#US-Israel Relations

[girlactionfigure]

One Choice: Fight to Win

Yesterday Israel preempted a potentially disastrous attack by Hezbollah on the center of the country. Thirty minutes before launch time, our aircraft destroyed literally thousands of launchers, rockets, and drones that were aimed at various targets including IDF headquarters in Tel Aviv and sensitive installations in the North.

Despite being an impressive technical and tactical achievement, it does not herald a new, more aggressive Israeli military policy. A column in the Israel Hayom newspaper this morning was titled “Preemptive operation, not preemptive attack,” and that sums it up. The 100 aircraft that were involved were simply a more elaborate and expensive Iron Dome. Admittedly the enemy lost more assets than the rockets and drones it had planned to use; launchers and installations were also destroyed. But the objective of the operation was entirely defensive. Great care was taken to ensure that it would be seen as a “legitimate” response to aggression. Israel waited until just before Hezbollah was expected to fire, and the attack was limited to southern Lebanon. As is always the case when we play pure defense, the enemy has learned lessons and will try again.

It was telling that Israel and the US both indicated that the US knew about it in advance, and that the attack was “fully coordinated” with the US. It’s well known that the US forbids Israel to preemptively attack its enemies, so it was important to present it as limited and “intended to prevent escalation.” But it should be noted that Hezbollah did succeed to launch some 300 weapons at the northern part of Israel, from which tens of thousands of citizens have become refugees. The defensive strike still did not enable them to return home. No purely defensive operation can.

American policy continues to have as its top objective the prevention of escalation. The pressure to reach a cease-fire agreement with Hamas continues at a high level. Although they are often presented as “hostage return” deals, no proposal has been seriously considered that allows more than a minority of the living hostages in the hands of Hamas to return. The Americans have made it clear that they intend for any temporary cease-fire to become permanent, or at least extended; and this implies the continued rule of Hamas and the abandonment of more than half of the hostages.

Israel cannot allow a situation to continue in which large numbers of her citizens from both the northern and southern parts of the country have been driven from their homes and can’t return for fear of rocket attacks and 7 October-style invasions. Essentially, a third of our country has been occupied by our enemies since 7 October. This is the status quo that American-brokered diplomatic “solutions” will perpetuate.

American forces have been sent to the region to prevent escalation by either side while they pursue diplomatic initiatives. But today Israeli deterrence is at its lowest point in years, and any American-brokered compromises with Hamas, Hezbollah, or Iran, will be disastrous to us.

If the Democrats win the US presidency, it’s expected that the pro-Iranian policy begun under Obama will gather steam. The Iranian regime is not sitting idly by, but is galloping toward the finish line in developing its nuclear umbrella. Israel can’t afford to wait and hope for a more friendly administration next January, which may or may not materialize.

Israel lost her way strategically at some point, when her military leadership buckled under American pressure, abandoned Ben Gurion’s philosophy of taking the war to her enemies, and began to fight, as Gadi Taub said, “with a shield but without a sword.” We have paid a huge price for this, and it’s not sustainable. Now we are at the point at which we have no choice but to fight to win.

[eretzyisrael]

Confrontation with Iran: Who Won?

The West likes its Jews passive, dependent, and weak. When American officials say “Israel has a right to defend [herself]” they mean that they will allow her, and even assist her, to ward off the blows of her enemies. But their “rock solid support” does not extend to Israel taking offensive actions. Israel is allowed passive defense, but not to take the war to our enemies. And don’t even think about preemption.

Insofar as Israel obeys her Western “allies,” she is placed at a great disadvantage for several reasons. The most obvious one is that an entirely passive defense does not deter enemies from attacking over and over again. Why shouldn’t they? They have nothing to lose. The opposite: they will learn valuable lessons from their failures, which they can apply to the next round. And everyone is encouraged to keep trying for the honor of being the one who finally broke the Jewish state.

Then there is the relative high cost of defensive weapons. Each Arrow 3 missile like the ones used to intercept missiles fired at Israel on Saturday night, costs $3.5 million. Each Tamir interceptor used by the Iron Dome system to destroy the cheap Qassams of Hamas, the Katyushas of Hezbollah, and the drones of Iran, costs $50,000 (and two are usually fired at every enemy weapon). Each Iron Dome battery costs $50 million. The cost of using F-35s to shoot down drones is also high relative to the cost of the drones. Passive defense is expensive.

A purely passive defense strategy is so expensive, in fact, that no small country can afford to sustain it for a long period of time (and passivity guarantees that it will be needed forever). As a result, there is no alternative but to turn to one of the great powers as a sponsor. The price is loss of control and ultimately of sovereignty. It is already clear from the way American officials talk about Israel (e.g., President Biden is often described as “furious” with Israel), that Israel is seen as a satellite at best and a satrapy at worst.

Finally there is the message that is inherent in passivity. Shooting at Jews, because there are no consequences for it, becomes normalized. The Jews, people think, must deserve being shot at because, after all, everyone is doing it with impunity. This is particularly important in the Middle East, where honor is a paramount element in most cultures. Individuals, tribes, or nations that are hurt by an enemy must strike back or suffer a loss of honor, a mark that invites others to victimize them as well. Even in Western cultures – well, at least in the recent past – children were taught that failure to strike back at a bully invites more bullying.

An active defense, on the other hand, creates deterrence and restores lost honor. Nobody will attack Israel if they know that retaliation will be swift and disproportionate. If they are hurt badly enough, they will think twice about attacking again – if they have even retained the ability to do so. There is also an economic advantage: offensive weapons, like drones, rockets, missiles, and artillery, are far cheaper and simpler than technological marvels like Arrow and Iron Dome.

Israel has come a long way down the road to losing her sovereignty to the US as a result of her increasing dependence on military aid, in part to finance astronomically expensive systems of passive defense, and in part because she chooses to adopt other super-sophisticated weapons systems that are “free” even when they may not be optimal for her needs (e.g., the F-35). She has developed a culture at the top of her military hierarchy which is as loyal to the American military-industrial complex as it is to the State of Israel. The American government has, for its part, extended its influence deeper into all the affairs of our state, and in particular her management of her wars.

After the horrific atrocities of 7 October 2023, Israeli leaders had no choice but to adopt the strategic objective of removing Hamas from power and destroying its military capabilities. The US opposed this from the start, forced Israel to delay her ground invasion, and now – for several months – has prevented her from entering the last Hamas stronghold, Rafiah. The US has pushed for an extended (in effect, permanent) ceasefire, and has tried to turn Gaza over to the corrupt, terrorist, Palestinian Authority, a step which would nullify the gains made by the IDF at great cost.

After Iran attacked Israel with hundreds of drones and missiles on Saturday night, President Biden called for Israel to treat its success at intercepting most of them as “a win,” and not retaliate. The media in Israel are trumpeting the success of our air defense array, which – with some significant help from the US, the UK, and Jordan – managed to down 99% of the weapons before they could land in Israel. This is a remarkable technological achievement, but it was an expensive operation, estimated to cost 5 billion shekels, or more than $1.3 billion.

Israel has not yet retaliated, and it is clear that the price demanded for accurate American intelligence about the impending attack and assistance in defending against it was that any retaliation will be at best symbolic – and certainly not include an attack on the Iranian nuclear project.

But the 99% figure is not as “phenomenal” (Israeli media love this word) as it looks nor is it likely to be repeated. Respected Israeli analyst Yigal Carmon wrote that the whole operation was choreographed by Iran with the cooperation of the US in order to allow the Islamic Republic to come down from the tree of needing to retaliate for Israel’s recent assassination of an Iranian general:

Iran wanted to retrieve its deterrence after the killing in Damascus of Iranian General Mohammad Reza Zahedi, who, by Iran’s own testimony, was the mastermind of the October 7 attack. … [The US] coordinated with the Iranians so that civilians would not be struck. Arab media are already reporting this coordination. Iran made it easy for the U.S., Israel, Britain, and Jordan to know what it would and would not do, and where it would do it. Israel was not part of this coordination. …

The Americans played Israel and they are continuing to do so by preventing an Israeli reaction. In fact, they began the pressure on Israel not to react even before the attack took place. CENTCOM’s commander General Michael Kurilla went to Israel on April 13 and pressed for prior coordination with the U.S. of any action by Israel. Now President Biden said it himself: You were not hurt, they failed. Do not do anything. Do not escalate because you will be dragging us into a war. We protected you and no one was hurt. The answer will be diplomatic.

What did the various parties gain and lose from this exercise? Iran’s top priority today is to avoid triggering a serious confrontation that might result in damage to her nuclear weapons program, which is on the verge of completion. However (unlike Israeli leaders), the Iranians understand the psychological importance of at least appearing to get revenge when they have been injured, and this massive attack achieved that end. At the same time, the coordination with the Americans insured that Israel will not strike back, and therefore will lose points in the calculus of honor that is so important in the region. Israel also lost an opportunity, perhaps her last, to take action against the Iranian nuclear project before it becomes operational.

The Americans gain exposure for their defensive weapons systems, establish themselves as the protector of their allies, and increase their influence over Israel and her dependence upon them. Israel will have to replenish her supply of American weapons and ammunition, and the military aid is an important subsidy for the US defense industry. The Biden administration also maintains its (still inexplicable to me) policy of protecting and even encouraging Iran’s drive to become the nuclear hegemon of the region.

Carmon also notes – and this is a critical point for Israeli planners – that the 99% success rate in interceptions is not likely to be repeated in the event of a real surprise attack by Iran.

Israel can’t continue on the path of subservience to the US, because American objectives in the region are inconsistent with the continued existence of a Jewish state. She must reduce her dependence, develop her own defense industries, approach other great powers (e.g., China), and become a “nonaligned” nation rather than a satellite of one side or the other. In the short term, she must enter Rafiah, crush Hamas, repel Hezbollah, and keep Iran from becoming a nuclear power.

May Hashem give our leadership the sense to see this and the strength to act.

[alwaysbewoke]

[munib4444]

[politijohn]

Source

Source

Same day 👍🏼

[athymelyreply]

For those who can’t see it, the above is a Twitter thread by Bernie Sanders that goes as follows:

Benjamin Netanyahu is a war criminal. He should not be invited to address a joint meeting of congress. I certainly will not attend. Israel, of course, has the right to defend itself haunts the horrific Hamas terrorist attack of October 7th, but it did not, and does not, have the right to go to war against the entire Palestinian people.

Israel does not have the right to kill more than 34,000 civilians. It does not have the right to orphan 19,000 children. It does not have the right to annihilate Gaza’s healthcare system, knocking 26 hospitals out of service and killing more than 400 healthcare workers. It most certainly does not have the right to block humanitarian aid to the desperate people of Gaza, creating the conditions of starvation and famine. This is a clear violation of American and international law.

The ICC is seeking warrants for the arrest of Netanyahu and Yahya Sinwar, the leader of Hamas. The ICC is right. Both of these people are engaged in clear and outrageous violations of international law.

[mieczyhale]

Let Jews Define Jewish Terms 2kAlwaysWhyIsThisADebate

[shalom-iamcominghome]

I'm kind of obsessed with the wikivoyage page for israel like... just read it

[troythecatfish]

According to a survey by CBS News and YouGov on June 7, the majority of US citizens think the US government should send humanitarian supplies to Gaza rather than weapons to Israel.

At least 61% of US citizens said that the US shouldn't arm Israel.

Source: Mintpress

[girlactionfigure]

Israel Waits on the Edge of War

Israel has been in crisis mode for two weeks, waiting for a promised attack from Iran. At the same time, the Biden-Harris administration is trying to force Israel to accept a cease-fire agreement with Hamas. How are these things related?

The US administration is heavily invested in stopping the Gaza war and preventing Israel from obtaining full security control over Gaza both for domestic political reasons, and in order to advance its long-term goal of unifying the Palestinian territories under the control of single authority that can be a candidate for statehood.

The US has no leverage over Hamas, so the approach is to apply pressure to Israel, its client state, and to Iran, which is concerned that the US does not interfere with its progress toward nuclear weapons, which is currently at an advanced stage.

Pressure on Israel is multifaceted, including both carrots and sticks. The carrots are promises of future military aid and protection against attacks from Iran and its proxy Hezbollah. The sticks include slowdowns in delivery of promised munitions and threats to abandon Israel in the event that the war blows up into a major regional conflict. There is also the continuing political activity against PM Netanyahu, including various forms of support for his domestic opponents.

To Iran, the administration promises further sanctions relief and protection against a possible Israeli attack on her nuclear facilities.

At this point, the US has warned the Iranian regime against carrying out its planned revenge attack against Israel or allowing its various proxies, especially Hezbollah, from doing anything that might cause Israel to abandon the negotiations for a cease-fire deal. It has moved military assets into the region to back this up. The Iranians seem to have accepted the American demand. It is in their interest to avoid a confrontation with Israel now, before their nuclear umbrella unfolds, and while Israel is at peak readiness. In addition, the likely cease-fire arrangements will constitute a victory for the Iranian-led “axis of resistance.”

Although the precise terms of the latest deal as proposed by the Americans, Qatar, and Egypt are not public, we know that the first stage will include return of only some hostages (not including soldiers and possibly other males), a cease-fire of about six weeks, and a release of a number of Hamas terrorists in Israeli prisons. Issues in dispute include whether Israel will keep forces on the border between Gaza and Egypt, in the “Netzarim corridor” that separates the northern and southern parts of the Gaza strip, and in a security zone on the Gazan side of the border with Israel. The number and identity of the terrorists to be released in return for hostages is also an issue, and where they will be released. Hamas demands include that no Israeli forces may remain anywhere in Gaza, that the cease-fire will be extended as long as negotiations continue, and that the released prisoners include some of the most dangerous terrorists. Hamas also is demanding international aid to rebuild (in effect, to reconstitute itself as a military force).

Among the consequences of any agreement that even comes close to meeting Hamas’ conditions will be that Hamas remains in power, and strengthens itself in Palestinian politics. Terrorism in the territories and in the rest of the country can be expected to increase with the release of prisoners; and the international investment and presence in Gaza will deter Israel from periodically “mowing the grass” in Gaza. Israeli residents of the western Negev will soon face renewed threats from Gaza in the form of rocket fire and even incursions.

It is probable that only a mass release of thousands of convicted terrorists will bring home the male prisoners and soldiers that remain alive. It’s hard to imagine the chaos that this would bring. In the area of information warfare, the survival of Hamas will be presented (not incorrectly) as a massive victory and will encourage the other members of Iran’s “axis of resistance.”

In the next few days, the Israeli government will have to decide whether to take the deal that is being demanded by the US and by the opponents of PM Netanyahu. Israelis are being told by their media that this will “bring the hostages home” and end the fighting in the north as well as in Gaza. In fact, it will bring fewer than half of the hostages home. Iran and Hezbollah will not be deterred from continuing their attacks in the north; and it’s likely that American diplomacy will be brought to bear to protect them from Israel as well. The tens of thousands of Israelis that are internal refugees today from the north and south will not be able to safely return to their homes.

It’s true that two right-wing parties that are part of Netanyahu’s coalition have threatened to quit if the government agrees to a disadvantageous deal. Unfortunately the result of this would only be that the Opposition will support the deal and it will pass. Netanyahu’s coalition will be castrated and elections will soon follow.

Those in Israel who see the removal of Netanyahu as PM as a higher priority than the defeat of her enemies are idiots at best and traitors at worst. Our future here depends on our ability to stand up to American pressure, to defeat Hamas and keep security control of Gaza, and to successfully prosecute the coming war against Iran and her proxies. No political objective is more important than this.

[eretzyisrael]

The American Front

An American friend asked me yesterday where I thought our greatest dangers lie. Getting bogged down in Gaza? The northern front, facing Hezbollah and the Iranian militias in Syria? The soon-to-be nuclear Iran? Another intifada in Judea and Samaria? Violent riots by Arab citizens of Israel?

None of those, I said. The greatest danger facing Israel today is from the Americans.

My friend was surprised. How is that possible? President Biden expressed his full support for Israel, and is supplying us with weapons and ammunition, and has sent significant naval forces to our region. He threatened Iran against intervening. Congress just overwhelmingly passed a resolution of support for Israel. What more do I want?

So I explained that the problem with America is the same problem that we had here in Israel until October 7. It is the conseptzia, the stubborn resistance to the reality that is behind the conflict that has been going on for at least a century, and of which the butchery on Simchat Torah was just the most recent flareup.

What is the conseptzia? It is a collection of wrong ideas, a constellation of misunderstandings about who the Palestinians are, what motivates them, and what they want. It involves the mistaken projection of a set of values common in the West on a people that have different values, a stubborn refusal to listen to them, and a consistent underestimation of their intelligence, their tenacity, and the exceptionally strong emotion of hatred that infuses their culture.

Right now someone is asking how I can generalize. There are several million Palestinians, and multiple political and religious factions. How can I say they are all the same? Hold that thought – I will come back to it.

Here are a few false propositions that are part of the conseptzia:

1. Like most present-day Americans and Western Europeans, Palestinians are primarily motivated by economic considerations and only secondarily by religion and ideology. 2. The violent terrorism of the Palestinians comes from their frustration that they do not have an independent state. 3. Palestinians are essentially corrupt and will give up their ideological goals if paid enough. 4. The Palestinian Authority (dominated by the Fatah movement) is more moderate than Hamas, and would accept a Jewish state somewhere between the river and the sea if enough of their demands were met.

The reasons none of these are true come from the nature of Palestinian culture.

Palestinian culture is very different from that of liberal Americans or Europeans. That is not surprising, since it developed in an entirely different place from different antecedents. The starting point is traditional nomadic Arab culture, with its emphasis on maintaining personal and family honor and avoiding shame. The Arabs of Eretz Yisrael, who came from various parts of the region, did not consider themselves Palestinians in the beginning of the 20th century (with the exception of a small movement made up of educated Christian Arabs). Their identity was as part of their clans, and as part of the Muslim Ummah. As far as they were concerned, Eretz Yisrael was southern Syria.

Once the 400-year yoke of the Ottomans was removed and Jewish immigration increased, Muslim resistance to the possibility of a Jewish state grew, and was especially encouraged by Amin al-Husseini, the British-appointed, Nazi-supporting, Mufti of Jerusalem. The British had their own reasons for preferring Arab sovereignty when they left in in 1948, and they supported resistance by local Arabs as well as an invasion by the Arab states. But as everyone knows, the Jews succeeded in defeating the Arabs, Arab society in Eretz Yisraelcollapsed, and hundreds of thousands of Arabs fled the area that became the State of Israel.

This was the nakba, a terrible blow to the honor of all the Arabs, who were defeated – and to Islam which was outraged by the reversion of an area from Muslim to infidel rule. And they lost to Jews, the Jews that Mohammed routed in the 7th century and who were permitted to live in Muslim lands only as dhimmis, institutionally inferior to Muslims. It is impossible to overemphasize the importance of this event in forming a specifically Palestinian culture, a culture that grew out of this massive loss of honor. To be Palestinian is to suffer from the nakba, and to dream of reversing and avenging it.

During the 1960s, the Soviets encouraged Palestinian nationalism, adding to it some spices of Marxism-Leninism, and presenting the Palestinians to the world as an oppressed third-world people fighting a war of national liberation against European colonialism. Later we had the “Zionism is racism” resolution in the execrable UN, followed by the 2001 anti-racism summit in Durban, South Africa, which emphasized this theme (despite its complete inapplicability to the conflict), leading to today’s accusations of “apartheid.” Despite all this, which is mostly intended to make Western liberals comfortable with idea of wiping Israel off the map, the Palestinian consciousness still centers on the shame of the nakba.

The honor lost in 1948, and which has continued throughout “the occupation” (to Palestinians this means the period of Jewish sovereignty that began in 1948), can only be recovered by reversing the nakba, bringing back all those who fled in 1948 and their descendants, and establishing Palestinian sovereignty over the land. It is also a religious imperative to restore rule by Muslims. Finally, the shame of what has occurred is so great, that the reversal must be accomplished with great violence. Only if the land runs with blood can the accumulated insults of the last 75 years finally be avenged.

This is Palestinian culture. This is what separates Palestinians from other Arabs and Muslims, many of whom can accept the existence of a Jewish state. With various modifications and different emphasis, this is what every Palestinian child learns in school, whether in a Hamas or UNRWA school in Gaza, or a PA school in Judea/Samaria. It is even to a great degree taught to Arab citizens of Israel in the Israeli Arab educational system. It is what Palestinians hear from their leaders, in their mosques, on the TV and radio, and in their newspapers and social media. It’s what Palestinians say in Arabic, and often in English too.

Certainly there are Palestinians for whom economic goals are important; there are secular ones and Christians; and there are those who hate violence and believe in democracy. There is opposition to Hamas in Gaza and to the PA in Judea/Samaria. But the basic ideas are unchallenged – they are pervasive in the culture itself. They are the conventional wisdom, the motherhood and apple pie of Palestinians, and some form of them is accepted by the great majority. Polls consistently show that most Palestinians favor armed resistance against Israel, and elections are almost always won by the most radical candidate. If that isn’t enough, Palestinian values are often enforced by men with guns.

So that is why the ultra-violent massacre in the south was cheered by Palestinians everywhere. And that is why the propositions of the conseptzia are false. Honor/shame and religion are at the top of the list of motivators for the Palestinians. Palestinians have consistently chosen violence over statehood, and weapons over economic development. They are not frustrated because they don’t have an independent state – they are infuriated because we have one on what they believe is their property. If we give them money for development, they will take it (and skim off plenty from the top for the benefit of their leadership). But the PA will always pay terrorists and their families, and Hamas will not stop building tunnels and rockets.

The Palestinians can’t be bought off and they can’t be persuaded that it is in their interest to live at peace alongside a Jewish state. The various factions have different strategies and tactics, but their ultimate objective is the same: Israel must disappear.

The Americans are dangerous, because they don’t or won’t accept this. The Americans have been slaves to the conseptzia since at least 1967. Biden, Blinken, and the rest continue to talk about a “two-state solution”, by which they mean a Palestinian state under the PA in Judea/Samaria and Gaza (sometimes even with a road between them cutting Israel in two!) What happened on October 7 shows that this is unacceptable. If Israel loses control of Judea and Samaria, the horrific events in the lightly populated Gaza Envelope could be repeated, this time in Tel Aviv. Even if the PA were more moderate than Hamas (it isn’t), who is to say a moderate leadership wouldn’t be replaced by an extreme one? Indeed, Gaza was originally ruled by the PA, but Hamas won the PA elections; and when in 2007 it wasn’t allowed to take power, it overthrew the PA in Gaza, tossed local officials off buildings, and took over.

Ordinary Israelis understand this, and our government seems to as well. This is why it announced that it did not want to decide at this time what would happen in Gaza after Hamas is defeated. It is obvious to us that only some form of Israeli control in both Gaza and Judea/Samaria can protect us, and it is equally obvious that the Americans oppose that. That’s why they are demanding that we come up with a plan for “the day after.” Israel would prefer not to have this argument today.

There are two kinds of people that favor a two-state solution: those that don’t understand Palestinians, and those that do and want to hurt Israel. I believe that Biden belongs to the first group, but there are far too many in his administration and the State Department in the second.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Joshua Keating at Vox:

Today, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was back in a very familiar building. Not only was he making his fourth address to a joint session of Congress — breaking Winston Churchill’s record for foreign leaders — he’s also been a presence in the building’s halls since serving as a diplomat in the early 1980s. Since he made his first speech to Congress in 1996, Netanyahu has been almost as much a fixture of politics in America as in Israel.

Things felt different today. It’s not just that Netanyahu is a controversial figure, one who drew thousands of protesters onto the streets of Washington. That’s not new; Netanyahu’s 2011 speech to Congress was interrupted by a pro-Palestinian protester in the chamber. What is new is that he has become an increasingly marginalized one. Even a few weeks ago, when Netanyahu’s speech was announced, it had the makings of a marquee political event. Today, it was overshadowed by President Joe Biden’s highly anticipated Wednesday night speech to address his decision to drop out of the presidential election. Dozens of lawmakers — around half of Congress’s Democrats — skipped Netanyahu’s speech altogether.

Soon-to-retire Maryland Sen. Ben Cardin’s presence behind Netanyahu on the rostrum attested to how much of a partisan figure Netanyahu has become. Vice President Kamala Harris, Senate President Pro Tempore Patty Murray, and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, one of whom would normally have been in that seat, all declined the role. Netanyahu, who has been Israel’s prime minister for 17 of the last 30 years, has done more than anyone to make support for the country an increasingly partisan issue in the United States, in part through actions like his speech to Congress in 2015. That time, he was invited by congressional Republicans to lobby against the Iran nuclear deal then being negotiated by the Obama administration in what was considered a remarkably partisan speech for a foreign leader. In today’s address, by contrast, Netanyahu made little news. It was a speech that gave little indication of a plan to end the war in Gaza, and likely undermined diplomatic efforts underway to do so. It was a notably defensive speech for Netanyahu, devoted more to refuting criticism of Israel than to charting a way forward out of the morass it has found itself in. Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called it “by far the worst presentation of any foreign dignitary invited and honored with the privilege of addressing the Congress of the United States.”

What Netanyahu said — and what he’s doing

Netanyahu recounted the horrors of Hamas’s October 7 attacks and vowed to the families of hostages currently being held in Gaza that he “would not rest until all their loved ones are home.” Not all of those families may be inclined to take him at his word. Many of them are calling for the prime minister to accept a ceasefire deal to secure the hostages’ release, but today Netanyahu vowed that “Israel will fight until we destroy Hamas’s military capabilities and its rule in Gaza and bring all our hostages home,” adding, “That’s what total victory means and we will settle for nothing less.” Netanyahu also said, as he has in several previous remarks, that “[Israel] must retain overriding control [in Gaza] to ensure that Gaza never again poses a security threat to Israel” — a demand likely to be a nonstarter for any ceasefire deal. Despite that, Netanyahu has said in recent days that a ceasefire deal may be near, and the deal currently being negotiated is likely to be the focus of the prime minister’s meeting at the White House with Biden on Thursday. The Biden administration has tended not to respond directly to Netanyahu’s public statements on the deal, and this time was no exception. Asked if Netanyahu’s remarks made that deal less likely, a senior US administration official told reporters on Wednesday afternoon, “We were in the Situation Room doing some other stuff, so I have not seen the speech.”

[...]

How to lose friends and influence

Netanyahu praised President Biden for his “half a century of friendship to Israel” and noted that the president describes himself as a “proud Zionist.” But that only served to highlight the shrinking number of Democratic politicians who would publicly describe themselves that way. Polls have consistently shown a deep partisan divide opening up over sympathy toward Israel. He also thanked former president and current Republican nominee Donald Trump for actions in support of Israel during his presidency, including recognizing Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights and moving the US embassy to Jerusalem. Netanyahu will be traveling to Florida to meet with Trump (and possibly celebrate the birthday of his son, who lives in Miami). Still, while Trump has not exactly turned on Israel, he has clearly soured somewhat on Netanyahu, who he is still angry at for congratulating Biden on his election victory in 2020. It doesn’t seem like a coincidence that Trump posted a friendly letter from Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas on the day he announced the Netanyahu meeting.

Yesterday’s joint address to Congress from war criminal Benjamin Netanyahu is further proof that his support is restricted to hard-line pro-Israeli supporters in the USA.

Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) had the right response to his grotesquely hateful speech with the “War Criminal” sign.

[psychicthepsychic-daily]

what to boycott

click once daily to generate a donation for Palestine

join the campaign to ban Israel from the 2024 Olympics

on 2nd March there will be a worldwide protest against the genocide and the invasion of Rafah. Israel plans to launch a full scale attack on Rafah on 9th March, just before Ramadan begins, astaghfirullah.

find more information on how to participate in the global protest and sign onto pro-Palestine movements on shutitdown4palestine.org.

from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free 🍉🇵🇸

[an-onyx-void]

Exclusive: Israeli documents show expansive government effort to shape US discourse around Gaza war | Israel | The Guardian