall by transmitting the words of the resistance directly,” said the manifesto, distributed by CUAD, an SJP spinoff, to incoming freshmen. “This material aims to build popular support for the Palestinian war of national liberation, a war which is waged through armed struggle.”
Other sections of it were explicitly Islamist, invoking the name of “Allah, the most gracious” and referring to Hamas as the “Islamic Resistance Movement.” Proclaiming, “Glory to Gaza that gave hope to the oppressed, that humiliated the ‘invincible’ Zionist army,” it said its purpose was to build an army of Muslims worldwide.
“Groups in the pro-terrorism, anti-Israel movement co-exist as our concentric circles of increasing malevolence,” Mauro said of the level of support for revolutionary violence on college campuses. “Groups in the outermost circle avoid risks as they recruit new protest members and seek to integrate as many political causes as possible under the anti-Israel umbrella … Some militants aspire to incorporate the campaign into a broader wear on law enforcement if not an insurgency.”
As The Algemeiner has previously reported, pro-Hamas activists have already demonstrated that they are willing to hurt people to achieve their goals.
Last year, 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. Violence, according to a report by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), was most common at universities in the state of California, where anti-Zionist activists punched a Jewish student for filming him at a protest.
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
The post Pro-Hamas Groups Planting Seeds of Domestic Terrorism in US, New Report Says first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Trump’s Pick for US Attorney General, Matt Gaetz, Draws Ire Over Lawmaker’s Record on Antisemitism
US Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) speaks at a campaign rally for Republican presidential nominee and former US President Donald Trump in Henderson, Nevada, US, Oct. 31, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Mike Blake
US President-elect Donald Trump announced on Wednesday that he plans to nominate Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) as his attorney general for the incoming administration, drawing attention to the lawmaker’s record on antisemitism, which has prompted criticism from prominent Jewish organizations.
Lawmakers from both major US political parties reacted with surprise and disbelief at the prospect of elevating Gaetz — a scandal-ridden figure with charges of sexual misconduct — to one of the most powerful positions in the federal government whose responsibilities include combating discrimination and hate crimes.
The divisive appointment faces dubious odds of succeeding in Senate confirmation, given Gaetz’s widespread unpopularity even among his Republican colleagues.
Gaetz resigned from Congress on Wednesday, reportedly days before the House Ethics Committee was set to release the findings of its investigation into the congressman’s sexual misconduct and drug use allegations.
Earlier this year, Gaetz objected to the Antisemitism Awareness Act, arguing that the widely accepted International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism undermines the teaching that Jews are responsible for killing Jesus.
“The Gospel itself would meet the definition of antisemitism under the terms of this bill!” Gaetz wrote on X/Twitter. “The Bible is clear. There is no myth or controversy on this.”
The legislation ultimately passed the house in May by a 320-91 margin.
Gaetz has also condemned the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) as a “racist” organization after it called on Fox News to punish former host Tucker Carlson for spreading the controversial “Great Replacement Theory.” The theory, which is often promoted by white nationalists, posits that Jews are responsible for trafficking hordes of migrants into the United States for the purpose of replacing the white majority.
In 2018, Gaetz offered Chuck Johnson, a right-wing political activist and Holocaust denier, a ticket to the State of the Union. Though Gaetz initially denied knowledge of Johnson’s Holocaust denialism, he refused to rescind the activist’s invitation after it was brought to his attention by a staffer. Gaetz subsequently defended Johnson in an interview, lauding the right-wing provocateur as “polite.”
“He’s not a Holocaust denier, he’s not a white supremacist. Those are unfortunate characterizations of him, but I did not know he was as perhaps as infamous and controversial as he was when he came by to my office. … He was a polite and just entirely appropriate guest I thought,” Gaetz said in an interview to Fox Business.
In 2019, Gaetz hired a former Trump speechwriter who was canned from his position after his ties to a white nationalist conference became public. The speechwriter, Darren Beattie, spoke at the H.L. Mencken Club Conference, an event that drew famous white nationalists and antisemites such as Richard Spencer.
In 2018, the lawmaker peddled the conspiracy theory that Jewish billionaire George Soros paid migrants to join caravans headed to the United States. In 2023, Gaetz engaged in a fiery debate with American University Professor Pamela Nadell over whether criticism of Soros should be considered an antisemitic trope.
ADL CEO Jonathan Greenblatt took to X/Twitter to criticize Gaetz’s selection for attorney general.
“Rep. Matt Gaetz has a long history of trafficking in antisemitism — from explaining his vote against the bipartisan Antisemitism Awareness Act by invoking the centuries-old trope that Jews killed Jesus to defending the Great Replacement Theory and inviting a Holocaust denier as his 2018 State of the Union guest. He should not be appointed to any high office, much less one overseeing the impartial execution of our nation’s laws,” Greenblatt wrote.
Rep. Max Miller (R-OH) slammed Gaetz’s nomination as a “reckless pick.” He added that “Gaetz has a better shot at having dinner with Queen Elizabeth II than being confirmed by the Senate.”
The American Jewish Committee (AJC) condemned Gaetz’s previous remarks as “disqualifying” and urged Trump to “reconsider” the nomination.
“Matt Gaetz’s history of problematic remarks — including perpetuating antisemitic conspiracy theories — should be disqualifying for anyone seeking to be America’s top law enforcement officer,” the AJC said.
Gaetz, a firebrand with strong ties to fringe elements of the Republican party, faces long odds in making it through the Senate’s confirmation process. While Gaetz’s combative nature has eroded his relationships with many of his fellow GOP colleagues, the lawmaker still has some influence, as evinced by his successful effort to oust then-Republican leader Kevin McCarthy from his position as Speaker of the House last year.
The post Trump’s Pick for US Attorney General, Matt Gaetz, Draws Ire Over Lawmaker’s Record on Antisemitism first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Swiss Museum Compensates Jewish Heirs of Nazi Looted Painting for Pissarro Artwork
A partial view of Camille Pissarro’s “La Maison Rondest, l’Hermitage, Pontoise” (1875). Photo: Provided by the Kunstmuseum Basel
A museum in Basel, Switzerland, said on Thursday it will compensate the heirs of the late German-Jewish textile entrepreneur Richard Semmel for a Camille Pissarro painting he was forced to sell due to Nazi persecution.
Kunstmuseum Basel said that, together with Semmel’s heirs, they decided upon the compensation payment as a “just and fair solution” regarding Pissarro’s “La Maison Rondest, l’Hermitage, Pontoise” (1875). The painting will remain a part of the museum’s permanent collection in its main building and will be displayed alongside a sign that explains the origins and history of the artwork. The exact amount of the compensation payment was not revealed.
“The Kunstmuseum is delighted to be able to retain the work in its collection and the heirs are satisfied with the solution,” the museum stated in a press release.
The Pissarro artwork was donated to the museum in early 2021. It was part of the collection of the late Dr. Klaus von Berlepsch and was set to appear as a loan in an exhibition at the museum about the famed artist. However, even before the exhibition opened, von Berlepsch decided to donate the work to the Kunstmuseum Basel. The museum and von Berlepsch were both unaware of the painting’s provenance at the time of the donation. The Swiss institution researched the painting’s provenance only after it joined the museum’s collection and “prior ownership by the Jewish entrepreneur Richard Semmel was quickly revealed,” the museum said.
Semmel owned a Berlin-based linens manufacturing company called Arthur Samulon, which he led as sole shareholder starting in 1919. In June 1933, Semmel he and his wife emigrated to the Netherlands, which was not yet under Nazi occupation. The couple had no children. Semmel himself said that he left Germany not only due to “racial” persecution by the Nazis, but also because he was accused of having ties to the Social Democratic party.
He managed to transport a large portion of his art collection of more than 100 works to the Netherlands and the Pissarro painting was sold at auction in Amsterdam in June 1933. In October of that same year, it was displayed at a gallery in Basel, where it was quickly sold to the collector Walther Hanhart. Around 1974, Hanhart passed the painting on to his daughter, who was married to von Berlepsch.
Proceeds from the sale of his art were used by Semmel to mitigate financial difficulties his linens company faced in Berlin and was also spent on salaries, debt repayments, and taxes. The Kunstmuseum Basel explained that the National Socialist Factory Cell Organization, which was a worker’s union controlled by the Nazi Party, ordered that despite a decrease in orders from Semmel’s company, no employees could be dismissed, so Semmel was forced to continue paying them and keeping the business afloat from abroad.
“From the point of view of Semmel’s heirs, the sales [of his art] were a direct consequence of Richard Semmel’s persecution, regardless of where they took place, and thus represent a loss of assets due to Nazi persecution,” according to the Kunstmuseum Basel. “Richard Semmel could not remain in Germany or could do so only at great risk to his life. He used the proceeds from the sale of his paintings to try to keep the linens business in Berlin operational. The art sale proceeds therefore flowed into the German Reich.”
“Semmel thus fought for economic control of his companies in Germany while on the run and outside the Nazis’ immediate sphere of influence, albeit in vain and most likely with no chance of success to begin with. For this reason, the Kunstmuseum and the Kunstkommission [Art Commission] agree that the heirs’ claim to the work is justified.”
In June 1939, Semmel and his wife fled again but this time to New York via Chile. They lived in the US in poverty and with poor health. After his wife’s death in 1945, Semmel was taken care of by an acquaintance from Berlin, Grete Gross née Eisenstaedt (1887-1958). As thanks, he appointed her as his sole heir. When she died in 1958, her daughter Ilse Kauffmann became Semmel’s heir. Kauffmann is now deceased and her two daughters will receive the compensation payment from the Kunstmuseum Basel.
The Swiss institution said several museums have also determined that Semmel was forced to sell his art collection due to Nazi persecution. Some have restituted arworks to Semmel’s heirs — such as The National Gallery of Victoria, in Melbourne, Australia — and others have paid his heirs compensation for the artwork, including a Dutch museum in 2021. Kunstmuseum said that privately, there have been “numerous” out-of-court settlements with Semmel’s heirs about artwork that he formerly owned.
In 2022, a landscape painting by Claude Monet was auctioned by Christie’s for $25.5 million and portions of the sale were divided between Semmel’s heirs and a French family who are the painting’s current owners.
The post Swiss Museum Compensates Jewish Heirs of Nazi Looted Painting for Pissarro Artwork first appeared on Algemeiner.com.