Connect with us

RSS

What Would a Palestinian State Mean for Regional Security, and a War with Iran?

FILE PHOTO: The atomic symbol and the Iranian flag are seen in this illustration, July 21, 2022. REUTERS/Dado Ruvic/Illustration/File Photo

Though significant, connections between Palestinian Arab statehood and nuclear war remain generally ignored. For Israel, the seemingly discrete perils of war with Iran and Palestinian Arab statehood are potentially intertwined and mutually reinforcing. This means that continuing to treat these issues as separate security problems could represent an especially grievous policy error.

There are variously clarifying particulars. Once established, a Palestinian state could tilt the balance of power between Israel and Iran. For the moment, there is no law-based Palestinian state (i.e., no Palestinian Arab satisfaction of authoritative requirements delineated at the Montevideo Convention of 1934). But if there should sometime come a point where Palestinian statehood and a direct war with Iran would coincide, the effects could prove determinative. In a worst case scenario, the acceleration of competitive risk-taking in the region would enlarge the risks of unconventional warfare.

For the moment, any direct war between Israel and Iran would be fought without any “Palestine variable.” Ironically, however, one more-or-less plausible outcome of such a war would be more pressure on Israel to accept yet another enemy state. To be sure, Iran’s leaders are unconcerned about Palestinian Arab well-being per se, but even a continuously faux commitment to Palestinian statehood would strengthen their overall power position.

Additionally, any formal creation of “Palestine” would be viewed in Tehran as a favorable development regarding wars fought against Israel. While nothing scientifically meaningful can be said about an unprecedented scenario (in logic and mathematics, true probabilities must always be based upon the determinable frequency of pertinent past events), there are persuasive reasons to expect that “Palestine” would become a reliably belligerent proxy of Iran.

A “Two-State Solution” would enlarge not “only” the jihadist terror threat to Israel (conventional and unconventional), but also prospects for major regional war. Even if such a war were fought while Iran was still pre-nuclear, it could still use radiation dispersal weapons or electromagnetic pulse weapons (EMP) against Israel and/or target the Dimona nuclear reactor with conventional rockets. In a worst case scenario, Iran’s already nuclear North Korean ally would act in direct belligerency against the Jewish State.

In these complex strategic assessments, Israeli-Palestinian negotiations ought never be confined to “general principles.” Rather, variously specific issues will need to be addressed head-on: borders; Jerusalem; relations between Gaza and the “West Bank;” the Cairo Declaration of June 1974 (an annihilationist “phased plan”); and the Arab “right of return” and cancellation of the “Palestine National Charter” (which still calls unambiguously and unapologetically for the eradication of Israel “in stages”).

Not to be overlooked by any means, any justice-based plan would need to acknowledge the historical and legal rights of the Jewish people in Judea and Samaria. Such an acknowledgment would represent an indispensable corrective to lawless Hamas claims of “resistance by any means necessary” and to genocidal Palestinian calls for “liberating” all territories “from the river to the sea.” On its face, the unhidden Palestinian Arab expectation is that Israel would become part of “Palestine.” But this ought not to come as any surprise. All Islamist/Jihadist populations already regard Israel as “occupied Palestine.”

“Everything is very simple in war,” warns classical Prussian strategist Carl von Clausewitz in On War, “but the simplest thing is still very difficult.” American presidents have always insisted that regional peace be predicated on Arab recognition of the Jewish people’s right to security in their own sovereign nation- state.

Concurrently, most Arab leaders in the Middle East secretly hope for a decisive Israeli victory over Hamas in Gaza and over Hezbollah in Lebanon.

What about North Korea and future Middle Eastern war? Pyongyang has a documented history of active support for Iran and Syria. Regarding ties with Damascus, it was Kim Jung Un who built the Al Kibar nuclear reactor for the Syrians at Deir al-Zor. This is the same facility that was preemptively destroyed by Israel in its “Operation Orchard” (also known in certain Israeli circles as “Operation Outside the Box”) on September 6, 2007.

For Israel, nuclear weapons, doctrine and strategy will remain essential to national survival. In this connection, the country’s traditional policy of “deliberate nuclear ambiguity” or “bomb in the basement” should promptly be updated. The key objective of such dramatic changes would be more credible Israeli nuclear deterrence, a goal that will correlate closely with “selective nuclear disclosure.” Despite being counter-intuitive, Iran will need to become convinced that Israel’s nuclear arms are not too destructive for purposeful operational use. Here, in an arguably supreme irony, the credibility of Israel’s nuclear deterrent could vary inversely with its presumed destructiveness.

For Israeli nuclear deterrence to work longer-term, Iran will need to be told more rather than less about Israel’s nuclear targeting doctrine and about the invulnerability of Israel’s nuclear forces/infrastructures. In concert with such changes, Jerusalem will also need to clarify its still opaque “Samson Option.” The point of such clarifications would not be to suggest Israel’s willingness to “die with the Philistines,” but to enhance the “high destruction” pole of its nuclear deterrence continuum.

If the next US president maintains America’s support of Palestinian statehood, Iran will more likely consider certain direct conflict options vis-à-vis Israel. At some point in these considerations, Israel could need to direct explicit nuclear threats (counter-value and/or counter-force) toward the Islamic Republic. As policy, this posture could represent a “point of no return.”

For Israel, the unprecedented risks of Palestinian statehood could prove irreversible and irremediable. These risks would likely be enlarged if they had to be faced concurrent with an Israel-Iran war. It follows that Jerusalem’s core security obligation should be to keep Iran non–nuclear and to simultaneously prevent Palestinian statehood. From the standpoint of authoritative international law, meeting this two-part obligation would be in the combined interests of counter-terrorism, nuclear war-avoidance and genocide prevention. Prime facie, meeting this overriding obligation would be in the interests of regional and global justice.

Louis René Beres was educated at Princeton (Ph.D., 1971) and is the author of many books, monographs, and scholarly articles dealing with military nuclear strategy. In Israel, he was Chair of Project Daniel. Over recent years, he has published on nuclear warfare issues in Harvard National Security Journal (Harvard Law School); Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists; International Journal of Intelligence and Counterintelligence; Israel Journal of Foreign Affairs; The Atlantic; Israel Defense; Jewish Website; The New York Times; Israel National News; The Jerusalem Post; The Hill and other sites. A version of this article appeared in Israel National News.

The post What Would a Palestinian State Mean for Regional Security, and a War with Iran? first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Post Views: 226
Related Topics:
Continue Reading

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.

Post Views: 3
Continue Reading

RSS

Reclaiming Jewish Pride on Campus: Lessons from an Israeli Reserve Captain

An Israeli soldier stands during a two-minute siren marking the annual Israeli Holocaust Remembrance Day, at an installation at the site of the Nova festival where party goers were killed and kidnapped during the Oct. 7 attack by Hamas terrorists from Gaza, in Reim, southern Israel, May 6, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Ammar Awad

I recently traveled across the United States with Olami, a global organization committed to building Jewish identity and ensuring Jewish continuity. My goal was to connect with Jewish students on campus, and share my experiences as a reserve captain in the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) on and after October 7th. 

This was my first trip to the US, and I came simply expecting to tell my story: On that black Saturday, I mobilized two of my sergeants and headed straight to the Nova music festival, where one of my soldiers was trapped. We began the rescue mission for him, but ultimately saved over 100 civilians. During the operation, I found my own father’s body, yet I pressed on, driven by our duty to protect others. Afterward, I continued my service in Gaza, spending months defending my country and rooting out the terrorists who had taken so much from us.

When I spoke with American students on campuses and in communities across the East Coast, I realized that something vital was missing: their confidence. Over the past year, they had faced such vicious attacks for being Jewish that they were left with a deep struggle, rooted in uncertainty, fear, and hesitancy regarding their Jewish identity.

In Israel, strength and pride in our identity are ingrained. It’s part of who we are — passed down through generations and fortified by a shared history. In the US, I encountered a very different reality.

At each event hosted by Olami, a large group of students gathered, and many expressed a deep insecurity about standing up for themselves or even speaking openly about being Jewish. They seemed paralyzed in the face of campus hostility, unsure of how to respond or confront the negativity they encountered. For the first time in my life, I saw young Jews unsure of their own strength, something I’d never encountered among my peers in Israel, where Jewish pride is second nature.

I realized my focus for the speaking tour had to shift. This trip was no longer just about sharing my story, it was about helping these students find confidence as Jews.

I wanted to address the fear and hesitation they felt in expressing their Jewish identity, and impart some of the pride that, for us in Israel, is part of our national DNA. We are raised to face daunting challenges head-on because there’s simply no alternative. We are taught from a young age that if we stand up, others back down. This strength isn’t just a mindset; it’s essential to who we are as Israelis and as Jews.

I felt compelled to share this message with the students I met. I wanted them to understand that even though American campuses may feel hostile, they don’t need to compromise their pride or dilute their identity to fit in or avoid conflict. When we stand proudly as Jews, our presence itself — as a united community — is a powerful shield against hate and prejudice. This sense of unity is something deeply ingrained in Israeli society, where we rely on one another not just for support but for survival. It’s a powerful source of resilience that I believe can be shared with Jewish communities everywhere.

To my fellow young Jews in America, I say this: you must reclaim your confidence. You have the right to be unapologetically Jewish, to speak out and stand firm against hate. It’s not easy, but when we remember that we are not alone — that Jews around the world are standing with us — our strength becomes undeniable. The challenges we face may be different, but the need for unity and Jewish pride is the same. 

I left those US campuses with a renewed understanding of the work we must do together. We need to build bridges within and between Jewish communities, creating spaces like Olami does, where students can strengthen their identity and learn to develop resilience in the face of hostility. This effort should involve meaningful dialogue between Israeli and Diaspora Jews, along with regular cultural gatherings, Shabbat meals, and holiday celebrations. These experiences reinforce our shared history, deepen our bonds, and create a supportive foundation for students to confidently embrace their Jewish identity.

Yhoni Skariszewski is a VP of Sales and a reserve deputy commander in the Givati unit of the Israeli Defense Forces. He is a graduate of Olami-Nefesh Yehudi Jerusalem University chapter.

The post Reclaiming Jewish Pride on Campus: Lessons from an Israeli Reserve Captain first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Post Views: 17
Continue Reading

RSS

‘Globalize the Intifada’ Becomes Reality as Amsterdam Erupts in Fresh Wave of Antisemitic Riots

Pro-Palestinian protesters face Dutch police while taking part in a non-authorized protest in Amsterdam, Netherlands, Nov. 10, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Anthony Deutsch

“Globalize the Intifada.”

It’s the chant that has become a staple at anti-Israel protests sweeping across the West after the Hamas-led October 7 attacks ,and throughout Israel’s subsequent war against the terrorist group in Gaza. The phrase is a call for Israel’s destruction, and a thinly veiled invitation to target Jews worldwide.

Unfortunately,“Globalize the Intifada” is fast becoming a reality. On Monday night in Amsterdam, violence erupted again. Rioters, reportedly “youth claiming solidarity with Palestinians,” attacked police with fireworks and projectiles, destroyed property, and set a tram ablaze.

This time, there were no Israeli sports fans in sight and no alleged provocation. Just a city under siege, with attackers chanting “Cancer Jews” into the night.

What’s more, the violence appears to be escalating, with Belgian police announcing on Monday the arrest of five people in Antwerp as calls spread on social media for a “Jew hunt” in the city, which was already grappling with a surge in antisemitic assaults.

The scenes in Amsterdam last week hinted at what was to come: Israeli soccer fans were ambushed in what we now know was a coordinated attack planned in advance and unleashed after the Maccabi Tel Aviv versus Ajax match.

And yet, many media outlets were predictably reluctant to call it what it was: antisemitic violence.

Meanwhile, media pundits like Mehdi Hasan and Owen Jones rushed to rationalize the attacks, implying Israelis “brought it on themselves” by singing offensive songs before the game — as if that justified being hunted down by a baying mob (and ignoring that he attack was planned.)

This, despite the Mayor of Amsterdam condemning the attacks as perpetrated by “antisemitic hit-and-run squads,” and Dutch police confirming evidence of premeditation.

In other words, Israeli fans were targeted not for their chants, but simply for being Israeli.

So, how are the media covering Monday’s fresh wave of violence? Mostly, they’re not.

The Associated Press and BBC are among the few major outlets to report on it in any capacity, and even they avoid linking it to the recent antisemitic surge — ignoring footage of rioters screaming “Cancer Jews.”

The conclusion? “No Jews, no news.”

If there’s no angle to subtly blame Jewish victims, the mainstream media doesn’t seem interested.

The attacks in Amsterdam last Thursday night, reminiscent of Nazi-era pogroms, are the direct result of the “Globalize the Intifada” movement that anti-Israel protesters have been championing for over a year. This slogan isn’t just a catchy chant; it’s a blatant call for violence against Jews, mirroring the atrocities of the First and Second Palestinian Intifadas.

Just days before Israelis were hunted down in the streets of Amsterdam, reports emerged from the Netherlands revealing that some Dutch police officers were refusing to guard Jewish sites, citing “moral dilemmas.” Such inaction and moral equivocation effectively serve as a green light for the violence we’ve witnessed, both last week and this week.

Welcome to the “globalized intifada” — it didn’t begin in Amsterdam, and it certainly won’t end there.

The author is a contributor to HonestReporting, a Jerusalem-based media watchdog with a focus on antisemitism and anti-Israel bias — where a version of this article first appeared.

The post ‘Globalize the Intifada’ Becomes Reality as Amsterdam Erupts in Fresh Wave of Antisemitic Riots first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Post Views: 19
Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News