As we grieve for Israeli victims of Hamas’s October 7 raid into Israel, and for Israeli soldiers killed in fighting Hamas, and for Palestinians caught in the crossfire and starved by Hamas, and for the devastation in Israel and Gaza – let’s not forget a key cause of the ongoing disaster: Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s 2005 “disengagement” from Gaza and the attendant expulsion of “Gush Katif” settlers from Gaza. What a whopping strategic mistake!

The wrong and wrenching Israeli disengagement – twenty years ago this week – inspired the October 7 massacre. It not only gave Hamas the opportunity to seize control of Gaza and dig attack tunnels and arm itself to the hilt, but it gave Hamas the motivation and confidence that it could crush Israel.

The fact that the supposed Israeli strongman, General Sharon, fled lock-stock-and-barrel from Gaza in the face of Palestinian terrorism and brutally crushed the Israeli “settler” sector, strengthened extremists in Palestinian society and led to collapse of Israeli deterrence.

Sharon’s argument – that after leaving Gaza Israel would enjoy overwhelming backing from the world to decisively crush “residual” Palestinian terrorism from Gaza – turned out to be utter nonsense. Until recently, the world never truly supported Israeli military action against the jihadist Palestinian state that emerged in Gaza. And even today many world leaders refuse to recognize the obvious existential threats that any Palestinian state in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza would pose to Israel for the foreseeable future

The bottom line is that those who understood in real time that the Israeli disengagement was bound to be a disaster for Israelis and Palestinians alike – were right. The resilient Right knew that the ravaging of Gush Katif was a deathblow to Zionism and to Israeli security. The levelheaded Left knew that unilateral withdrawal would boost the worst elements in Palestinian society.

If all this was so painfully obvious, why did Sharon obtain real-time support from so many Israelis? The answer I think is that the disengagement initiative was a trenchant exhibition of bleak and vengeful impulses in Israeli politics. It was not really or mainly about peace with the Palestinians (which Sharon certainly did not believe in), but, alas, about the crushing of Religious Zionism.

Reflect upon this story from miserable August 2005. This happened several days after the violent ejection of Israelis from the magnificent towns of Gush Katif and the ransacking by Palestinians of the spectacular farms and greenhouses that Israel purposefully left behind for Palestinian benefit. I hosted in Israel a group of 14 Canadian newspaper editors. The group met its peers at all Israeli newspapers, including the then-editor-in-chief of Haaretz, David Landau.

Mr. Landau was an English gentleman, and to me, always a good colleague. While we were poles apart ideologically, I appreciated his advice and even his support. I knew that my Canadian guests would find him fascinating. But this time, Landau’s radical creed got the better of him, and he proceeded to give a lesson in raw Israeli politics to the unsuspecting Canadians.

“You undoubtedly want to know what I think about the disengagement from Gaza,” he told the Canucks. “I’ll tell you: I think that it was the most important and uplifting thing that has happened in this country in decades! It gives me great hope for the future. I am delighted by the disengagement. But not for the reasons you imagine,” Landau asserted with a smirk on his face.

“You Canadians probably think that the withdrawal is a fine thing because it ends the Israeli occupation of Gaza,” Landau said, toying with the visitors. “But that’s not it,” he proclaimed, gesticulating with his hand in a dismissive motion. “That’s not what makes the disengagement important.”

“And you Canadians probably think that the withdrawal is a good thing because the Palestinians now will be able to build a thriving state in Gaza, and show Israel and the world that they can live in peace alongside Israel. But that’s not it,” Landau again proclaimed, again waving his hand dismissively. “That’s not what makes the disengagement important.”

“And you probably think that I think the withdrawal is a very good thing because my sons will no longer have to do army duty patrolling the alleyways of Khan Yunis and Jabalya,” said Landau. But that’s not it,” he proclaimed, his hands flicking furiously and derisively. “That’s not what makes the disengagement important. In fact, that’s really not important at all.”

Here Landau turned red in the face. He began banging on the table and bellowing at full volume. “I’ll let you in on a secret: a dirty little secret known only to true Israeli insiders!” he said.

Now screaming: “The reason why the disengagement is so important; the reason why it is so historic a move; the reason why it makes Ariel Sharon into such a great hero; the reason why it fills me with hope for the future – is because we crushed Religious Zionism!” Landau barked.

Shocked silence in the room. And then boom, crash, whack – Landau pounded on the table some more. “We crushed the Religious Zionist rabbis and settlers! We destroyed their Gush Katif towns, and we smashed their political power! We decimated the Religious Zionist lock-hold on Israeli politics. And now, now, now… Now there may be, finally, true hope for peace!”

Landau then wiped away the saliva that was literally oozing from his mouth. He had completed this bloody baring of his soul.

The Canadian visitors sat dumbfounded. They had come seeking understanding of Israel’s strategic environment and of Israel’s diplomatic horizons. Instead, they were treated to an acerbic exhibition of the vindictive compulsions that course through Israeli politics.

EVER SINCE THEN, it has been clear to me that a very deep and central motivation of the Left’s enthusiasm for the Gaza disengagement indeed was evisceration of the settlement movement and the disembowelment of the Religious Zionist community that largely stands behind it.

This ugly truism was borne out at conferences in 2015 marking the tenth anniversary of the disengagement, held at the Israel Democracy Institute and the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies.

None of Sharon’s aides who spoke at these conferences – Dov Weissglass, Yisrael Maimon, Amos Yaron and others – could cobble together a convincing diplomatic rationale for the expulsion; any logic that stood the test of time. Nor did they express any remorse, despite the obviously catastrophic security consequences of the unilateral withdrawal.

Intellectual figures like A.B. Yehoshua and Fania Oz-Sulzberger were no better. No regrets, no political repentance, no recalibration of their ragged strategic worldview.

“The settlers are just a bunch of fanatic right-wing crybabies,” the foul-mouth Israeli media personality Yaron London roared. “So they had to move a few kilometers away, so what? I moved 16 times in my lifetime and never demanded compensation from anyone!”

Then London let the cruel cat out of the bag. “We had to get out from under your strangling grip,” he told former National Religious Party MK and Gush Katif resident Zvi Hendel, with whom he shared a stage. “The domination of Israeli politics and policy by messianic settler forces was much too overwhelming. So we clobbered you, and I am not sorry.”

David Landau could not have said it better. His successor at Haaretz, current editor-in-chief Aluf Benn, this week wrote similarly with disdain about the “massive compensation and valuable real estate” that Gush Katif “evacuees” supposedly received. (Not true.) He would like to see a repeat of the disengagement in the West Bank. Ugh.

The morals of the story are clear: Be very skeptical of fallacies about free Palestinians living in peace alongside Israel (unless Israel maintains full control of the entire security envelope) and beware the ruthless resentments in Israel politics. Israel must rebuff international pressures to rush into risky diplomatic gambits, and Israelis must refrain from ruinous internal reprisals.

Published in The Jerusalem Post, on August 8, 2025.

Forty or so years of Oslo-style arrangements, in which the West cajoled and pressured Israel into territorial withdrawals and restraint against emerging enemy threats – has proven to be an utter failure. “Containment” policy which prioritized diplomacy over decisive military triumphs against jihadist adversaries – has failed.

These approaches blew-up in Israel’s face, with terror and invasion from the West Bank and Gaza, and Syria and Lebanon, and with the march of Iran’s nuclear bomb program to near completion.

Over the past 20 months Israel has necessarily moved to a better balance between diplomacy and the use of force to scuttle enemy threats. It has shifted to thinking like a superpower; to becoming a force that acts proactively to assert dominance along its borders and strategic ascendancy against threats farther away.

Thus, Israel must and will continue to make fierce, overwhelming, and surprising strikes against enemy assets and strongholds from Khan Yunis to Isfahan. It needs to keep its enemies off base with beeper blasts and bunker-busting airstrikes.

Israel wants to be feared, militarily dominant – and yes, even “hegemonic” – not loved. Jerusalem knows that its neighbors will seek true reconciliation only when Israel is strong.

Thus, Israel can no longer accept policies that emphasize “quiet for quiet” and prioritize “restraint,” because this allows the enemy to develop attack capabilities under the cover of diplomatic breathing time; what some Western officials mistakenly call periods of “stability.”

In this new era, Israel intends to project its strength to definitively neutralize adversaries, and in so doing to lead the region – to gather a coalition of truly peace-seeking nations. Israel intends to truly “stabilize” the region, but not through reliance on hackneyed diplomatic templates and failed formulas that ooze weakness.

All this is based on a clear strategic prism that stems from a realistic understanding of the region. Israelis and their leaders understand that the set of rules by which the worst actors in the Middle East operate are ideological, attritional, and genocidal – not accommodational or transactional.

So, for example, Israelis understand that beyond whatever security accords might be possible with the new regime in Syria (headed by the Sunni jihadist named Ahmed Al-Sharaa) and the Aoun government in Lebanon, the IDF itself must and will continue to regularly interdict threats to Israel over the borders with these countries. Israel will not sit back for a decade or two, merely gathering intelligence on emerging threats until they reach monstrous proportions (as Israel unfortunately did versus Hezbollah for three decades, and Hamas for two).

It means that to some extent Israel will intervene on behalf of the non-jihadist Druze community in Syria which holds a zone of strategic importance in the southeast of that country along Israel’s northern border. That is what superpowers do. Israel will not wait for American mediators to calm the situation or rely on UN peacekeepers to protect the Druze and secure the border, nor refrain from hitting Al-Sharaa’s assets because Europe is again investing in Syria.

The same goes for Judea and Samaria. Nobody is under the illusion that any Palestinian “authority” can or will counteract the build-up of Iranian backed Islamic terrorist armies in these areas – which directly threaten Jerusalem and central Israel. Only the IDF can and will; thus, the full-scale Israeli military operations in places like Jenin, Tulkarm, and Nablus to resolutely rout out such threats will continue. This is likely to be a permanent feature of Israeli policy.

And by the way, Israel has no confidence whatsoever in the ability of the EU or the US to substantially reform the Palestinian Authority to make it a “democratic, transparent, efficient, and sustainable governance system,” as per EU goals.

Thirty years and billions of dollars and euros later, the return on Western investment in Palestinian independence is abysmal. There is no democracy, no rule of law, no transparency, no sustainability, no investment in economic stability, and no peace education in the PA. There is only nepotism and corruption, “pay-for-slay” handouts (meaning the incentivizing and rewarding of terrorism against Israel), violent propagandizing against Israel (including support for Hamas’s October 7 invasion and massacres), and diplomatic assault on Israel in every possible international forum.

And not one single new hospital in the West Bank has been built with those EU and American funds. Only one sewage treatment plant. Not a single refugee has been resettled. They’ve had over 30 years to do more! You get the picture…

As for Western (especially US) security assistance to the PA, well, over $1 billion in US training and equipment for PA security forces – including over $40 million in US funds for 2025 – has produced mixed results, at best. PA security personnel have repeatedly participated in or facilitated terror attacks against Israeli civilians and IDF soldiers, including PA policemen Mahmoud Abed and Malek Salem who last week murdered Shalev Zvuluny at a Gush Etzion shopping center. PA security personnel account for 12% of all Palestinian terrorists held by Israel.

This explains why it is so nonsensical of France, Saudi Arabia, and others to resuscitate delusions of Palestinian statehood, specifically now. This is a recipe for devastating disappointment and escalated conflict; and of course, for the isolation of Israel.

Alas, that may the entire point of the French/Saudi exercise – to weaken Israel, to prevent it from growing too strong, too “hegemonic” in its ambitions, too “aggressive” in its military actions, too “dominant” in resetting the regional strategic situation. Too successful in defending itself, including the prevention of runaway Palestinian statehood.

According to President Emmanuel Macron of France, Israel must not be allowed to win so much – especially after its game-changing, successful strike on Iran’s nuclear bomb program. Instead, Israel needs to be constrained, hemmed-in, humbled, and dictated to. “No discussion” he pompously said this week regarding “the need to urgently recognize” Palestinian statehood. It “must” happen, Macron declared – over the protests, and if necessary, over the dead bodies of Israelis.

The situation regarding Gaza is similar. Israel intends to act hegemonically to end the military threat from Gaza and to secure the Negev for renewed Israeli civilian prosperity. This means that beyond whatever temporary accords might unfortunately be necessary to obtain the release of a few more Israeli hostages held by Hamas, there are no long-term accommodations with that terror movement. It must be rooted out from Gaza.

Certainly, there must not be any reconstruction of Gaza without complete demilitarization of the enclave, which probably means a decade more of warfare at varying degrees of intensity.

Do not expect Israel to rely on Egypt or any other Arab state, never mind UN forces, to bring security or stability to Gaza. For years, Egypt turned a blind eye to the massive smuggling of weapons from the Egyptian-controlled Sinai Peninsula into Gaza, and of course it did nothing to stop Hamas from staging a coup against the Fatah-controlled PA and making Gaza into a Moslem Brotherhood mini-state. Nor will Israel abide a “technocratic” Palestinian government in Gaza that is but a flimsy cover for de facto Hamas rule.

The new Israeli superpower mindset applies, of course, to Iran. Iran must be prevented from rebuilding its nuclear bomb and ballistic missile programs and be deterred from rebuilding its network of proxy armies across the Middle East.

Any attempt at cosmetic boondoggle with Iran, say another insubstantial P5+1 accord with the ayatollahs, will force to Israel to again act against Tehran. Israel will apply its updated defense doctrine, its regional superpower prism, of preventively downgrading enemy capabilities and preempting enemy threats.

In short, Israel intends to bugger on and maintain its upper hand. Israelis understand the long-term ideological and civilizational nature of the battles ahead. They gird themselves for these battles with the superpower mindset described here, intending to be a proactive regional power – the only true Western ally – reshaping the Middle East for the better.

To old-guard denizens of traditional, feeble diplomacy, whose antipathy toward Israel stinks to the high heavens, I say: too bad. Get used to a revamped Mideast strategic situation anchored by a very strong Israel.

Published in The Jerusalem Post, 18.07.2025.

Occasionally, it is useful to take a step back from the breakneck-speed flow of daily news with its never-ending fare of political mudslinging and reportage on pain and suffering, and instead read long-form essays that reflect on more substantial ideas and long-term trends.

Here is a summer reading roundup of 17 recent deep-think articles on a range of issues: the Gaza and Iran wars, US-Israel relations, global antisemitism, Israeli society, and more.

Summer reading list 

1. “Iran’s Target Isn’t Just Israel; It’s Us,” by Mathias Döpfner, chair and CEO of Axel Springer (Politico). Döpfner explains why the entire West should celebrate Israel’s strike against Iranian nuclear weapons facilities – because Iran leads the forces of tyranny against the forces of freedom. This most important narrative is still not sufficiently understood worldwide.
2. “How Bibi Buggered On to Victory,” by Prof. Edward N. Luttwak (Tablet). The dean of American defense strategists argues that Prime Minister Netanyahu’s tenacity, against “howling mobs in Israel and around the world that demanded a ceasefire and the Israeli prime minister in handcuffs,” has led to Israel’s conclusive victories in Gaza, Lebanon, and Syria. To this, he might now add Iran.
3. “From Patronage to Partnership: Re-envisioning US-Israel Strategic Cooperation during the Second Trump Administration,” by Dr. Raphael Ben-Levi (Misgav Institute for National Security & Zionist Strategy). A brave and deep dive into the future of American military assistance to Israel. The scholar argues that Israel must transition over the next decade from US military financing toward greater independence in defense acquisitions and its own defense industrial base, alongside more cooperation with the US in defense innovation and start-ups.
4. “The Dramatic Operations Israel Coordinated with the US – and Those It Didn’t,” by Itay Ilnai (Israel Hayom). The longest and most in-depth investigation (in two parts) of US-Israel relations during the Gaza war, specifically the restraints that the Biden administration slapped on Israel and how Israel maneuvered with and around them. Also, how Jerusalem managed to persuade Washington to support the ground invasion of Lebanon.
5. “The Israeli Raid on Syria that Exposed the Weakness of Hardened Targets,” by Maj. (ret.) John Spencer, chair of urban warfare studies at the Modern War Institute at West Point (Mosaic). A revealing and detailed study of the September 8, 2024, IDF commando assault on the underground missile-production facility near Masyaf, which was making precision-guided missiles for Hezbollah. Spencer says that the raid was a spectacular demonstration of Special Forces capability with profound strategic implications, showing that Iran and its network of proxies must reassess the survivability of even their most hardened infrastructure.
6. “Hamas’s Human Shield Strategy in Gaza,” by Andrew Fox and Salo Aizenberg (Henry Jackson Society). This study represents the chapter that is missing in all UN and NGO reports – a comprehensive analysis of the use of human shield tactics by Hamas: how Hamas has systematically weaponized Gaza’s population and urban landscape to achieve both tactical and strategic objectives.
7. “The Gaza Famine Myth,” by Michael Ames (Free Press). How lazy journalism, bad data, and skewed statistics fueled accusations of war crimes against Israel. A key culprit in this calumny: Samantha Power, Biden administration director of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID).
8. “To Save Itself from International Isolation, Israel Must Hold on to the West Bank,” by Rafi DeMogge (Mosaic). The author makes the diplomatic case against territorial concessions, arguing that a Palestinian state would lead to war, not peace. Any Palestinian state would almost certainly find itself in armed conflict with Israel, either as a belligerent party or as a passive victim unable to exert full sovereignty within its borders and restrain terrorist groups like Hamas.
9. “The Golden Age of American Jews Is Ending,” by Franklin Foer (Atlantic). A sad but undeniable chronicling of how antisemitism on the Right and the Left threatens to bring to a close an unprecedented period of safety and prosperity for Jewish Americans – and to demolish the liberal order they helped establish.
10. “They’re Coming After Us,” by John Podhoretz (Commentary). A searing lament of how emotionally unprepared American Jews were for the outbreak of anti-Jewish activism on October 7 – on college campuses, at the businesses they own and work at, at the shuls in which they pray, and in their homes and on the streets. It is a national onslaught that has no precedent in American history or American life.
11. “Antisemitism and the Politics of the Chant,” by Cynthia Ozick (Wall Street Journal). This sizzling indictment, the shortest article on my list, is by who many consider to be the greatest American Jewish writer of this generation. It ruminates on the novel sounds of today’s hatred, like the beat of drums to sloganeering such as ‘From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free’ and ‘Say it loud, say it clear, we don’t want no Zionists here.’ 

• “Multiplied by a thousand throats, these rumbles and roars let out a crashing thunder, a delirium of dervishlike self-intoxication, rushing on in oceanic waves, undermining reason and drowning thought. Here there is no history, no honest journalism, no honorable discourse, no argument, no analytic engagement. Not so much as a coherent sentence. What we are hearing is the cruel zeal of an up-to-date hypnotic cultism: the politics of chant.”

12. “Antisemitism Is an Early-Warning Siren for Western Society,” Douglas Murray, interviewed by Brendan O’Neill (Spiked-UK). On the scapegoating of Israel, the fascism of Hamas, and the moral disintegration of the West – based on Murray’s upcoming book on these topics. “In Britain, we have hundreds of thousands of people who are sympathetic to Hamas…. We need to be able to say that if you want to bring down the West, if you want to kill the Jews, if you hate liberal democracy and you want to subvert it, then there are lots of places you can live, but this ain’t one of them.”
13. “The War Against the War Against the Jews,” by Danielle Pletka (Commentary). The American Enterprise Institute scholar outlines necessary countermeasures to antisemitism – “to weaponize antisemitism against its perpetrators and sponsors” and to institutionalize the kinds of protections imperative to keeping Jews safe in America. These range from congressional investigations and administrative sanctions to far-reaching legislative action and immigration reform.
14. “How Qatar Bought America,” by Frannie Block and Jay Solomon (Free Press). The definitive, exhaustive study of how the tiny Gulf nation spent almost $100 billion to establish its influence in Congress, universities, newsrooms, think tanks, and corporations – and what it wants in return. Frightening.
15. “How Harvard Can Reform Itself,” by Prof. Gil Troy (Tablet). A bold, near-heretical call for ending the tenure system! The prominent public intellectual and presidential historian, who is also one of Israel’s greatest defenders on the global stage (as well as being a regular op-ed contributor to The Jerusalem Post), builds on the failures of Harvard to combat antisemitism and anti-Americanism to argue that lifetime guarantees of academic employment produce torpor and ideological extremism.
16. “The Israeli Reservists Who Just Won’t Quit,” by Daniel Polisar (Mosaic). The Shalem College leader painstakingly and upliftingly demonstrates how the IDF’s citizen soldiers are revitalizing the Zionist ideal. He details the sacrifices of these “unsung heroes” and their families, and he demolishes the misleading claim frequently made in the media that reservists are showing up for duty in ever-declining numbers and that the reserve army is “on the brink of collapse.”
17. “Why Are Israelis So Happy?” by Natan Sharansky and Gil Troy (Tablet). In a world of globalized alienation, secular and religious Israelis alike remain proudly connected to their story as a people, through rituals as old as the Passover Seder and as new as the letters soldiers write before they go into battle, sometimes sadly their last. “A healthy commitment to community, connectedness, and history anchors us. It motivates us to defend ourselves when necessary, while inspiring us always to build a better world.

 Published in the Jerusalem Post, on July 11, 2025

The straw man of “settler violence” was this week once again spit out by supposed “allies” of Israel in the West to justify the obnoxious imposition of sanctions against two right-wing Israeli cabinet ministers.

The sanctions are galling, and the accusation is false. The move effectively brands Israel a pariah state, even though it was wrapped in fussing-phony language about friendship for Israel.

And it does so based on systematic distortions and demonization. “Settler violence” is an ugly, fringe phenomenon falsely and purposefully puffed-up to ‘balance’ the crimes of Hamas.

The “settler violence” narrative is a well-funded juggernaut; no less than an international campaign to delegitimize the State of Israel and the IDF, to justify violence against Israeli soldiers and civilians, and to pave the way for a runaway Palestinian state.

This is proven by two new, important reports: OCHA-oPT – The UN Organ Behind the “Settler Violence” Smear Campaign, by Adv. Avraham Shalev of the Kohelet Policy Forum; and False Flags and Real Agendas – The Making of a Modern Blood Libel: The ‘Settler Violence’ Narrative as a Weapon in the Battle to Delegitimize the Jewish Presence in Judea and Samaria and the State of Israel, by Adv. Yona Admoni (Coblenz) and Moriah Michaeli of the Regavim Movement.

OCHA is the “Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs in the occupied Palestinian territory” – the “humanitarian” arm of the UN Secretariat, which coordinates the work of about 80 UN groups and NGOs operating in Judea & Samaria. Shalev definitively shows how is the font of all so-called “settler evil” statistics. He reveals how OCHA relies on organizations whose entire purpose is to destroy Israel and those clearly aligned with Palestinian terrorist organizations.

According to Shalev, OCHA’s grossly biased and fabricated reports even count many cases of Arab terror attacks on Jews, and left-wing anarchist attacks on settlers, as “settler violence.” Yet OCHA is the “authoritative” source quoted by every foreign ministry in the world about Israel’s “monstrous” settler crimes. (Monstrous is the wild word disgustingly used this week by British Foreign Minister David Lammy.)

The Biden Administration’s State Department – which played a major role in revving-up the fallacious settler violence story line – relied on OCHA too.

Regavim’s deep dive into this issue (125 pages, including detailed statistical appendices) further shows how the so-called “settler violence” is a carefully planned and well-funded international campaign; a crusade to drive the notions that there is a “widespread” (– did somebody say “monstrous”?) phenomenon of violence by settlers in Judea and Samaria against Arab residents in the area (– not isolated instances of violence) and that the Israeli government is complicit in this. And to turn this into common knowledge, into “undisputed fact.”

Note: Neither report denies that there are Israelis who act violently toward Palestinians, and that these attacks are wrong, injurious, immoral, and destabilizing.

But the reports convincingly show that this is not a widespread phenomenon; and that there is a vast gap between the branding, focus, and preoccupation with marginal incidents of violence perpetrated by Jews against Arabs in comparison with the incidence, frequency, severity and prevalence of other incidents of violence (against Israelis!) in Judea and Samaria and in Israel as a whole. The reports also demonstrate that Israeli authorities indeed are addressing the problem (although I think that an even tougher Israeli hand is required.)

Regavim: “The fact that thousands of events, most entirely unrelated to violence, and many occurring outside of Judea and Samaria, are labeled ‘settler violence,’ is eerily parallel to Hamas’s murderous logic in claiming that residents of Kibbutz Be’eri and Kfar Aza are ‘settlers’ – or to the absurd declarations of the official Palestinian news agency, which reports on ‘settler roadblocks’ in Tel Aviv in protest of the Netanyahu-led right-wing government.”

“The absurdity deepens as Arab terror attacks are counted as ‘settler violence’ if they end with the terrorist being killed or injured. Even IDF interdiction of terrorists bith during military operations and in thwarted terror attacks is labeled as settler violence. Fabricated events – which a basic check proves never happened – as well as thousands of peaceful visits by Jews to the Temple Mount, or official government actions such as land declarations, settlement planning, or nature reserve designations – all are included in OCHA’s ‘databases’ as incidents of ‘settler violence’.”

Worse still, Regavim’s report also persuasively demonstrates how Palestinian Authority officials together with extreme left-wing Israeli and foreign organizations openly plan confrontations with IDF soldiers and Jewish residents in Judea & Samaria to provoke them into violent behavior – which is then filmed and edited (i.e., distorted) to fuel the “settler violence” narrative. Regavim also tracks the foreign money routes that fund this malicious effort.

Regavim criticizes the Israeli government for its failure to respond to the “settler violence” campaign. “Israel has neglected to offer a unified, official, and transparent database on the actual scope of ideologically motivated crimes both by Jews and by Arabs. With such data, alongside proportionate framing and factual context, it would have been easy to debunk the campaign at much earlier stages. The lack of official Israeli data has given tailwind to the campaign.”

I KNOW that Regavim is right in this regard because two years ago I conducted my own research into this issue, and struggled mightily to pry real statistics out of the Israeli security establishment.

I submitted a formal request for information to the Israel Security Agency (Shin Bet), which is the government arm responsible for tracking and countering violence in Judea and Samaria.

From the detailed and precise statistics I eventually received, it became crystal clear that there had not been a significant increase, no “surge,” in right-wing Israeli-Jewish violence against Palestinian Arabs in Judea and Samaria since the beginning of the current Gaza war compared to earlier periods.

I also learned that “violence” in this context means many different things, from verbal altercations and rock throwing (what the ISA calls “frictions” or “harassment”), to spray-painting of anti-Arab slogans and other undercover vandalism including agricultural vandalism (“price tag activities”), to firebombing of homes or mosques (which are classified as outright “terrorist strikes”).

I learned that the more serious type of incidents had dropped by 50% thanks to Israeli enforcement actions. And that there is no evidence whatsoever of wild accusations (say, by B’Tselem or Yesh Din) that hundreds of Palestinians from many communities have been forced to abandon their homes due to fear of settler attacks. And that indeed many of the Palestinians listed by OCHA as victims of settler violence are in fact Palestinian terrorists killed by Israeli troops in necessary, defensive and offensive operations.

It is unfortunately true that altercations and aggressions by settlers in 2022 and 2024 rose over that in 2020, 2021, and 2023. Perhaps this is because Jewish residents of Judea and Samaria, in fact all citizens of Israel, had been subject to a wild wave of murderous Palestinian terrorist attacks ever since 2022.

In case officials in Washington, London, Ottawa, Canberra, Wellington, and Oslo have forgotten, here is a reminder. In 2022, there were more than 5,000 Palestinian terror attacks against Israeli Jews, including car-ramming, shooting, stabbing, and bombing of innocent men, women, and children. These attacks included over 500 Molotov cocktail attacks (firebombs), leading to the injury of more than 150 Israelis. There was a 210% rise in rock throwing incidents in 2021 over 2020, and a 156% rise in bomb throwing incidents in 2021 over 2020.

And in spring-summer 2023, Palestinian terrorists slaughtered close to 40 Israelis in and beyond the Green Line, with more than 3,640 recorded acts of Palestinian and Arab terror throughout Israel, including 2,118 cases of rock-throwing, 799 fire-bombings, 18 attempted stabbings, and six vehicular assaults.

Palestinian terrorism in central Israel was even worse in 2024 (although I don’t have exact statistics), and this can be layered onto Hamas’ truly horrific attacks in the Gaza envelope in late 2023, and the tens of thousands of rockets subsequently fired into Israel.

And yet, I don’t recall hearing about sanctions levied by Washington, London, Ottawa, Canberra, Wellington, and Oslo against ministers in Palestinian governments or ministers in Arab governments supporting hostile Palestinian operations against Israel. Say, ministers in Qatar, Turkey, and Yemen.

So, is there Jewish violence in Judea and Samaria? Yes. We all have seen the dreadful videos of settlers in kipas and keffiyas setting fire to Palestinian cars or trees at night. This is unacceptable, and I hold no wellspring of sympathy for the hilltop wild boys involved. Israel must aggressively combat this lawlessness.

But has there been an enormous, out-of-control surge in settler violence recently? No.

And is there a culture of Jewish violence in settler communities? Also no.

In fact, attacks on Palestinian property and individuals committed by a few extremists at the fringes of an overwhelmingly peaceful community of half a million Israelis who live over the Green Line calculates to a level of violence that is lower than that done by Israelis against Israelis in greater Tel Aviv!

And without meaning to diminish the problematics of extremist Israeli attacks on Palestinians, violence by some settlers also pales in comparison to the “regular” 5,000 Palestinian boulder, bomb, and shooting attacks a year aimed at killing Israeli civilians.

And again, this super-pales in comparison to the 1,200 Israelis slaughtered by Hamas on Oct. 7 or the reign of terror inflicted on all Israelis by the thousands rockets and missiles fired by Hamas (and Hezbollah and the Houthis and Iran) into Israeli civilian population centers.

But what the heck. It is great performative political theater to sanction right-wing Israeli cabinet ministers. The conjuring-up of really bad Israelis – who, gulp, don’t support a helter-skelter rush to Palestinian statehood in addition to their other settlement “crimes” – seems to provide some Westerners (those who dislike Israel but still want to hide their antipathy) with some ersatz moral counterweight to their condemnations of Hamas violence.

Stop throwing pernicious pieties about “settler violence” in Israel’s face as it fights for its very life against genocidal Hamas and hegemonic Iran. At best, this is a red herring issue. At worst, it is an ugly attempt to discredit the righteousness of Israel’s war effort.

Published in The Jerusalem Post 13.06.2025

Why has the US under President Donald Trump failed to broker an end to the Russia-Ukraine war, an end to the Hamas war against Israel and the hostage crisis, an end to Houthi assaults on Israel, and an end to the Iranian nuclear bomb program?

Because Trump and his team have the wrong paradigm in mind. They approach everything with a pragmatist, transactional perspective. They see everything through dispassionate business eyeglasses. They think that America’s enemies do the same.

Worse still, Trump thinks that the weighty economic power of America and the force of his own HUGE personality will bend adversaries to his will.

But what if America’s challengers are motivated by deeper, darker purposes? What if Russia, Iran, Hamas, and the Houthis (and even the Chinese) are driven by ideological ambitions that go far beyond the calculations of economic and other cold-neutral self-interest? What if these actors are prepared for decades of war against the West, and specifically against Israel, no matter what “great deals” Trump offers them?

The latest example of such American miscalculation is the reported Trump administration proposal to shoehorn Iran’s program for enrichment of uranium to atomic-bomb levels into some wacky offshore consortium of Middle East countries including Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Turkey alongside the US. This would somehow dilute or restrict Iran’s near-bomb-ready nuclear colossus.

But of course, Iranian dictator Ayatollah Khamenei defiantly has rejected this idea, for ideological reasons. “National independence means that the Iranian nation stands on its own feet; it means not waiting for a green or red light from others,” he declared.

Iran’s resolve to forge its own path without foreign interference “defines its sovereignty,” he said. “We can” is a revolutionary principle taught by Imam Khomeini, he bellowed. He proceeded to call US proposals rude, insolent, arrogant, destructive, and “deviating from the motivations and sacrifices rooted in our people’s faith.”

Khamenei ranted on about Zionist “crimes,” with the usual formulas about Israel as a cancer in the Middle East that must and will be eliminated by Iran, and he insisted that Iran is developing all means to do so. “By definite divine decree, the Zionist regime is collapsing. God willing, the day [of its demise] is not far off.”

In short, no pragmatic deal offered by the US to Iran nor any further Western sanctions against it are going to knock the Islamic Republic off its radical path, even if it bends a bit to mollify Trump for a bit. Ingrained ideological commitment for the long-term trumps short term accommodations to Trump.

The algorithm by which America and Israel’s adversaries operate is attrition; long wars of attrition, informed by an ethos of sacrifice and eschatological visions of zealous, crushing victory.

AFTER OCTOBER 7, all Israeli leaders and most of the Israeli public recognize this; that the set of rules by which the worst actors in the Middle East operate are ideological, attritional, genocidal; not accommodational or transactional.

For example, Israelis understand that beyond whatever temporary accords might unfortunately be necessary to obtain the release of a few more Israeli hostages held criminally and viciously by Hamas, there are no long-term accommodations with Hamas. It must be rooted out from Gaza, Judea, and Samaria – and this means a decade (or more) of bloody warfare at varying degrees of intensity.

It means “managing the conflict” through the determined use of force in a proactive, preemptive, and persistent manner. It means no establishment of any runaway, radical, revolutionary Palestinian states.

And if there are any accommodations and reconciliations in the broader region to be had, they run through the Abraham Accords prism which purposefully and smartly sidelined the Palestinian issue.

(This is also why it is so nonsensical of France, Saudi Arabia, and others to resuscitate delusions of Palestinian statehood, specifically now. This is a recipe for devastating disappointment and escalated conflict. And of course, for the isolation of Israel – which may be the point of the whole French-Saudi exercise.)

Similarly, Israelis understand that beyond whatever interim accords might be possible with the new Al-Jolani regime in Syria and the Aoun government in Lebanon, the IDF itself must and will continue to regularly interdict threats to Israel over the borders with these countries. Israel will not sit back for a decade or two, merely gathering intelligence on emerging threats until the threat reaches monstrous proportions (as Israel unfortunately did versus Hezbollah).

The same goes for Judea and Samaria. Nobody is under the illusion that any Palestinian “authority” can or will counteract the build-up of Iranian backed Islamic terrorist armies in these areas – which directly threaten Jerusalem and central Israel. Only the IDF can and will; thus, the full-scale Israeli military operations in places like Jenin, Tulkarm, and Nablus to resolutely rout out such threats. This is likely to be a permanent feature of Israeli policy. President Macron should take note.

The same goes for Iran. The IAEA is warning that Iran already has enriched enough uranium at near-bomb-ready levels for 6-8 nuclear bombs, and that its advanced centrifuges could do so many times over within three months’ time. Thus, Israelis know that complete dismantling or military destruction of this apparatus (as well as Iran’s ballistic missile empire) is necessary soon.

Half or cosmetic measures based on “trust” that purport to put the Iranian nuclear juggernaut to bed are insufficient. Especially if they ignore the missile threat and Iran’s other hegemonic incursions across the region. Any such boondoggle of an American accord with Iran will force to Israel to act against Tehran on its own.

THE ENEMY wars of attrition against Israel, like the drawn-out and purposefully never-ending negotiations for hostage release, have an additional, central purpose. This is the ripping to shreds of Israeli society from within – the exacerbation of political and religious-social divisions; the exhaustion of Israeli citizens and fighters; and the sapping of a will to fight on.

Alas, this enemy strategy is highly effective. Israel is indeed increasingly drained and divided (not to mention highly taxed and exasperated with the country’s leadership); although not crushingly so.

I am certain, as detailed above, that most Israelis understand the long-term ideological and civilizational nature of the battles ahead and are girding themselves for them. This, irrespective of what political changes may be wrought by an Israeli election campaign over the next year and regardless of what mistakes of accommodation/surrender might be made in the coming weeks by Western leaders.

Israelis have every reason to believe that the State of Israel can successfully reset the regional strategic architecture in positive directions – as it did once through the Abraham Accords; as it has in going a long way toward crushing Hamas and Hezbollah (which also sped forward collapse of the Russian- and Iranian-backed Assad regime in Syria); as it has in stripping Iran of its air defenses, and more.

The question is: How does one advance a deeper, more mature, more resilient, and more patient appreciation of threats and responsibilities in the Middle East among Western leaders? How does one assist them in growing a spine and backing Israel along its long path toward security and prosperity?

Published in The Jerusalem Post 06.06.2025.

**The opinions expressed in Misgav publications are the authors’ alone.**

French President Emmanuel Macron is currently threatening to unilaterally “recognize” Palestinian statehood, in order to punish Israel for its war of self-defense in Gaza and pressure it to withdraw from all “Palestinian territories.” In response, Israeli leaders have threatened to apply Israeli sovereignty to parts or all of Judea and Samaria.

Macron needs to be slapped down. (His wife can show us how.) Recognizing ersatz Palestinian “statehood” at this time is an unforgivable offense. But the Israeli counter-threat is a mistake for two reasons. It will not deter Macron and other hostile Western leaders from pursuing their nefarious agenda, and it is the wrong way to rightfully apply sovereignty.

Macron and others are convening a “High-Level Two-State Solution Conference” at the UN three weeks from now to “build consensus” around political recognition of a pseudo “State of Palestine.” “Irreversible and concrete measures are necessary to maintain the prospect of a Palestinian state,” the French president has imperiously declared.

The fact that previous such resolutions and proclamations have only bolstered Palestinian rejection of Israel’s right to exist – and have been interpreted by Palestinians as an international green light for the use of terror to destroy Israel – does not frighten Macron.

Nor is he dissuaded by the fact that blabbering at this moment about Palestinian statehood is the very essence of victory for Hamas terrorism and incentivizes more acts of massacre. Merely discussing Palestinian statehood now gives Hamas more sway in Palestinian politics than it ever had, especially in Judea and Samaria (known as “the West Bank”).

Don’t confuse Paris with facts – like the support of three-quarters of Palestinians in the West Bank for the October 7 Hamas-led massacre, or the support of governors in the Palestinian Authority for terrorism and the active participation of its Fatah Party in the wave of terror attacks threatening central Israel.

INSTEAD OF pushback against the increasingly genocidal Palestinian national movement, we get more perilous pablum about the “urgency” of Palestinian statehood. Instead of action to retaliate and truly deter Hamas from ever raising a hand against a hostage again, we get diplomatic rewards for Palestinian intransigence and violence.

International wags should ask themselves: Is their effort to bolster Palestinians with “recognition” of faux statehood – and with more and more aid money – helping Palestinians mature? Or is it merely deepening Palestinian dependency, perpetuating Palestinian victim-refugee-martyrdom identity, prolonging the campaign to demonize Israel as a genocidal monster, and in the end, just plainly and unabashedly weakening Israel?

In fact, one suspects that the latter motivation, tinged with a smidgen of deep-seated antisemitism, is the main impulse.

The scent coming from Macron and his ilk is antipathy toward Israel. They simply cannot stomach a strong Israel. In their view, Israel is a global problem because it has grown too strong, too “hegemonic” in its ambitions, too “aggressive” in its military actions, too “dominant” in resetting the regional strategic situation; too successful in defending itself, and too effective in crushing the holy Palestinian campaign to force Israeli withdrawals.

And also, too threatening against Iran, which soon may sign another nuclear bamboozle with Washington that leaves Tehran in pole position towards an atomic bomb while claiming otherwise; a phony “achievement” that Macron will surely welcome.

Therefore, in the French president’s view, Israel must be restrained, constrained, hemmed-in, humbled. Brought to heel, under a responsible Western thumb. Compelled to accept a cancerous Palestinian “state” which, alas, will be an elevated platform for continuing the war against Israel.

HAVE ANY of Israel’s critics dared to ask themselves why Israelis today are overwhelmingly unwilling to even contemplate establishment of a Palestinian state, at least not for a generation or two or three? Have Israel’s critics any gumption for telling Palestinians: “No, there will be no Palestinian statehood ‘from the river to the sea,’” which means erasure of Israel? Have any of Israel’s critics dared to ask themselves what type of Palestinian state they are seeking to create?

And have Israel’s “friends” like Macron bothered to contemplate the bigger picture – the annihilationist, pernicious narrative against which Israel is contending? Have they thought about pushing back against the relentless equation of Israel and Zionism with the evils of current discourse – imperialism, colonialism, apartheid, white supremacy, and genocide?

Why are good people pretending Palestinian attacks on Israel are legitimate?

It is so exasperating that otherwise good people pretend that Palestinian assaults on Israel’s sovereignty and security have anything to do with legitimate demands for humanitarian aid or with a “two-state solution.” They profess to be concerned for Palestinian rights yet ignore the murderous intentions of Palestinians against Israel. They disregard Palestinian antisemitic discourse and the Fatah/Hamas record of dictatorship and human rights abuse.

Instead, they complain that Israel is restricting supply convoys into Gaza during the current fighting and worry aloud that Hamas will not get kid-gloves treatment after the fighting ends (including the provision of cement and steel to “rehabilitate” Gaza, which would also mean the rebuilding of military capacity against Israel).

And, instead, they tolerate Palestinian “Days of Rage,” “Nakba Day” riots, and missile barrage eruptions as expected behavior. As if the Palestinians cannot help themselves from throwing a tantrum. As if responsible and reasonable behavior – such as negotiation, democratic and peaceful discourse, and normative state-building – cannot be demanded of the Palestinians.

This is the soft bigotry of low expectations of the Palestinians, which is the counterpart of hard bigotry of unreasonable demands on Israel.

IT IS high time that Palestinian leadership be showered with the “tough love” that is usually, uniquely reserved for Israel – especially after October 7.

Why continue to fund a corrupt and Hamas-penetrated UN agency, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), with more than a billion dollars every year, feeding the Palestinian claim to a “right of return” to all of Israel: the delusion that Israel can be overwhelmed and wiped out?

Why not tell the Palestinians to grow up, and choose leaders who don’t endlessly run around the world peddling lies about Israeli war crimes?

For Macron and others to scurry about without pressing on the Palestinians the inevitability of compromise with Israel is mischievous; to be overly solicitous of the Palestinians especially now, and crushingly censorious of Israel especially now, is malicious. Dishing out some tough love and dialing down Palestinian expectations would be much more constructive.

In short, the Macron-ian campaign to unilaterally, “urgently,” and immediately recognize synthetic Palestinian “statehood” is destructive: an unforgivable offense.

AT THE same time, the counter-threat to apply Israeli sovereignty to parts or all of Judea and Samaria, issued by Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar and other Israeli ministers in response to Macron’s muckraking, is a mistake. Aside from the fact that it will not deter Macron, it is the wrong way for Israel to rightfully apply sovereignty.

Israel should unequivocally realize its historic and legal sovereign rights in Judea and Samaria. Its hesitancy to do so over the past 50 years only has strengthened Palestinian claims that the areas are “Palestinian territory,” helping to establish a fiction that has been willingly accepted within the international community.

But doing so should not be the function of a momentary need to slap Macron on the cheek, or in response to any particular act of Palestinian terror. It should come, soon, as an essential part of a well thought out, broader Israeli strategic plan to reassert this country’s rights and security needs and to restructure relations with regional and international partners.

Sovereignty assertion must be an up-front and forward-looking move, a central and proud plank in a major Israeli party platform, perhaps ratified in an election campaign. It should not be a backhanded rejoinder to the spasms of spent European politicians who are peddling hackneyed “solutions” and beating up on Israel because they know of nothing else to do.

There are other just, punitive measures that Israel can and should take against countries that diplomatically assault it in the way that Macron is planning, such as closing their consulates in Jerusalem that function as “embassies” to “Palestine.” And there are other forward-looking, Zionist moves that Israel can and should make in the immediate term, like strengthening Israeli cities and towns in Judea and Samaria – defiantly so.

Published in The Jerusalem Post, May 30, 2025.

**The opinions expressed in Misgav publications are the authors’ alone.**