As always, Trump’s speech swung between solemnity — when he read from the teleprompter — and stand-up comedy when he improvised, blending anecdotes, attacks on rivals, and self-congratulation. It was at times confusing, but his message left no room for doubt: after two years of war that ended with the return of the hostages, the election campaign had begun — and Trump had already made his choice.

“Bibi, please stand up,” he said from the Knesset podium, as Netanyahu’s loyal cheering section erupted in applause. “I want to express my gratitude to a man of exceptional courage and patriotism, whose cooperation did so much to make this great day possible. And he’s not easy,” Trump added with a grin. “Let me tell you, he’s not the easiest guy to deal with. But that’s what makes him great. That’s what makes him great. Thank you very much, Bibi. Great job.”

To remove any doubt, Trump turned toward President Isaac Herzog near the end of his address and said: “Hey, I have an idea. Mr. President, why don’t you give him a pardon? Come on. By the way, that wasn’t in the speech, as you know. But I like the man sitting right here, and it just seems so logical. You know, whether we like it or not, this was one of the greatest wartime leaders ever. One of the greatest wartime leaders. And cigars and champagne—who the hell cares?”

At that moment, the opposition’s hopes evaporated. For Trump, there is only one candidate he wants to work with. True, he was pleased when the opposition and the hostages’ families credited him for the deal, but he was not confused. In his eyes, it was Bibi who “did so much to make this possible.” And Trump knows what he’s saying. Just ask Joe Biden, who steadfastly refused to invite Netanyahu to the White House, opposed an assault on Rafah and the assassination of Nasrallah, and did everything possible to prevent an attack on Iran out of fear of a regional war.

Trump himself was hardly enthusiastic about the strike on Iran. Shortly before it, he had practically begged Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei to open direct talks, and on the first day of the war, he made sure that his secretary of state, Marco Rubio, clarified that Trump’s “hands were clean.” Then, suddenly, as Trump was praising Qatar’s emir, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad, Netanyahu bombed Hamas headquarters in Doha, publicly taking full responsibility. Indeed, Bibi is not an easy man. To put it mildly — Trump didn’t like what happened.

Israel’s opposition accused Netanyahu of ordering the strike to sabotage the hostage deal, and yet, after the bombing in Doha, Qatar and Turkey blinked. Netanyahu apologized, and the hostage deal moved forward. When the opposition later claimed that “the same deal could have been reached a year earlier,” Trump once again came to his ally’s defense, declaring at the Knesset: “Suppose those B-2 bombers at the Fordow site had missed, and suppose Iran had large-scale nuclear weapons — we couldn’t be here today, even if we wanted to sign a deal. We couldn’t sign it, because many people wouldn’t want anything to do with it.”

In other words, it was Bibi who paved the way for the deal. As Yedioth Ahronoth columnist Avi Shilon wrote, “The credit for the agreement — which clearly favors Israel and brings about Hamas’s surrender, at least on paper — cannot go only to Trump but also to Netanyahu. Just as he, as prime minister, bears responsibility, though not necessarily blame, for the calamity of October 7, so he also bears responsibility for ending the war with Hamas’s fall and the hostages’ return.”

Given Trump’s speech and Netanyahu’s about-face, the question now is what the opposition has to offer. Continued praise for Trump as the sole architect of the hostage deal only plays into Netanyahu’s hands. Trump has made his choice, while the opposition remains visionless — abandoning its liberal worldview by embracing Trump. Netanyahu’s authoritarian leanings pale next to those of an American president who sends troops into U.S. cities under the pretext of a “war on crime” and puts his political opponents on trial.

To grasp the full significance of Trump’s visit, one must look back six months ago. In mid-May, Trump toured the Gulf states, led by Saudi Arabia, while deliberately skipping Israel — a clear signal that the U.S. now views the Gulf, not Israel, as the hub of its Middle East presence. “Billions or trillions will fall on America like manna from heaven,” he boasted. Turkish President Erdoğan and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman orchestrated a public meeting between Trump and Abu Muhammad al-Julani, the jihadist leader in Damascus — a gesture from the two patrons of Syria’s new Islamist regime. Riyadh then sponsored a UN conference on Palestinian statehood that explicitly excluded Israel, while Erdoğan compared Netanyahu to Hitler. It seemed that the “most pro-Israel president ever” had no qualms about aligning himself with Israel’s bitterest foes — so long as the business interests of the Trump, Kushner, and Witkoff families came first, even before the interests of Israel or the U.S.

As early as March, Steven Witkoff said in a candid interview with far-right, antisemitic host Tucker Carlson: “Hamas is not ideologically committed to suicide; therefore the conflict can be resolved through dialogue.” At the time, I wrote an article titled The Gospel of Witkoff [https://en.daam.org.il/?p=1543], stating: “Since Trump’s first term, the tables have turned. If the original Abraham Accords sought to prove that regional peace could be achieved without solving the Palestinian question, the second-term version asserts that regional peace must pass through it.”

Trump’s Knesset speech thus symbolizes a broader shift in U.S. Middle East policy. If October 7 represented Israel’s weakness and its inability to deter Iran’s coalition, two years later, after the blow dealt to the Iranian regime, the balance has reversed. Trump was forced to make a U-turn and inform his allies across the region that Israel could no longer be bypassed. Not by chance, he ended his Knesset address with these words: “The story of Israel’s determination and victory since October 7 should prove to the entire world that those who seek to destroy this nation are destined to fail. The State of Israel is strong, and it will live and prosper forever. Therefore, Israel will always remain a vital ally of the United States of America.”

While Trump was forced to reconsider, so too was Netanyahu — especially when Trump turned directly to him during the speech and reminded him that “the world is big and strong.” In other words: don’t try to defy the world — it’s bigger and stronger than you. By accepting Trump’s 20-point peace plan, Netanyahu finally abandoned his dream of “voluntary transfer of Palestinians from Gaza,” the annexation of the West Bank, and the illusion of “peace for peace.” In an interview with CBS, he said: “We agreed to give peace a chance.” In practice, that will likely mean parting ways with his far-right allies Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir, who voted against the deal.

Given Trump’s speech and Netanyahu’s about-face, the question now is what the opposition has to offer. Continued praise for Trump as the sole architect of the hostage deal only plays into Netanyahu’s hands. Trump has made his choice, while the opposition remains visionless — abandoning its liberal worldview by embracing Trump. Netanyahu’s authoritarian leanings pale next to those of an American president who sends troops into U.S. cities under the pretext of a “war on crime” and puts his political opponents on trial.

Netanyahu’s responsibility for Israel’s military victories over the Iranian coalition does not absolve him of his many failings: he fed Hamas, bears responsibility for October 7, weakened the judiciary, and drove the country toward constitutional crisis — and, above all, he still has no solution for the Palestinian question, Israel’s core strategic problem. But the opposition has no solution either.

I’ll end with a quote from Avi Shilon’s article, which captures the sentiment of many Israelis yearning for change:
“Israel is entering a new era, with enormous potential, ahead of elections that will determine its direction. It’s easy to complain about the political system’s flaws, but the fact that Israel’s main political players remain the same — and that no new, significant party or leader has emerged since October 7 — is also the responsibility of Israeli society. The time has come.”

The post Trump Has Already Chosen first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

“Mr. President, give the order.”
That is the headline of an opinion piece by commentator and journalist Shimon Shiffer, published in Yedioth Ahronoth on June 18, 2025. Shiffer—who until recently directed much of his criticism at Benjamin Netanyahu and his far-right government—now expresses a prevailing Israeli consensus, forged in the pain and aftermath of Iran’s backed attack on October 7. Every Israeli now understands: Iran, through its regional proxies—chief among them Hamas—has resolved to bring about the destruction of the State of Israel.

“Mr. President Trump, this is your moment to make history, to stand alongside Roosevelt. Order a strike on the Fordow nuclear facility and help us do the dirty work for the rest of the world. Now is the time to lead a coalition that will dismantle Iran’s nuclear project and force the ayatollahs into an agreement that prevents its reconstitution.”

The Trump administration’s reluctance to join the campaign to end Iran’s nuclear ambitions reflects a broader mood in America. Since 2008, the United States has lost its status as leader of the free world. Trump’s isolationism—backed by the fascist-leaning MAGA movement within the Republican Party—is a radical expression of an American consensus now shared by Democrats and Republicans alike. It’s a consensus born of the bitter failures in Iraq and Afghanistan, rejecting any further military interventions abroad involving “boots on the ground.”

Ironically, while key figures in the American administration now oppose Israel’s plans to strike Iran, it was the U.S. itself that empowered Iran and fostered a near-mystical belief in the military might and stability of the Ayatollah regime.

The original sin traces back to the Republican administration of George W. Bush. It was then that the lie took shape: Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction. This fabrication served as the pretext for invading Iraq under the banner of regime change. Worth remembering is the role of none other than Benjamin Netanyahu—then a private citizen temporarily out of politics—who testified under oath before a congressional oversight committee. With his trademark certainty, he declared: “The question isn’t whether to topple the Iraqi regime, but when.”

Judging by the consequences, Netanyahu’s contribution to the catastrophe that engulfed the Middle East—and enabled Iran’s ascendancy—demonstrates that despite his boastful claims to prophetic vision, he in fact dug Israel into a deep hole, from which it now bleeds to escape. As the proverb says: “A fool throws a stone into a well, and a thousand wise men cannot retrieve it.”

American administrations’ aversion to military involvement was also evident in the 2013 U.S.-Russia deal to remove Syria’s chemical weapons arsenal. This deal came after the Assad regime used chemical weapons against its own people to suppress a popular uprising that threatened to unseat it. President Obama initially set a “red line,” warning that crossing it would trigger U.S. military intervention. But under pressure from his Democratic Party, he settled for a weak agreement with Putin. While it removed some of Syria’s chemical stockpile, it opened the door for direct Iranian and Hezbollah intervention, which saved the Assad regime and led to their complete takeover of Syria.

Assad, of course, ignored the American warning once he realized that Washington had no intention of deploying troops on Syrian soil. Moreover, Obama consistently refused to support the democratic opposition forces in Syria. And Netanyahu? He supported the Obama-Putin deal and ignored the existential threat posed by Iran’s total takeover of Syria and Lebanon.

Over time, Syria and Lebanon became strategic Iranian outposts. Israel, caught unprepared, was stunned by the “seven-front” assault of October 7. Once again, Netanyahu—self-proclaimed oracle of future threats—was caught with his pants down, lost control, and nearly lost the country.

Many U.S. Democrats and prominent Israeli commentators blame Netanyahu for pushing to cancel the Iran nuclear deal, attributing Iran’s sprint toward a nuclear bomb to Trump’s withdrawal from the agreement. It’s a difficult point to refute. Still, all those critics—including Netanyahu himself—entirely ignore the deal’s dark side. It gave Iran free rein to develop its ballistic missile program and enabled it to entrench itself throughout the Shiite Crescent via proxies in Yemen, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and the Palestinian territories through Hamas. Simultaneously, it allowed Iran to lay out its practical blueprint for Israel’s annihilation from multiple fronts.

It was precisely this danger that Netanyahu failed to warn the world about. Instead, he reveled in playing a game of “deterrence” against Iran’s proxies. He transformed the so-called “Campaign Between the Wars” (MABAM)—Israel’s ongoing military effort to curb Iranian entrenchment in Syria—into a kind of strategic genius endorsed by Military Intelligence. The IDF was so focused on MABAM that it missed Iran’s strategic surprise being orchestrated right under its nose by Hamas—a relatively weaker and poorly armed proxy, which in fact depended on Israeli financial and economic assistance to survive.

As the trauma of the October 7 massacre lingers, Netanyahu decided to target the “head of the octopus” and launched “the mother of all wars.” While some critics see this as “another attempt by Bibi to evade his trial,” the broader Israeli public—including most opposition parties—perceives this campaign as a just and existential battle: a fight for survival.

Yet, at this critical juncture, our “strategic ally” limits itself to tactical calculations. Like the Biden administration, the Trump administration hides behind the pretext of “regional war risk” to justify its appeasement of a weakened Iranian regime—deprived of its primary pillar, Hezbollah in Lebanon. Iran made its intentions clear with two deadly missile attacks on Israel in April and October 2024. In both cases, Biden demanded Israeli restraint—first urging no response, then permitting only a symbolic one. Again, under the excuse of “regional escalation.”

But after October 7, time began to run out. The Trump administration has done everything to placate Iran while signaling clear disapproval of Netanyahu. Trump’s highly publicized visits to Saudi Arabia and the Gulf—deliberately skipping Israel—the separate deal he struck with the Houthis, his admiration for dictator Erdogan, direct negotiations with Hamas behind Israel’s back, and his initiation of talks with Iran all left little room for doubt: Trump is willing to throw Israel under the wheels of the Saudi bus in exchange for a handful of petrodollars and MAGA applause.

Israel’s strike on Friday morning, June 13—the elimination of Iran’s entire military leadership and nuclear scientists—not only exposed the regime’s vulnerability, thanks to Mossad’s deep intelligence penetration, but also forced the U.S. into a dramatic dilemma. Israel chose to go at it alone, placing its own civilian population on the front lines. The sirens night and day, the casualties, the ruined homes, and the response of Israeli society all bear witness: the people of Israel see this as a war of survival.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz spoke the truth: “Israel is doing the dirty work for all of us.”

As of this writing, it remains unclear whether Trump will join the campaign to finish the job. The path has already been paved. U.S. participation is not a favor to Israel—it is a moral obligation. After all, it was the U.S. that created Middle Eastern chaos with its misguided war to topple Saddam Hussein. The war against Iran could mark the beginning of a new era in the region—not for the sake of the corrupt Gulf princes, but for the sake of 100 million Iranians and 300 million Arabs who languish under authoritarian regimes that perpetuate backwardness, poverty, and repression of civil rights.

They were betrayed by the indifference of America and Europe in the face of the Arab Spring—the greatest democratic revolution the Arab world has ever seen. This too will be remembered as a historic strategic and moral failure.

As for Netanyahu, he will go down in history as a leader who failed to anticipate the future, made every possible mistake, and above all, committed the fatal error of ignoring the Palestinian question—thereby opening the front door for Iran’s entrance into the Arab world.

The post Iran – The Original Sin first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

It was a three-act play. The setting: the Oval Office. The lead actor: the ruler of an empire who calls himself “the King.” Surrounding him: a chorus of cheerleaders in suits, each vying to glorify and elevate him, competing to recite his falsehoods the loudest. This is a dystopian drama set in a virtual reality. The audience watches, bewildered, struggling to believe their eyes.

In the first act, “the King,” heavyset and imposing, sits with a leaner man, much younger, bearing the title “President.” He speaks English with a pronounced French accent, joking hesitantly with “the King,” sometimes timidly stroking his ego, fearful of exposing his lies. And when he does, he smiles apologetically, as if to say: “Don’t take me too seriously.” What brought “the President” to the Oval Office? He pleads, flatters, and tries to change “the King’s” mind about “the Actor” who is set to appear in the third act.

In the second act, for the same purpose, enters “the Prime Minister,” whose polished English impresses “the King.” In a conciliatory gesture, he hands over a royal invitation from the British monarch. “The American King” seems amused and at ease, and “the Actor’s” fate appears secure.

But in the third act, the plot twists. “The Actor” enters – clad in military fatigues, his English broken, laden with a thick Ukrainian accent. Compared to the Frenchman and the Englishman, he looks tense, fully aware that he is walking into a well-laid ambush. “The King” does not conceal his disdain. It seems that all the Frenchman’s and the Englishman’s efforts were in vain. “The King” repeats his accusations: “You have no cards to play. Without me, you are nothing.” He parrots, word for word, the arguments of his “Tsar” friend, who has recently seized vast swaths of “the Actor’s” homeland. In desperation, “the Actor” dares to do the unthinkable—he tries to point out “the King’s” mistake. But “the King’s” henchman immediately scolds him, and “the Actor” is unceremoniously expelled from the kingdom, left to face the eastern beast alone.

A few weeks earlier, in the same Oval Office, a very different kind of leader was hosted—an honored guest, the first to be invited to the kingdom. This guest was cut from the same cloth as “the King.” He came from the wounded, blood-soaked Jewish state, fresh from a war fought on seven fronts. He is wanted in Europe for war crimes; like “the King,” he is perpetually pursued by his nation’s deep state. For him, lying is the norm, and corruption is a way of life. His genius lies in his gamble—betting on “the King’s” return to power—and together, they weave fantasies detached from reality.

In this scene, “the American King” is at ease, while “the King of Israel” reclines comfortably, savoring the delusions spewing from his host. “The King of Israel” carries on his back the greatest failure to befall the Jewish people since the Holocaust: the ruthless massacre of his citizens—elderly, women, and children—and the abduction of hundreds taken as hostages by savages emerging from the sprawling refugee camp known as Gaza. While he indulges in a luxurious weekend, his people continue to march the streets in desperate protest: “Free our hostages, take responsibility for your actions, establish a state commission of inquiry, call for new elections, do something to heal the nation’s bleeding wounds.” But he remains unmoved, refusing to bear any responsibility. Like “the American King,” “the Russian Tsar,” and “the Turkish Sultan,” he believes God chose him to rule. And, like his American counterpart, he surrounds himself with a chorus of cheerleaders, faithfully reciting his lies.

As they sit comfortably in the Oval Office, “the American King” prattles on about his vision for peace in our conflict-ridden region, while “the King of Israel” chuckles in disbelief. “How did I get so lucky?” he wonders. “The American King” lays out his vision for “the day after”: “You just need to clear out all of Gaza’s residents, scatter them to the winds, and I—as a former contractor—will clear the rubble and build Mar-a-Gaza, the Mediterranean Riviera!” The words sound delightful to “the King of Israel.” Original! Genius! Truly thinking outside the box!

Imagine this: until now, “the King of Israel” has been tearing his hair out, caught between two opposing demands. On one side, most of his people demand, “Free the hostages, even at the cost of stopping the war!” On the other, his messianic partners warn: “Continue the war, or be deposed!” “The King of Israel” entered the Empire-beyond-the- sea tormented and left it elated. He returned home proclaiming, “Eureka! There’s a plan for ‘the day after’—transfer! This time, with approval and legitimacy.”

As they sit comfortably in the Oval Office, “the American King” prattles on about his vision for peace in our conflict-ridden region, while “the King of Israel” chuckles in disbelief. “How did I get so lucky?” he wonders. “The American King” lays out his vision for “the day after”: “You just need to clear out all of Gaza’s residents, scatter them to the winds, and I—as a former contractor—will clear the rubble and build Mar-a-Gaza, the Mediterranean Riviera!” The words sound delightful to “the King of Israel.” Original! Genius! Truly thinking outside the box!

Unbelievable. What was once an unmentionable messianic fantasy has overnight become an operational plan. “Transfer!” his loyalists cheer. And so, we have arrived at this moment. “The King of Israel” has declared that the hostage release-deal he recently signed with the monsters is null and void. There’s a “new King” beyond the sea, and everything agreed upon before him has expired.

And now what? After a year and a half of war, in which none of its objectives have been achieved, the army is once again ordered to prepare for battle. According to “the American King’s” vision, they must make life in Gaza a living hell. “But we’ve already made their lives hell,” cry the hostages’ families. “No,” answers the King of Israel, “this time, we will unleash a hell unlike any the world has ever seen. We will cut off food, water, and electricity. We will starve them and torment them until the monster gives in and returns our hostages without any concessions on our part. Today, everything is permitted.” Some ask: “Will this actually bring the hostages home?” But that question is irrelevant now. What matters is the fate of the King of Israel. And, following the example of the American King, in order to remain on the throne, everything is permitted.

After the humiliating expulsion of the Ukrainian Actor from the kingdom in the third act, the world was left gaping in shock, eagerly awaiting what would come next. Meanwhile, in our own small and tormented kingdom, some found encouragement in these developments. One of the admirers of the King of Israel, Naveh Drori, wrote in a respected daily newspaper about “the connection between Ukraine and Gaza” under the headline “There’s a New Boss,” stating: “For Israel, this could be a positive development.”

A nation that had just faced a multi-front attack, threatening its existence, now sees the sacrifice of another nation to a bloodthirsty Tsar as something “that could be a positive development.”

It seems the world has veered off its moral axis. Human existence is losing its meaning: Two million Gazans face annihilation, hostages are abandoned to their fate, soldiers are sent to fight phantoms and sacrifice their lives for the King of Israel, who has embraced the delusions of the American King. It turns out that this is what hell looks like: people being sent into the fire as an offering for a false king who has inscribed on his banner the saying, “There is none beside me.” This is how the prophet Isaiah described the spirit that ruled the Kingdom of Babylon—a kingdom that has long since vanished, leaving behind only a desolate and shattered land.

The post Everything is Permitted – A Three-Act Play first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

In his November 18 Knesset speech, Netanyahu bid farewell to President Biden, yet not before settling scores over the bitterness he felt Biden had caused him over the past year. On one hand, Netanyahu is fully aware that without Biden, he—and Israeli society as a whole—would not be standing on their feet today. It is no secret that on October 7, he was overcome by panic; he disappeared, his vociferous government fell silent, and the Israeli society felt leaderless. Ten days later, Biden arrived in Jerusalem to fill the leadership void and offer hope to Israeli citizens.

However, shortly thereafter, the United States decided to micro manage the war from afar and actively worked to bring about political change in Israel. For Biden, Netanyahu became the main obstacle to peace. “He’s lost his way,” wrote Democratic Senate leader Chuck Schumer, asserting that Netanyahu must be replaced. Yet in the meantime, Biden is on his way out, Schumer is no longer the Senate majority leader, Donald Trump has achieved a resounding victory, and Netanyahu’s political horizon has reopened wide.

Now, in the Knesset, Netanyahu chose to publicly air his grievances, unafraid of an American response. He enumerated what he viewed as the sins of the U.S. administration:
“The United States objected to entering Gaza City, to entering Al-Shifa Hospital, to entering Khan Yunis, but most of all, they strongly opposed entering Rafah. Not only did they oppose it, but President Biden told me, ‘If you enter, you’ll be on your own.’ He said even more than that—he said he would stop arms shipments, including specific weapons that are very important to us. And that’s exactly what happened. A few days later, Secretary of State Blinken appeared and reiterated the same points. I told him in a broad forum: ‘Tony, if we have to, we will fight with our fingernails.’”

This is why the Israeli right has no real reason to celebrate. Israel needs a functional United States, not an unpredictable country that cannot be relied upon.

There was nothing new in Netanyahu’s words—they were already known—but this was the first time they were publicly expressed by the Prime Minister of Israel, a country entirely dependent on U.S. support.

Netanyahu’s reckoning with Biden was accompanied by an equally sharp critique of Israel’s legal authorities. Behind Netanyahu’s demand to investigate leaks from the military and the cabinet lies a strong desire to dismiss the Attorney General, Gali Baharav Miara, who heads the public prosecution. The prosecution’s refusal to grant Netanyahu’s request to delay his testimony in his upcoming corruption trial and the court’s decision requiring him to testify at the beginning of December have backed him into a corner. None of this would have occurred had he succeeded in carrying out his judicial overhaul: changing the Supreme Court composition, granting the Knesset the power to override Supreme Court rulings, and passing any law he deems necessary to cement his position.

Netanyahu gazes wistfully at Trump, who has risen from the ashes and transformed into an all-powerful figure overnight. Trump controls all branches of government—the presidency, both houses of Congress, and the Supreme Court. Trump’s campaign was utterly insane in every sense of the word. He rallied dubious figures to his side, such as Elon Musk and Robert Kennedy, whose common denominator is their disdain for the establishment and willingness to wage all-out war against the “enemy within.” If Netanyahu had the power Trump now enjoys, he would crown his son Yair as his successor and send the legal, security, and media establishments packing.

But Trump is not Netanyahu, and the United States is not Israel. What happens in Israel will affect its citizens and its Arab neighbors, while what happens in the United States will impact 350 million Americans and an additional seven billion people around the world. Trump is not returning to correct the injustices of a ruthless capitalist system, as many of his supporters believe, but to ignite a true revolution and upend the status quo. His driving forces are anger over his loss in the previous election, a desire for revenge against the legal establishment that prosecuted him, and against Congress, which impeached him twice—once for abuse of power and a second time for incitement to insurrection.

Trump despises the media for exposing his lies; he hates the medical establishment for siding with science against his conspiracy theories; he loathes the military establishment for remaining loyal to the American Constitution instead of pledging allegiance to him as leader; and he views academia as a breeding ground for “woke” culture corrupting American youth. He paints Biden’s America in distorted terms, claiming millions of immigrants are preying on pets, committing assaults, and stealing. He promises to fix it all, to deport immigrants, and to lower prices. This, he says, will make America great again.

However, reality is far removed from Trump’s delusions. He begins his second term with excellent macroeconomic indicators: low unemployment, controlled inflation, a thriving stock market, and flourishing worker pensions—all thanks to the very institutions on which he has declared war. You can fire the entire military leadership, unleash the Department of Justice against its critics, censor the press, curtail voting rights, dismantle health insurance, eliminate regulatory health agencies, and slash university budgets. Such a plan guarantees chaos. It would destroy the U.S. as a military superpower and as a leader in scientific, medical, and academic innovation. This path mirrors the models of Turkey, Russia, and Hungary—systems that promise perpetual rule but come with poverty, suppression of free speech, and economic and scientific stagnation.

The United States undoubtedly needs change, and Trump’s rise and the overwhelming support he enjoys are proof of that. His re-election underscores the dysfunction of the current system: a cumbersome, undemocratic electoral process; a Supreme Court and legal establishment selected on political tendency rather than merit; capital dominating politics to its extreme advantage; a privatized healthcare system that failed in the face of COVID-19; and the absence of public housing and a social safety net, which condemns working people to poverty. America indeed needs a social and constitutional revolution—but one that preserves democracy and safeguards civil rights. No good will come from the chaos, destruction, and upheaval that Trump is leading it toward.

This is why the Israeli right has no real reason to celebrate. Israel needs a functional United States, not an unpredictable country that cannot be relied upon. Despite the tensions between Netanyahu and the Biden administration, they managed to coordinate efforts against Iran and its proxies and mediated to achieve a ceasefire in Lebanon. Israeli academia relies heavily on collaboration with American academia. Every Israeli medical drug and invention require FDA approval, an agency Trump wants to dismantle. Fighting the next pandemic will be impossible without American vaccines, and if the American economy takes a hit, Israeli companies will be among the first to suffer.

A dysfunctional United States is a threat to the world, especially to nations wholly dependent on its economy and military. It might be possible to annex the occupied Palestinian territory, attempt another judicial overhaul, or mimic Trump’s actions, but the result would be disastrous for Israeli society as a whole. While the future is hard to predict, Trump’s new appointments promise a turbulent and unpredictable path ahead. He will provoke the anger of millions of Americans from all walks of life who will be directly harmed by the disfunction of a failed government.

The million Americans who died from COVID-19 and the January 2021 attack on the Capitol to prevent the peaceful transfer of power are stark reminders of the painful price a nation pays for the unchecked egotism of a leader consumed by delusions of grandeur.

In Israel, the people must hold accountable those responsible for the catastrophe of October 7. That stain will not be erased by Trump, nor will he be able to pardon Netanyahu as he pardoned himself.

The post Trump’s Chaos and Netanyahu’s Hopes first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

“Lead not by example of power, but the power of our example,” was President Biden’s rallying cry at the beginning of his tenure. Due to Donald Trump’s refusal to acknowledge his election loss, the United States narrowly escaped a coup attempt following the assault on the Capitol on January 6, 2021. Since then, democracy in America can no longer be taken for granted. The economic and social crisis that befell the U.S. following the 2008 financial meltdown shook the foundations of its democracy, leading to unprecedented social and political polarization. In Russia, autocracy replaced communism, and in the US Donald Trump was crowned as the representative of dictators, such as Putin through Bolsonaro, Orban to Xi Jinping.

Learning from the bitter experience of the failed Iraq and Afghanistan wars, Biden decided that the struggle for democracy would not be waged through military force akin to the methods of George W. Bush, but through profound economic and social change. America would return to its New Deal roots, and on a grand scale. This was undoubtedly a revolutionary approach. Such change could propel American society forward based on the technological revolution, investment in the public sector, especially in education, and thus surpass competitors, primarily China and Russia.

However, reality is much more complex, and Biden’s days of grace ended the moment Putin decided to seize control of Ukraine and capture Kyiv. Only a year passed between Biden’s entry into the White House and the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. Lacking high technology and economic achievements to boast about, Putin decided to use his military power to maintain Russia’s status as a global power.

Putin decided to challenge Biden and managed to surprise him, despite his strategic failure to capture Kyiv. Thus, the American government entered a confrontation between two superpowers, with Biden concerned that Kyiv would survive, but on the other that Russia would not be utterly and disgracefully defeated. This formula served to play into Putin’s hands, as he succeeded in proving that the United States fears of spreading the conflict throughout Europe. A year and a half passed between the Russian invasion of Ukraine and Hamas’s invasion of Israel, and more than one line connects these two events.

The Tehran-Moscow axis was formed during the war in Ukraine, without a clear opposing axis being formed against it. The Netanyahu government, and later the Bennett-Lapid government, adopted a “neutral” stance towards Ukraine. Netanyahu, out of sympathy to the anti-liberal camp led by Trump and Putin, and Bennett-Lapid out of narrow considerations of safeguarding Israeli interests, even if they come at the expense of US interests and those of democracies in Europe.

Thus, the gap between Israel and the American government widened, especially with the establishment of the ultra-right-wing government under Netanyahu. The rupture in relations between the US and Israel, Netanyahu’s attempted judicial coup, his government’s loss of international legitimacy, and the massive protest movement that erupted in Israel going as far as threats of refusal to serve in the IDF, if Israel goes all the way in its judicial coup  – all these created optimal conditions for the October 7 massacre.

During the three years since Biden entered the White House, the power of positive example has only weakened, and American democracy has failed to overcome the looming threat to the regime. Donald Trump continues to threaten democracy and strengthen in polls despite the legal proceedings against him. Alongside this, the American Congress has become an example of utter lack in governance, with a small group of extremists controlling its agenda.

Biden failed in spreading the American example worldwide, while Putin managed to organize an extreme faction within the Republican Party that succeeded in delaying approval of American aid to Ukraine for six whole months. This is the harsh reality in which the US (and thus the world) finds itself, and from which American foreign policy is derived. Biden is now primarily fighting for the survival of democracy in the US, and his considerations are subordinated to the goal of thwarting fascism at home.

From here, one can understand the White House’s position regarding the Gaza war. October 7 was a strategic blow that threatened to undermine Israel. When Netanyahu’s government was paralyzed and in disarray, Biden arrived in Israel within 12 days to clarify America’s full support. From America’s point of view, an Israeli defeat was not possible because it would have represented a victory for Putin and Iran, endangering not just the Middle East but Europe too. Biden’s support for Israel stemmed primarily from a vital interest of American democracy itself.

However, Israel is not viewed with the same sympathy as Ukraine; it carries the stain of 55 years of occupation and the most right-wing, fascist government in its history. Additionally, the political and security establishment, from both right and left, nurtured, and fed the Hamas monster. On that cursed day, Israel found itself weakened and defeated despite its absolute technological and military superiority.

After the world recovered from the horrors of October 7, it began to express its full condemnation of Israel. The scenes of destruction and the deaths of over 30,000 Gaza residents automatically transformed into accusations of genocide and deliberate starvation of the civilian population. Ironically, Netanyahu is now subjected to severe criticism for his past refusal to occupy Gaza and eliminate Hamas. The justification for his refusal appears in a passage from his book “Bibi – My Story,” written a year ago:

“In light of the recurring public demands from Bennett, with Lieberman’s support, to occupy the Gaza Strip, I convened the cabinet. I asked the Chief of Staff to present a ground occupation plan and the human cost it would entail. I then asked the Ministry of Defence to assess the resources needed to manage Gaza after the war. I believed that the human cost and resources did not justify such action.”

In other words, the occupation of Gaza and the immense toll it exacted in destruction and loss of life did not stem from an Israeli plan. It was a result of the arrogance and madness of Hamas. Only a fanatic organization like it could carry out such an unjustifiable massacre. However, all of this doesn’t interest the radical faction within the Democratic Party, for whom white Israel represents the villains, while Palestinians are seen as the good guys, even if they support Hamas.

Despite all efforts to “balance” support for Israel with support for Palestinians, warnings by Biden and his officials about the large number of casualties, the humanitarian crisis, Israel’s refusal to accept the two-state solution, refusal to accept Netanyahu in the White House, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer’s explicit call to oust Netanyahu and hold elections now, have turned into a coordinated campaign. This made the war illegitimate because the government is not legitimate. Even the hostages became a card in the hands of the United States to pressure and vilify Israel. It seems that the situation has spiralled out of control: Hamas has gained legitimacy, and the Muslim Brotherhood leaders are leading protests across Europe and infiltrating campuses in the US. It has come to the point where even Iran has joined the bloodbath and launched unprecedented missile attacks on Israel.

The power of example has weakened to the extent that following the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Biden unwillingly went to Riyadh to visit Mohammed bin Salman, the man responsible for the Khashoggi murder, and to sign a strategic agreement with Qatar. Recently, Thomas Friedman proposed in a New York Times article that Israel needs to choose between Riyadh and Rafah. In other words, to choose between an agreement to allow Hamas to remain in Gaza in exchange for the gift of normalization with Saudi Arabia, or to abandon both. The democratic vision has shrunk to a “day after” vision that many in the Israeli left are enthusiastic about, despite being based on the autocratic Saudi kingdom, with its extreme ideology and religious regime, such, that Smotrich and Ben Gvir can only envy.

The vision of world peace and democracy cannot exist alongside Putin, Khamenei, Xi Jinping, and Mohammed bin Salman. It also cannot exist alongside Trump, Netanyahu, Orban, and the extreme European right. America must stand with every democratic force in the world, especially if such a force does arise in the Arab world. In Israel, we took to the streets for months in support of democracy, yet we have not found even one Palestinian partner. If, amid all this destruction, a new Israeli-Palestinian democratic movement is created that aspires to build a shared democratic and egalitarian future, we can also be part of the force of example, and forever abandon the example of force.

The post The Power of Example first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

Israel is going to elections for the fifth time in three years, an unusual event by all accounts. These elections occur time after time because of one person, Binyamin Netanyahu, who challenges the saying that “the cemetery is full of indispensable people.” Netanyahu refuses to entertain the possibility of a loss. He is on trial for bribery, fraud and breach of trust; the prime ministry is his last refuge, provided he can get the support of 61 Knesset members. This is the number that will determine his fate, and he will do literally anything to reach it. In the previous election he was ready to join up with Mansour Abbas of the Islamic movement, and today he relies on Arab-hater Itamar Ben Gvir, a protégé of Meir Kahane.

The United States is also preparing for midterm congressional elections, which will take place a week after the Israeli. In the US there are also two major camps: Republicans who support Trump and Democrats who support Biden. A line connects Netanyahu and Trump:  both are power-hungry populists ready to trample democracy and the rule of law. The difference is that Trump is less of a politician and much more aggressive. Not only does he refuse to recognize the results of the 2020 presidential election, but he even sent fascist militias and mobs to the Capitol on January 6 to prevent Congress from declaring Biden as president.

This failed coup brought the United States to a historical turning point. From Biden’s first days in office, he declared that the US was fighting for its very soul, that is, for the democratic regime that had existed for over two centuries. Although Trump is an American phenomenon, he belongs to an international wave that advances an extreme nationalist ideology. Other members are his friends and allies: Russia’s Vladimir Putin, Hungary’s Viktor Orbán, Poland’s Andrzej Duda, France’s Marine Le Pen, India’s Narendra Modi, China’s Xi Jinping, and of course Netanyahu.

Biden and the Democratic Party knew that the Trump phenomenon could not be defeated without eradicating the new fascist movement around the world. Therefore, he divided the world based not on the narrow strategic interests of the US, as was earlier the case, but in terms of ideologies and values that clearly define the democratic camp versus the autocratic. In Israel, Biden’s political ability was underestimated. Trump called him “Sleepy Joe”, and no one took seriously the change he proposed. For 200 years, after all, the US had not only gotten along well with autocratic regimes, but it encouraged them and opposed democratic movements, for example in Iran in 1953 and Chile in 1973. This behaviour had been an integral part of American DNA since the 1823 Monroe Doctrine. Therefore, the change in Biden’s attitude largely went unnoticed.

America’s pre-Biden foreign policy had matched the Israeli strategic conception. For Israel, democracy can live in coexistence and symbiosis with autocracy, as evinced by the concept that a Jewish and democratic state is sustainable alongside an Israeli military regime in the West Bank and Gaza. Furthermore, Israel’s security is based on agreements with all the dictatorial regimes in the region – Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, the Emirates, Bahrain, Sudan and Morocco. Still further, on the international level, Israel was able to maintain a strategic alliance with the Trump administration alongside friendly relations with the Putin regime.

Yet Putin put Biden’s declarations to the test by invading Ukraine. Like everyone from Saudi Arabia’s Mohammed bin Salman to Israel’s lowliest politician, Putin was convinced that Biden’s statements were hot air. After all, Putin had conquered parts of Georgia in 2008 and the US had been silent. He’d annexed Crimea in 2014 and America had sat by. In 2015 he had destroyed Syria to save Assad, without American reprisals. He had blatantly intervened for Trump in the 2016 US elections and America had swallowed the frog.

The Saudi regime also underestimated Biden, thinking he was in its pocket. It is a fact that the US concealed Saudi involvement in the 2001 attack on the Twin Towers, and Bush preferred to accuse Saddam Hussein of responsibility for al-Qaeda. Saudi Arabia has worked incessantly to eliminate every sign of democracy in the Arab world, and since the crowning of Mohammed bin Salman as heir to the throne, it has lost all inhibitions. The murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi and the dismemberment of his body at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul crossed all red lines. Yet the then President Trump chose to believe that Ben Salman was not involved, just as he chose to believe Putin, who denied interference in the US elections, despite the CIA’s position.

Israel too wasn’t moved by the murder of Khashoggi. On the contrary, it highlighted Israel’s status as the only democracy in the Middle East, and it presented the Arabs as unscrupulous barbarians. Nor was Israel moved by the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Its intelligence assessments predicted a quick and easy victory for Putin. But Putin had miscalculated in more ways than one. It turned out that Biden had meant every word.

The world is changing beyond recognition. As the defeat of Nazi Germany determined the fate of everyone, so our fate will be determined in Ukraine. Trump sided with Putin, as did Mohammed bin Salman, and Netanyahu’s silence on Ukraine is worth a thousand words. On the other hand, Yair Lapid, prime minister of Israel’s transitional government, altered his position twice: at first from neutrality to timid support for Ukraine, and then to explicit condemnation of the Russian annexations.

Today, two important allies of Israel, Russia and Saudi Arabia, are in direct conflict with its most strategic ally, the United States, and therefore Israel has difficulty choosing sides. Moreover, the mass demonstrations in Iran, the fact that women are taking to the streets, calling for overthrow of the regime and freedom, have reshuffled the deck. Biden unhesitatingly supports the women’s struggle in Iran and has halted negotiations on a nuclear agreement. On the other hand, Putin has made an alliance with Iran, which came to his aid in Ukraine by selling him drones.

Saudi Arabia also panics at the protests in Iran. What will happen if the women’s struggle brings down the ayatollah regime? What will be the response of Saudi women, who suffer even worse oppression? For Israel, however, the most difficult question is: what will happen if Putin falls? What will be the consequences for the American attitude to Saudi Arabia? And what will be the fate of Israel’s other Arab allies who suppress every democratic movement with an iron fist?

The Israeli strategic concept—that what was is what will be, that Putin will thrive forever, as will bin Salman and the other Middle East kings and generals—is collapsing. This is also the perception regarding the Palestinians. Israel’s insistence on managing the conflict instead of resolving it, its furtherance of a merely economic peace, and its use of military force in the Occupied Territories have weakened the Palestinian Authority. The result has been a new wave of protest, which grows with the number of Palestinians killed. So too grows the feeling of impasse.

The battle between the stalwarts of yesterday’s world and those of tomorrow’s encompasses every field of life. When Israelis go to the polls, however, most will be voting “Yes Bibi” or “No Bibi”— a question blind to the historical moment in which they stand.

The post The Israeli elections: a historical turning point first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

“Jews in the Service of Anti-Semitism” is the title of an article by Ben-Dror Yemini, a columnist for Yedioth Ahronoth, published on May 25. Yemini does not spare his wrath against organizations and individuals who harshly criticize Israel for its treatment of the Palestinian people.  Yemini accuses Jewish opinion shapers such as Noam Chomsky and Peter Beinart, as well as the executive director of Breaking the Silence, of adopting Hamas’ version of events and thus encouraging anti-Semitism, even though they are Jews. Yemini’s conclusion is clear: “The illusion that ‘anti-Zionism is not anti-Semitism’ is disappearing.”

There is no doubt that many opponents of Zionism are indeed anti-Semitic, as evidenced by recent attacks on Jews in New York and Los Angeles in the name of support for Palestine. Things got to the point where Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, who leads the progressive wing in the Democratic Party and supports Palestinian rights, tweeted: “We will never ever tolerate anti-Semitism here in New York or anywhere in the world.” She was joined by her friend Ilhan Omar and by Senator Bernie Sanders, who are known for their support of Palestinians.

The problem is that while Israeli critics are accused of encouraging anti-Semitism, a much more dangerous anti-Semitism has grown among fierce supporters of Israel, those who have also identified themselves as ardent backers of former President Donald Trump. On the one hand, the Arab and Islamic public has slipped into Jew-hatred in the wake of the unresolved national conflict between Israel and the Palestinians, which has lately become a religious conflict, climaxing around the question of sovereignty over the al-Aqsa Mosque. On the other hand, the anti-Semitism of Trump supporters, as well as the American Right, draws from classical anti-Semitism and Nazism. Paradoxically, among these anti-Semitic Trump fans are people who back the Israeli Right; their support for Israel stems not from love of Jews but rather from hatred of Muslims. Because Israel is seen as anti-Muslim, it has become the object of admiration of outspoken anti-Semites who advocate white supremacy, according to the logic “my enemy’s enemy is my friend.”

As you may recall, on Saturday, October 27, 2018, Robert Bowers, a white American nationalist with anti-Semitic views, burst into a Pittsburgh synagogue with a semi-automatic rifle, shouting “All Jews must die,” before massacring 11 worshipers. Trump condemned him as did Netanyahu, of course, but the power of white supremacist organizations has only grown since then, with the active encouragement of Trump. The process culminated on January 6 this year, when an incited mob occupied the US Capitol to prevent Biden from being made president. Thus, pro-Trump and Israeli-loving American anti-Semites attempted to stage a coup d’état. Clearly, anti-Semitism, even when it does not threaten Israel, is a danger to American democracy when appearing in its fascist version.

Other bizarre examples from the Trump camp are the performances of Marjorie Taylor Green, a newly elected congressperson from the state of Georgia. During the severe fires in California and the criticism leveled at Trump, Green came out with the delusional announcement that the fires were not caused by humans, rather by secret laser forces from social circles around the “Rothschilds.” On the other hand, Green has recently compared the American medical establishment’s demand for wearing masks to the Nazis’ requirement that Jews wear a yellow star. Her position gained so much popularity among the Republican base and Covid deniers that she added to her Nazi comparison, announcing that a local bakery’s demand that its employees display a symbol of having been vaccinated was also reminiscent of the Nazi demand. While it took Republican Party leaders five whole days to come out with a weak condemnation of what she said, Donald Trump himself said not a word. It’s troubling that even in Israel we have not heard criticism of this contempt for the Holocaust. Green, by the way, is an ardent supporter of Israel, which proves in her opinion that she is no anti-Semite.

The overarching question is this: What has Israel contributed to the rise of anti-Semitism in the United States? We will start with Netanyahu’s sweeping support for Donald Trump, including the failure to criticize him or the violent occupation of the Capitol. Other factors have also contributed: How shall we describe the Nation State Law that discriminates against the Palestinian minority within Israel? Or the attempt to evacuate the Palestinians from Sheikh Jarrah and Silwan on the basis of the Absentee Property Law that applies—how surprising!—only to Palestinians? How do we describe Israeli control of 2 million Palestinians in the West Bank while denying their fundamental human rights? How do we describe the hermetic siege of Gaza and the ongoing humanitarian catastrophe there? How do we describe Netanyahu’s wild incitement against Arabs and his attempt to delegitimize their electoral power? This is a situation that has been going on for 54 years, and no person with a liberal democratic perspective can justify it, despite Israel’s lame excuse that the situation is due to the Palestinian refusal to recognize Israel.

In the United States, the Black Lives Matter movement occupied a central place in American politics. It was Trump who brought about extreme internal polarization, when the racism he encouraged caused a backlash from the Afro-American community, which mobilized and provided victory to Biden. And how surprising, Trump refused to recognize the legitimacy of the black votes just as Netanyahu refuses to recognize the legitimacy of the Palestinian or Arab votes. But unlike Israel, in the United States the political power of blacks is enormous, and they have succeeded in placing the question of institutionalized racism on the public agenda.

While the Democratic Party, which controls the White House and both houses of Congress, encourages the debate on racism to the chagrin of Republicans, in Israel the very raising of the issue results in a cry of “anti-Semite!” Herein lies the growing gap between liberal American society and Israeli society. While Americans dare to look inward, Israeli liberals flee from this question, as evidenced by their willingness to forge an alliance with racists such as Naftali Bennett and Gideon Sa’ar in the name of removing Netanyahu from the prime ministry.

Since there are anti-Semites who declare themselves to be Zionists, anti-Semitism is not necessarily anti-Zionism. But it’s good to be cautious and say that opponents of Zionism and white supremacy can also be drawn into anti-Semitism, if they wrap all Jews and Israelis in one package. As time goes by and Israel moves further to the right, to the point of supporting Trump, it is no wonder that increasing sections of the American Jewish public are ceasing their blind support for Israel. And so, not coincidentally, many from the liberal Jewish public, including Jewish members of Congress, are among the major supporters of both Afro-American and Palestinian rights. At the same time, clear supporters of Palestinian rights, such as Bernie Sanders, are very careful, and rightly so, not to fall into the trap of anti-Semites who connect Judaism to Zionism.

Criticism of Israel is not only legitimate but necessary. There is no other way to bring Israeli democratic forces and Palestinian democratic forces together. Democratic Israelis condemn any expression of racism by Israel’s messianic Right against Palestinians, just as democratic Palestinians are obligated to condemn any expression of national religious racism and anti-Semitism against Jews. In doing so, the Israelis are doing the Palestinians no favors, but are defending their very right to live in a democratic and secular society that respects human rights. Similarly, condemnation of fundamentalist political Islam and narrow nationalism is not doing a favor to Jews but to Palestinian society itself, in order to break free from patriarchal society and its political establishment, which suppresses all criticism and freedom of expression. The way to fight anti-Semitism in America, as well as in Israel, is to adopt democratic values that unite whites and blacks, Israelis and Palestinians, on the basis of equality and partnership in destiny.

The post Faces of anti-Semitism first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

The carnage in the Pittsburgh synagogue overshadowed the international scandal aroused by the murder of the well-known journalist and Saudi government critic, Jamal Khashoggi. Although there appears to be no connection between an anti-Semitic slaughter and the murder, President Trump is linked to both events. The Jewish community in Pittsburgh protested Trump’s visit. They view his rhetoric as racist. The fact that he defines himself as a “nationalist” foments division and hatred, encouraging murder.

Trump continues to be a welcome guest in Saudi Arabia’s capital, Riyadh. He is doing everything in his power to help his friend, the de facto Saudi leader and crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman (a.k.a. MBS), to obscure the latter’s direct involvement in Khashoggi’s death. Trump hastened to announce, “I believe him.” He also trusts Putin, Kim Jong Un, the Philippine strongman Rodrigo Duterte, and now the newly elected extreme right-wing president of Brazil, Jair Bolsonaro.

Many were surprised by the crude and amateurish way in which Khashoggi’s execution was carried out inside the Saudi consulate in Istanbul. As Trump’s protégé, the crown prince must have felt he had complete immunity. When the US president legitimizes lies as a weapon to attack his rivals, there is no reason why MBS’s fabrications should not be accepted too. MBS did in Istanbul what Trump does every day in Washington: eliminating political rivals through deception. This encourages attacks like the sending of bombs to Democrats and the massacre of Jews during prayer.

Khashoggi’s murder is a seminal event with the potential to shake up the Saudi royal family and threaten the throne of the supposedly enlightened crown prince. The mafia-style political hit has revealed his violent and murderous character. Is this the sort of man we can expect to lead Saudi Arabia into the 21st century by making far-reaching changes in the economy, social reforms, and the status of women?

The brutal war in Yemen (a humanitarian disaster), MBS’s detention of Lebanese President Saad Hariri, the arrest and extortion of MBS’s opponents within the royal family, barely raised the global eyebrow. Saudi Arabia’s enormous weapon procurements worldwide, especially from the United States, blinded many to his tyrannical behavior. However, Khashoggi’s murder has changed the equation.

Jamal Khashoggi was not some innocent journalist. An important political figure who once worked close to the royal court, he was an unofficial Saudi spokesperson while Prince Turki Al-Faisal headed the Saudi security services. Although Khashoggi used to talk about democracy, he stressed that the religious regime was the most suitable sort for conservative Saudi society. Khashoggi’s professional journalistic roots lie deep in Afghanistan, where he was close to Osama bin Laden when the latter was a favorite of President Ronald Reagan. However, following MBS’s palace coup, Khashoggi found himself, along with many in the royal court, cut off from power and a foe of the new ruler.

Following the rise of MBS, Khashoggi went into exile to conduct his struggle against the new regime. He chose the Washington Post as a platform from which to blast the new Saudi ruler. Jeff Bezos, the CEO of Amazon and one of Donald Trump’s most vocal opponents, owns the Washington Post. Jamal Khashoggi served as a tool of the American liberal wing to attack American policy in the Middle East, especially Trump’s support of MBS.

Khashoggi acted as a journalist steeped in Saudi affairs, exposing the shady sides of the new ruler. This undoubtedly offended MBS, who from his first days has employed an aggressive public relations campaign and invested money in Silicon Valley’s high-tech giants. His goal has been to create a technological revolution for his ambitious plan, “Vision 2030,” which will end Saudi dependence on oil as a major source of income. The vision is to attract large foreign investments to the Saudi economy in renewable energy, education, health, culture, recreation, and tourism.

However, the kingdom’s illnesses obstruct these goals. First, Saudis have grown accustomed to a life of idleness. Ten million foreigners, mainly Pakistanis and Indians, do the hard work. Saudis live on oil revenues. Their daily needs are subsidized and they pay no taxes. This is how the regime maintains internal quiet. Second, Saudi Arabia’s judicial system is based on Islamic Sharia law.It has no modern legal apparatus that can protect the interests of foreign companies. Third, in a country where half its citizens, the women, are unemployed and oppressed, there is little chance of economic growth. MBS’s steps for women are still far from what is needed to enable their integration into society and the economy. Fourth, every word of criticism is prohibited. This stymies cultural and scientific innovation and is contrary to Islamic religious law. Therefore, the transition to innovation is almost impossible. Saudi Arabia will need a lot more than a charismatic leader to propel itself into the modern world.

The Saudis fully understand that the era of oil has passed. Renewable energy occupies a central place in the world’s leading economies, and large amounts of capital are being invested in the development of autonomous electric cars. This threatens the very essence of the conservative Saudi regime. That is why Khashoggi’s murder is not only the beginning of MBS’s end, but it also puts a finishing touch on attempts to combine a royal religious dictatorship with modern economics.

The murder also sends a clear message to Benjamin Netanyahu and all those in Israel who see the Sunni axis as a bulwark against Iran, thinking it relieves them of any need to reach peace with the Palestinians. Officially, Israel has refrained from condemning Khashoggi’s slaying. Supreme security interests motivate cooperation with Israel buffs like Viktor Orban, Rodrigo Duterte, Jair Bolsonaro, and Donald Trump. However, the Saudi regime is built on sand, and its approach to Israel stems from weakness, not power. A self-confident regime does not urgently dispatch fifteen security men on a private plane to liquidate a rogue journalist who has come to its consulate in Istanbul to get papers that will allow him to marry.

Saudi Arabia serves as Trump’s ticket to the Arab world. MBS initially agreed to broker the “deal of the century,” which will give Israel control over the West Bank in exchange for limited Palestinian autonomy. Saudi Arabia, heading the coalition of Sunni Arab states, remained silent when Trump transferred the American embassy to Jerusalem. In exchange, Israel kept as quiet as a tomb when Khashoggi disappeared. Saudi Arabia backed the military coup in Egypt and supported the dictatorship of General el-Sisi, who is also a close friend of Israel.The Saudis also appointed jihad militias in Syria that liquidated the democratic youth who led the revolution against the Assad regime. Saudi money has also helped spread fundamentalist Islamic Wahhabism by funding mosques in Israel and around the world.

Therefore, the decline of the Saudi regime represents, above all, an eclipse of fundamentalist Islam as we have known it since the 1980s. This decline paves the way for the democratic forces that led the Arab Spring to return to the stage and establish a democratic regime. Only such a revolutionary movement, rising from the rank and file, can usher the Arab world into the Fourth Industrial Revolution that is currently spreading throughout the globe.

* Translated from the Hebrew by Robert Goldman

The post Khashoggi’s murder will bury the Crown Prince first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

Israel’s 70th Independence Day marked a change. What began with the establishment of the State of Israel by David Ben-Gurion is ending abruptly with none other than Donald Trump. Declaring Jerusalem the capital of Israel was not just the “right and natural thing,” as Trump claimed, but an opening shot in a drastic, aggressive and uncompromising effort to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Even before the rollout of the “Deal of the Century”, its general guidelines are clear. Jerusalem is off the table; defunding UNRWA (United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees) solved the refugee problem; a confederation with Jordan will replace Palestinian sovereignty over the West Bank; and the closure of the PLO’s mission in Washington effectively removes the PLO as a partner for negotiations with Israel.

In Israel, Trump’s impulsiveness enjoys across-the-board approval. The ruling coalition is overjoyed, and the opposition is silent. After all, how can the latter oppose the recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, or the sleight-of-hand trick to resolve the issue of the right of return? Why should the opposition oppose sanctions against the Palestinian Authority? Moreover, what Israeli could even contemplate the removal of an American president who fulfils the Zionist vision of a Greater Israel via his three wise men – Jared Kushner, Jason Greenblatt and David Friedman, along with the hawkish national security adviser John Bolton?

In fact, one finds it difficult to know where the Israeli government ends and the Trump administration begins. Trump promotes policies so far to the right that they probably wouldn’t make it through the Knesset or even the cabinet. He knows better than Israelis do how to conduct negotiations (The Art of the Deal!), and how to reach the finish line: power, more power, extortion, threats, fraud, and deceit are the accepted rules in Trump’s shadowy world.

Although Trump’s decisions receive wall-to-wall acceptance in Israel, in the United States Trump is perceived as a national security risk. His own administration is doing everything it can to thwart his agenda, especially with regard to foreign relations. Books such as Fearby Bob Woodward, or Fire and Fury by Michael Wolff reflect the terror that has taken hold of the American political, security and media establishment. Viewing Trump’s Twitter page suffices to show the depth of the crisis in American and global politics.

Investigations into and convictions of some of his close associates, his sordid sex affairs, his hallucinatory press conference with Putin in Helsinki (where he announced that he believed the Russian dictator and not his security services), and the incessant evidence of his impulsive nature and comprehensive ignorance testify to the nature of Trump’s strange decisions and distorted judgment. However, in Israel, as in the Philippines, Russia, North Korea, and Saudi Arabia, there are those who love Trump and view him as an asset, giving them an excellent opportunity to reinforce their political status. Usually, these tyrants and dictators maintain aggressive regimes and stamp out opposition.

Israel is not a dictatorial state. It still enjoys a democratic regime and a vibrant and critical press. This, however, raises the question: how is it possible that Trump’s delusional steps regarding the conflict with the Palestinians are accepted with such complacency? If the problem of Jerusalem could be removed from the negotiating table with such alacrity, why was it not done before? What was the problem that prevented the cancellation of the right of return by simply abolishing UNRWA? Why take the trouble to finance the Palestinian Authority if it can simply vanish by closing the money tap? How can it be that no previous US administration, conservative or liberal, Democratic or Republican, thought of this before? And why have Israeli governments lived with this situation for 70 years? Either Trump is the genius of the generation, or he is the fool of the century.

If we examine Trump’s policies, we will soon conclude that they are bad and will only aggravate the present situation. The PLO mission in Washington opened after the PLO recognized Israel and signed the Oslo Accords. From that moment on, the Palestinian Authority replaced the Israeli Civil Administration. The PA became Israel’s security sub-contractor in the occupied territories, especially in the densely populated cities of the West Bank and Gaza. Does Israel have another alternative—a more reliable partner to manage and maintain order in the occupied territories? It is true to say today that, despite the complete freeze in negotiations, the PA continues to provide economic and security benefits for Israel. According to Abu Mazen himself, there is a 99% agreement between him and Israel’s security service.

Does ending financial aid to UNRWA solve anything? American funding for the UN agency was never due to generosity, but to coldly calculated political considerations. The purpose was to “maintain” the refugees and keep them from becoming a factor that could shock and destabilize Arab countries, especially Jordan and Lebanon, as well as the West Bank and Gaza. Who will fund the education of almost a quarter million Palestinian children, and who will benefit if, instead of attending school, these youngsters roam the squalid refugee camps and throw stones at Israeli soldiers?

Trump’s latest moves reveal, more than anything does, the surrealistic nature of the Israeli Right and the weakness of the opposition. It is increasingly clear that not only Jerusalem has been taken off the negotiating table, but also the other sticking points of the Oslo Accords, which were supposed to be resolved in the final status negotiations. Now, interim agreements are frozen, and a permanent agreement is not on the horizon. There are no more topics to discuss, so there is no need to negotiate. That is the true meaning behind the closing of the PLO mission in Washington.

It seems that Trump and Netanyahu believe, and in this, they are probably right, that the PA’s political and economic interest to continue living off external handouts, and off the transfer of customs duties from Israel, is greater than its desire to end the occupation. Anyone who has watched the current series “The Oslo Diaries,” gets the impression that the PLO would have accepted any Israeli conditions that gave them a foothold, if only limited, in the occupied territories. Therefore, if the PA wants to continue to exist, even as a straw man, it must accept the situation.

The message of “The Oslo Diaries” is very clear: Likud and Hamas—the two players that today set the tone of the conflict—are living in a symbiotic relationship. The Baruch Goldstein massacre at the Tomb of the Patriarchs in 1994 was a trigger to the wave of terrorism by Hamas, and Yigal Amir finished the job with the murder of Yitzhak Rabin. Both Likud and Hamas rely on messianic religious doctrines – Israeli-Jewish religious law and Palestinian-Islamic extremism. They cannot defeat each other, even though the balance of power is always in favor of the Israeli side.

The Israeli Right has thus far succeeded in preserving economic well-being while conducting a cruel and bloody war of attrition. In the shadow of its futile war against the Palestinians, the Right has opened another front against Israeli liberalism, as expressed in its nation-state law, its measures to change the nature of the Supreme Court, and its steps to rein in human rights organizations. There is currently a Palestinian-Israeli consensus that this conflict has no foreseeable solution and that the occupation will continue along with the siege of Gaza. Therefore, Israel forfeits peace and democracy, and the Palestinians give up the possibility to live in dignity and freedom.

Thus, an American president who sees democracy as a danger and believes peace to be a simpleton’s pipe dream will continue to make new and delusional proclamations. The “Deal of the Century” remains unpublished, and it is doubtful whether it will ever be. However, published or not, it endangers the lives of Israelis and Palestinians.

* Translated from the Hebrew by Robert Goldman

The post The Demise of the Palestinian Question first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

Three of President Trump’s envoys – Kushner, Greenblatt and Friedman – spent this past weekend in Israel. They worked on Friday and marked the end of the Sabbath in a West Bank settlement. Afterwards, they returned for a second meeting with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The subject: Trump’s so-called deal of the century. Jared Kushner and Jason Greenblatt began their journey in Saudi Arabia, continuing to Qatar, Egypt, Jordan and Israel. They didn’t go to Ramallah, where they had been declared personae non gratae. The perplexing thing is that although Kushner and Greenblatt were sent to discuss a plan that concerns the Palestinians, they view Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) as an absentee landlord. Just as Syria’s fate is being decided by America, Russia, Turkey, and Iran without Syria’s participation, the current deal is being forged between the Arab states and Israel without Palestinian engagement. Moreover, the current round of talks takes place against the background of the opening of the American Embassy in Jerusalem and the murder of more than 100 Gazans by IDF snipers. This did not prevent Trump’s senior advisors from being received with great pomp in the courts of Arab kings and dictators.

The heads of the “moderate” Arab states where Kushner and Greenblatt visited expressed few reservations about the one-sided American move of the embassy to Jerusalem, an act that emptied any would-be negotiations of all content. They adopted Trump’s position as expressed in his first official press conference with Netanyahu at the White House: “I am looking at two-state and one-state, and I like the one that both parties like.” The Arab states’ position was cunning in its ambiguity: “We will accept what will be agreed upon by the Palestinians.” In other words, we Arab rulers will not oppose the deal of the century, but you, Americans, will have to bring the horse to the water, even if it will take some whippings.

Saudi Arabia is prepared to sacrifice the Palestinian ‘pawn’ in order to save the Saudi ‘queen’ from the Iranian threat, just as Hamas is prepared to sacrifice the West Bank in order to maintain its rule in Gaza. But the separation between the PA and Hamas, between the West Bank and Gaza, gives the Americans wiggle-room. They exploit the humanitarian situation in Gaza to advance Trump’s ‘ultimate deal,’ which returns us to the pre-Oslo era and the ‘Gaza first’plan. Abbas has more than a little responsibility for the present crisis. He stopped paying salaries to unemployed PA officials in Gaza and cut back severely on electricity and health services. This provides an opening for Israel, Egypt, and the Americans to pursue a final separation between the West Bank and Gaza. But Abbas is confident that it will be impossible to rehabilitate Gaza without his involvement and that the deteriorating situation will force Israel into another round of bloodshed with Hamas. For its part, Israel is trying to delay the next war by reducing sniper fire. It is also floating the idea of building a pier in Cyprus for the processing of goods heading to and from Gaza (they currently go through Israel), along with a plan for a solar power plant near the Erez checkpoint. In effect, it is trying to persuade Hamas to accept a “quiet-for-quiet” formula, thereby thwarting Abbas’s desperate attempt to perpetuate the economic siege on Gaza and force Netanyahu to negotiate.

Kushner’s rare interview with the Palestinian Jerusalem daily Al-Quds (June 24, 2018) was meant to inform Abbas (and anyone else) that the US is “not counting on him” and would launch its peace plan with or without him. In fact, Kushner appealed to the Palestinians over Abbas’s head and questioned his willingness to end the Israeli–Palestinian conflict: “To make a deal, both sides will have to take a leap and meet somewhere between their stated positions. I am not sure President Abbas has the ability to do that.” Kushner did not even mention a Palestinian state or Israeli settlements, referred instead to economic peace. The interview looks toward the day when the ailing 82-year-old Abbas leaves the stage, along with his 25-year-old mantra of “an independent Palestinian state along the 1967 lines with East Jerusalem as its capital.” Kushner wants this formula to go away. He urges the Palestinians to change the diskette and see reality through an ‘economic’ rather than a ‘political’ prism.

For four years, Netanyahu has worked ceaselessly to neutralize the land-for-peace idea by stubbornly declining to discuss the fundamentals of the conflict with Abbas. He crossed swords with, and survived pressure from, Obama and Kerry. The latter pretended to know what was good for Israel, just as Kushner pretends to know what’s best for the Palestinians. Nonetheless, as soon as Obama finished his term and Trump came to power, things changed. Trump and Netanyahu are one, and what Netanyahu asks, Trump executes with great enthusiasm. Netanyahu is marking 12 years of continuous rule and has formed the most extreme government Israel has ever known. Apparently, it’s easier to ignore Abbas than the Palestinians as a people. Even when the Palestinian presidentmakes an exit, the Palestinian people will remain stuck in Israel’s throat. The solution, according to Netanyahu, is undoubtedly the ‘deal of the century,’ which seems to have the support of Arab allies from the Sunni axis.  Nevertheless, without a united Palestinian leadership to implement it, it will remain a draft on paper.

The Kushner-Greenblatt duo is not satisfied with the enlisting support of the Sunni axis, but seeks to create a new Palestinian leadership that would shake off the ‘historic’ approach and accept economic peace. However, the US faces obstacles. Many candidates are competing to inherit Abbas’ position. Muhammad Dahlan, from the Khan Yunis refugee camp in Gaza, is supported by the Emirates and Egypt but shunned in the West Bank. His rival from Hebron, Jibril Rajoub, has support in the West Bank but is unwelcome in Egypt. There is also Mahmoud al-Aloul, who returned from exile in Tunisia with Arafat. And apart from these legionnaires, who are fed up with Fatah infighting and Israeli jails, there is Salam Fayyad, a former prime minister and World Bank official, who enjoys the trust of the Americans but has little support on the ground.

Because of the rivalry between Fatah and Hamas and the absence of a political horizon, democratic elections for the Palestinian Authority will not take place. The competition between heads of the various organizations, while the Gulf States meddle in choosing Abbas’s successor, promises an uncertain period in which the chaos in Gaza could spill over to the West Bank. Any candidate who consents to the Trumpian-Israeli ‘deal of the century’ will receive the dubious titles of National Traitor and Collaborator. The storm that Trump is currently brewing in the Middle East is a direct continuation of the havoc he is producing in his own country and the world as a whole: trade wars with Europe and China; draconian laws against immigrants; denial of climate change; the embracing of tyrants like Putin and Kim Jong-Un; and the backing of racists in Europe. Few will escape the Trump tornado.

Netanyahu can take encouragement from the Sunni axis, Europe’s swelling nationalism, and Trump’s crazy tweets, especially his attacks on the legal authorities and the press, but when all is said and done, Bibi finds himself immersed in the burgeoning chaos of Gaza and the West Bank. It is a chaos of his own making, and he need blame no one else. Twelve years of Likud rule have buried the Palestinian State. On its ruins is arising the New Israeli Apartheid State.

* Translated from the Hebrew by Robert Goldman

The post Kushner, Greenblatt, Friedman and the absent Palestinian president first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.