Tag Archives: Politics

Sovereignty, When?

Posted on October 31, 2025 | Comments Off on Sovereignty, When?

(First published at Israelnationalnews.com)

It certainly seems like last week’s preliminary Knesset vote declaring sovereignty over most of Judea and Samaria was ill-timed. It was an opposition maneuver meant to embarrass the government, especially considering that US Vice-President Vance was in Israel at the time. Probably a better time would have been any other time in the last 58 years, including last month, last year, five years ago, and next week. If anything, the move set back our ability to exercise Israel law over Judea and Samaria, as it moved the Americans from a position of studied neutrality to vehement objection. It was a cynical move at the wrong time.

That being said, we have to ask ourselves, if last week was the wrong time, when is the right time? Most often people who remonstrate against a worthy deed by saying it is the “wrong time” never quite articulate when would be the right time. It is a classic politician’s (and occasionally, rabbi’s) trick to avoid making tough decisions by embracing something wholeheartedly but then failing to implement it out of cowardice or other concerns, often described as “the big picture.” It works well, and we should ask our government, many of whose leaders have been promising sovereignty over Judea and Samaria for decades – especially during election season – when is the right time?

In a sense, it is analogous to successive Israeli governments publicly proclaiming the imperative of all nations recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital but then privately urging foreign governments (such as the United States) not to do it.

What does sovereignty mean? It is unwise and unjust to keep territories and its resident population in legal limbo for more than half-century. More than 500,000 residents do not deserve to have to seek army approval for construction issues. Worse, a reluctance to declare sovereignty over Judea and Samaria nurtures the fantasy that this land – the heartland of Israel, after all – is not really ours, and that one day it will be the foundation of a Palestinian state. We keep that diabolical dream alive by playing semantic games, failing to promote our own interests, and cowering before the dictates of even friendly allies who, it must be said, have their own interests like all nations have their own interests.

What would be the effect of defying the United States and the world and passing the Knesset law in its second and third readings? We should distinguish between the practical and the political effects.

The immediate response of all nations including the US would be non-recognition of Judea and Samaria as part of the State of Israel. Much would be made of that, too much. Historians could remind us that when Jordan annexed Judea and Samaria in 1950 – necessitating the change of that country’s name from Transjordan to Jordan – until two countries on the globe recognized that annexation, Britain and Pakistan. Only two. Yet, did anyone in the world doubt that Jordan was the claimant and that the land was part of Jordan? Of course not. It is a semantic and legal game.

For that matter, Israel formally annexed Jerusalem in June 1967, then cementing its status as part of Israel and our eternal, undivided capital in 1980. How many countries have recognized that annexation? Who cares? Practically, Jerusalem is Israel, which in legal terms is considered a de facto annexation. To the extent that we tolerate those nations which trample on Israeli sovereignty in Jerusalem by maintaining consulates that function as embassies to the Palestinians is shameful, and an indictment of our government for several generations. Why doesn’t the government shutter these consulates? Apparently, it is never the right time.

Consider, as well, Israel’s annexation of the Golan Heights in 1981. The UN Security Council declared it “null and void.” No country recognized it until the United States did in 2019. Who cares? Does anyone doubt that the Golan is part of Israel? It is worthwhile to add parenthetically that Israel’s annexation of the Golan did not stop Israel’s government in the 1990’s from negotiating a possible surrender of this vital land to Syria despite such negotiations violating Israeli law.

There are other cases of countries across the world declaring sovereignty over specific parcels of land, and other nations either recognize it or do not, and life goes on. What is missing in terms of international recognition is gained through clarity, an expression of national will, and a desire for some measure of finality in a nation’s borders.

Those are practical considerations. The political and diplomatic factors receive the most attention. Several Israeli governments have begun the process of declaring sovereignty and then abruptly aborted them. PM Netanyahu’s governments had several opportunities to declare sovereignty when Trump declared himself an agnostic on the question, and flubbed them all, caving in for one reason or another. It seems clear that our reluctance to apply Israeli law to much of Judea and Samaria is rooted in a fear of what the Americans will say or do. The threats – in line with President Trump’s style – are blustery, thunderous, and vague, including, perhaps, loss of support at the UN, boycott of weapons sales, etc., and all, like most of Trump’s threats to sundry countries across the world, unlikely in the extreme to materialize. Will the US turn on Israel for declaring sovereignty over land that is in our possession for almost sixty years and is an integral part of our biblical patrimony? How that aligns with American interests is a mystery.

If anything, putting another nail in the coffin of Palestinian statehood is in the interest of Israel, the United States, and what passes for the moderate Arab world. A Palestinian state would constitute a threat to us and to much of the Arab world, and a new and even larger terror base than was Gaza. It should be obvious to us that any country that opposes our sovereignty over Judea and Samaria because such is perceived as the death knell for an independent Palestine does not have our best interests at heart.

Do we? Does the Israeli government have the capacity to act in our national interest without our hand being held tight by our greatest patron? Based on past experience, the answer is no – except if we insist and we demonstrate clearly to the US why this is in our and their interest.

To the Americans, sovereignty over Judea and Samaria takes a back seat to expanding the Abraham Accords to include Saudi Arabia who, along with other countries, apparently threaten to walk away from negotiations if a pathway to an independent Palestine is not created. But such is not in our national interest, and if we don’t assert our national interests forcefully, and explain cogently why, we will find ourselves under enormous pressure to midwife a Palestinian state into existence with eastern Jerusalem as its capital.

For sure, it is incomprehensible at this point to see how Israeli society would ever agree to such a situation, which would be both a reward for past terror and an incentive for future terror. Now the political establishment is largely against it but our leaders can be as fickle as the people they lead. PM Netanyahu was a sworn opponent of Palestinian statehood, then supported it, and now opposes it again. The opposition leaders keep their fingers to the wind to see which way the public weathervane blows. In truth, only those whose commitment to the land of Israel is rooted in religious doctrine are inflexible and will remain implacably opposed to again partitioning the land of Israel. All others, whose world views are based on politics, history, security, and the like, will necessarily be more malleable. Under pressure, they will succumb and then rationalize it quite eloquently.

If we do not declare sovereignty over Judea and Samaria, the day will soon come when a Palestinian state is back on the global agenda, and vigorously. We must preempt that. One way to do it sensibly is to make it part of the negotiations on the Abraham Accords.

Let’s face it: The Abraham Accords is mostly about trade and business, in other words, money. That is the American interest, more than a Trump Nobel Peace Prize. (After all, how prestigious can such an award be if Yasser Arafat was a recipient?) Our peace treaties are quite similar. Neither Egypt nor Jordan has maintained an ambassador in Israel for several years. Relatively few Israelis visit those countries, and even fewer Egyptians and Jordanians visit Israel. Business aside, these treaties and the Abraham Accords engender an absence of war, itself quite valuable, but not the type of peace that exists between countries with warm relations and shared values. Yes, a cold peace is better than a hot war, but what if the cold peace eventually paves the road to a scorching hot war because we have allowed ourselves to be lulled into complacency?

We erred in not annexing Judea, Samaria, and Gaza decades ago, and we have paid a terrible price in life and blood for that neglect, which has also whetted the appetite of our enemies that they can ultimately wear us down and destroy us. Arabs who live there need not become citizens; there are tens of millions of people who live in the United States who are not citizens. We need not twist ourselves like a pretzel trying to find the right legal formulation.

A rapprochement with Saudi Arabia is not worth it if the price is a Palestinian state, the redivision of Jerusalem, and/or a repudiation of our rights and claims to Judea, Samaria, and our eternal capital. After all, Trump cherishes agreements, ceremonies, and deals far more than substance, but we have to live with the substance. Thus, our soldiers can be killed during a “cease fire,” which again goes into effect when the shooting stops, and then when the shooting continues and stops again. It is a fantasy to think that Hamas will disarm and depart on its own, and an even deadlier fantasy to think that the United States or any Arab countries will go to war in Gaza to do it.

We have to live in reality. Part of reality is defining our national interests and pursuing them sedulously. The reaction to our declaration of sovereignty over Judea and Samaria is likely to be quite similar to the reaction to the US recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital eight years ago (which was then followed by a handful of other nations). That is, predictions that the heavens will collapse, the Arab street across the Middle East will explode, and the region will descend into war.

The reality was otherwise. The reality was some public handwringing from a few countries, followed by … nothing. The dogs bark and the caravan moves on. We are not needy beggars at the trough of world recognition. We are a generation that has been blessed to return to our ancient homeland, as promised in the Bible, a generation of dedicated warriors and fighters who have been given nothing by the world on a silver platter.

It is time we act like it.

Comments Off on Sovereignty, When?

Tagged , ,

Dangers Ahead

Posted on October 22, 2025 | 2 comments

(First published at Israelnationalnews.com)

If past is prologue, Israel is entering a period as dangerous, if not more so, than actual wartime. We are not strangers to the phenomenon of winning wars, losing the subsequent negotiations, and winding up in a much worse strategic position than when the hostilities ended. We have withdrawn from Gaza already five times since 1948. The boundaries at the conclusion of the Six Day War have mostly disappeared into the sands of history.

The Sinai Peninsula has been surrendered several times, the last in return for its demilitarization. That buffer zone is also gone, as the Egyptian Army has returned in force to the Sinai. The great Arab and Western summit several weeks at Sharm el Sheikh recalled for me that Ron Eliran song, after the Six Day War, in which we purported to return “to Sharm el Sheikh a second time but it is in our hearts always.” Maybe in our hearts – but not the world’s maps or consciousness. Few remember that Israel captured Sharm el Sheikh twice and then forfeited it.

It should not be lost on anyone that we just fought a war on multiple fronts and the results were decisive on all fronts – except the one which launched the war, Gaza. We achieved great strategic advances in Iran, whose nuclear program was arrested and for the moment neutralized; in Syria, where Assad is gone, Israel commands the Golan, Hermon, and points beyond; Yemen has been (at least) temporarily defanged; and in Lebanon, where Hezbollah has been greatly weakened and might even be compelled by the Lebanese government to submit to its authority. Iran is being held accountable for all its proxies, itself a deterrent. For sure, much credit should be given to PM Netanyahu for orchestrating these successes in a masterful way and to our military that realized such triumphs.

Of course, waging war in those territories was not complicated by the presence of Israeli hostages cruelly held and brutally mistreated, as it was in Gaza. And undoubtedly Hamas has also been weakened grievously but as a suicidal death cult nurtured in a culture where Jews are hated and Israel must be destroyed, it will not be difficult for them to reconstitute. Such has already begun.

The diplomatic dangers we are facing are a consequence of fundamental errors that the American negotiators, Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, are making. I believe they mean well, and like President Trump, truly desire the peace and prosperity of Israel and the region. And the deal they engineered was nothing short of miraculous, a hidden miracle that reflects Shlomo’s words in Mishlei (21:1): “Like the water courses (in different directions), so is the king’s heart in G-d’s hand; He turns it whenever He desires.” It was an amazing feat to induce Hamas to free our hostages at one time, upfront, thus relinquishing the diabolical leverage they had over us. That was a stunning accomplishment for which the Americans and our government (Netanyahu, Ron Dermer, and others) deserve praise, notwithstanding the release of terrorist murderers that will plague us for years to come. And that the Arabs and Turkey pressured Hamas can surely be traced to our attack on Doha that suggested to Qatar that its territory is not sacrosanct as a haven for terrorists. But Witkoff and Kushner neglect two points.

First, they do not seem to consider the reality of Hamas, as Hamas itself advertises, proclaims, and uses to recruit new terrorists. It helps to read the Hamas charter: “Palestine is the land of the Arab Palestinian people, from it they originate, to it they adhere and belong… Palestine is a land whose status has been elevated by Islam… Palestine is a land that was seized by a racist, anti-human and colonial Zionist project that was founded on a false promise (the Balfour Declaration), on recognition of a usurping entity and on imposing a fait accompli by force… Palestine is an Arab Islamic land. It is a blessed sacred land that has a special place in the heart of every Arab and every Muslim… Hamas believes that no part of the land of Palestine shall be compromised or conceded, irrespective of the causes, the circumstances and the pressures and no matter how long the occupation lasts. Hamas rejects any alternative to the full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea… Resistance and jihad for the liberation of Palestine will remain a legitimate right, a duty and an honour for all the sons and daughters of our people and our Ummah.”

These are the words – never revoked or modified – of Hamas, a genocidal death cult that wants to destroy us. What part of this Jew-hating screed signals to the American negotiators that Hamas is a worthy interlocutor, deserving of a seat at the table of civilized nations? It is hard to detect any wiggle room in their call to genocide. In truth, the naiveté about Palestinian intentions has been a staple of American and Western diplomacy since the Palestinians were invented in the late 1960’s.

Some people found it very humane that Steve Witkoff, a bereaved father himself, offered condolences to the Hamas terrorist leader Khalil al-Hayya, whose son was killed in the Israeli attack on Doha, Qatar. I found it bizarre. Witkoff’s son died, sadly, of a drug overdose. Khalil al-Hayya’s son died because he was present in the headquarters of a genocidal death cult that yearns for the death of Jews (and Americans, but that is another matter). The difference between the two young men could not be starker. One was innocent and troubled; one was a terrorist or at least an associate of terrorists. Khalil al-Hayya himself called the massacre of Jews on October 7 “a great act,” something that should greatly curb any sympathy we have towards this monster.

The relentless and eternal hatred of Hamas – and of the Palestinian Authority – for Israel and Jews remains. We cannot wish it away. These are not “stupid Middle Eastern word games,” as Mr. Kushner called the long-lasting and frivolous focus of decades of Western diplomats. This is the sad reality. Nothing has happened that controverts that reality, and this reality has been ignored for time immemorial because – as once explained to me by a senior US negotiator – there could never be negotiations if we accepted that as a possibility. But wishing something away does not make it go away.

Thus, the absurdity of PM Netanyahu “apologizing” to Qatar for Israel’s attack on the Hamas headquarters, which of course I understand and accept on a political level (it’s just words, and it did help free the hostages from captivity). But was Qatar asked to apologize for hosting on its soil a genocidal death cult or subsidizing it with billions of dollars used to build its subterranean terror infrastructure? Of course not. Was Hamas asked to apologize for its ruthless assault on October 7 – its murdering, raping, pillaging, and kidnapping? Of course not; see their charter above, it is their “legitimate right.” Indeed, of all the billions the world plans to “invest” in the rebuilding of Gaza, should not the first allocation of that money be given to us to rebuild the Jewish communities around Gaza? After all, why are the aggressors more entitled to that money than the victims?

This is because of the second, almost inevitable, error made by the negotiators. They assume Qatar’s good faith and do not see them for what they are: fomenters, aiders, and abettors of terror. Witkoff and Kushner have this notion that Arabs say one thing in public and something else in private (that part is true) and assume that what they say in private is the truth and what they say in public is to quell the Arab street. They are seemingly oblivious to the possibility that what they (the Americans) are being told in private are lies for their consumption, while what the people are inculcated, and what their media proffer, are their true feelings. Children across the Arab world – and even in Palestinian schools in Jerusalem, certainly in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza – are still being taught that Jews are evil and Israel is illegitimate.

It is quite possible that these negotiators are being played and I hope that they consider that possibility. Some would argue that they might be blinded by lucre, their investments and plans for more, in these countries, but I think it is more likely that they see Qatar and Egypt (worse, Turkey) as worthy negotiators and countries instrumental in Gaza’s future because they have no choice but to believe that.

Just like Oslo was founded on willful delusions accepted by the world and thrust on the Israeli people, and just like the Gaza expulsion was sold to the Israel public by the promise of no more wars and deaths in Gaza, we are being sold this dream of imminent peace by assuming the good will of the funders, advocates, and brethren of the genocidal death cult. We fall for this latest delusion at our peril.

Part of the mirage is that peace is moments away, while it is likelier we will find ourselves again in a war of attrition, in which our soldiers and civilians occasionally are attacked and die, and we are urged to show restraint to maintain the “cease fire.” After the Six Day War, from 1968-1970, Israel lost roughly 900 soldiers in that War of Attrition, about as many as died in the Six Day War itself. We must be alert not to fall into this trap again and not pretend that only we have to “cease” while the enemy can still “fire.” And that fire can take the form of attacks on our soldiers, rockets sent our way, bombs placed in our restaurants, shootings at bus stops, and stabbings on our streets – all of which we will be cajoled into downplaying to protect the “cease fire.”

Additionally, we should be wary of another old tactic employed by our enemy and embraced by the West: attributing terror against Israel to “rogue groups” (like Trump just termed the Hamas attack that killed two soldiers from Modiin). This recalls similar excuses from decades past when to protect the PLO or Hezbollah, all terrorist acts were routinely attributed to a “previously unknown group,” which actually was the same old group, and occasionally to “lone wolves.” This verbal legerdemain fooled those who desperately wanted to be fooled. (I suppose we should then also attribute our counterattacks to “rogue forces” not under the control of our government, but I suspect we will not be believed).

We should also be concerned about safeguarding the “process,” diplomatic double talk for accepting our losses, paying a steep price, and doing nothing that will endanger the continuation of talks. There are certain staples in the world of illusion. Words matter more than deeds. Declarations of peace matter more than peace itself. President Trump repeatedly threatens to eradicate Hamas, just as Israel is assured that only Arab forces of which we approve will enter Gaza, but will all that be thrust aside to keep the process going?

There will be tremendous pressure on Israel to compromise on the disarming of Hamas, in whole or in part, and on the complete banishment of Hamas from Gaza; to overlook if all the bodies of our fallen and murdered held in Gaza are not returned; to pretend that violations of the cease fire do not mean there is no cease fire; and to allow nefarious forces such as Qatar and Turkey to gain a foothold in Gaza – Qatar, the longtime host of Hamas, and Turkey, from whose consulate in Jerusalem (which should be closed forthwith) it orchestrates anti-Israel activity through its organs TIKA, KUTAD, Younes Amra, and others. The Turks are especially dangerous, and especially in Jerusalem, where the Hamas leadership previously incarcerated has now been released and resumed its previous support of terror.

The genius of agreement was that, if executed, it fulfills all of Israel’s war aims. The weakness is that those objectives might be conceded under pressure to maintain the illusion that peace has broken out. Israel must insist that the disarming of Hamas and demilitarization of Gaza take place before any money enters Gaza, that voluntary emigration be placed on the table as a viable option that the international community will facilitate, and that a Palestinian state is a nonstarter. 

Witkoff and Kushner believe that all residents of the Middle East want peace with Israel and prosperity for all. I wish it were so. Absent concrete evidence – a good start would a complete halt to funding terror and relocation of all Gazans who do want a better life – we should not believe that.

Once again, the world will expect Israel to endanger itself to accommodate our enemy. The pressure will be intense. Let us ensure that does not happen. 

2 Comments

Tagged , , ,

The Inscrutable Mr. Trump

Posted on September 30, 2025 | Comments Off on The Inscrutable Mr. Trump

(Published yesterday at Israelnationalnews, beffpre the DC summit.)

We are an interesting nation. More than 147 countries have recognized a non-existent “State of Palestine” in the last 40 years, yet we are upset when another five nations similarly sign on to this farce. We delay, postpone, and defer a declaration of sovereignty over Judea and Samaria for almost sixty years, yet we are upset when Donald Trump says he will now “not allow Israel to annex the West Bank… It is not going to happen.” Politics, like nature, abhors a vacuum – and when we don’t act, someone else does. Yet, there is little that is more vacuous than recognition of a Palestinian state, which hasn’t changed the situation on the ground an iota, and even Trump’s blustery exclamations should be put into context.

How should Israel respond, on both fronts?

In line with the columnist Salena Zito’s prescient observation almost a decade ago, one should take Trump “seriously, but not literally.” He says things, he dominates the news cycle every day, and from one day to the next, he changes his mind. He has declared a dozen times in the last half year that a “deal in Gaza”is imminent, “maybe this weekend” he says every Friday. And, from his perspective, it always is “imminent,” as it only requires Hamas’ agreement to free the hostages, lay down its weapons, and surrender. Yet, it never happens. It is a bemusing combination of bravado, wishful thinking, and showmanship; it is not statesmanship and I genuinely doubt that Trump keeps track of the details or could recite them by heart.

Note that if Israel applies Israeli civil law to Area C, or even to most of Judea and Samaria outside of the Arab population centers, Israel has, literally, not annexed “West Bank” (just parts of it) and thus not run afoul of the Trump dictate. Nevertheless, to paraphrase Ben Gurion, it always matters less what the Gentiles say than what the Jews do, and we have been perpetually negligent in asserting our rights to our biblical patrimony and consequently engendered this diplomatic chaos.

Trump – who just a few years ago in a different iteration of his diplomatic deliberations embraced Israeli sovereignty over Judea and Samaria – could change his mind tomorrow. He is obviously concerned about potential harm to one of his concrete achievements, the Abraham Accords. But the fact that the viability of the Accords would be threatened by annexation of parts of Judea and Samaria demonstrates that they might be more tenuous than we like to believe.

After all, PM Netanyahu is not motivated by the sanctity of the land of Israel or the inviolability of our biblical patrimony but rather by Israel’s basic security needs. It is widely assumed by most Israelis, and with good reason, that a Palestinian state would not end the conflict (regardless of protestations of good faith, signing ceremonies, or Nobel Peace Prize presentations) but would be used as a launching pad for another October 7-like massacre in order to destroy Israel completely.

How does it benefit signatories to the Abraham Accords – the UAE, Bahrain, Sudan, etc. – if Israel is weak and vulnerable? Undoubtedly, another massacre of Jews would generate a (brief) wave of sympathy from these nations, but would they mourn our demise, G-d forbid? Hardly. It should be a wakeup call to all Israelis that many countries with whom we have peace treaties or are currently negotiating with to sign some sort of agreement – Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, Saudi Arabia, and others – all walked out on PM Netanyahu’s speech. They could not bear to hear him. (To his credit, the UAE ambassador stayed. To their shame, the self-styled mediator, Qatar, hosts of Hamas, walked out.)

If I had a choice between sovereignty over Judea and Samaria and a fragile agreement with Saudi Arabia, I would choose sovereignty over Judea and Samaria. Frankly, I am tired of this hollow concern with the Arab street, how Arab leaders cannot get ahead of their people, and how even Arab despots cannot be seen as too friendly to Israel lest their people… what? Rebel? Overthrow them? Each Muslim country that is part of the Abraham Accords is ruled by a dictator, a strongman, or a monarch. They are unelected, self-appointed. They have more to fear from the lack of freedoms in their countries and their heavy-handed rule than even if they would don a kippah serugah and wear it in a mosque.

The days should be long gone when it was deemed a major concession to hear a Jewish leader speak. And enemies of Netanyahu should be reminded that walking out on Israeli leaders at the United Nations is a hoary tradition that dates back to the 1950’s. Once again, it is the soft bigotry of low expectations that purports to understand why Arab leaders can’t be expected to listen to what Israel has to say. From outright Jew haters like Iran and Turkey, it is unsurprising. But we should have little faith in the viability of Accords with leaders of countries who are presently too scared to hear what the Jew has to say.

Should Israel defy Trump? It does set a terrible precedent for Israel to acquiesce in the grandiose edict of any US president – even a friend like Trump – that he “will not allow” what is essentially a unilateral decision on Israel’s part. That hubris should be challenged or we will pay a heavy price for it in the future. In reality, all Trump can do is recognize or refuse to recognize the annexation. (Indeed, when Transjordan annexed the “West Bank” in 1950, necessitating the change of that country’s name to Jordan, only Britain and Pakistan recognized it.) Israel has been in control of all or most of Judea and Samaria for almost sixty years. For how long must its residents live in limbo?

That vacuum must be filled sooner or later, and better sooner, like today or yesterday. Jewish sovereignty over Judea and Samaria – all or most – would be the final stake in the heart of that Jewish blood-seeking and blood-sucking vampire known as “Palestinian nationalism.”

There are lingering suspicions that Netanyahu encouraged Trump to oppose a declaration of sovereignty. That would be why Netanyahu said that he would have strong responses to the countries that recognize a “State of Palestine” but only after he returned from the US. But why not before he left on his journey? This would not be the first time that Netanyahu solicited American pressure in order not to do something that he did not want to do in any event. He is cautious, unpredictable, and despite the public persona of a bold and fearless visionary, he is actually quite tentative in his statecraft. And equivocal.

There is the Netanyahu of thirty years ago who vowed to reverse the deleterious effects of Oslo, and then did not, and even signed the Hebron Accords. There is the Netanyahu who voted for the expulsion of Jews from Gaza until he at last voted against it. There is the Netanyahu of the Bar Ilan speech of 2009 endorsing a Palestinian state to appease Barack Obama, envisioning “two peoples [who] live freely, side-by-side, in amity and mutual respect,” and the Netanyahu of two weeks ago vowing there will never be a Palestinian state. There is the Netanyahu on whose watch Israel was invaded, our citizens massacred, defiled, and kidnapped, and the Netanyahu who has led remarkable victories on multiple fronts, transforming the Middle East (for how long is anyone’s guess). And that is not all.

In that, Netanyahu is Trump-like, residing in a world where spin matters more than substance. In Trump’s world, it is enough to say again and again that America has “the hottest economy in the world.” It doesn’t; inflation persists, unemployment is up, no one really knows how much revenue tariffs are raising or where are all the billions and trillions of dollars of investments promised from nations across the world. It is enough to say, in many American cities, that crime is down, when in fact only arrests are down, not crime. It is enough to say things, repeatedly, and then move on to something else.

Thus, if a Palestinian state is an existential threat to Israel – and it is – then no European country or fair-minded Arab potentate who wants good relations with Israel should support it or recognize it. And since one way to avert it is by exercising sovereignty over Judea and Samaria, Netanyahu (and Trump) can spin it in a way in which sovereignty is declared, Jewish rights and interests are advanced, the Arab world is mollified, Americans (Jews and Gentiles) who support the Jewish presence in Judea and Samaria are gratified, and Trump can move on to settling the war in Ukraine, which, we have learned, was not resolved on the first day of his administration.

Will PM Netanyahu have the courage of his convictions to declare sovereignty? We shall see but do not be surprised if this can is again kicked down the road to be used as a campaign promise in next year’s election.

What can be done in response to those Western countries recognizing a Palestinian state? A proud country would call in the ambassadors of those countries to the Foreign Ministry in Jerusalem for a tongue-lashing. Some of those countries – like Britain, France, Belgium, and others like Turkey – maintain consulates in Jerusalem that for years have functioned (due to Israeli fecklessness) as embassies to “Palestine.” Those consulates should be closed forthwith, the diplomats accredited to the PA should be barred from Israel and sent to live in Ramallah, the special parking privileges, and VAT exemptions their diplomats enjoy in Jerusalem should be revoked, and whoever protests should be expelled as persona non grata.

Let’s face it. The notion of Britain and France as world powers is nostalgia, certainly in France’s case, the French having not won a war in over a century and not distinguishing itself in the century before that. That both continue to serve on the UN Security Council – while real powers with economic, political, and military muscle like India and Germany, even Japan, are excluded – is an anachronism. Most of Europe is in decline, being overrun by radical Muslims, and intimidated by the Islamist terror that visited London, Paris, Nice, Brussels, Barcelona, Madrid, and other cities.

Their appeals to morality and their concern for Palestinian lives are unconvincing. They are frightened and have been intimidated by their growing Muslim population to turn on Israel. And given these countries’ wretched history with the Jewish people from medieval times through the Holocaust, they did not need much prompting.

Trump’s musings, Netanyahu’s hesitations, and Europe’s perfidies are all ephemeral. What is permanent and enduring? The words of our prophets that have been realized in our time, such as those of Jeremiah (31:4) who proclaimed in one of the direst times in Jewish history, “you shall again plant vineyards on the mountains of Samaria; the planters shall plant and shall enjoy it.” And (31:7), “I will bring them from the north country, and gather them from the uttermost parts of the earth.” And (31:10), “for G-d has rescued Jacob, and redeemed him from the hand of one stronger than him.”

That is real. We can either choose to defer and let others dictate our future, or as people of faith, take our destiny in our own hands. If the nations of world are determined that their path to survival is through a Palestine that will temporarily pacify their mobs, then we can either acquiesce now and passively observe our decline or stand firm against the mobs and be witnesses and midwives to the redemption of Israel. The choice is ours.

Gmar Chatima tova to all!

Comments Off on The Inscrutable Mr. Trump

Tagged , , ,

Extreme Cancel Culture

Posted on September 19, 2025 | 3 comments

(First published at Israelnationalnews.com)

One can hope that the assassination of Charlie Kirk is a watershed moment for the United States but, sadly, political violence has been ubiquitous in American life for almost two centuries. Four presidents have been murdered, Gerald Ford was shot at twice, Ronald Reagan once, Harry Truman was saved by his security team (one of whom was killed), FDR as President-elect was shot at (the mayor of Chicago was killed), and two former presidents running again for office (Teddy Roosevelt and Donald Trump) were both hit and survived. (Roosevelt, in fact, continued to give his speech with a bullet in his chest.)

Yet, Kirk’s murder has especially touched people across the world, and not only because he was a young husband and father in the prime of his life. Charlie Kirk wasn’t a politician. He was what young people today called an “influencer,” a purveyor of ideas and opinions, a spokesman for conservative values, a shaper of young minds, and one of the most powerful countercultural forces to ever appear on American college campuses. His bold challenge to those who differed with him – “Prove Me Wrong” – typified his self-confidence as well as his willingness to dialogue with ideological opponents. Quite possibly, he was perceived by his killer as even more dangerous than most politicians.

Charlie Kirk was also the victim of cancel culture, taken to its logical though gruesome and hideous extreme. For well over a decade (perhaps even four decades, if one counts the conservative speakers harassed and driven from campuses in the 1980’s), there have been persistent efforts to silence people who hold views disfavored by the liberal elites. It was started by advocates of a nuclear freeze and appeasement of the Soviet Union, but was accelerated by proponents of one side of the various culture wars that waft through Western society: abortion (both pro and con), issues relating to race, women, same sex relationships, transgenders, etc. As we know, there are many places in the world today – even so-called free societies – where supporters of Israel face harassment, threats, silencing, social distancing, and cancelling.

It happened to me on several occasions, for a variety of ideological positions (all rooted in Torah) I was not supposed to have, even twice including death threats. I never paid much attention to the canceling attempts, which failed because no one I knew that mattered paid any attention to the cancelers either. As I have never been on social media, I was spared the invective directed at me, nevertheless shared with me by good-hearted souls who didn’t want me to miss out. Ignoring social justice warriors was always the best tactic – and never apologize – and they really do go away after a brief period of time.

Canceling takes the form of social pressure, censorship, termination of employment, bullying, assaults on family, and of course, character assassination. The difference between character assassination and actual assassination is a difference in degree, not in kind.

Most of the assaults and homicides of US presidents have been perpetrated by mentally deranged individuals, with Lincoln’s killer, John Wilkes Booth, a Southern zealot, being one of the very few exceptions. Kirk’s assassin presents as a kindred spirit – motivated by fierce antagonism to Kirk’s ideas and feeling no need to prove him wrong. The attack on free speech – a bedrock of liberal societies – is considered justified in many circles, as are attacks on people who speak freely. Not all speech should be supported or consequence-free but reasonable people should be able to distinguish between, say, those who are pro- or anti-abortion, and those who tastelessly celebrate the murder of someone who thinks differently than they do. The former is a clash of values regardless of how passionately one clings to either position, and should be debated. The latter, as happened several times in the US in the past week, are rightfully fired from their employment and denounced publicly. They have the right to speak, but no inherent right to work for any particular company, which most cogently recoils from employing someone whom their clients or customers might find repugnant. Where can we draw the line? At attempts to enforce a new and fabricated morality that conflicts with traditional morality, with such enforcement a staple of cancel culture.

What exacerbates the problem is the flippancy with which opponents are vilified, and called “Hitler,” “fascists,” “Nazis,” “dangers to democracy,” or “threats to society.” No one should be surprised when an advocate for whatever tries to murder his ideological antagonist whom he deems to be Hitler, or a Nazi. He thinks he is doing the world a service. It should not be lost on anyone that while the right generally believes the left to be misguided but salvageable, the left believes the right to be evil, immoral, and incorrigible. The horrific results of that equation are inevitable.

We have not yet emerged from the morass of cancel culture and its real threats, not in the US nor in Israel. The vituperative descriptions listed above are freely tossed about in Israeli society, especially by haters of the Prime Minister. The breakdown of civil society, the inequitable enforcement of the law, the rights afforded some groups and people but not others, and the outright violations of the law that may result in arrests but never serious prosecutions – including threats to many ministers and attempts on the lives of others – are the real threats to democracy in our time.

Indeed, recent claims by politicians on the left that Netanyahu will cancel the next election or that he is planning to win by cheating, will invariably attract some provocateurs who will take the law into their own hands, rationalize it, and find more support among the leftist elites in Israel than we would like to believe. Those claims are evocative of our sages’ dictum that “he who disqualifies others, disqualifies them with his own flaws” (Kiddushin 70a). They would love to cancel elections if they are left in power, one reason the elites in Israel have coalesced around the most undemocratic institution – the judiciary – and guards their privileges zealously. It also feeds their narrative that the right can never win because the whole country is against them, and if they do, it means they cheated. That claim is obviously false but also incendiary.

Is there a way forward?

Rav Chaim Yosef David Azulai, the great Chid”a (1724-1806), cited the prophet’s admonition (Hoshea 14:2-3), “Return, Israel, to the Lord, your G-d… Take your words with you and return to Hashem…” and explained that taking our words with us means that “the beginning of repentance is guarding our tongues,” monitoring our speech, being conscious of both the short- and long-term effects of what we say or write. For sure, the crawl spaces of the internet and social media have allowed people to write with such animosity, usually in anonymity but polluting society nonetheless, and finding many like-minded haters to egg them on and reward with likes, checks, subscriptions, etc.

It is not entirely clear that American society can preserve itself from the consequences of cancel culture, given that the politics is so polarized, hate speech proliferates, and few can see any good or even humanity in their ideological foes. Most American women, for example, will not date a man with whom they disagree on political or cultural issues. People live in their own information silos and have little interest – and sometimes an aversion – to stepping outside themselves and interacting with others who profess views contrary to theirs. They would rather go through life lonely and angry than re-think even one position of theirs.

Jews should know better, but our society too has been infiltrated and infected by these foreign notions, and too much attention is lavished on even tiny groups of protesters if the media elites admire the cause for which they are protesting. But we should know better because on the eve of the Days of Awe we again confront the reality of our lives, what is important and less so, what we should prioritize, de-emphasize, or ignore completely, and how G-d’s nation must show the world how disparate groups can live together in harmony when what unites them far exceeds what divides them.

It all begins with “taking our words,” seriously, guarding our tongues, respecting differences of opinion because no two of us think alike, being extremely judicious as to whom we label enemies, and regaining a sense of our mutual destiny. If we accomplish that, we will merit not only the blessings of life, peace, prosperity, and meaning, but we will also hasten the coming redemption.

Shana Tova to all!

And may I heartily recommend my book, “Repentance for Life,” very timely, and available at https://kodeshpress.com/product/repentance-for-life/ ? Yes, I may and will. Enjoy!

3 Comments

Tagged , ,