Arabs and Nazis - Can it Be True?

Elliott A Green

Whitewashing the Arab historical record has long been the practice not only of Arab spokesmen but of the Arabs' Western and Communist sympathizers. Among the most persistent efforts to this end have been the denial and belittling of Arab involvement with the Nazis and the Holocaust.

In fact, many Arab nationalist leaders - from Morocco in the west to Iraq in the east - not only sympathized with the Nazis but cooperated with German agents before and during World War 2. The most outstanding Arab Nazi collaborator, however, was the leader of the Palestinian Arabs, Haj Muhammud Amin el-Husseini, Mufti of Jerusalem. Husseini spent most of World War 2 in the Axis domain in Europe. He conferred officially with Mussolini and Hitler. In a petition he submitted together with other Arab leaders, Husseini urged the Fuehrer in the name of the Arab nation to recognize the Arab right to solve "the Jewish Question" in the Arab countries. Later he helped the Germans recruit an SS division among the Bosnian Muslims, exerting his influence over their imams, later on inspiring them during their service.

One researcher tells us, "The Mufti worked closely with the Nazi machinery responsible for exterminating Jews." (1)

This apparatus was part of the SS headed by his friend Himmler. Husseini made energetic efforts to further the mass murder process by preventing the emigration of Jews from the Axis domain. He petitioned the governments of Axis Croatia, Hungary, Rumania, and Bulgaria, as well as their patrons in Germany and Italy, and neutral Turkey, (2) to prevent Jews from leaving the Axis zone.

Towards the end of the war, when the Axis satellite states of Eastern Europe could see the looming Nazi defeat, they made plans to release Jews, especially children, from their territory, in return for various considerations or perhaps in order to clear themselves with Allied public opinion. The Mufti, hearing of these plans, exerted his considerable diplomatic influence among the Germans and their satellites to stop these children and adults from escaping their fate under the Nazis. For instance, Husseini wrote to the Prime Minister of Bulgaria, an Axis partner, urging Bulgaria to send 4,000 Jewish children to Poland where they would be "under stringent control" in his words (letter of June 5, 1943). These children, he asserted, presented "a degree of danger to Bulgaria whether they be kept in Bulgaria or be permitted to depart from that country." (3)

Under "stringent control" in Poland, apparently, these children would no longer represent a danger to Bulgaria. He also delivered a note to the same end to the German Foreign Ministry which in turn instructed its ambassador in the Bulgarian capital to bring to the Bulgarians' attention the common German-Arab interest in preventing the departure of these children. Thus, the Mufti succeeded in blocking the further release of Jewish children from Bulgaria. That same summer of 1943, he sent a similar letter to the Rumanian foreign minister. He again urged sending Jewish children -- 1,800 this time -- to Poland where they would be under "active supervision." (4)

Husseini even intervened with the Germans against trading Jews under their control for fellow Germans (including the so-called Templars) who had been interned by the British in the Palestine mandate, perhaps thusly showing himself more resolute in finishing off the Jews than were the Germans themselves. Complaining to SS chief Himmler about this planned trade, the Mufti wrote, "It is to be feared that further Jewish groups may leave Germany and France." By "further" groups, he had in mind his earlier, unsuccessful attempt to prevent Egyptian Jews from leaving the Axis domain as part of a larger group of Egyptians. "In my letter to you of June 5, 1944, I referred back to our conversation in which I reported to you on the inclusion of [Egyptian] Jews in the exchange plan of some Egyptians living in Germany." He complained in this later letter (July 27, 1944) that despite his earlier protest and general German promises to the Arabs, "the Jews, nevertheless did leave." (5) This shows that he was not always successful in his efforts.

Interventions of this kind were widely reported after World War II. Bartley Crum, an American member of the Anglo-American Commission of Inquiry on Palestine (1946), was shown documentation to this effect by an investigator for the Nuremberg Tribunal. It was also reported at the time in the New York Post by Edgar Ansel Mowrer. Since then, however, this information has generally been omitted from both academic studies and popular-level accounts of Arab-Israeli relations and modern Arab politics. But research has gone on. Fairly recently, Professor Daniel Carpi of Tel Aviv University has published his research on the matter, based on Italian archives, whereas most earlier information had come from German archives. (6)

Yet the whitewashers customarily overlook this information which does not fit the innocuous, put upon image of the Arabs (particularly Palestinian Arabs) that they wish to project.

Husseini broadcast often to the Arab countries over Radio Berlin. Indeed he was in charge of Arabic broadcasting not only for Radio Berlin but for the Italian station at Bari. (7)

In one broadcast he urged Arabs, "Kill Jews wherever you find them for the love of God, history, and religion." (8)

If those who had heard such urgings yet acclaimed the Mufti as a leader after World War 2, would this reflect on their attitudes towards genocide and Jews? The thought might be inconvenient. Another broadcast presented what was the first public notice from an Axis source as to the scope of the Holocaust. In a broadcast of September 30, 1944, he asked the Arabs rhetorically, "Is it not in your power to repulse the Jews whose number is not more than eleven million?" (9)

Before the war, the world Jewish population had been estimated at around 17 and 18 million, which Husseini surely knew.

The Germans subsidized Haj Amin in the amount of 75,000 reichsmarks per month. He received other sums from them for expenses for his several residences, for maintaining his "Arabisches Büro," for maintaining other Arabs living in Axis Europe, etc. The Germans also subsidized a number of other prominent Arabs who had found refuge in Nazi Germany. (10) Husseini's subsidies came from both the Foreign Ministry and the SS. (11)

Husseini's Nazi collaboration did not begin with World War 2 itself. As early as March 1933, after the Nazis under Hitler had won the general elections in Germany, Husseini offered his congratulations through the German consul in Jerusalem. (12)

Hitler's fanatic Judeophobia was no secret even then, not even in far off Jerusalem.

Admiral Canaris of German intelligence, the Abwehr, provided support for the socalled Arab revolt in mandatory Palestine (1936-1939), the first intifada. Meanwhile, the Mufti sent emissaries to Berlin in 1937 and 1939 to discuss financial, diplomatic, and weapons assistance. He also received financial support for the Arab revolt from the wealthy American anti-semite and Hitler sympathizer, Charles R. Crane who was also the patron of Husseini's associate on the Palestine Arab Executive, George Antonius. (13)

Of course Husseini did not act alone. He had a large following and travelled with an entourage. When the British decided in 1937 to stop indulging the Arab revolt, he was allowed to leave mandatory Palestine for Lebanon where he was surrounded by his own retinue. He again had an entourage with him when he settled in Baghdad from 1939 to 1941, one of his close advisors being his kinsman `Abdul-Qadir al-Husayni (Husseini), Faisal Husseini's father. In Iraq he very successfully engaged in pro-Nazi, pan-Arab intrigue. He was in fact one of the major figures in Iraqi politics at that time, helping to instigate a coup d'etat which installed a pro-Nazi government that declared war on the British while Rommel was advancing in North Africa. British intelligence reports show that Husseini was one of the decision-makers of the Iraqi government in this period, while Rashid `Ali el-Kilani was prime minister. (14)

Part of the pro-Nazi work at the time of Husseini and his allies was propagating hatred of Jews among the Muslim Iraqis. This came to its most violent expression in an incident called the Farhud in June 1941, after British defeat of the Iraqi Arab army. The Mufti's pro-Nazi Iraqi associates incited a pogrom in Baghdad which killed an estimated 600 Jews while British troops stayed outside the city. Subsequent to the restoration of order in the country, an official Iraqi investigating commission reported that the Mufti of Jerusalem and his entourage were among the factors causing the pogrom. Husseini, after arriving in Iraq, "began disseminating Nazi propaganda with great cunning... His entourage also engaged in wide-scale anti-Jewish and anti-British propaganda activities among all classes." The report added, "The Palestinian and Syrian schoolteachers" in Iraq opposed "government... steps against Nazism." (15)

While operating in the Nazi-fascist domain during the war, the Mufti demonstrated complete identification with the Nazi policy of mass murdering Jews as outlined above. He also knew the scope of the Holocaust in terms of numbers killed before the fact of the mass murder was generally known. This knowledge showed up in a broadcast of 1944 quoted above and no doubt came from his close ties to Himmler.

On occasion he went farther than the Germans themselves. We see this for instance, in his opposition to the German plan to exchange Jews for German prisoners of the British. Husseini energetically protested against letting any Jews escape their fate under the Nazis.

His help for the Holocaust was considerable. Besides helping to recruit Bosnian Muslims for the SS - who later went out to hunt down partisans and slaughter Serbs, Jews, and Gypsies - he also recruited Soviet Muslims to collaborate with the Nazis. (16)

Some of them served in the Einsatzgruppen, the dread murder detachments that massacred Jews in Belarus and Ukraine.

In fact Husseini set up an Islamic Institute in Dresden for training Soviet Muslim imams. Meanwhile, he also set up an Arab Institute for Research into the Jewish Question (based on a German model). These projects were made possible by the generous German subsidies that he received. (17)

His ties were particularly close with SS commander Himmler. A photograph of the Mufti with Himmler bears a dedication to him from the Nazi leader, reading as follows: "Seiner Eminenz dem Grossmufti zur Erinnerung 4 VII. 1943" ("To his Eminence the Grand Mufti in remembrance, July 4, 1943"). This photo has been fairly widely published (18) as has the photo of his meeting with Hitler.

Members of his entourage in Germany, young men of various prominent Palestinian Arab families, Khalidis and others besides Husseinis, took SS training and visited the Sachsenhausen murder camp. All this was done with German money. Apparently the Germans considered his work worthwhile for them, since they gave Husseini's activities wide publicity. For instance, his review of Bosnian Muslim SS troops was featured on the front cover of the Wiener Illustrierte (January 12, 1944).

Busy as he was helping the Nazis in places as far apart as Bosnia, Belarus, and the northern Caucasus, Husseini did not forget the Jews in the Arab countries. While battles raged in Libya, the Mufti urged that Tripoli be "purged" of its Jews. As pointed out above, he and his associates had urged Hitler to extend the "Solution of the Jewish Question" to Arab lands. In their meeting, November 28, 1941, Hitler promised that this was part of his own plan. When the German troops crossed the Caucasus, the Fuehrer added, "then will strike the hour of Arab liberation." Hitler informed Husseini of his intent to "solve" the "Jewish problem," not only in Europe but in non-European countries as well. "The Grand Mufti replied that... He was fully reassured and satisfied by the words which he had heard from the Chief of the German State." (19)

Of course pro-Nazi sentiment among the Arabs did not stem from the Mufti's influence alone. While Iraq had the pro-Nazi Futuwwa and Youth Phalanxes youth groups, Egypt and Morocco had their "Green Shirts" in imitation of the Italian fascist blackshirts and the Nazi brownshirts. Nasser and his "Free Officers" circle were notoriously pro-Nazi.

The former Egyptian Army Chief of Staff, `Aziz `Ali el-Masri, was arrested on his way to Rommel's headquarters to aid the German war effort. One of the plotters in this affair was Anwar Sadat, then a young officer and comrade of Nasser. Sadat wrote of this at length in his early book of memoirs, Revolt on the Nile (London, 1957). (20)

He wrote: "We made contact with the German Headquarters in Libya and we acted in complete harmony with them." (21)

He added: "We prepared to fight side by side with the Axis." (22)

To show Sadat's identification at the time with the paranoid Judeophobia of the Germans, we may point to his explanation of the failure of a German intelligence mission. Certain Egyptian Jews, he claims, gave the British information on two German agents sent to Cairo to make contact with the pro-Nazi Egyptian officers. (23)

Through the Allied victories at El-Alamein and Stalingrad, he wrote, "both arms of the German pincer movement on Egypt were broken, and Egyptian hopes were broken too." (24)

At any rate, Sadat's later essay at autobiography, In Search of Identity (New York, 1978), softens the picture of his pro-German, anti-Jewish attitudes.

"Arab nationalists found Berlin a haven of hospitality and understanding in World War II," the International Herald Tribune tells us in an unusual show of candor on this issue. (25)

The hospitality extended not only to Husseinis but to certain of their Hashemite rivals, at that time the ruling family in both Iraq and Transjordan. Rashid `Ali el-Kilani, the Iraqi prime minister who had declared war on Britain in 1941 with the Mufti's encouragement, found asylum in Berlin too. Saudi Arabia, hostile to the Hashemites for its own reasons, was also pro-Nazi. (26)

It was one of the first states to recognize the Italian fascist conquest of Ethiopia. (27)

Arab-Nazi collaboration took place on the ideological plane as well as the political and military planes. On a visit to Berlin in 1937, Dr Sa`id `Abdel-Fattah Iman of the Damascus Arab Club proposed, inter alia, to promote National Socialist ideology among the Arabs and Muslims generally. (28)

As time went on, Nazi ideological penetration of the Arab world took place in various ways and through several channels. Mein Kampf was published in Arabic, the translator later becoming a minister in the Kilani cabinet in Iraq. The Nazis supplied information bulletins to the Arab press. Nazi agents encouraged Arab nationalists to travel to Germany and to study there. (29)

Movie theaters in Beirut, Damascus, and Aleppo received German films and newsreels. (30)

German and Italian radio broadcast Arab nationalist agitation in Arabic to the Middle East. In an expression of sympathy for Nazi ideology, Arab politicians showed their presence at Nuremberg rallies. (31)

It is admitted even by sympathizers of Arab nationalism that the Ba'ath Socialist Party, separate factions of which now hold power in Syria and Iraq [in Iraq until 2003], got its start in imitation of German National Socialism. (32)

Another instance of Arab imitation of the Nazis was the Palestinian Arab Party founded by Husseini family members. Jamal Husseini, its president, freely admitted this. The party's youth group, modelled on the Hitler Youth, was for a while called the "Nazi Scouts." (33)

On the other hand, some Arabs did object to Nazi anti-Jewish policy. Monsignor Arida, the Maronite Patriarch in Lebanon, issued a pastoral letter in 1933 "strongly condemning the Nazi persecution of Jews." (34)

Nevertheless, Arab-Nazi collaboration had serious implications for the future. Sami al-Jundi, a Syrian Arab nationalist, a founder of the Ba`ath Party, wrote in his memoirs, "We were racialists. We were fascinated by Nazism, reading its books and the sources of its thought..." (35)

From the 1930s till now, Mein Kampf, other Nazi writings, and earlier Judeophobic works like the forged Protocols of the Elders of Zion, have been commonly read in Arab countries. And Arab writers have made their own contributions to this literary genre. PLO publications have joined in the chorus of Holocaust denial. (36)

Arab leaders freely expressed pro-Nazi sentiments even years after the war. For example, Nasser told a German neoNazi editor in 1964: "Our sympathies in the Second World War were on the German side." (37)

Nazi war criminals were granted refuge in Syria and Egypt. Some of them, such as former Goebbels assistants, Johann von Leers, Franz Buensche, and Louis Heiden, helped those governments make anti-Jewish propaganda, while others helped Nasser to set up a security police. (38)

Moreover, Arab governments have carried out their own mass murders. Sudan is the worst example. There Arab Muslims have slaughtered tribal Black Africans. The New Columbia Encyclopedia (1975) estimated the tribal Black victims of the civil war at 1.5 million as of 1972; and it still goes on. In Iraq of course, the army has murdered tens of thousands of Kurds with poison gas and other means. The civil war in Lebanon saw scores of thousands of civilians massacred by their Arab brothers, with the Palestino-Progressiste forces (to use the label favored by the French press) as major culprits.

Arab nationalist spokesmen in the West have naturally tried to downplay or minimize - and where they could get away with it, to deny - the record of Arab-Nazi collaboration. For instance, Philip Mattar, executive director of the PLO-sponsored Institute for Palestine Studies in Washington, distorts the Mufti's work to organize Bosnian Muslims to fight for the Germans. In Mattar's words, Husseini "recruited Muslims to fight the Communists in Croatia, Bosnia, and Serbia." Mattar carefully avoids informing his readers in the Washington-based Middle East Journal, (39) an anti-Israel publication since its founding, that the Mufti was recruiting an SS division, formally called the 13th Waffen-Gebirgsdivision der SS "Handschar" (kroat. Nr.1). (40)

The Handschar as the division was called for short after a Turkish sword (khanjar), was notorious for atrocities, (41) not only against the Yugoslav partisans, but against Serbian, Jewish, Gypsy and other civilians. The Yugoslav war criminal commission charged that the Handschar had handed Allied airmen over to the Germans, in addition to other crimes. (42)

In a speech to these troops, Husseini declared:

This division of Bosnian Moslems, established with the help of Greater Germany, is an example for Moslems in all countries... Many common interests exist between the Islamic world and Greater Germany, and those make cooperation a matter of course... National-Socialist Germany is fighting against world Jewry. The Koran says: "You will find that the Jews are the worst enemies of the Moslems." There are also considerable similarities between Islamic principles and those of National Socialism... I am happy to see in this Division a visible and practical expression of both ideologies. (43)
The reader can judge for himself whether, as Mattar implied, the goal that the Mufti urged on the Handschar was merely the fight against Communists.

Mattar does allow that Husseini helped the German war effort. However, he omits the Mufti's work for the genocide of the Jews. As a sign of our times, a New York publisher has commissioned Mattar to edit a reference work on the Middle East.

In view of the evidence, the efforts in the West and even in Israel to overlook or deny or whitewash the Arab historical record are simply outrageous. The Encyclopedia Britannica (EB) offends in this regard. The EB Micropedia (1985 ed.) tells us of the Mufti that in 1939, "Ceasing to play an active role in Palestinian politics, Husayni spent most of World War II (1939-45) in Germany. At the war's end he fled to Egypt." In the article entitled "Palestine," (44) Walid Khalidi asserts: "The Arabs [in Palestine] had remained quiescent throughout the war, and some 12,000 enlisted in the British forces." This may be true as far as it goes but it certainly gives an incomplete, misleading picture, especially since comparative figures for Jewish enlistment are not given. On the other hand, Kamal Salibi and William Polk in the article entitled "Israel" are slightly more forthcoming. (45)

They allow that "German propaganda was gaining wide support in Arab nationalist circles." The editor of a later edition of EB, Robert McHenry responded to criticism of the EB's soft approach to the Mufti by boasting of an "article in the Britannica, to which the Index will direct any curious reader," which describes the Mufti as "Amin al-Husayni, Grand Mufti of Jerusalem and admirer of the Nazis." (46)

The EB writes as if the Mufti merely "admired" the Nazis.

The Britannica's approach is typical. The Dictionary of World History (London, 1973), a weighty tome of about 10 pounds for which A.J.P. Taylor served as advisory editor, writes of Husseini, "For a time (1937-46), he lived outside Palestine, during which period he negotiated with Germany. He resumed his leadership of the Palestinian Arabs (1946)..." By this account, he was not necessarily an admirer of the Nazis. He merely "negotiated" with them.

Now let us look closer to home. If it is only to be expected that Arab spokesmen will try to whitewash the Arab record in general and in respect of the Holocaust in particular, such efforts are bizarre when made by Israelis. Consider the writings of two members of Israel's "peace camp." Amos Elon, the journalist, recently penned a choleric tract for the habitually anti-Israel New York Review of Books (47) in which he deplores the propensity among some Israelis to see the Palestinian Arabs as continuing the work of the Nazis, or to even consider that they might.

"Standing behind each Arab or Palestinian, Israelis tend to see SS men determined to push them once again into gas chambers and crematoria." (48)

Elon sees this as an obstacle to peace. Of course it would be foolish to see every Arab in this way and the typical Israeli that Elon presents seems to be a straw man of his own manufacture. Yet Elon's diatribe, which goes on for eight columns of rather small type, disregards the relevant history, to wit, the collaboration in the Holocaust of the Mufti of Jerusalem and others whose families are still prominent in the Palestinian Arab leadership. Nor does he mention the massacres carried out by Arabs in the past 40 years in Lebanon, the Sudan, and Iraqi Kurdistan. Surely this information was relevant to his discussion. However, these omissions are apparently intentional since Elon goes on to argue that "a little forgetfulness [toward the Holocaust] might finally be in order." (49)

One might accept Elon as sincere if one knew that he had asked the Arabs too to forget their various grievances.

Making Elon's article all the more bizarre (and it happens to be the featured article of the issue), is that the same issue of New York Review contains a piece by George Soros describing contemporary Holocaust-like events in Bosnia. Now after all, if Serbs or other former Yugoslavs, exposed for years to Communist propaganda in favor of the brotherhood of nations, could commit numerous atrocities against other ethnic groups, then why could not the Arabs who have been subject for years to intense nationalist (indeed chauvinist) indoctrination (and more recently to Islamic jihad incitement) do the same?

Another Israeli, Zvi El-Peleg, a biographer of the Mufti, admits part of the Mufti's pro-Nazi activities, denies or casts doubt on other parts, and distorts the moral meaning of his pro-Nazi and pro-Holocaust exertions. In the Hebrew edition of his book, El-Peleg takes pains to cast doubt on one of the incriminating pieces of evidence against Husseini. He writes that "those who saw him [Husseini] as a partner to the Nazi crimes" reported "that he asked of the Germans that upon their arrival in the Middle East they allow the Arabs 'to solve the Jewish Question in Palestine and the other Arab countries in accord with the interests of the Arabs and in the same ways in which this problem was solved in the Axis states.'" (50)

El-Peleg writes as if to insinuate that Jewish writers hostile to the Mufti chose to believe without substantial proof that he had made such a request of the Germans. What El-Peleg fails to say is that a nearly identical request is reported in a book by Husseini's Arab admirer, the historian Majid Khadduri (Independent Iraq, 2nd ed.), (51) a book listed in El-Peleg's bibliography. Neither Khadduri nor his publisher, the Royal Institute of International Affairs (Chatham House), has been suspected in the past of pro-Zionist or pro-Jewish bias. By the way, an interesting discussion of different versions of this request appears in Bernard Lewis' Semites and Anti-Semites. (52)

Lewis considers the difference between versions submitted while Husseini was in Iraq and those drawn up after he arrived in Axis Europe.

Another tendentious interpretation by El-Peleg is his denial of Husseini's Arab nationalist, pan-Islamic political outlook, by making him into a "Palestinian" nationalist, a more suitable, politically correct creature for the 1990s. Ironically, the quotes from the Mufti that El-Peleg presents in his book show Husseini's pan-Arabist, pan-Islamist character.

Whereas the respected American journalist Edgar Ansel Mowrer said of Husseini, "As a murderer, this man ranks with the great killers of history," (53) El-Peleg chooses to glorify this war criminal. El-Peleg is a historical revisionist, but even more is he a moral revisionist.

Just what explains the compulsion of Elon, El-Peleg, and others to portray the Arabs as historical innocents or to explain away Arab guilt remains an open question. But it appears symptomatic of the political prejudices and Orwellian political morality of our times.

Sources

- Irit Abramski-Bligh, "Husseini, Haj Amin al-" in Encyclopedia of the Holocaust [Hebrew & English editions].

- Daniel Carpi, "The Mufti of Jerusalem, Amin el-Husseini, and His Diplomatic Activity during World War II (October 1941-July 1943)" Studies in Zionism, No. 7, Spring 1983.

- Elias Cooper, "Forgotten Palestinian: The Nazi Mufti," American Zionist, March-April 1978.

- Bartley Crum, Behind the Silken Curtain, New York, 1947.

- Zvi El-Peleg. HaMufti HaGadol. Tel Aviv, 1989.

- Lukasz Hirszowicz, The Third Reich and the Arab East London, 1966.

- Majid Khadduri. Independent Iraq. London (2nd ed. 1960). Bernard Lewis. Semites and Anti-Semites. New York, 1986.

- Joseph Schechtman, The Mufti and the Fuehrer New York, 1965.

- Anne and Robert Sinai, Israel and the Arabs, New York, 1978.

- George Stein, The Waffen SS. Ithaca 1966.

- Norman Stillman, The Jews of Arab Lands in Modern Times, Philadelphia, 1991.

- Other authors consulted include Abdel-Razak Abdel-Kader, Elie Kedourie, etc.

ADDITIONAL BIBLIOGRAPHY AFTER PUBLICATION OF ARTICLE IN MIDSTREAM

Jennie Lebel. "Hitler v'haMufti." Meqor Rishon [article published about Spring 1998].

Jennie Lebel, Haj Amin uBerlin Tel Aviv 1996 [book on Mufti based inter alia on little used Serbian-Croatian sources].

Martin Kolinsky, "After the Arab Rebellion," Part I, Israel Affairs vol. 2, no. 2 (Winter 1995), Part II, vol. 5, no. 1 (Autumn 1998).

Eliyahu Green, "Ha`Arabim ve'haNazim," Nativ no. 4 1995, p 12.

Eliyahu Elath. Haj Amin al-Husayni. Tel Aviv 1968.

David Yisraeli. Ba`ayat Eretz Israel baM'diyniyut haGermanit 1889-1945, Ramat Gan 1974.

E Kedourie and S. Haim,eds., Palestine and Israel London 1982.

See various articles here, rather detailed and difficult reading.

Rafael Medoff, "The Mufti's Nazi Years Reexamined," Journal of Israeli History 17, 3.

E. Wohlgelernter, "In a State of Denial," Jerusalem Post June 8, 2001.

Monty Penkower. The Jews Were Expendable. Urbana & Chicago: U of Illinois Press, 1983.

OTHER HOLOCAUST BIBLIOGRAPHY

On Pius XII, see Journal of Modern Italian Studies 6,1 (spring 2000)-review by A Long.

Peter Neville, Appeasing Hitler: the Diplomacy of Sir Neville Henderson -- see review in European History, 31,2 (4/2001).

Temps Modernes

Revue d'Histoire de la Shoah

Barbara Rogers, "Auschwitz and the British," History Today, 49 (10) Oct 1999.

Notes

1. Lukasz Hirszowicz, The Third Reich and the Arab East, London, 1966; 312-13.
2. The Mufti's appeals to all the countries mentioned, but for Turkey, were known from documents, and in large part published, not long after World War II. It appears that Husseini himself was the first to make known his appeal to the Turkish government not to permit the passage of escaping Jews through Turkish territory. This revelation came in his own memoirs issued in Arabic in 1970 in Falastin (Beirut, July 1970), pp. 4ff. These memoirs included other documents relating to his efforts to prevent Jewish escape which had been previously published. See Bernard Lewis, Semites and Anti-Semites, New York, 1986; p. 268 n19. The major post-World War II collection of relevant documents was The Arab Higher Committee: Its Origin, Personnel, and Purposes. The Documentary Record. New York: The Nation Associates, 1947. This collection will be henceforth referred to as Arab Higher Committee.

3. Bartley Crum, Behind the Silken Curtain, New York, 1947; 111-12.

4. Crum, 110-112; Hirszowicz, 262-63, 312-13; Daniel Carpi, "The Mufti of Jerusalem, Amin el-Husseini, and His Diplomatic Activity during World War II (October 1941-July 1943)," Studies in Zionism, No. 7, Spring 1983; pp. 130-31. Joseph Schechtman, The Mufti and the Fuehrer (New York, 1965); pp. 154-58. The sardonic use of euphemisms such as "active supervision" for the mass murder of Jews was not limited to the Mufti. Consider Count Ciano's record of a conference with Croatian officials in Venice on 16 December 1941, several weeks after Husseini's meeting with Hitler. The Croatian fascist leader Pavelitch explained to Ciano, the Italian foreign minister, that, in Ciano's words: "The most urgent problems [of the new Croatian state] were being faced, and in the front rank that of the Jews. The latter, who were 35,000 when the Ustashis took power, do not exceed 12,000 at present (Young Kvaternik [an aide to Pavelitch and nephew of the Croatian minister of war] explains this reduction by the word 'emigration,' accompanied by a smile that leaves no room for doubt)." Galeazzo Ciano, Les Archives secrètes du Comte Ciano (Paris: Plon, 1948), p. 487. The Mufti later collaborated with Pavelitch and other Croatians when helping recruit and motivate the Bosnian Muslim SS division.

5. Letter in Schechtman, p. 310. See a similar letter to Ribbentrop in Ibid., 155-56; A number of important letters in this vein are in Arab Higher Committee.

6. Carpi, op. cit., 130-31; and D. Carpi, "The Diplomatic Negotiations over the Transfer of Jewish Children from Croatia to Turkey and Palestine in 1943," Yad Vashem Studies, vol. XII (1977), pp. 109-124.

7. Elias Cooper, "Forgotten Palestinian: The Nazi Mufti," American Zionist, March-April 1978; p. 19.

8. Hirszowicz, pp 311, 364 fn 18.

9. Crum, 113.

10. Cooper, 18.

11. Cooper, 23.

12. Irit Abramski-Bligh, "Husseini, Haj Amin al-" in Encyclopedia of the Holocaust [Hebrew & English editions].

13. F.W. Brecher, "Charles R. Crane's Crusade for the Arabs, 1919-39," Middle Eastern Studies, XXIV, January 1988; pp 46-47. Also see Elliott A Green, "The Curious Careers of Two Advocates of Arab Nationalism," Crossroads [published in Jerusalem], no. 33 [1992].

14. Cooper, pp 14-16.

15. Norman Stillman, The Jews of Arab Lands in Modern Times (Philadelphia, 1991); 414-15.

15. Hirszowicz, 312.

16. Cooper, 18.

17. inter alia, in Cooper, p. 22.

18. Walter Z. Laqueur (ed.), The Israel-Arab Reader, New York: Bantam, 1969; pp. 80-84; also see Hirszowicz 204, 218-19; Schechtman, p. 306.

20. Anwar Sadat, Revolt on the Nile, London, 1957.

21. Ibid., p. 34.

22. Ibid., p. 42.

23. Ibid., pp. 46-49.

24. Ibid., p. 50.

25. International Herald Tribune, July 13, 1987.

26. Hirszowicz, pp. 48-52.

27. Hirszowicz, p 52 and footnote

28. Ibid., pp. 35-36.

29. Ibid., p. 27.

30. Ibid., p. 131.

31. Ibid., p. 19.

32. Eric Rouleau, "The Syrian Enigma: What Is the Ba'ath?" New Left Review, No. 45, September-October 1967.

33. Jillian Becker, The PLO, London, 1984, p. 19.

34. Stillman, op. cit., p. 108.

35. Stillman, op. cit., p. 106.

36. For instance, El-Istiqlal, a PLO paper published on Cyprus, ran a two-part feature article denying the Holocaust, December 13 and 20, 1989. The Simon Wiesenthal Center of Los Angeles privately circulated photocopies and a partial translation of this material.

37. I.F. Stone's Weekly, June 1, 1964, quoted from Deutsche National Zeitung und Soldaten Zeitung, May 1, 1964. I.F. Stone was known as a leftist critic of Israel.

38. See, inter alia, Glenn Infield, Skorzeny: Hitler's Commando, New York, 1981; pp 205-219; and Robert St John, The Boss, New York, 1960; pp 152-53; Simon Wiesenthal provided a list of names of Nazi veterans who had obtained refuge in Arab countries, see Le Monde, June 9, 1967.

39. Philip Mattar, "The Mufti of Jerusalem and the Politics of Palestine," Middle East Journal (vol. 42, Spring 1988); p. 237.

40. George Stein, The Waffen SS. Ithaca, 1966; pp. 179-185.

41. For instance, see Parameters, Autumn 1993; p. 80. Parameters is the quarterly of the US Army War College.

42. Anne and Robert Sinai, Israel and the Arabs, New York, 1978. p. 65.

43. Schechtman, pp. 139-40.

44. EB Macropedia, vol. 25, 1985 edition.

45. EB Macropedia vol. 22, p. 142.

46. Robert McHenry, letter to the editor of Commentary, Nov. 1993.

47. Amos Elon, "The Politics of Memory," New York Review of Books, October 7, 1993; pp 3-5

48. Ibid., 3.

49. Ibid., 5.

50. Zvi El-Peleg, HaMufti HaGadol, Tel Aviv, 1989; 72. See the review of this book by Eliyahu Green, in Nativ [Tel Aviv, Hebrew], March 1990; pp 81-84.

51. Majid Khadduri, Independent Iraq, London (2nd ed.) 1960; p. 185.

52. Bernard Lewis, Semites and Anti-Semites, New York, 1986; pp. 157-58.

53. John Roy Carlson, Cairo to Damascus (New York, 1951), 413-14.

Elliott A. Green is a writer, researcher, and translator living in Jerusalem.

'Quartet may recognize Palestinian state'

Foreign diplomats warn that if Netanyahu fails to present new peace plan soon, superpowers may officially endorse Palestinian state in 1967 border, with east Jerusalem as its capital

Ynet

American and European diplomats warned that if Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu fails to present a new peace initiative soon, the Quartet may be compelled to recognize a Palestinian State in the 1967 borders, with east Jerusalem as its capital, the Los Angeles Times reported on Tuesday. According to the report, Netanyahu is under mounting pressure to unveil a new plan that would jump-start the deadlocked negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians.

If the prime minister does not deliver, the Quartet members – which include the United State, Russia, The European Union and the United Nations – may opt to resume the peace process by officially endorsing a Palestinian state.

"The Israelis are facing a bit of pressure with the way things are proceeding," a western diplomat stationed in Israel told the newspaper. "People are starting to look to the US for some kind of action," he added.

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton hinted last week that the international community may apply pressure on both sides in order to promote a settlement to the longstanding conflict, which she said was as pressing as ever given recent developments in the Arab world.

"The status quo between Palestinians and Israelis is no more sustainable than the political systems that have crumbled in recent months," Clinton said during a speech at the US-Islamic World Forum in Washington.

Netanyahu, who thanked US President Barack Obama on Sunday for approving the aid budget for the Iron Dome missile defense system, is expected to speak in front of the US Congress next month.

"This is an opportunity to present Israel's political and security principles, following dramatic changes in the region and in light of our national interest to ensure our peaceful and secure future," he said during the latest cabinet meeting.

Analysts have claimed the US postponed a Quartet meeting, which was scheduled to take place in Berlin last week, due to Washington's reservations vis-à-vis the European peace initiative.

Peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians were renewed last September, but stopped shortly afterwards, following the resumption of construction in the settlements after a government-imposed 10-months freeze.

"We've Got Them!!"

Arlene Kushner

I extended my Pesach greetings late last week, but knew I had to do this additional posting before Pesach began.

A gag order that was in effect during the course of the investigation of the terrorist attack on the Fogel family -- which saw the parents and three of their children (pictured below) cruelly slaughtered -- has now been lifted. The commander of the IDF in Samaria Col. Nimrod Aloni has announced: "The murderers are in our hands."

The terrorists are Amjad Awad, 19, and Hakim Awad 18, from Awarta, an Arab village near Itamar, where the Fogel family lived. Members of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), they were assisted by at least six others, four of them from the Awad family. All have been taken into custody.

They have confessed and expressed readiness to become "martyrs." Not only have they not expressed regret for their actions, they said they would have killed two other brothers who were in the house, had they known they were there.

~~~~~~~~~~

Even during the blackout on news about the investigation, it was clear that the focus was the village of Awarta, where large numbers of people were rounded up and questioned. At one point residents were complaining because they were asked to give DNA samples. What seemed likely at that point was that at least one of the terrorists, having fought with Ruth Fogel, left behind hair, or blood, or skin under her nails.

~~~~~~~~~~

Prime Minister Netanyahu congratulated the Shin Bet and the police today on the thoroughness of the operation that led to these arrests. "I was updated on the investigation's progress in the last number of weeks and days, and I must commend the Shin Bet and police who wanted to make sure their findings were complete, not only on the murderers themselves, but also for their accomplices."

~~~~~~~~~~

Involvement with terror seems to be an Awad family proclivity. Arutz Sheva reports that the father of Hakim was also with the PFLP and had served time in Israeli prison, while an uncle was involved in a 2002 terror attack in Itamar that killed five people.

Still another uncle, says Arutz Sheva, burned the boys' bloodstained clothes, and took the knives they had used to Ramallah. Incredibly, the boys returned to school as if nothing had happened.

The weapons have now been recovered by Israeli authorities; the man who hid them is one of those now in custody.

~~~~~~~~~~

Council chief of Awarta, Kais Awad (how much of this village consists of the Awad clan?), says he will demand an "international inquiry" because the boys who have been apprehended are "just children" and couldn't have done this. He believes the confessions were secured under duress and that "Israel wishes to cover up the crimes it committed in Awarta over the last month..."

Yea, yea, it's about Israeli "crimes" again.

But the fact that two young men -- they are NOT children -- could have done this makes it all the more chilling.

~~~~~~~~~~

Already, there are calls for capital punishment for the slaughterers, following a judicial conviction. And I think this is a splendid idea. In fact, it should go as the Eichmann trial did -- boldly public, so the world can begin to see.

My gut tells me that anyone who slits the throat of a three-month old baby without remorse (decapitates that baby?) deserves to die. But there are issues of law. Adolph Eichmann is the only one who has ever been executed in Israel. Yet the law reads that capital punishment is possible in cases of genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and crimes against the Jewish people.

I'll likely come back to this after Pesach. But it's time to send a bold message to our enemies and to the world: we will tolerate this no longer. That is, if there is the courage to go this route when the perpetrators are being called "children."

~~~~~~~~~~

Col Aloni indicated that the motivation of terror groups in Judea and Samaria to carry out attacks against Israeli civilians is still high.

As far as I am concerned, this makes any suggestion (whether it was Barak's suggestion or Netanyahu's) that we pull back the IDF from certain areas of Judea and Samaria either breathtakingly stupid, or a sin.

~~~~~~~~~~

And there's more. Also to be noted by my readers with great attention:

Dr. Aaron Lerner, Director of IMRA, placed a phone call today to S'ad Nimr, Minister of PA Detainees, and asked about PA policy with regard to the current PA demand for the release of all "detainees" (which includes all Palestinian Arabs in Israeli prisons for terrorist acts).

Asked Lerner, would the PA also demand the release of the two men just caught by Israeli authorities in connection with the murders in Itamar? Well, said Nimr, we don't know if the accusations are accurate. Assuming for the moment that they are, said Lerner, would the PA include these men in their demand that detainees be released?

Yes, replied Nimr. Palestinians have "a right" and "an obligation" to "resist the occupation."

Be very clear on this: a PA minister is justifying (as an "obligation") the brutal murder of children because of the "occupation."

This, of course, is no different from Hamas. Our "peace partners."

You can hear it all on Youtube. (Lerner's questions were not perfect in transmission, but the answers are quite clear.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AOUPcrDIsoU

Kol hakavod (well done!) to Aaron Lerner on this.

~~~~~~~~~~
Prime Minister Netanyahu will be in the US in late May, and House Speaker John Boehner has announced he will be inviting the prime minister to address a joint session of Congress. Will the prime minister be advancing a "peace plan"? Don't know. I'm not sure if he has decided yet.

But what I do know is that this is Netanyahu's chance to make Israel's case, boldly and with self-assurance -- with the whole world listening.

His message the last couple of days is less troublesome than prior rumors would have suggested:

"We will stand for our principles and fight those who try to dictate terms that would strip us of security and peace.

"We have been steadfast these two years, making sure that any peace agreement brings with it a secure, safe peace. Not just peace on paper, but a sustainable peace. I have set two core principles to that effect: the first - Palestinian recognition of the State of Israel as the Jewish people's homeland; and the second - real security arrangements on the ground."

Now we have to see these words expressed in Israeli policy -- in a refusal to cave to make others happy.

~~~~~~~~~~

But what we're seeing right now with regard to policy is mixed. This comes as no surprise as Netanyahu often plays both ends against the middle, attempting to satisfy everyone at once.

A few days ago came a report from YNet that Netanyahu intends to honor his promise to residents of Itamar, following the grisly murder of the five members of the Fogel family, that building would be done in that community.

However, there was a legal proviso included: that Defense Minister Ehud Barak has to sign off on this as well. (My best information is that this is true, and that Netanyahu could not override it on his own, but would require some legal maneuvering.)

According to YNet, less than a week ago:

"Though Netanyahu's office refused to comment on the matter, sources told Ynet that he has ordered Cabinet Secretary Zvi Hauser and Minister Benny Begin to ask Barak to approve the plans as soon as possible."

However, I just spoke with Minister Begin, who says the report is in error and he has not been asked to do anything. He has no knowledge regarding whether Netanyahu will sincerely try to push this through, or will allow Barak to block it.

~~~~~~~~~~

And then, in an interview in the Mishpaha newspaper, Minister of Housing Ariel Attias (Shas) now claims that -- contrary to his public statements -- Netanyahu has caved to Obama's demands and has de facto frozen building in the parts of Jerusalem that the PA claims.

The prime minister's office denies this, but Attias says, “The facts are correct." He says he cannot market new housing units that have already received the necessary bureaucratic approvals, because the government has not allowed tenders to be issued for contractors.

~~~~~~~~~~

As to attacks from Gaza, Netanyahu said:

"We will not stand for fire on buses or on our children. We will not abide a situation where Israeli citizens are sleeping in shelters - anywhere."

Which means...?

~~~~~~~~~~

Former National Security Adviser Maj. Gen. (res.) Giora Eiland joined the ranks last week of those saying that Israel should consider implementing a Defensive Shield-like operation in Gaza. Operation Defensive Shield -- which was initiated in Judea and Samaria in April 2002, in response to terror attacks on Israeli civilians -- totally shifted the dynamic and has made it possible for the IDF to consistently nab terrorists.

~~~~~~~~~~

Meanwhile Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon, responding to the firing from Gaza of two Grad Katyusha rockets on Friday, has now said that there is no solution other than toppling the Hamas regime.

~~~~~~~~~~

The US Senate unanimously passed a resolution on Thursday calling on the UN Human Rights Council "to reflect the author's repudiation of the Goldstone report's central findings" and rescind the report. It also asks UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to work towards the "reform" of the Human Rights Council "so that it no longer unfairly, disproportionately, and falsely criticizes Israel on a regular basis."

Please, don't hold your breath waiting for this to happen. But celebrate a very supportive US Senate.

~~~~~~~~~~

I want to end this posting by sharing an unusual and inspiring video. This is a speech by Cory Booker, the black mayor of Newark, NJ, delivered in February to a Chabad group: "Any Jew who wants to shrink from who he is, is not being Jewish," he tells his audience. "This is the spiritual question of our age...Where are we? ...Why do we persist in playing small?"

He speaks to Jews, and, I would suggest, if you substitute "Israeli" for "Jew," his message also resonates.

http://youtu.be/anBHv4mu9_I

(Thanks to my sister, Loretta T., for bringing this to my attention.)

~~~~~~~~~~

© Arlene Kushner. This material is produced by Arlene Kushner, functioning as an independent journalist. Permission is granted for it to be reproduced only with proper attribution.

Israel Warned not to Enable PA State Now

Hillel Fendel

Arab-affairs expert Prof. Mordechai Kedar of Bar Ilan University says Israel would be "clearly suicidal" in enabling a Palestinian state, in light of the revolutionary fever sweeping the Arab world. In the latest edition of his weekly column entitled "Middle Eastern Insights," Kedar writes that given the calls in Egypt to abrogate its peace treaty with Israel, and the shakiness of even the Jordanian regime, Israel cannot afford to consider entering into a process that would lead to the formation of a Palestinian state in Judea and Samaria. This is especially true, he adds, now that "we already have a terror state in Gaza that torments Israel with rockets and missiles made there or smuggled from Iran.

No Guarantees

"There is no country in the world that can guarantee that the Arab League commitment to recognize Israel will be honored by a new Palestinian state," Kedar warns, "particularly if it is again taken over by Hamas through elections as in January 2006 or a military coup as in June 2007."

Kedar states that if the Arab League "wants to persuade Israel to accept the API [Arab Peace Initiative], it must treat Israel as a negotiating partner and engage in serious discussions of conditions for peace… But the words of [diplomatic adviser to Saudi King Abdullah] Mohammad Al Zulfa, spoken to the Arab nation, point to a different outcome: the Saudis and the Arab summit have no intention save the defeat of Israel without a fight, by means of false premises that harbor no commitment to real implementation."

In short, Kedar says, Israel must not enter into negotiations at this point, and it and the world "must wait patiently until the smoke clears."

(IsraelNationalNews.com)

The Battle That Dare Not Speak Its Name: 48 Hours in the Life of an Anti-Islamist

Phyllis Chesler

The information is in and I don’t like it one bit. On the other hand, if one remains flexible, realistic, and calm and persists in telling the truth, one may also prevail.

I am talking about the hoops one has to jump through in order to be heard on any subject having to do with Islam.

I am not talking about the Danish Mohammed cartoon controversy, the criminal trials of the heroically determined Dutchman, Geert Wilders, or the unexpectedly great Austrian, Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff. I am not even talking about Lars Hedegaard of the Danish Free Speech Society, who was put on trial for making “racist” statements about Muslims, or Lars Vilks, the Swedish cartoonist, who has required 24-hour protection. I am not even talking about the high-profile and world-class beauty, Aayan Hirsi Ali, the Somali-Dutch-American feminist anti-Islamist. Nor am I talking about Random House’s 2008 decision to renege on its contract to publish “The Jewel of Medina,” a novel about Mohammed’s wife Aisha—and all because a single professor suggested via e-mail that the book “might lead to violence”—or about the Yale University Press 2009 decision to omit the Danish cartoons from a book they published about the Danish cartoon controversy; they did not even bother to tell the author.

No, I am not talking about any of this. I am only talking about what happened to me personally in the course of one 24-48 hour period.

A deservedly popular network radio program asked to interview me—but then begged me to “work with them” because they are being closely monitored in terms of their “Islamic” content. “Please be sure to say something like ‘Many Muslims are moderate,’ or ‘All Muslims are not jihadists.’” I assured him that I usually say these kinds of things anyway because I believe them—but still, a cold wind blew across my grave.

A distinguished American government publication had previously interviewed me at great length and very respectfully about honor killings. The editors ultimately asked me to participate in a debate about whether coverage of honor killings in the West “stigmatizes” Muslims. I said it did not—that if anyone was “stigmatized” it was Hindus, whose India-based honor killings are covered by the same American mainstream media which will not cover Muslim honor killings in America. Guess what? When they sent me the final version for my approval I saw that they had dropped the word “Muslim” before “honor killings” and had added a sentence that softened what I had to say about such Muslim-on-Muslim crimes. I immediately re-inserted the word “Muslim” and hope that the piece sees the light of day as I wrote it.

I believe it will. I did not raise my voice or lose patience. Calmly but firmly, I re-inserted my own words and once more explained why they were logically necessary.

But I did wonder: To what extent have the Saudis bought up our government media? Or are the same-old-same-old “politically correct” speech code censorship regulations operating behind the scenes without benefit of legislation?

Finally, on the same day, a magazine commissioned me to write a piece about honor killings but the editor asked me to “try to be balanced so that his bosses will approve the piece more easily.” I pointed out that it was an opinion piece, not a news item. I wrote the piece. It is slated to run—but alongside a piece which will oppose my point of view.

The message is clear: Either steer clear of all Muslim subjects or write only positive things about Islam. At the very least, be prepared to have a companion piece which differs from your own, not in the next issue, but right alongside you, speaking over you, as you speak. Be prepared to have to “debate” as the price for being able to present your own arguments.
Continue reading click here

France Is Brave and Right to Ban the Burqa Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/04/13/france-brave-right-ban-burqa/#ixzz1JURx8DSa

Phyllis Chesler

Earlier this week, France put its 2010 law banning the veil into effect, spurring angry demonstrations in both Paris and London. Two women were arrested, not because they were wearing burqas but because they participated in an illegal demonstration. Parisian police arrested 61 people this past weekend for holding an outlawed protest on this issue.

It is important to understand that the French ban is not specific to Islam. The French law is ethnicity -- and religion-neutral and refers only to a generic “face-covering.” In 2004, France became the first European country to legally restrict all religious clothing in public schools: veils, visible Christian crosses, Jewish skullcaps, and hijab (headscarves) were forbidden, not in public, but in public schools.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/04/13/france-brave-right-ban-burqa/#ixzz1JUS4Wqry
The French police will not forcibly remove any woman’s burqa nor will they arrest such women as long as they identify themselves. The police will fine them. Further, anyone who forces a woman to cover her face can be imprisoned for up to a year and fined about 30,000 euros (or about $43,000.00).

What does this ban mean for the West?

The West believes in freedom of religion, tolerance, multi-cultural diversity and, within limits, a woman’s right to dress as she pleases. (Nudity is not permitted everywhere). These values are precisely what sets the West apart from so many Muslim-majority countries which engage in religious apartheid and which persecute infidel religions. Saudi Arabia bans the practice of Christianity and Judaism outright.

Here are our tricky questions: Do we want the state telling women what to wear and how to worship? What if a woman has been misinformed. Isn’t it still her right to obey misleading information?

Does Islam mandate face-covering—is this a genuine religious requirement—or not? Have all face-veiled women freely chosen to veil—or have they been coerced into doing so to please their families and to avoid being beaten or even honor murdered? This does happen in the West.

Many eloquent and educated Muslim religious women insist that this is their free choice; that to them it does not signify subordination but rather resistance to Western “racism” or alleged “Islamophobia” and to a Western culture which, in their opinion, condemns women to dangerous sexual licentiousness, pornography, and lonely lives. Some say that face-veiling signifies their “devotion to God.”

However, Muslim men, both religious and secular, wear modern, western clothing. Why do Muslim women alone have to bear the burden of representing 7th century Islam--especially since this means sweltering in the summer heat and walking dangerously amidst crowds and traffic?

Many other equally eloquent, equally educated Muslim religious (and secular) women—as well as ex-Muslims--insist that the Koran does not mandate that women cover their faces—only that men and women both dress “modestly.” Leading Islamic scholars agree with them. History reveals that Muslim women successfully fought against wearing both the face-veil and the headscarf for more than one hundred years in countries such as Egypt, Lebanon, Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco, Turkey, Iran, and Pakistan.

In 1994, the Supreme Court of Malaysia prohibited public servants from covering their faces. Their grounds included the fact that doing so is not required by Islamic law.

In 2009, Sheikh Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi, the grand Sheikh of al-Azhar University, Sunni Islam’s highest institution of religious learning, was angered when he toured a high school in Cairo and found a teenage girl wearing a face-veil. He said: “The niqab is a tradition. It has no connection to religion.” He instructed the terrified girl never to wear the niqab again and issued a fatwa (religious edict) against its use in schools.

In 2010, Syria banned full face-veils in certain public places, including universities. In 2010, Iraqi religious authorities issued a fatwa requiring courtroom witnesses to appear unveiled; they said that only the Prophet Muhammad’s wives were obliged to wear face-veils.

And on April 12, 2011, Dr. Taj Hargey, Imam of the Oxford Islamic Congregation, wrote in the Daily Mail: “The decision by the French government to outlaw all forms of public face-masking, including the burka and niqab, is welcomed by all thinking Muslims around the world.”

The face-veil (niqab or burqa) presents both a security and health risk to others. Imagine a doctor or nurse who is veiled in terms of spreading deadly superbugs; imagine the awkwardness of a face-veiled courtroom witness, judge, teacher, or bank manager.

Most important, from my perspective, the burqa is a “prison,” a “coffin,” a “moving sensory deprivation isolation chamber.” I have argued that it is a human rights violation and constitutes both a health hazard (to the wearer) and is a form of torture. Burqa wearers have no peripheral vision and only limited forward vision. Hearing and speech are muffled. Facial expressions remain hidden. Movement is severely constrained. No eye contact can be made.

Burqa-wearers have written memoirs which describe how burqas cause panic attacks, anxiety, fears of suffocation, claustrophobia, depression, low-self-esteem, and vitamin D deficiency diseases from lack of sunlight. In "Princess: A True Story of Life Behind the Veil in Saudi Arabia," Jean Sasson describes how one Saudi woman felt when she wore a veil for the first time:

“When we walked out of the cool souq area into the blazing hot sun, I gasped for breath and sucked furiously through the sheer black fabric. The air tasted stale and dry…I had purchased the sheerest veil available, yet I felt I was seeing life through a thick screen. How could women see through veils made of thicker fabric? The sky was no longer blue, the glow of the sun had dimmed; my heart plunged to my stomach when I realized that from that moment, outside my own home I would not experience life as it really is in all its color…I groped and stumbled along the pitted, cracked sidewalk, fearful of breaking an ankle or leg.”

Women wearing burqas may feel they are defending Islam’s “honor.” In so doing, they are presenting a decidedly unfriendly face of Islam. Why not dress modestly and wear a headscarf?

I understand why many liberals, libertarians, leftists, and Islamists feel strongly about the importance of allowing Muslim women to veil their faces in the West. I wonder how many face-veiled women they have interacted with personally or in an ongoing way? Do they see face-veiling as impeding or accelerating an assimilation process in which religion is, indeed, a private, not a public matter?

France is brave and right to ban the burqa. There is no reason for a modern Western country to honor what is, essentially, a political statement and an ethnic and misogynistic custom. Banning the burqa is not infringing on religious freedom but is, rather, a principled blow against the Talibanesque and barbaric subordination of Muslim women on Western soil.

Phyllis Chesler, Ph.D. is a frequent contributor to Fox News Opinion. She is the author of thirteen books, including "Woman’s Inhumanity to Woman" and "The New Anti-Semitism," and may be reached at her website www.phyllis-chesler.com
Print Close

URL

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/04/13/france-brave-right-ban-burqa/

Hillary on the Thawing Arab...Winter???

My Right Word

Here are from the remarks of Hillary Rodham Clinton, Secretary of State, at the Gala Dinner Celebrating the U.S.-Islamic World Forum Hosted by the Brookings Institution and the State of Qatar, Andrew W. Mellon Auditorium,
Washington, DC, April 12, 2011:- First, her introduction -

Good evening, everyone. And let me thank you, Strobe, for that introduction and for your many years of friendship. It is such a pleasure for me to join you at this first U.S.-Islamic World Forum held in America. His Highness the Amir and the people of Qatar have generously hosted the Forum for years. And as Strobe said, I was honored to be a guest in Doha last year. And now I am delighted to welcome you to Washington. I want to thank Martin Indyk, Ken Pollack and the Saban Center at the Brookings Institution for keeping this event going and growing. And I want to acknowledge all my colleagues in the diplomatic corps who are here tonight, including the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs of Qatar, the Foreign Minister of Jordan, and the Secretary General of the Organization of the Islamic Conference.

Over the years, the U.S.-Islamic World Forum has offered the chance to celebrate the diverse achievements of Muslims around the world. From Qatar – which is pioneering innovative energy solutions and preparing to host the World Cup – to countries as varied as Turkey, Senegal, Indonesia, and Malaysia, each offering its own model for prosperity and progress.
This Forum also offers a chance to discuss the equally diverse set of challenges we face together – the need to confront violent extremism, the urgency of achieving a two-state solution between Israel and the Palestinians, the importance of embracing tolerance and universal human rights in all of our communities.

And I am especially proud that this year the Forum is recognizing the contributions of the millions of American Muslims who do so much to make our country strong. As President Obama said in Cairo, “Islam has always been a part of American history,” and every day Americans Muslims are helping to write our story.

I do not need to tell this distinguished audience that we are meeting at an historic time for one region in particular: the Middle East and North Africa. Today, the long Arab winter has begun to thaw. For the first time in decades, there is a real opportunity for lasting change, a real opportunity for people to have their voices heard and their priorities addressed.


What a metaphor to choose: "Arab winter has begun to thaw" in such a hot region. And then her specific reference to us here -

Now, this raises significant questions for us all:
Will the people and leaders of the Middle East and North Africa pursue a new, more inclusive approach to solving the region’s persistent political, economic, and social challenges? Will they consolidate the progress of recent weeks and address long-denied aspirations for dignity and opportunity?...

...We put partnerships with people, not just governments, at the center of our efforts. The Administration moved quickly to respond to recent events and to affirm the principles that guide our approach...And we start from the understanding that America’s core interests and values have not changed, including our commitment to promote human rights, resolve longstanding conflicts, counter Iran’s threats, and defeat al-Qaida and its extremist allies. This includes renewed pursuit of comprehensive Arab-Israeli peace. The status quo between Palestinians and Israelis is no more sustainable than the political systems that have crumbled in recent months. Neither Israel’s future as a Jewish democratic state nor the legitimate aspirations of Palestinians can be secured without a negotiated two-state solution. And while it is a truism that only the parties themselves can make the hard choices necessary for peace, there is no substitute for continued active American leadership. And the President and I are committed to that.


There are so many platitudes in that speech (and more in her additional remarks I did not include) that it is amazing that a college graduate with such a record of political/public service could mouth them.

But one substantive comment:

to compare the character of Arab governments - depsotic, undemocratic and oppressive - with Israel's rule over portions of its historic homeland not under our full political sovereignty is not only incorrect but nasty.

The Next Declaration of Palestinian Statehood

Seth Mandel

On Tuesday, the United Nations published a report by its Middle East coordinator claiming that the Palestinian Authority is prepared to govern a state of its own, and that any challenges it faces would be the fault of the continued Israeli “occupation.”

The report is another step toward the declaration of a Palestinian state with the imprimatur of the United Nations. Just a few months ago the Palestinian leadership of Mahmoud Abbas and Salam Fayyad were threatening unilateral declaration through the UN Security Council, though that would be subject to an almost certain veto by the U.S. This time, the Palestinians are seriously floating a plan to call for a vote on statehood by the full General Assembly this coming September. But as University of San Diego law professor Abraham Bell pointed out, this would not enable the Palestinians to avoid the American veto.

“Member states have to be recommended by the Security Council, and then after the Security Council recommends them, the General Assembly can then vote by two-thirds majority to accept them,” Bell said.

Bell said that if the U.S. vetoes the resolution at the Security Council, the Palestinian Authority would be denied statehood, but that in the General Assembly the Palestinians would likely have the votes for a supermajority. If the Palestinians get only the supermajority vote in the General Assembly, their status would not change one iota under international law. “It doesn’t make something that wasn’t a state into a state. And failure to win the vote, doesn’t make what is a state, not a state.”

But that doesn’t mean the Palestinians would gain nothing from the vote, even if the resulting resolution is nonbinding. The Heritage Foundation’s Brett Schaefer, author of ConUNdrum: The Limits of the United Nations and the Search for Alternatives, said that the Palestinians could still open certain legal doors with such a vote, and would certainly reap some diplomatic benefit from it.

“It’s obviously a political coup for the Palestinians, because what it does is it signals widespread recognition of them as an independent state,” Schaefer said. “It could lead to diplomatic recognition individually among states in increasing numbers. And it does give them more leverage over certain things including, potentially, joining the International Criminal Court, as a participant in that. That’s a double-edged sword. One ramification of that, should it happen, would be that any attacks that Israel launches on Palestinian territory could be subject to the jurisdiction of the ICC. However, the Palestinians themselves would also be subject to that jurisdiction. I think that the Palestinians would want to think long and hard about whether they’d want to subject themselves and the actions of Hamas, who operate in their territory, to that type of jurisdiction.”

Ironically, Bell said it is Hamas in Gaza that possess the legal prerequisites to form a state—not Fatah, which controls the West Bank and runs the PA.

“Hamas in Gaza has the legal ingredients, which are territory, a population, government, and a capacity to carry on foreign relations,” Bell said. “So if they declare themselves to be a state, I think they are a state. They don’t apparently have any interest. And then you have Fatah, which controls some authority in the West Bank, though under Israel, and I don’t think they have the ingredients. Do they have territory? It’s doubtful; they don’t really control exclusively any territory. Do they have a government? Yes, but it’s subordinate to Israel under the agreements. They have a population; they have the capacity to carry on foreign relations. So I think they’re missing ingredients. The General Assembly voting to say that they’re a state doesn’t make them actually one if they’re missing legal ingredients. And they’re the ones who are going to be pressing for this vote.”

Both Bell and Schaefer agreed that the vote would be designed to put diplomatic pressure on Israel. Bell referenced the vote the PLO called for in 1988, which was intended to pressure Israel into unilaterally relinquishing territory that UN member states now recognized as part of “Palestine.”

Amir Mizroch, former executive editor of the Jerusalem Post, believes it would accomplish just that—if the Palestinians invoked UNGA Resolution 377, also known as the “uniting for peace” resolution. It states that the General Assembly may take matters into its own hands if the Security Council fails to uphold its responsibilities to maintain peace. If the Palestinians won a GA vote after invoking 377, Mizroch wrote on his website, it would put Israel in an exceedingly difficult situation diplomatically.
Click here to continue reading

"Please! Stand Up for Israel Now!!"

Arlene Kushner

Dear friends, you've heard me speak often enough about how we must "wait and see." But now we don't have that luxury. Now is a time when the message coming from Israel must be one of strength, and if each of you will act, it is much more likely that it will be.

We are beleaguered. No doubt. The world is on us for several things. But the way to protect Israel is to stand strong for our rights, and to be clear in what those rights are. Appeasement has never worked in the past, and it will not work now.

Yet we have a prime minister who seems to believe that when we are about to be pressured big time, the way to protect us is by offering something that will deflect that pressure. So what happens in effect is that we surrender something, without having gotten anything, because we're too afraid to take the stand that must be taken. We do our enemies' work for them. There are two issues to be addressed here. I will describe each briefly, and then ask that you contact Prime Minister Netanyahu about these two matters in a single communication. I will provide contact information and sample letters for you to draw upon.

Please follow this message through and then act.

~~~~~~~~~~

1) Haaretz, a far-left Israeli paper, came out with an article today that says:

"Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is weighing a withdrawal of Israel Defense Forces troops from the West Bank and a series of other measures to block the 'diplomatic tsunami' that may follow international recognition of a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders at the United Nations General Assembly in September."

What is being mentioned is the possibility of withdrawing the IDF from Area B -- the region where the PA has civil control and Israel security control -- and leaving the PA exclusively in charge.

Now this idea is more than stupid. This is suicidal idiocy that takes the breath away. It is absolutely and unequivocally something that cannot be permitted to happen. Since the IDF went back into PA controlled areas in 2002 -- in Operation Defensive Shield, after horrendous terror attacks -- we have had low levels of terrorism in Jewish population areas, because the IDF searches out terrorists. To give the PA full control of the area would be to sentence innocent Jews to death. It would be to bring us back to pre-Defensive Shield.

~~~~~~~~~~
I have checked this with an impeccable source, who has, in turn, checked with a source in the prime minister's office. There is no official word on this. I am not telling you that this is Netanyahu's decision.

But what I am telling you is that this seems to be a trial balloon. An attempt to see how well it might fly.

Apparently, Netanyahu or someone on the left in his government (Barak? advisor Molcho?) believes it might be better to do this than to allow the General Assembly to declare a Palestinian state within the '67 armistice lines. But a vote of the General Assembly is only a recommendation, it carries no legal weight. And now is the time when the Israeli government should be making our case -- broadcasting loudly the fact that the '67 line was never a border, and that Israel has rights to the land east of that line.

~~~~~~~~~~

2) After everything, we have entered an uneasy period of quiet with Hamas in Gaza. Nothing official: an informal agreement on our part that we'll stop air strikes if the terrorist groups in Gaza, primarily but not exclusively Hamas, will stop launching rockets and missiles and mortars at Israel.

I have already written about the fact that such a lull works against us, as the terrorists will keep strengthening during that lull: we simply set ourselves up for worse later.

Now Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman has come out with this position:

"There was quiet, and Hamas took advantage of the quiet in order to smuggle more and more weapons. We remember when Kassams only had a range of 20 km; today they reach Beersheba and Ashdod and in the end they'll reach Tel Aviv.

"Hamas took advantage of the quiet in order to gain power and turn a gang of terrorists into an organized army...another battalion and another company and they will truly follow Hezbollah's model."

~~~~~~~~~~

Of course, Lieberman -- who wants to invoke a clause in the coalition agreement making it a government goal to take out Hamas -- is correct.

Even IDF high level officers concur with regard to what's going to happen next: The news yesterday was that the IDF expects a large confrontation with Hamas soon. Said one senior officer:

"Hamas has been busy rebuilding its forces for the past two years, and this can only mean we're facing an all-out clash."

According to Asharq Al-Awsat, cited by IMRA yesterday, what Islamic Jihad agreed to was a "lull" not "calm," which pretty much says it all. What is more, there is still a feud over the issue of our right to take out "smoking guns": if we stop someone who is actively planning or on the way to executing a terror attack, they would claim that we are the ones have broken the lull or quiet, or whatever it is.

Great! So we'll let them bide their time, and hit us at the time of their choosing?

~~~~~~~~~~

Tzachi Hanegbi, former chair of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, has written an important piece in the JPost. He suggests we need "Defensive Shield II" instead of "Cast Lead II."

We learned during Cast Lead in 2008/9, he says, that "in the absence of widespread and sustained damage to weapons smuggling operations, and to the capacity of the local Gaza arms industry to continue to independently produce weapons, the practical effect of such an operation dissipates in a relatively short time."

And so, Hanegbi suggests that instead of a short-term massive operation, we do "a broad operation aimed at completely destroying the terror kingdom established by Syria and Iran on our southern border."

~~~~~~~~~~

Please contact Prime Minister Netanyahu with regard to these issues. Keep it short, simple and to the point. Remain cool and polite. This is essential.

Communication to Prime Minister Netanyahu goes to:


Fax: 02-670-5369 (From the US: 011-972-2-670-5369) This is most effective.



E-mail: Memshala@pmo.gov.il and also pm_eng2@it.pmo.gov.il (underscore after pm) use both addresses



~~~~~~~~~~



Please use your own words -- it is SO much more effective. But here are a couple of model letters to draw upon:



Dear Prime Minister,



I look to you as the head of the government of Israel to take a strong stand on Israel's behalf at this time when Israel is greatly threatened. Appeasement will only harm Israel. Please! do not do the work of Israel's enemies for them by conceding what should not be conceded. Instead, stand for Israel's rights and make the case for those rights forcefully within international forums.



There are news reports indicating that you are considering a pull back of the IDF in parts of Judea and Samaria as a way to counteract the plans of the PA to go to the UN General Assembly. Please! Do not consider this even for a second, for this would constitute a death sentence for innocent Israeli citizens.



Additionally, Israel has come to some terms with Hamas in order to achieve a measure of quiet in the south. This is not in Israel's interest either. You are permitting Israel's enemy to continue to strengthen and then to choose the time for attacking Israel again. It is past due: Israel must work out a plan for taking down Hamas at last.



Please know that millions of people who love Israel are with you as you face your enemies, and praying for you to be strong.



Most respectfully,

________________



Dear Prime Minister Netanyahu,



A great deal rests on how you handle yourself during Israel's current struggles. I call on you to be a leader of strength. Please do not make concessions that should not be made -- they will weaken Israel without achieving anything. Instead, have the courage to speak out for Israel's rights with full vigor.



I was horrified to learn that you may be thinking of pulling the IDF out of certain areas of Judea and Samaria to counter PA plans in the UN. Surely you know how seriously you will put the Israeli people at risk if you do such a thing. It is an idea that is beyond terrible.



I ask, as well, that you find the courage to deal with Hamas forthrightly. Periods of "quiet" -- during which they can continue to strengthen -- is not what Israel should be aiming for. This too is self-destructive. Foreign Minister Lieberman is correct: it is time to make the elimination of Hamas a strategic goal for Israel.



History is watching you now. I pray for you to have strength and wisdom as you proceed.



Most respectfully,



~~~~~~~~~~



OK, now STOP. Please! Write your communication to PM Netanyahu NOW. If you table this task for later, you may well forget.



Then I ask you to immediately forward this to every person you can think of who might also respond to this. Post this on blogs and sympathetic genuinely pro-Israel discussion groups.



Do not imagine that what you do is worthless here. Numbers DO count and we need to deluge the prime minister with messages.



~~~~~~~~~~

© Arlene Kushner. This material is produced by Arlene Kushner, functioning as an independent journalist. Permission is granted for it to be reproduced only with proper attribution.

Why No One Wants to Admit that a War is On?

Steven Shamrak

Hamas has started another aggressive war against Israel. In accordance with international law, Israel, as any sovereign country, has the right to repel this aggression and end the occupation of Jewish land by removing enemies from Gaza. Why is Israel still behaving as a "Ghetto Jew"?

On Friday April 8 more than 60 Hamas and Jihad Islamic mortar shells and missiles hit Israeli towns, villages and farms on the Israeli side of the Gaza border and injured a civilian. This heightened Israeli fury over Hamas's attack on a school bus on Thursday, April 7, for the first time using a sophisticated Cornet anti-tank missile. A 16-year old boy was critically wounded. This attack was followed by 50 rockets and mortar rounds fired from Gaza by Hamas. Hamas is trying to establish new rules for the conflict on advice and directives coming from its Lebanese ally, Hezbollah, by stepping up its barrage on Israel by 25 percent. Hamas was advised by Hezbollah to blitz Israel into relinquishing the 500-meter deep security strip the IDF had established inside the Gaza border. This occurred when Palestinians continued to fire on Israel after the strip was temporarily reduced by the 2009 Cast Lead operation.

The IDF is fighting to hold onto this buffer zone to keep back Palestinian terrorists from breaching the border to direct attacks in Israel . Hamas is threatening to raise the cross-border violence until Israeli troops pull back to the border. Its anti-tank missile attack on the school bus on Thursday was the opening shot of its battle for the buffer zone.

The IDF's tactics for countering Hamas aggression remain unchanged, except in scale. In the last 48 hours, Israeli helicopters, mortars, tanks and naval units have been pounding the Gaza Strip while Hamas releases barrages of dozens of missile and mortar attacks on villages and towns - practically without a pause. Israeli civilians were told to stay close to bomb shelters in the days to come. Schools, road traffic, public transport and businesses will function intermittently.

Since the Israeli government has not adjusted its policies to the new developments, its military tactics are operating a vacuum and will have little deterrent effect. The current upsurge of Hamas-Jihad aggression will therefore go on.

Hamas fires 24 Grads, 50 shells on Saturday.

A million Israelis in shelters!

Food for Thought. by Steven Shamrak

There are many genuine people (nations) around the world, who are still suffering from occupation by others: Kurds, Armenians, Tibetans, Chechens, Western Saharans, and Basques. So-called Palestinians, a recently forged mix of people, are not one of them! In fact, they are actually the occupiers of Jewish land!

Cycle of Terror Attacks and Ceasefires Must End

In response to Thursday's terror escalation, a school bus was hit during a barrage of mortar shells and rockets , IDF strikes back hitting smuggling tunnels and terror cells in Gaza. No casualties were reported. Terror groups announce a ceasefire. (IDF is deliberately bombing tunnels, but avoiding killing terrorists. This stupid game has to end and Gaza must be free from occupation and reunited with Eretz-Israel.)

World Press 'Conspiracy'

The British media is failing to report the attacks on Israel and only reporting Israeli responses, thus creating the entirely false impression that Israel is the aggressor, thus, in turn, creating the kind of hatred of Israel in the world. By ignoring attacks on Israel the West is rewarding and encouraging Arab aggression.

Death Sentence for Peace Lovers

A well-known Arab Israeli actor, Juliano Mer Khamis, has died after being shot on Monday (04Apr11) by masked men in an attack in Jenin, Judea. He was a peace activist who ran a drama project in the theatre he founded in Jenin. (Arabs do not want peace with Israel . They do not want even to hear the ideas that would lead to peace!)

There is still Hope for Israel's Future

A poll conducted by the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung organisation shows that 70% of Israeli Jewish youth ages 15-18 believe that if forced to choose between national security needs and the values of democracy, a country's security needs comes first. 60% said that strong Israeli leaders are more important than other considerations.

Unilateral Palestinian State Game

Israel is continuously threatened with a unilateral declaration of a Palestinian state. Dr. Dore Gold reminds: "Since the 70s, the US is committed to veto any unilateral moves." (Considering the current and historical record of the US 'commitments' to Israel and other friends, can Israel rely on the US at this time of unpredictability of its ME policies or of having no policy at all? There are no demands for recognition of independece of Tibet, Chechnya or Basque people. Is it because they are collonised by China, Russia, France and Spain?)

Israel and Hamas in a dangerous game

Victor Kotsev

TEL AVIV - A second Gaza war in just over two years is, strictly speaking, not imminent; at least not until Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu returns to the country on Friday, following a trip to Germany and the Czech Republic. While neither side seems to want a full-scale collision (or so they say), violence is steadily rising, and the time between successive escalations is shrinking A public relations campaign is in full swing, and both sides are positioning for a vantage point in any blame game that would undoubtedly accompany a war. Israel's northern front is tense as well, and as the Jewish state faces unprecedented challenges following the Arab revolts practically everywhere around it, its leaders have to make fateful choices about the use of force.

On Thursday, an advanced anti-tank missile fired from the Gaza Strip destroyed an Israeli school bus, critically wounding a 16-year old boy and moderately injuring the driver. A greater tragedy was avoided only by chance, since the driver had already dropped off the rest of the passengers and the driver and boy were the only people left in the bus. Only a few minutes earlier, one report has it, a large group of children had disembarked at a nearby community.

Israel responded with over a dozen air and artillery strikes in Gaza that killed at least five people and wounded more than 40. One of the dead was reportedly a civilian in his fifties, while the other four were Hamas militants, including a commander. The injured included an unknown number of civilians. At the same time, militants in the Strip fired around 45 mortars and short-range missiles into Israel, one of which reportedly struck a house; no casualties were reported. In a twist, another missile was intercepted before it could hit the Israeli city of Ashkelon by the domestically-developed Iron Dome short-range missile defense system. This marked the first battle test of the new system, as well as, according to analysts, the first interception of a short-range rocket in "world history."

At 11 pm local time on Thursday, Hamas, whose armed wing claimed responsibility for the school bus attack, declared a unilateral ceasefire, but the Israeli air force continued to bomb smuggling tunnels and other targets throughout the night. Israeli experts estimated that the missile was fired from a distance of four to five kilometers, and that the militants who launched it aimed at a school bus with the full intention to commit a massacre and provoke the Jewish State. A senior defense official, quoted by the Israeli daily Ha'aretz, claimed that Hamas aimed to establish a "balance of terror".

Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak said in a statement that Israeli responses would continue "in order to make clear that things like this cannot continue". Netanyahu also vowed to take "all necessary action" as soon as he returns on Friday.

The violence comes in the wake of numerous other escalations in recent days and weeks. I outlined some of what now serves as context to the current round in two articles titled Jerusalem bomb seeds gathering conflict (Asia Times Online, March 24, 2011) and Fighting drowns out talking (Asia Times Online, March 23, 2011). It is a convoluted tale of several major terror attacks, including one in Jerusalem that broke a period of several years of relative calm; the interception of a ship carrying Iranian weapons, most likely for Gaza; rocket and mortar attacks from the Strip; Israeli retaliatory and pre-emptive strikes that killed dozens, including civilians; the abduction of a Gaza engineer in Ukraine; reconciliation talks between rival Palestinian factions, Fatah and Hamas; and increasing international pressure on Israel related to the Palestinian bid to achieve statehood some time this year.

The more recent developments are hardly any less diverse or difficult to interpret. On Tuesday, the Sudanese authorities accused Israel of conducting a mysterious air strike on a car in Sudan killed two people. According to most versions that have emerged so far, the dead were important arms smugglers, but there are conflicting reports of their identity and nationality. Some sources have it that both were Sudanese, perhaps working for Hamas, others claim that one was an "Arab national"; there is even speculation that one was Iranian.

According to a report in the Palestinian news agency Ma'an, "Palestinian security officials said that the target [Abdul-Latif Ashkar] in what has been alleged to be an Israeli strike on Sudan was the successor to assassinated Hamas official Mahmoud Mabhouh." Mabhouh was killed in Dubai last year in mysterious circumstances, and the Israeli Mossad is widely believed to be behind his assassination. He was allegedly a key figure in the Hamas arms smuggling network.

The Israeli intelligence analysis website Debka File, known for occasionally spreading wild rumors as well as legitimate intelligence leaks, speculates that the strike was a response to a plot to ship thousands of artillery shells containing mustard and nerve gas, obtained from the Libyan rebels, to Hamas and Hezbollah.

In the absence of similar reports, this information must be taken with a grain of salt, but it is indeed possible that the Libyan conflict is somehow related to this development. High-ranking American officials have also mentioned the presence of Hezbollah and other Islamic militants among the Libyan rebels. Many weapons from Libyan stockpiles are unaccounted for, and diverse groups including elements of al-Qaeda are vying to get hold of them.

Meanwhile, on Monday Israel indicted a Gaza engineer, Dirar Abu-Sisi, whom it reportedly abducted in Ukraine in February, accusing him of being a key figure in Hamas’s home-grown missile industry (“the father of missiles”). The indictment, much of which is classified, mentions that Abu-Sisi received his PhD from a Ukrainian military academy, and was mentored there by one of the leading experts on Soviet Scud missiles, from whom he “acquired extensive knowledge in missile development, control systems, propulsion and stabilization".

Abu-Sisi allegedly played a crucial role in improving the range and accuracy of Palestinian Qassam rockets, from six kilometers in 2002 to 22 kilometers in 2007. He also augmented the penetration capabilities of Palestinian anti-tank missiles, and planned further innovations such as a boost in the range of the Qassams and new mortars that could penetrate armor. After Operation Cast Lead in 2008-2009, he helped establish a Hamas "military academy".

Abu-Sisi and his family have insisted that he is innocent, that he was abducted in relation to the captive Israeli soldier, Gilad Shalit, and that he was "framed" after the Israelis discovered he had nothing to do with that affair. Since much information on the case remains classified, and some analysts have speculated that the extraordinarily detailed indictment indicates that Israeli officials were nervous to justify the clandestine operation, it is hard to discard this argument completely. However, circumstantial evidence points against it; Israel is known to plan meticulously international operations that could hurt its ties to other countries, to cross-check all information carefully and to act only in cases where it perceives grave urgency.

In a separate development, the internal Israeli security agency, Shin Bet, announced that it had recently broken up several Hamas terror cells in Jerusalem and the West Bank. One of these was allegedly responsible for a mysterious pipe bomb hidden in a garbage bag that tore off the hand of a municipal worker earlier this year. According to the indictment, a member of the cell discarded the pipe bomb in the garbage after another member was arrested.

Other cells allegedly plotted to kidnap and murder Israeli soldiers. According to Ha'aretz:

Palestinian and Israeli security sources told Ha'aretz last month that Hamas militants in the West Bank have resumed their efforts to kill Israeli soldiers or civilians and abduct their bodies.

The sources said Hamas activists believe they cannot keep Israeli hostages out of the Shin Bet and Palestinian Authority's reach for long. So they plan to kill them, abduct and bury the bodies, then negotiate for returning them to Israel.

The Palestinian Authority and Israel have recently captured in the Ramallah region alone about five cells planning to kill Israelis and abduct their bodies.

Last Saturday, Israel conducted an air strike in Gaza that shattered a few days of calm. It killed Mohammed al-Dayah, a senior Hamas military commander, along with two other operatives, whom an Israeli spokesperson accused of "planning to kidnap Israelis over the upcoming Jewish holiday of Passover." Another militant was gravely wounded.

Click here to continue reading

I rest several cases

The Post West

As it turns out, I was right that Goldstone recant would not make any difference; and I was right that the West acts out of hostility towards Israel and not out of any real concern for the Palestinians. The Commentator (Goldstone report set to continue passage through UN despite Goldstone’s retraction):

It now appears all but certain that the controversial report alleging deliberate Israeli atrocities against Palestinian civilians in Operation Cast Lead in Gaza will not be withdrawn from the United Nations despite retractions of key allegations made in the report by its author, Justice Richard Goldstone.
One well-placed European diplomat told The Commentator on Saturday that all the signs this week from major European countries and from the United Nations itself suggested that hostility to the Jewish state remained so strong that even Goldstone’s remarkable comments, made in the Washington Post on April 1, could not stop the report’s momentum in its passage through UN bodies

Here is further evidence and also validation of my prediction that Israel will be made to pay for the instability in the Arab world that scares a West in decline. That the country responsible for the Holocaust is joining the effort is significant -- never again, my foot. The New York Times (Germany Pushes Israelis on Peace):

BERLIN — As Germany moves closer to other European countries in adopting an increasingly tough stance toward Israel’s reluctance to resume peace negotiations with the Palestinians, Chancellor Angela Merkel said Thursday that it was more urgent than ever that the talks be restarted. With the Middle East highly volatile as fighting and protests continue in a number of countries, Mrs. Merkel warned the visiting Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, against any further delay in returning to the negotiating table. “The Middle East peace talks have an impact on the stability of the region,” Mrs. Merkel said after a nearly two-hour meeting with Mr. Netanyahu.

And yet another correct prediction: Jerusalem Post (Arab League to ask UN to impose no-fly zone over Gaza):

The Arab League on Sunday announced during a special meeting in Cairo that it plans to press the UN to impose a no-fly zone over Gaza amid an escalation in violence in the area, AFP reported.

Adds Jihad Watch:

The Arab League knows the jihadists would stand to gain on every possible outcome from such a measure, if it succeeded in passing. On the most basic level, they would have a free-fire zone from Gaza into Israel. They would score propaganda points if Israel chose to defy the ban in order to exercise its right to defend itself. They would scream "occupation!" at the top of their lungs if Israel opted for a ground incursion, claiming casus belli for "defensive jihad," which is ultimately a jihad waiting for an excuse.
They could thus potentially draw Israel into a broader conflict not only with Hamas and Hizballah, but neighboring countries, for which the deck is substantially stacked more against the Jewish state as Islamic parties are vying for power across the region. Above all, the Arab League would love to see Israel forced to choose between entering into an armed conflict with United Nations forces enforcing the no-fly zone, or having its hands tied, at the mercy of neighbors intent on destroying it.


Note, incidentally, that this was announced by Amr Moussa, currently the most popular of the candidates for the presidency in Egypt, and the League will meet in Cairo to issue the request. Note also the following:


Egyptian Rioters Try to Rip Down Israeli Flag from Embassy
Egyptian security forces surrounded the Israeli embassy Friday to keep thousands of rioters from attacking it. Protesters burned Israeli flags.

More on all this in my next post.

US Embassy Cable: Hamas-Hizbullah Arms Smuggling

Gavriel Queenann

Cable dated: 2009-11-18T14:32:00 S E C R E T SECTION 01 OF 02 TEL AVIV 002501 SIPDISE.O. 12958: DECL: 11/18/2019TAGS: PREL, PGOV, MOPS, PTER, KWBG, EG, IR, LE, ISSUBJECT: 40TH JPMG: COUNTERSMUGGLING TECHNICAL DISCUSSION (PART 2 OF 4) Classified By: A/DCM Marc Sievers, reasons 1.4 (b),(d)

1. (S) Summary: Concurrent to the Joint Political Military Group (JPMG) Executive Session, IDF J5 and Israel Defense Intelligence (IDI) officers briefed U.S. JPMG delegation members on current arms transfers and weapons smuggling into Lebanon and the Gaza Strip. IDF J5 and IDI officers first focused on arms transfers to Hizballah in Lebanon via Iran and Syria, and provided current estimates of Hizballah arms. IDF J5 and IDI officers argued that Hizballah's ultimate goal during any future conflict is to launch a massive number of missiles and rockets daily into Israeli territory, including those that can reach the Tel Aviv area. J5 and IDI also described the sophisticated smuggling routes from Iran into the Gaza Strip, arguing that Hamas is now more powerful than prior to Operation Cast Lead. IDF J5 and IDI officers noted improved countersmuggling efforts by Egypt, but stressed more must be done to curb smuggling into Gaza. This is the second of four cables (septel) reporting on the 40th Joint Political Military Group. End summary. 2. (SBU) Israeli attendees included representatives from the IDF J5, IDI, Shin Bet, and Mossad. The U.S. delegation was led by PM Coordinator for Counter Piracy Robert Maggi, and included PM/RSAT John Schwenk, OSD Israel Desk Officer Eric Lynn, J5 Israel Desk Officer LTC Alan Simms, U.S. DAO Tel Aviv Assistant Air Attache Matt Yocum, EUCOM LCDR Molly McCabe, and U.S. Embassy Tel Aviv political-military officer Jason Grubb.

3. (S) Maggi stressed the importance of and noted progress with counter-smuggling efforts into Gaza -- but also acknowledged the GOI desire to see even further progress. He said the USG was looking for practical ideas to improve counter-smuggling efforts. IDF J5 officers argued that smuggling represents a strategic challenge for the GOI, which is facing a proliferation of knowledge and capabilities that are severely limiting Israel's diplomatic options for peace. IDF J5 made the case that weapons and knowledge proliferate from state actors, which disrupts diplomatic regional efforts. IDF J5 highlighted "regional faultlines," with the United States and Iran leading two opposing camps -- and countries such as China, Russia, and Qatar remaining on the sidelines with unclear intentions.

4. (S) IDI officers briefed on arms "deliveries" to the Gaza Strip and Lebanon, making the case with the latter that these arms transfers were done openly and should not be considered smuggling. IDI noted that since 2006, Hizballah has increased its quantity of sophisticated arms with improved range and accuracy -- these arms were acquired via Syria and Iran despite the presence of UNIFIL and Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF). IDI highlighted the continued desire by Hizballah to avenge the assassination of its former military commander Imad Mughniyah, and pointed to failed attempts to do so in Azerbaijan and Egypt. Finally, IDI reviewed the arms delivery route from Syria to Lebanon via the Beqa'a Valley, and then to points south through Beirut.

5. (S) IDI presented estimates of Hizballah arms in Lebanon, including a breakdown of arms south of the Litani River. According to the IDI, Hizballah possesses over 20,000 rockets, hundreds of 220 mm and 302 mm rockets, several hundred "Fajr" rockets, hundreds of simple anti-tank (AT) launchers with rockets and missiles, and hundreds of advanced anti-tank wire guided missiles (ATGM), dozens of SA-14, SA-7, and QW-1 anti-aircraft guns, several Ababil unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), an unknown quantity of C-802 coastal missiles and up to thousands of improvised explosive devices (IEDs).

6. (S) Given this arsenal, Maggi asked what the IDF thought Hizballah's intentions were. IDI officers opined that Hizballah was preparing for a long conflict with Israel in which it hopes to launch a massive number of rockets at Israel per day. IDI officers noted in the 2006 Second Lebanon War, Tel Aviv was left untouched -- Hizballah will try to change the equation during the next round and disrupt everyday life in Tel Aviv. A Mossad official noted that Hizballah will want to ensure it can launch rockets and missiles to the very last day of the conflict, i.e., avoid running out of munitions. He estimated that Hizballah will try to launch 400-600 rockets and missiles at Israel per day -- 100 of which will be aimed at Tel Aviv. He noted that Hizballah is looking to sustain such launches for at least two months.

7. (S) IDI then shifted focus to the Gaza Strip, describing three circles of arms smuggling: 1. arms sources and TEL AVIV 00002501 002 OF 002 financing, such as Iran, Syria, Lebanon, and unfettered arms markets such as Eritrea and Yemen, and possibly China; 2. transit areas and states such as the Red Sea, Yemen, Sudan, Syrian, Lebanon, and Libya; and finally, 3. the "close circle" along the Sinai-Egyptian border and Philadelphi route. Maggi asked what percentage of arms transfers occurred via land, sea and air. IDI noted that it was difficult to determine: smugglers tend to prefer the naval route -- as there are fewer obstacles -- but the last segment almost always occurred overland. IDF J5 added that land smugglers are learning from past experience and building new overland "bypasses." When asked about air routes from Iran over Turkey, IDI officials indicated that Turkey has been made aware of such activity, although a Mossad representative suggested Turkey may not be entirely aware of the extent of such activity, given the IRGC's smuggling expertise. The GOI highlighted that focusing solely on the last phase of smuggling (e.g. along the Philadelphi route) would only lead to limited success, and that wider efforts were key.

8. (S) IDI also provided an analysis of weapons entering Gaza following Operation Cast Lead. IDI noted that one of the goals of Cast Lead was to damage Hamas' ability to produce its own weapons. In this regard, the IDF was successful, but Hamas is reconstituting its capabilities. According to the IDI, Hamas possibly possesses a few rockets with ranges over 40 km -- perhaps as far as 60-70 km, or within range of Tel Aviv. In addition, the IDI believes Hamas possesses quality AT systems such as the Kornet PG-29 and quality anti-aircraft artillery (AAA). These weapons join an already potent arsenal including Grad rockets with ranges up to 40 km, ammonium perchlorate (APC) oxidizer for indigenous rocket production, hundreds of 120, 80 and 60 mm MBs, dozens of mortars, C5 K air-to-surface rockets, PG-7 AT rockets and launchers, SA-7 MANPADS, PKS AAA MGs and thousands of rounds of ammunition, and quality AT, such as Sagger missiles and launchers, and light anti-tank weapon (LAW) rockets.

9. (S) IDF J5 presented some basic benchmarks for possible countersmuggling solutions for Gaza. First, Egyptian national commitment is required. Other benchmarks outlined by the IDF included a clear chain of command, control of the Sinai and its inhabitants, systematic treatment of tunnel infrastructure, trial and imprisonment of smugglers, and overcoming traditional failures such as bribery and lack of coordination. IDF J5 noted that Egyptian Intelligence Minister Soliman has been supportive, while there is growing awareness on the part of Egyptian Defense Minister Tantawi -- who the IDF views as an obstacle to counter-smuggling efforts. However, IDF J5 said there is a lack of coordination between the Egyptian Army and intelligence service on counter-smuggling efforts.

10. (S) The IDF has observed a more systematic response by Egypt in recent months, including assigning guards to newly discovered tunnel entries, or even blowing up tunnels -- by IDF estimates, the Egyptian Army has collapsed 20-40 tunnels in the last 4-5 months. Nevertheless, the IDF continues to see a lack of urgency on the part of Egypt regarding smuggling into the Sinai; little attention has been paid to improving the socio-economic conditions of Bedouins primarily responsible for Sinai smuggling. While Egypt has made several key arrests -- including prominent smuggler Muhammad Sha'er -- others are still at large. Finally, the IDF noted the construction of an underground barrier and sensors' network -- but in many cases, the smugglers have dug deeper tunnels to avoid the network.

11. (S) The IDF J5 outlined consultations with geology and tunnel experts, whom suggested several possible solutions to the Sinai-Gaza tunneling network: constant and specific mine activity in the vicinity of the border to a depth of 20-30 meters; the use of a shock device or stun charge, or smoke at a tunnel entrance for deterrence purposes; constructing underground obstacles 90 meters deep to destabilize current tunnel infrastructure; close supervision and inspection of buildings in urban areas, in which there is a high concentration of trucks and newly built rooftops and roads; and the arrest of major smugglers -- such as Darwish Madi -- and utilization of interrogation to discover major tunnels and dismantle smuggling networks.

12. (U) PM Coordinator for Counter Piracy Maggi has cleared this cable. CUNNINGHAM

Who Will Be Egypt's Next President? Find Out Here Five Months Ahead of Time

RubinReports
Barry Rubin

There are twenty candidates running for Egypt’s presidency. Most are not serious candidates but can split the vote for various blocs. I think the winner will be the radical nationalist Amr Moussa, which isn’t great but is better than an Islamist regime.

Moussa, former Egyptian foreign minister and then secretary-general of the Arab League, has lots of advantages. He has more name recognition by far than any opponent. As a veteran of the old regime he has the votes of Mubarak supporters. As a radical nationalist, Moussa appeals to many Egyptians. He is not an Islamist in any way, which will appeal to the majority of Egyptians who don’t want the Muslim Brotherhood to rule. And he knows how to be a demagogue. I’ve written more about him here.

The twenty candidates include two women, a Christian, two retired generals, and a couple of journalists. But there are no Islamists, or at least no Muslim Brotherhood representatives, among them. The Brotherhood won’t run a candidate and will have to decide who to vote for. Now, here’s what I want to tell you. There is only one other candidate from the old establishment so that vote—perhaps one-quarter of the electorate?—will go to Moussa.

But, there are five leftists and six liberals who will split those two blocs to smithereens, if I can coin a phrase. The leftist bloc is relatively small but the following are all running:

Abdallah al-Ash'al, pan-Arab nationalist.

Hamadein Sabahi, Al-Karama (Dignity) party.

Hussein Abd al-Razeq, neo-Communist Al-Taggam'u Party.

Magdi Hussein, Al-'Amal Party

Sameh 'Ashour, Nasserist Party.

Incidentally, several of these people—notably al-Ash’al and Hussein, get along very nicely with the Brotherhood. How can Marxists, radical nationalists, and Islamists all work together? Well, that’s Egyptian politics.

Yet that’s not the key problem. Remember those young pro-democratic Facebook liberals who supposedly were going to rule Egypt? Well, they are all running against each other, splitting an already small voting bloc into a microscopic one. The six rivals are:

Mohamed ElBaradei, who is more popular and better-known by far with Western journalists than with Egyptians.

Hisham Al-Bastawisi, a judge who was one of the first to come out against Mubarak.

Ayman Nour, al-Ghad (Tomorrow) Party, who ran against Mubarak in the previous election and spent four years in prison.

Midhat Khafaji, deputy head of the al-Ghad party who is running against Nour, the party’s leader!

Buthaina Kamel, a tv host who is from the Kefaya movement, another early anti-Mubarak group.

Wissam Abd al-Gawwad, a teacher who founded the Egyptians for Change association and the al-Nahhar party.

While only the first four are more important, that’s still a pretty big field. Remember also that when it comes time to assemble lists for the parliamentary election such splits will be even more damaging.

Here are the two interesting questions:

--Who will the Brotherhood back with its twenty to thirty percent base? They were supporting ElBaradei (yes, Islamists backing a liberal because he isn’t so liberal) but have quarreled with him lately.

--Will Moussa organize his own party which, if successful, could come in first in the parliamentary election.

But one thing isn’t in much doubt: President Amr Moussa sounds likely.