Connect with us

RSS

The Myopia of the Bibi-ists

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speaks during a ceremony marking Memorial Day for fallen soldiers of Israel’s wars and victims of attacks, at Jerusalem’s Mount Herzl military cemetery, May 13, 2024. Photo: Gil Cohen-Magen/Pool via REUTERS

Benjamin Netanyahu was probably Israel’s best finance minister and public spokesman (second maybe to the more erudite Abba Eban). However, despite efforts by his supporters — “Bibi-ists” — to craft a flattering narrative around the man they call “King Bibi,” recent events have tarnished his legacy.

The turning point was the Oct. 7 massacre that happened on his watch. Since that horrible day, Netanyahu has sounded like Sgt. Schultz, the hapless German guard in a fictional POW camp in the sitcom Hogan’s Heroes.

In the show, the American prisoners always conducted a covert campaign against the Germans under his nose, leading to his frequent retort, “I see nothing, I hear nothing, and I say NOTHING!!!”

While the leaders of Israel’s defense and intelligence agencies have accepted responsibility for the failure to protect Israel, Netanyahu, who fancies himself as “Mr. Security” and the world’s authority on terrorism, has avoided accountability. He has turned Harry Truman’s famous dictum, “The buck stops here,” on its head. For Netanyahu, the shekel stops anywhere but here.

Defense Minister  Yoav Gallant called for an investigation into the failures on and before Oct. 7. Netanyahu said that couldn’t be done while the war continued, meaning he could delay it for months or perhaps years. Gallant insisted the inquiry couldn’t wait.

Netanyahu also got into a fight with IDF Chief of Staff Herzi Halevi, after Netanyahu blamed the military for the lack of progress in hostage negotiations. He said the IDF wasn’t applying enough pressure on Hamas.

A furious Halevi said, “These words are serious. I demand that the prime minister apologize.”

Reportedly, Netanyahu did not respond.

Netanyahu subsequently pulled a Sgt. Schultz in a meeting with bereaved families of observation soldiers murdered on Oct. 7. Fifteen were killed and six taken hostage. The prime minister claimed he did not know the soldiers had reported seeing indications that Hamas was planning an attack, or that the women responsible for the surveillance at the border were unarmed, or that no one from the government or Knesset had come to visit them.

“All this information — it’s astonishing to me that I’m hearing this,” was Netanyahu’s reaction.

Netanyahu promised to defeat Hamas and bring all the hostages home. After nearly nine months, neither has happened. Meanwhile, the IDF spokesperson admitted Israel cannot defeat Hamas, and his military advisers have echoed American insistence that Israel must formulate a strategy for postwar Gaza to avoid chaos, but he won’t hear of it.

The Bibi-ists would prefer to ignore how we got to this point.

A brief reflection reveals a troubling pattern: From his divisive rhetoric after the Oslo Accords to his tenure marked by corruption indictments and coalition compromises with extremists, Netanyahu’s leadership has polarized Israeli society and alienated global allies.

In 1995, Netanyahu demonized Yitzhak Rabin. Many on the left still blame his incitement for Rabin’s assassination, which the right laughs off. Now Netanyahu and the Bibi-ists claim the provocation of the left is endangering the prime minister.

Netanyahu attacked Rabin for reluctantly shaking Yasser Arafat’s hand and signing the Oslo Accords. After being elected, Netanyahu shook Arafat’s hand and agreed to further withdrawals from Judea and Samaria. Netanyahu also agreed to a division of Hebron, the holiest city in the territories. He continues to rail against Oslo, but has not withdrawn Israel from the agreements. The Bibi-ists are silent on the subject.

Before Oct. 7, Netanyahu fractured Israeli society by refusing to resign after being indicted for a variety of corruption charges and agreeing to bring racist extremists into his coalition to keep power. He further alienated much of the country and Jews abroad with his efforts to reform the judiciary to weaken its power and strengthen his own.

Even some of Netanyahu’s harshest critics give him credit for keeping Israel out of a war before Oct. 7. That policy of restraint, however, emboldened Israel’s enemies, whom he erroneously believed were deterred.

Hamas was severely weakened by Operation Cast Lead, initiated by Ehud Olmert in 2008, but it regained strength during Netanyahu’s tenure. Mistakenly believing Hamas could be appeased through economic incentives, he agreed to Qatar bringing Hamas suitcases of cash that enabled the terrorists to build the “metro” of tunnels in Gaza and expand their rocket arsenal.

The failure to prevent the Hamas massacre will force Israel to station troops in Gaza for an indefinite period after Ariel Sharon relieved Israel of the burden with the 2005 disengagement.

Not only did Hamas grow stronger under Netanyahu’s nose, but so too did Hezbollah, which vastly expanded and improved its missile inventory, and now can threaten most of Israel. The failure to deter Hezbollah forced 60,000 Israelis to leave their homes, and northern Israel is now uninhabitable.

Netanyahu is the first prime minister in Israel’s history to cede sovereign state land to an enemy. Whether he takes decisive action against Hezbollah to allow the residents to return is an open question. Doing so will likely require a bloody war that will wreak more havoc on the Israeli economy, cause widespread death and destruction on both sides, and further isolate Israel internationally once Lebanese civilian casualties mount.

Netanyahu has spoken incessantly about the existential threat posed by Iran, but has failed to stop its march toward building a nuclear weapon. The radical Islamic regime is closer today to having an atomic bomb than when he first became prime minister.

Iran has also succeeded in building an Axis of Resistance — proxies surrounding Israel — with Hezbollah, Iraq, and Syria in the north, Hamas in the south and a growing presence in the West Bank, and the Houthis in Yemen. Rather than make Israel more secure, Netanyahu made it less so.

Netanyahu justly took credit for improving Israel’s standing worldwide, most notably by signing the Abraham Accords. Since Oct. 7, however, Israel’s image has reached a historical nadir. His contentious relationship with key allies, especially the United States, has strained critical partnerships at a time when unified support is most needed.

Netanyahu picked a public fight with the United States over the delivery of weapons, but no one is asking why private American citizens and the Friends of the IDF must raise millions to provide equipment for the IDF. The prime minister failed to ensure that Israeli soldiers had everything they needed to defend the country.

Bibi-ists want to deflect blame onto ideological opponents. The problem with the blame-the-left argument is that the last “leftist” prime minister was Shimon Peres nearly 30 years ago. Who has been the prime minister in most of the years since then?

Calls for new leadership resonate widely among the Israeli public, frustrated by Netanyahu’s persistence in clinging to power. The Bibi-ists argue an election can’t be held during the war because it would be a distraction Israel can’t afford. Still, England held an election in 1945, two months before World War II ended, and without an election, Winston Churchill replaced Neville Chamberlain as prime minister after the war began. Franklin Roosevelt won his fourth term during the final stages of the war.

With more than 100 Israelis still held hostage by Hamas, growing threats from Iran and its proxies, Israel’s isolation worsening, and Netanyahu’s looming criminal trials, the question is whether Netanyahu can restore the luster to his reputation and live up to the mythology created by the Bibi-ists.

Mitchell Bard is a foreign policy analyst and authority on US-Israel relations who has written and edited 22 books including: The Arab Lobby, Death to the Infidels: Radical Islam’s War Against the Jews and After Anatevka: Tevye in Palestine.

The post The Myopia of the Bibi-ists first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

RSS

China and Egypt Launch Joint Military Drills Near Israeli Border Amid Rising Regional Tensions

China and Egypt have launched their first-ever joint air force drill, “Eagles of Civilization 2025,” at an Egyptian airbase. Photo: Screenshot

China and Egypt launched a large-scale joint military exercise this week near the Israeli border, described by Chinese media as a “historic” first of its kind, aimed at deepening military cooperation amid rising regional tensions.

The joint drills — dubbed “Eagles of Civilization 2025” — began Sunday at an Egyptian Air Force base about 100 kilometers (62 miles) west of the Gulf of Suez and are expected to run through mid-May.

According to Israel’s Channel 12, the drill features Chinese J-10C fighter jets, refueling planes, and KJ-500 early warning aircraft, along with Russian-made MiG-29s flown by Egypt.

This exercise “is the first joint training between the Chinese and Egyptian militaries, which is of great significance to promoting pragmatic cooperation and enhancing mutual trust and friendship between the two militaries,” the Chinese Ministry of National Defense said in a statement.

Egyptian officials said the joint drills, aimed at strengthening military ties, will combine theoretical and practical training to enhance combat doctrines.

“The training will also involve joint aerial sorties, planning exercises, and simulated air combat management operations to exchange expertise and enhance the skills of the participating forces,” an Egyptian armed forces spokesperson said in a statement on social media.

Some experts view Beijing’s growing relationship with Cairo as the country’s latest move to expand its military presence in the Middle East and Africa, challenging the United States as its influence in the region stalls. This move could also help China strengthen ties with regional partners as the country faces mounting economic sanctions from Washington.

While details about Egypt’s military buildup remain unclear, “satellite images have shown the movement of tanks and battalions that exceed the limits set by the Camp David Accords,” Mariam Wahba, research analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), told The Algemeiner.

Under the peace treaty, Egypt can request permission from Israel to deploy more than the 47 battalions allowed. However, some estimates suggest that there are currently camps for 180 battalions.

“The Camp David Accords have long been a pillar of peace and stability in the Middle East,” Wahba explained. “A breakdown of the agreement would have serious implications, not just for Israel and Egypt but for the broader region.”

“It could embolden actors like Iran and its proxies to exploit tensions and could lead to increased militarization along Israel’s southern border,” Wahba told The Algemeiner.

Egypt’s military buildup, reportedly in response to Israel’s presence at the Philadelphi Corridor and concerns over a potential mass Palestinian exodus into the country, along with Jerusalem’s control of the corridor, could both breach the 1979 peace treaty.

Last month, China, Russia, and Iran held a three-day naval drill in the Gulf of Oman, conducting joint operations in Iranian territorial waters, strengthening their defense cooperation and bolstering their presence in the region.

China’s growing ties with Egypt come at a time when Egyptian relations with Washington are strained, following US President Donald Trump’s proposal to relocate Palestinians from the Gaza Strip — potentially to Egypt and other Arab countries — during reconstruction efforts after the war, a plan Cairo has strongly opposed.

“This is a reminder that our partners have options,” Former US CENTCOM Commander Gen. Joseph Votel told The War Zone. “China is positioning itself as a viable military supplier and strategic partner” in the region.

In a rapidly shifting Middle East marked by rising tensions and competing regional power blocs, China and Egypt’s deepening cooperation could reshape regional power dynamics, challenging American influence and diminishing Israel’s strategic flexibility.

Israeli defense officials have previously expressed growing concern over Cairo’s military buildup and armed presence in the Sinai Peninsula.

These concerns come amid escalating tensions between Jerusalem and Cairo since the outbreak of the war in Gaza, particularly over the Philadelphi Corridor along the Gaza-Egypt border, where Egypt has demanded Israel withdraw its forces.

Earlier this year, Jerusalem accused Egypt of violating their decades-old peace treaty, while also raising concerns about Cairo’s expanding defense capabilities.

 

The post China and Egypt Launch Joint Military Drills Near Israeli Border Amid Rising Regional Tensions first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

RSS

Pro-Palestine Demonstrators Blast Sanders as ‘Genocide Denier’

US Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) speaks to the media following a meeting with US President Joe Biden at the White House in Washington, US, July 17, 2023. Photo: REUTERS/Evelyn Hockstein

Sen. Bernie Sanders (D-VT) has been targeted by left-wing protesters over his supposedly insufficient support for Gaza.

Pro-Palestine activists crashed one of Sanders’s “The Fighting Oligarchy” rallies in Bakersfield, California last week to grill the senator about his position on the Israel-Hamas war. During Sanders’s speech, activists associated with United Liberation Front for Palestine (ULFP) berated Sanders for his reluctance in accusing Israel of committing so-called “genocide” against the civilians of Gaza.

“Are you going to call it a genocide, when it’s a genocide?” the activist bellowed. 

“And you defend Israel when Palestinians are being killed every single day and all you do is criticize Netanyahu! Israel does not have a right to exist or fight while Palestinians are dying,” she continued.

Other protesters then interrupted Sanders’s speech, condemning the progressive lawmaker as a “liberal Zionist,” accusing him of being “complicit with ICE,” and castigating him for voting in favor of the confirmation of Secretary of State Marco Rubio. 

“Bernie, why don’t you let your fans know that you’re a settler, that you occupy Palestinian land?” the activist said. 

Sanders does not possess dual citizenship with Israel. However, rumors about Sanders, who is Jewish, possessing Israeli citizenship have circulated around the internet since his 2015 presidential campaign. 

In recent weeks, anti-Israel protesters have grown increasingly critical of Sanders over his refusal to adopt more adversarial rhetoric against the Jewish state. Last week, Sanders incensed progressives after authorities removed an activist which unfurled a flag reading “free Palestine” during a tour stop in Idaho. 

During that rally, Sanders said, “Israel, like any other country, has the right to defend itself from terrorism, but it does not have the right to wage all out war against the Palestinian people” and “not one more nickel to Netanyahu,” triggering more outrage among his leftist supporters. 

Sanders, who is among the most vocal critics of the Israel-Hamas war in the federal government, spearheaded a number of failed efforts to implement a partial arms embargo on the Jewish state, citing supposed “indiscriminate bombing” in Gaza. However, progressive activists have grown increasingly vocal about their dissatisfaction with Sanders’s position on Israel, complaining that the senator has isolated his criticisms to Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and has refused to repudiate Israel’s existence. 

The post Pro-Palestine Demonstrators Blast Sanders as ‘Genocide Denier’ first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

RSS

Harvard Sues Trump Administration Over Massive Cuts Amid Campus Antisemitism Crisis

US President Donald Trump, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick attend a cabinet meeting at the White House. Photo: Nathan Howard via Reuters Connect.

Harvard University filed suit against the Trump administration on Monday to request an injunction that would halt the government’s impounding of $2.26 billion of its federal grants and contracts and an additional $1 billion that, reportedly, will be confiscated in the coming days.

In the complaint, shared by interim university president Alan Garber, Harvard says the administration bypassed key procedural steps it must, by law, take before sequestering any federal funds. It also charges that the Trump administration does not aim, as it has publicly pledged, to combat campus antisemitism at Harvard but to impose “viewpoint-based conditions on Harvard’s funding.”

As previously reported by The Algemeiner, the administration has proposed that Harvard reform in ways that conservatives have long argued will make higher education more meritocratic and less welcoming to anti-Zionists and far-left extremists. Its “demands,” contained in a letter the administration sent to Garber — who subsequently released it to the public — called for “viewpoint diversity in hiring and admissions,” the “discontinuation of [diversity, equity, and inclusion, or DEI, initiatives],” and “reducing forms of governance bloat.” They also implore Harvard to begin “reforming programs with egregious records of antisemitism” and to recalibrate its approach to “student discipline.”

Harvard rejects the administration’s coupling of campus antisemitism with longstanding grievances regarding elite higher education’s “wokeness,” elitism, and overwhelming bias against conservative ideast. Republican lawmakers, for their part, have maintained that it is futile to address campus antisemitism while ignoring the context in which it emerged.

Speaking for the university, Harvard’s legal team — which includes attorneys with links to US President Donald Trump’s inner circle — denounced any larger reform effort as intrusive.

“The First Amendment does not permit the Government to ‘interfere with private actors’ speech to advance its own vision of ideological balance,” they wrote in the complaint, which names several members and agencies of the administration but not Trump as a defendant. “Nor may the government ‘rely on the ‘threat of invoking legal sanctions and other means of coercion … to achieve the suppression of disfavored speech.’ The government’s attempt to coerce and control Harvard disregards these fundamental First Amendment principles, which safeguard Harvard’s ‘academic freedom.’”

The complaint continued, arguing that the impounding of funds “flout not just the First Amendment, but also federal laws and regulations” and says that Harvard should have been investigated by the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) to determine whether it failed to stop and, later, prevent antisemitism in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act — a finding that would have warranted punitive measures. Rather, it charges, the Trump administration imposed a “sweeping freeze of funding” that, it contends, “has nothing at all to do with antisemitism and Title VI compliance.”

Garber followed up the complaint with an exaltation of limited government and the liberal values which further academia’s educational mission — values Harvard has been accused of failing to uphold for decades.

“We stand for the truth that colleges and universities across the country can embrace and honor their legal obligations and best fulfill their essential role in society without improper government intrusion,” Garber said in a statement announcing the lawsuit. “That is how we achieve academic excellence, safeguard open inquiry and freedom of speech, and conduct pioneering research — and how we advance the boundless exploration that propels our nation and its people into a better future.”

For some, Harvard’s allegations against the Trump administration are hollow.

“Claiming that the entire institution is exempt from any oversight or intervention is extraordinary,” Alex Joffe, anthropologist and editor of BDS Monitor for Scholars for Peace in the Middle East, told The Algemeiner on Tuesday. “It would seem to claim, at least by extension, that the government cannot enforce laws regarding equal protection for individuals — namely students in minority groups — and other legal and regulatory frameworks because they jeopardize the institution’s academic freedom.”

He continued, “Moreover, the idea that cutting voluntary government funding is de facto denial of free speech also sounds exaggerated if not absurd. If an institution doesn’t want to be subjected to certain requirements in a relationship entered into voluntarily with the government, they shouldn’t take the money. Modifying a contract after the fact, however, might be another issue … At one level the Trump administration is simply doing what Obama and Biden did with far less controversy, issuing directives and threatening lawsuits and funding. But the substance of the proposed oversight, especially the intrusiveness with respect to curricular affairs, has obviously touched a nerve.”

Harvard’s fight with the federal government is backed by its immense wealth, and the school has been drawing on its vast financial resources to build a war chest for withstanding Trump’s budget cuts since March, when it issued over $450 million in bonds as “part of ongoing contingency planning for a range of financial circumstances.” Another $750 million in bonds was offered to investors in April, according to The Harvard Crimson, a sale that is being managed by Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley.

A generous subsidy protects Harvard from paying exorbitant interest on the new debt, as investors can sell most bonds issued by educational institutions without being required to pay federal income tax.

Other universities have resorted to borrowing as well, issuing what was reportedly a record $12.4 billion municipal bonds, some of which are taxable, during the first quarter of 2025. Among those which chose to take on debt are Northwestern University, which was defunded to the tune of $790 million on April 8. It issued $500 million in bonds in March. Princeton University, recently dispossessed of $210 in federal grants, is preparing an offering of $320 million, according to Forbes.

“If Harvard is willing to mortgage it’s real estate or use it as collateral, it can borrow money for a very long time,” National Association of Scholars president Peter Wood told The Algemeiner on Tuesday. “But it could destroy itself that way.”

Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.

The post Harvard Sues Trump Administration Over Massive Cuts Amid Campus Antisemitism Crisis first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News