Frenemies twittering

This post is about Israel’s Frenemies constantly complaining about Jerusalem, The “Two State Solution” and Whatever.

Compare the size of New York City to Jerusalem

Compare the size of New York City to Jerusalem

Compare the size of New York City to Jerusalem

Source: https://www.comparea.org/r1381350+r175905

Jerusalem and EI area boundaries

Jerusalem and EI area boundaries

Jerusalem and EI area boundaries

Israel’s Frenemies tried a Jerusalem building Freeze

Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs https://jcfa.org

Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs https://jcfa.org

The End of Building Freezes in the Jerusalem Area

Construction plans approved in E-1 and Givat Hamatos areas

Nadav Shragai
8March2020 https://jcfa.org/the-end-of-settlement-freezes-in-the-jerusalem-area/

Givat Hamatos (The Israel Project, CC-BY-SA-2.0)

Givat Hamatos (The Israel Project, CC-BY-SA-2.0)

There are two strategic building plans for Jerusalem. Givat Hamatos, which is only 300 meters from the Green Line, will prevent the possibility of a wedge dividing Jerusalem from the south.

 

E-1, between Maaleh Adumim and Jerusalem and as part of Greater Jerusalem, will strengthen the Israeli-planned east-west contiguity to the Dead Sea and perhaps stymie north-south Palestinian territorial contiguity.

 

Good News for Jerusalem

Just days before Israel’s latest elections, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu decided to end the construction freeze on two neighborhoods of strategic importance to Jerusalem, where construction was frozen for many years. The first is in Givat Hamatos, where tenders for the construction of 1,077 housing units were issued on February 24, 2020, by the Israel Land Authority. Construction in Givat Hamatos has been frozen for seven years. The second neighborhood is the “E-1” neighborhood, between Maaleh Adumim and Jerusalem, where Prime Minister Netanyahu announced that a plan to build 3,500 housing units would be issued for public review. E-1 construction has been frozen for 15 years. These are two brand new neighborhoods. In Givat Hamatos, a trailer site had been built for new immigrants from Ethiopia. Infrastructure has already been established in E-1: roads, sewage system, water, electricity, and a police station.

 

Note Givat Hamatos’ undeveloped location between the Israeli neighborhoods of Gilo, Har Homa, and Ramat Rachel. (Google Earth)

Note Givat Hamatos’ undeveloped location between the Israeli neighborhoods of Gilo, Har Homa, and Ramat Rachel. (Google Earth)

Note Givat Hamatos’ undeveloped location between the Israeli neighborhoods of Gilo, Har Homa, and Ramat Rachel. (Google Earth)

Construction Freeze during the Obama Era

The plan for the construction in southern Jerusalem of the Jewish residential neighborhood in Givat Hamatos was approved by the District Planning and Building Committee of the Jerusalem Area as already in 2014 but has since been frozen. Pressured by the United States, Germany, and other countries in the EU, the publication of tenders for construction has been delayed time and time again. This is a strategically significant construction program, which lies along the Green Line (but outside it), 300 meters from the Talpiot industrial area and adjacent to Hebron Road, a major traffic artery in what the world calls: “West Jerusalem.”

 

From the Israeli point of view, the construction of Givat Hamatos is one of the keys to preventing the division of Jerusalem from the south, which will prevent a Palestinian wedge that will block the long-planned Israeli contiguity between the Gilo and Har Homa neighborhoods on the southern border of Jerusalem. [See map 1.] In October 2017, a drilling operation for sampling the land began on the site, with the intention of starting and implementing the construction plans, but under pressure from the United States (during the Obama administration) and Germany, the move was frozen again.

 

From the Palestinian perspective, the construction freeze on Givat Hamatos is the key to preserving the option of an urban connection, and in the future, a political one, between Bethlehem and Beit Safafa, an Arab neighborhood in south Jerusalem. According to the Palestinians, such contiguity will form part of the Palestinian urban fabric, which in the future will form the territories of East Jerusalem, “the future Palestinian state capital.”

 

At the Annapolis Conference (2007), the Palestinians proposed an exchange of land with Israel, which included the continued existence of all major Jewish neighborhoods in east Jerusalem, including the Jewish Quarter, except for Har Homa and Givat Hamatos, which they demanded Israel evacuate.

 

Givat Hamatos is one of the last land reserves (apart from Atarot) available for construction for Jews under Jerusalem jurisdiction. Some 2,610 housing units are planned for the Jewish population.

 

Nearby, at Beit Safafa, increased density of built-up areas on private land was approved for the Arab neighborhood, (600-900 housing units), mainly by increasing the percentage of construction on the site instead of crowding in more buildings. This area, too – according to Prime Minister Netanyahu’s announcement – is now permitted for construction.

 

The plan for the construction of the Jewish neighborhood of Givat Hamatos is a direct continuation of the establishment of 12 large Jewish neighborhoods built since 1967 in the territories attached to united Jerusalem. The establishment of these neighborhoods is aimed at preventing the city’s division again while simultaneously preserving the Jewish majority in Jerusalem. The establishment of Jewish neighborhoods in the many empty areas annexed to Jerusalem, neighborhoods where today there are approximately 215,000 Jews, is intended to secure, both by territory and demography, the Jewish majority in Jerusalem and prevent the possibility of re-division.

 

E1: Part of “Greater Jerusalem”

The “E-1” construction building plan is also very important for Jerusalem.

The “E-1” construction building plan Area Map

The “E-1” construction building plan Area Map

 

It covers an area of ​​about 12,000 dunams, mostly state land, north and west of the Jerusalem-Maaleh Adumim road. The planners, based in the planning offices of the Israeli Ministry of Housing, sought to connect Maaleh Adumim – a city that was established east of Jerusalem some 45 years ago, which now has about 48,000 residents – with the Mount Scopus neighborhood under Jerusalem jurisdiction. All Israeli governments, from the time of Yitzhak Rabin to today, have supported the plan, with the understanding that Israeli urban contiguity between Maaleh Adumim and Jerusalem must be sought. This concept is part of the view of Jerusalem and its surrounding Jewish communities as one metropolitan area, known as “Greater Jerusalem.” The center of the E-1 plan is the construction of 3,500 housing units, a commercial area, and a hotel area.

 

For years, the plan has been severely disputed by the Palestinians’ position, which seeks to prevent what they call “dismemberment of the West Bank and the prevention of Palestinian and urban sovereign contiguity between northern and southern West Bank.” During the Obama administration, the United States sided with the Palestinian position and prevented Israel from building on the site, as long as a final settlement was not formulated.

 

Contest for Contiguity

The Israeli interest is to establish E-1, while the international community, and in particular, the EU, all seek to block it. They seek free north-south passage for the Palestinians. Israel seeks to create contiguity between the west (Jerusalem) and the east (Maaleh Adumim on the way to the Dead Sea) as part of a Jewish security belt around Jerusalem. Israel is very concerned about Palestinian attempts to impose a separation between Maaleh Adumim and Jerusalem. The concern also extends to a Palestinian construction belt surrounding Jerusalem from the east from which they could launch attacks against Jerusalem; this would return Jerusalem to a state of a “city on the border” (as it was on the eve of the Six-Day War) in a way that would block the possibility of the city’s development eastward. This would create a threat to the Jerusalem-Jericho Road, where Palestinian construction is already encroaching. This road is a major artery of paramount strategic security importance for Israel to transport troops east to the Jordan Valley and then north in the event of war.

Illegal buildings in Khan al-Ahmar along the east-west road to the Jordan Valley. (Wikimedia Commons)

Illegal buildings in Khan al-Ahmar along the east-west road to the Jordan Valley. (Wikimedia Commons)

 

In Israel, there has been an almost total consensus for years about the need to connect Maaleh Adumim to Jerusalem through the construction of E-1 and, in the future, to apply Israeli sovereignty to this area as part of Israel’s permanent borders. Six prime ministers, from Rabin to Olmert, have publicly pledged to build E-1, but with the exception of the construction of the District Police Station in this area, the building has not begun, due to U.S. resistance.

 

The years that have passed since the initial stages of the program were approved (23 years ago) have resulted in its collapse. Migrant Bedouin tribes and illegal Palestinian construction have reduced the area available for construction. This phenomenon also narrowed the corridor towards Jerusalem, where the main arterial road passes between Jerusalem and Maaleh Adumim and the Jordan Valley. The corridor, originally about two kilometers wide, has been reduced to only one kilometer wide. The route of the separation fence in the Jerusalem area includes Area E-1.

 

Maaleh Adumim and E-1: The Heart of the Israeli Consensus

A study published in 2009 by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs on the importance and implications of the E-1 plan, written by this author, included statements by Israeli public figures showing just how broad the consensus was on this building plan. Here are some of the statements:

  • In a Knesset debate on October 5, 1994, Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin stated: “United Jerusalem will also include Maaleh Adumim and Givat Ze’ev in Israel’s capital under Israeli sovereignty.” Six months earlier, in April, it was Yitzhak Rabin who handed the annexation documents of Area E-1 to the mayor of Maaleh Adumim, Benny Kasriel.
  • After Rabin’s assassination, on March 13, 1996, Prime Minister Shimon Peres reiterated the government’s position that Israel would demand the application of Israeli sovereignty to Maaleh Adumim in the framework of permanent agreements.
  • Prime Minister Sharon made it clear in early April 2005 that “E-1 is a 10-year program with the intention of continuing.” The Sharon government’s defense minister, Shaul Mofaz, also said in a tour of E-1 that he is behind the plan to create Jewish contiguity between Jerusalem and Maaleh Adumim.

In a video by the municipality of Maaleh Adumim, key personalities have been recorded over the years as they declare allegiance to Maaleh Adumim and to E-1 and explained its importance: Among the speakers:

    • The late Ariel Sharon (former Prime Minister): “Maaleh Adumim will continue to build as part of the State of Israel forever and ever.”
    • Ehud Barak (former Prime Minister and Minister of Defense):

It is imperative to translate our ownership to the corridor of E-1. Without a willingness to build contiguity that will connect Mt. Scopus to Maaleh Adumim, Maaleh Adumim in danger. If we do not take immediate political action, setting practical facts on the ground, we may lose Maaleh Adumim.

    • Ehud Olmert (former Prime Minister):

I see my vision, not as a distant thing but as a living reality, all the way from Maaleh Adumim to Jerusalem and all the way from Jerusalem to Adumim as one contiguous urban area, uninterrupted. There are things that are beyond dispute, beyond debate, and the whole area of ​​the Jerusalem envelope will remain part of Jerusalem and the State of Israel forever, and Maaleh Adumim is part of this area.

      • Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu:

We want to create a contiguous region from Greater Jerusalem from west to east, and the Palestinians want to create contiguous construction from north to south, and someone will overcome someone. They will not give up. They want to strangle Jerusalem on the one hand and separate Maaleh Adumim from the other. We have to overcome them and build up E-1.

      • Silvan Shalom (former Foreign Minister): “Maaleh Adumim’s connection to Jerusalem in the long term is inevitable.”
      • MK Tzachi Hanegbi:

No prime minister and government will dare to surrender on Maaleh Adumim, a city that protects Jerusalem. A city where thousands of residents live. Maaleh Adumim passed the point of no return. Nothing to worry about.

      • President Reuven Rivlin:

The E-1 program is a never-to-be-surrendered task. If Yitzhak Rabin were alive today, he would have given uncompromising instruction to carry out the E-1 plan.

    • Meir Porush (former Deputy Minister of Housing, Torah Judaism): “If you want to strangle Jerusalem, they should not build E-1.”

 

Nadav Shragai

Nadav Shragai is a senior researcher at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. He served as a journalist and commentator at Ha’aretz between 1983 and 2009, is currently a journalist and commentator at Israel Hayom, and has documented the dispute over Jerusalem for thirty years.   His books include: Jerusalem: Delusions of Division (Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, 2015); The Al-Aksa Is in Danger” Libel: The History of a Lie (Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, 2012); the ebook Jerusalem: Correcting the International Discourse – How the West Gets Jerusalem Wrong (Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, 2012); At the Crossroads: The Story of Rachel’s Tomb (Gates for Jerusalem Studies, 2005); The Temple Mount Conflict (Keter, 1995); and the essay: “Jerusalem Is Not the Problem, It Is the Solution,” in Mr. Prime Minister: Jerusalem, Moshe Amirav, ed. (Carmel and Florsheimer Institute, 2005).

 

TOP


allisraelnews-com-logo

European powers condemn Israel’s E1 construction plans in Judea, UK threatens sanctions

All Israel News Staff | Published: 21August2026
https://allisraelnews.com/european-powers-condemn-israels-e1-construction-plans-in-judea-uk-threatens-sanctions

 

France, the United Kingdom, Italy and Germany on Thursday jointly condemned the Israeli government’s plans to advance construction in the E1 area of Judea and Samaria, internationally known as the West Bank.

 

“The decision by the Israeli government to publish bid offers for construction projects within the framework of the E1 settlers’ project is unacceptable,” the four European powers said in a joint statement. The condemnation came after Israel announced plans to market the first 1,400 of 3,412 planned housing units in the Samaria.

 

The four European governments, like much of the international community, oppose Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria, which they consider “occupied territory” and therefore a violation of international law. Israel rejects that legal position, arguing that Judea and Samaria are disputed rather than occupied.

 

The British government went further in its condemnation of Israel, with Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband announcing that Britain would prepare new targeted sanctions against Israelis involved in what it described as “illegal settlement expansion” in Gaza and the West Bank.

 

“The Israeli Government’s launch of tenders for the E1 settlement project is unacceptable and destructive. Britain will not stand back and accept the destruction of the two state solution,” British Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband wrote on 𝕏.

 

The E1 area is considered strategically sensitive because of its location between Jerusalem and the Jewish city of Ma’aleh Adumim, which much of the international community considers an “illegal settlement.”

 

Critics of Israeli construction in E1 have argued that development there would undermine the geographic continuity of a future Palestinian state. However, even if Israel proceeds with construction in the area, Palestinian Authority-controlled territory would retain geographic continuity east of E1.

 

From an Israeli perspective, the E1 area is strategically important for strengthening Israel’s control of the Jerusalem area, which Israel considers its undivided capital.

 

Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar responded to Miliband’s criticism by saying he “rejected outright the statement of the UK Foreign Secretary and the patronizing tone of his words.”

 

“The Jewish people have the right to live throughout the Land of Israel, just as the British have the right to live in London and throughout the United Kingdom,” Sa’ar added.

 

The Israeli foreign minister also accused the British government of hypocrisy in its criticism of Israel.

 

“Britain itself still controls colonial territories thousands of miles from its shores. It is absurd for Britain to lecture the Jewish people about where they may live in their historic tiny homeland, when the Jewish people’s connection and right to this land is the most extensively documented of any people in human history,” Sa’ar argued.

 

Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir went further in his criticism of Miliband.

 

“Someone should update Ed that the British Mandate for the Land of Israel ended in 1948 and that Israel is an independent state,” Ben Gvir wrote on 𝕏.

 

“Perhaps instead of playing make-believe about the Mandate era, he ought to look out of the window at his London, which is rapidly turning into an Islamic Caliphate,” he added, referring to the large-scale immigration from Muslim-majority countries to the UK and other Western countries.

 

Last month, newly elected British Prime Minister Andy Burnham vowed to take a tougher stance against Israel amid growing diplomatic tensions concerning the Middle East conflict.

 

TOP

Joint Statement UK-EU-Canada Jerusalem E1 and reactions

Joint Statement UK-EU-Canada Jerusalem E1

Joint Statement UK-EU-Canada Jerusalem E1

REACTIONS:


Mossad Commentary-tweet-20August2026-israel should be writing the letters
PERHAPS ISRAEL SHOULD BE WRITING THE LETTERS TO EUROPE.

Seven Western governments are warning Israel over E1 construction, accusing Jerusalem of undermining a future Palestinian state and even cautioning businesses against participating.

Meanwhile, those same European governments are struggling with the consequences of their own border and migration policies — policies that have transformed their societies and fueled intense debates over security, sovereignty and national identity.

Europe lectures Israel about preserving the possibility of another state.

Israel might reasonably ask Europe a question in return:

Who is protecting the future of your own?

Mossad Commentary-tweet-20August2026-israel should be writing the letters

Mossad Commentary-tweet-20August2026-israel should be writing the letters

 


 


Mossad Commentary-tweet-20August2026-reaction to Joint Statement UK-EU-Canada Jerusalem E1
🚨 EU THREATENS SANCTIONS OVER E1 SETTLEMENT

The EU is reportedly preparing sanctions if Israel begins construction in the E1 area, including labeling products from Israel, scaling back academic ties, and halting some security and diplomatic cooperation.

Smotrich says he won’t accept “dictates from foreign countries,” while Ben Gvir told Ed Miliband: “someone should update Ed that the British Mandate for the Land of Israel ended in 1948 and that Israel is an independent state.”

Smotrich and Gvir are right.

Mossad Commentary-tweet-20August2026-reaction to Joint Statement UK-EU-Canada Jerusalem E1

Mossad Commentary-tweet-20August2026-reaction to Joint Statement UK-EU-Canada Jerusalem E1

 


 


Mossad Commentary-tweet-21August2026-Commentary-Joint Statement UK-EU-Canada Jerusalem E1
🇮🇱 COUNTRIES THAT CANNOT PROTECT THEIR OWN BORDERS WILL NOT TELL ISRAEL WHERE TO DRAW OURS…

💡MOSSADIL COMMENTARY: Reports say the EU is preparing sanctions against Israel if construction moves forward in E1, between Jerusalem and Ma’ale Adumim.

Israel should look very carefully at Europe’s trajectory before allowing these threats to dictate Israeli policy.

Anyone who believes that cancelling E1 will suddenly restore some permanent European-Israeli alliance is fooling themselves. Today it is E1. Tomorrow it will be another neighborhood, another security measure, another military operation, another Israeli government decision.

The pressure will not disappear. The demand will simply move.

Europe itself is struggling with uncontrolled borders, political radicalization, social fragmentation and increasingly aggressive extremist movements—and yet its governments presume to dictate where Jews may build and what Israel’s future borders should look like.

Israel cannot formulate national policy around winning temporary approval from governments that may look very different a decade from now.

We are not Europe First.

We are not Palestinian First.

We are Israel First.

We have stood alone before. If necessary, we will stand alone again.

Israel’s borders, security and future will be decided in Jerusalem—not Brussels, London or Paris.

Mossad Commentary-tweet-21August2026-Commentary-Joint Statement EU-UK-Canada Jerusalem E1

Mossad Commentary-tweet-21August2026-Commentary-Joint Statement EU-UK-Canada Jerusalem E1

 

Countries that cannot protect their own borders will not tell Israel where to Draw ours

Countries that cannot protect their own borders will not tell Israel where to Draw ours

 

TOP

Statement-on Israeli-Jerusalem-E1 Project-Ed Miliband UK Foreign Secretary

Statement-on Israeli-Jerusalem-E1 Project-Ed Miliband UK Foreign Secretary

Statement-on Israeli-Jerusalem-E1 Project-Ed Miliband UK Foreign Secretary


Ed Miliband-tweet-19August2026-statemen
The Israeli Government’s launch of tenders for the E1 settlement project is unacceptable and destructive. Britain will not stand back and accept the destruction of the two state solution. My statement:

Ed Miliband-tweet-19August2026-statemen

Ed Miliband-tweet-19August2026-statemen

 

TOP


UK-Lawyers-For-Israel-logo

UKLFI warns over proposed settlement trade ban

22August2026 /  https://www.uklfi.com/uklfi-warns-over-proposed-settlement-trade-ban

UK Lawyers for Israel (UKLFI) has warned the UK Government that introducing a ban on trade between the UK and Israeli settlement in East Jerusalem and the West Bank would breach several binding international obligations.

UK House of parliament

UK House of parliament

 

The UK Government is actively considering banning trade in goods and services between the UK and areas of Israeli settlement in East Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria (the West Bank). It says it has an obligation under international law to impose this ban.

 

UKLFI has sent a  Briefing Paper to the UK’s Foreign Secretary and the Legal Adviser to the UK’s Foreign Office, challenging that position.

 

The Paper disputes the claim that the UK has a legal obligation to impose a general ban on such trade and argues that, on the contrary, such a ban would contravene the UK’s legal obligations under the UK-Israel TPA, the GATT, the GATS, and (if applied to Northern Ireland) the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland to the Brexit Agreement.

 

At the same time, by harming Israeli businesses in the West Bank that employ Palestinian staff, such a ban would undermine the Palestinian economy and the prospect of a two-State solution.

 

In addition, such a ban might discourage US investment in the UK, since companies operating in the UK that comply with it would be exposed to potential sanctions under US Federal and State laws.

 

It would also have the effect of further promoting antisemitism in the UK.

 

Jonathan Turner, Chief Executive of UKLFI, commented:  “Statements made on behalf of the UK Government appear to be the opposite of the correct analysis. There is no international legal obligation requiring the UK to impose a blanket ban on trade with Israeli businesses in East Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria. On the contrary, our analysis shows that imposing such a ban could itself put the UK in breach of several binding international obligations, including the UK-Israel Trade and Partnership Agreement, the GATT and the GATS and, if the ban extends to Northern Ireland, the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland to the Brexit Agreement.”

 

Click to download PDF file Click to download PDF file Briefing-Paper-on-UK-Proposed-Trade-Ban-final

 

TOP

Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs https://jcfa.org

Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs https://jcfa.org

Understanding Israeli Interests in the E1 Area: Contiguity, Security, and Jerusalem

https://jcpa.org/understanding-israeli-interests-in-the-e1-area/

 

Jerusalem and EI area boundaries

Jerusalem and EI area boundaries

Why This Study Was Written

The Israeli building program known as E1 (East-1), situated between Jerusalem and Maale Adumim, has been on the Israeli and world agenda for twenty years. It is subject to a severe Israeli-Palestinian dispute and prompts strong international opposition. As a result, it has yet to be implemented.

 

On November 30, 2012, after long years in which Israel had almost completely frozen the program, a scaled-down forum of nine ministers of the Israeli government met and decided to renew the planning, approval, and construction processes in the E1 area. This decision was part of Israel’s reaction to the UN General Assembly resolution on recognizing the State of Palestine as an observer state that is not a full member of the United Nations.

 

Many countries displayed a total lack of understanding for Israel’s decision and condemned it, sometimes harshly. The White House spokesman, for example, said the program contravened U.S. policy and damaged the chances for a two-state solution. The Israeli ambassadors in Britain, France, Sweden, Spain, and Denmark were summoned for reprimands.1 In addition, fourteen of the fifteen members of the UN Security Council declared that the organization opposed Israel’s plans to build in E1. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said Israel had taken a “dangerous path.”2

 

At the beginning of January 2013, a group of Palestinians, with the backing of the Palestinian Authority, set up a protest encampment in E1. Israel waited a few days and then, with Supreme Court approval, evacuated it.

 

The Israeli government and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rejected the criticism over the decision to build in E1. The Prime Minister’s Office affirmed that Israel would “continue to act in accordance with the vital interests of the State of Israel even in the face of international pressures, and there will be no change in the decision that has been taken.” Israel’s decision was also taken in light of the fact that, according to every past Israeli government, Maale Adumim must be retained by Israel, and the Palestinians have agreed to this in past negotiations. Therefore, the connection of Maale Adumim to Jerusalem needs to be addressed when planning the future of the area.

 

At the beginning of December 2012, the Supreme Planning Council for Judea and Samaria, part of the Civil Administration, began to implement the government’s decision. It decided to deposit the construction plans for two of the E1 residential neighborhoods for public approval, a significant stage in the succession of approvals that still await the plan. At the last minute, however, an order by the Prime Minister’s Office put a halt to this procedure, and so far the plan has not been deposited for public approval.

 

This study discusses the E1 plan, its great importance for the State of Israel, and its vicissitudes over the years. It refutes the claim that the plan would hinder the two-state solution, or prevent linkage between the populations of the northern and southern West Bank. It describes the longstanding consensus in Israel about the future of Maale Adumim and the vital link between Jerusalem and Maale Adumim, of which the E1 plan is an integral aspect; the place of the Adumim bloc in the concept of metropolitan Jerusalem; and the place of that concept in Israel’s approach to security and settlement.

 

The study also explains why avoiding building in E1 is dangerous to Israel’s interests, and likely to result in Maale Adumim and Jerusalem being severed from each other. At the same time, the report strongly criticizes the Israeli authorities’ failure over the years to eradicate the phenomenon of illegal Palestinian building in the area between Maale Adumim and Jerusalem. While this stems from concern for the reaction of the international community, it is gradually constricting Israel’s options in an area so vital for its future integrity.

 

As the study shows, the E1 area is located in Area C, the portion of the West Bank in which Israel has the powers of zoning and planning according to the Oslo II Interim Agreement.  In the last year, the Palestinian Authority has nonetheless undertaken development projects in Area C, some with EU financing.  Thus the situation on the ground is not static, and Israel will have to find a way to protect its vital interests, especially in this sensitive area, to the east of its capital.

The Essential Points

  1. The site for the E1 building plan extends over an area of about 12,000 dunams,most of it state land, northward and westward of the Jerusalem-Maale Adumim road. Through this plan, Israel wants to link Maale Adumim – a city established east of Jerusalem about thirty years ago, in which about 40,000 people now live – with the ridge of Mount Scopus within Jerusalem’s municipal jurisdiction. So far, owing to the opposition of the Palestinians and the international community, the plan has not been implemented.
  2. Three residential neighborhoods, as well as an area for commerce, industry, and hotels, are envisaged for E1. So far only two residential neighborhoods totaling 3,500 housing units have been planned. An additional residential neighborhood, the northern one, and the commercial-industrial zone, which is supposed to link E1 to Jerusalem, are frozen for planning and legal reasons unconnected to the political controversy over the program. A police station and a network of roads and infrastructure have, however, already been built in E1.
  3. All Israeli governments since Yitzhak Rabin’s second tenure as prime minister in the 1990s have supported the program, appreciating the need to create an Israeli urban continuity from Jerusalem to Maale Adumim, leading out to the Dead Sea and the Jordanian border. That need is incorporated in the Israeli security and urban planning concept, which views Jerusalem and its nearby Jewish communities as a single metropolitan space – “metropolitan Jerusalem.”
  4. The plan is, of course, embroiled in an intense international dispute centering on the position of the Palestinians, who seek to prevent what they call the bisection of the West Bank – which, they claim, would torpedo the option of a Palestinian state and preclude a sovereign and urban continuity between the northern and the southern West Bank.
  5. The United States backs the Palestinian position and acts to prevent Israel from building at the site, so long as a permanent settlement has not materialized.
  6. The Palestinians oppose both the plan and the solution that Israel proposes for ensuring transportation continuity between the northern and southern West Bank. The solution Israel is offering the Palestinians is the use of what is effectively a bypass road (the literal Hebrew term is “fabric-of-life road”). This road would pass between Maale Adumim to the east and Jerusalem to the west, allowing the Palestinians free movement from the Ramallah area to the Bethlehem area.
  7. The opposition to building in E1 and to the bypass road is unacceptable to Israel for the following reasons:
    1. In the area between Maale Adumim and Jerusalem, along the Jerusalem-Jericho road and in the E1 area, a considerable amount of illegal Palestinian building is in progress. This illegal activity has already significantly narrowed the corridor along which the central arterial road between Jerusalem and Maale Adumim runs – from two kilometers to one kilometer. The illegal building already threatens to sever and, in the future, preclude Israeli continuity between the two cities.
    2. Under the Oslo Agreements, zoning and planning in these areas (Area C) is under the jurisdiction of Israel. Thus, Palestinian construction without any building permit along a main Israeli artery of this sort is a violation of the signed bilateral agreement and is thus illegal.
    3. Israeli avoidance of creating settlement continuity between the Jerusalem area and the Maale Adumim area will inevitably give rise to another, competing, Palestinian continuity running north to south.
    4. Even today Israel has great difficulty counteracting such continuity because of the international community’s stance, which opposes any measures against the extensive illegal building in the area.
    5. One practical manifestation of the Israeli weakness is the lack of resolve of the State Attorney’s Office and the Civil Administration in the face of this illegal building. This, among other things, is clearly evident in reports of the Civil Administration Central Supervisory Unit.
  8. The bypass road will have two lanes.  First, there is a lane for vehicles that have come out of the Israeli security envelope and, therefore, there is no concern that they could pose a security risk.  Second, there is a lane for traffic coming out of the Palestinian security envelope, which Israel cannot be certain about from the standpoint of security.  This separation of traffic into two lanes is not based on religious, ethnic, or national distinctions since Palestinian Arab residents of Jerusalem and Israeli Arabs will be expected to use the lanes for Israeli traffic.
  9. Where the traffic from both security systems mixed together on one road, the Palestinian vehicles would have to undergo time-consuming security checks at roadblocks.  The bypass road is thus designed to allow for rapid north-south movement in the West Bank with no interference from Israeli security authorities.
  10. The Palestinian opposition to the bypass road is based on the claim that having only a transportation link between the northern and southern West Bank is unsatisfactory.
    1. This is an unreasonable argument because it ignores the reality that emerged in the wake of the Oslo accords. As part of this reality, the roads in the West Bank became essential arteries for both the Palestinian and Jewish populations, with a dual use: for common transportation, and to create separation and prevent friction between the communities.
    2. The basic concept of a road as something not only intended for transportation purposes but also as a solution to political problems was, in fact, initially accepted by the Palestinian Authority:
      • In the framework of the Oslo accords, representatives of the PA agreed to the creation of the “safe passage” between Gaza and the West Bank. This was to be a wide road serving as a land link from the West Bank to Gaza, and a substitute for territorial continuity.
      • The Palestinians and the Israelis compromised on the “safe passage” issue, each conceding a principle: the Palestinians gave up contiguity between the West Bank and Gaza, while Israel agreed to the creation of a passage with some attributes of foreign land within its own territory.
    3. Despite what the Palestinians claim, the building in E1 that has been approved so far, and has not even begun, does not interrupt any existing Palestinian continuity of construction.
    4. The linking of Jerusalem to Maale Adumim is an overriding Israeli interest for several reasons:
      1. Israel cannot allow Maale Adumim to become like Mount Scopus in the 1948-1967 period, when the mount was an isolated Israeli enclave under UN custody with only a road connecting to it.
      2. Israel cannot allow a situation to emerge of security and urban discontinuity between Jerusalem and Maale Adumim, or the reversion of Jerusalem to a border-town status (as was the case before the Six-Day War) that would preclude the city’s eastward development.
      3. Israel cannot tolerate a threat to the Jerusalem-Jericho road, on which the Palestinian construction is encroaching. This artery is of supreme strategic importance to Israel. In time of war it would enable moving large quantities of troops to the Jordan Valley and northward, as Israel mobilized its forces to contend with a possible “eastern front.”
      4. The area of Maale Adumim, including E1, is part of the strategic depth that Israel requires in the context of defensible borders – again, in the face of an eastern front, and to make it possible to defend its capital, Jerusalem.
      5. The area of settlement around Jerusalem, including Maale Adumim, constitutes part of the metropolitan area of Jerusalem. This area incorporates both settlement and security as two vital, complementary components of the Israeli national interest.
    5. There is an almost complete Israeli consensus on the need to link Maale Adumim to Jerusalem via construction in E1, and on the need to retain this territory under Israeli sovereignty within the country’s permanent borders.
    6. Six prime ministers, from Rabin to Netanyahu, declared publicly that they would build in E1. Yet, except for the construction of the Judea-Samaria District police station, the process has not even begun because of the international community’s opposition.
    7. Time after time, Israeli leaders proclaim their commitment to Maale Adumim and the building of E1. These same leaders, however, show great deference to the position of the United States, which currently seeks to prevent construction in this area. This behavior entails a built-in contradiction: on the one hand, the message is conveyed that Israel will build in E1 because it is so vital to its interests; on the other, through nonpublic diplomatic channels, world leaders receive another message – that meanwhile Israel will bow to the international community’s opposition to this construction. This behavior makes it very difficult for those involved in Israeli public advocacy to address the world’s and the Palestinians’ objections to the E1 plan.

    The Metropolitan Jerusalem Concept

    During Israel’s initial 19 years (1948-1967), Jerusalem was divided by a wall and its “eastern” part was under Jordanian occupation. Over the past 45 years, under Israeli sovereignty, the city has been undivided, all residents have enjoyed free movement, and despite the national conflict and its associated problems, there are multiple elements of cooperation and understanding between the two populations.4

     

    Immediately after 1967, aiming to reinforce the status of united Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, Israel built a series of neighborhoods and satellite towns in the environs of the city. The purpose was both security and settlement.

     

    The State of Israel and the Zionist movement have always posited a link between settlement and security. From David Ben-Gurion to the present day, the country’s leaders have believed that settlements established in the area of Israel’s security borders would ensure those very borders. To maintain security borders that would enable the defense of Jerusalem and of the country as a whole, a line of fortifications, or weaponry, or strategic depth in themselves would not suffice; it was necessary to settle these areas, thereby anchoring Israel’s security presence in a permanent civilian presence.

     

    That approach was taken in the Galilee and the Negev in the earliest years of the state. It was also taken by Israeli governments regarding the large settlement blocs that were created in the West Bank after 1967, and in the Jerusalem area as well. This security-settlement combination is to a large extent the DNA that has flowed through the veins of Zionism since its inception – before and after the establishment of the state. Settlement and security are seen in Israel as two elements that mutually legitimize each other. The combined approach affirms that there is no security without settlement and no settlement without security.5

     

    In the context of this approach, two concomitant processes emerged in the aftermath of the Six-Day War:

    1. Jerusalem was united and expanded. Israeli sovereignty was applied to areas north, south, and east of the old jurisdictional borders (comprising about 70,000 dunams). In these areas (which the world has been calling “east Jerusalem” for years), a string of Jewish neighborhoods were set up that currently number about 200,000 residents.
    2. Along the new borders of Jerusalem, or in what is called metropolitan Jerusalem, Israel built an additional series of towns and settlements. Decisions by the government and by governmental committees, along with various experts’ committees, referred to this outer circle as “metropolitan Jerusalem.”6 That term drew its formal validity from the many interactions, in various areas of life, between Jerusalem and the surrounding area (the “Jerusalem environs”).

    With the change in political conditions, the escalating waves of Palestinian terror at the start of the 2000s (in what came to be called the Second Intifada), the worsening of security, and the building of the security fence around many parts of Jerusalem (aimed at obstructing suicide bombers and weapons smuggling), tight security restrictions were imposed on the Palestinian population’s freedom of movement within the metropolis. As a result, the links and interactions between the city and the surrounding area were weakened in the Arab sector. For the Jewish sector, whose freedom of movement was not restricted, the strong links and interactions between Jerusalem and the surrounding settlements were maintained in various domains such as transportation, employment, society, and family.

     

    Those linkages, and the perception of Jerusalem as the heart of a metropolis, were a new development. Up to 1967, Jewish Jerusalem had functioned as a border town, hampered and constricted in the economic, commercial, and social areas of life. In almost every regard, functionally speaking, the city in those years was confined to a narrow corridor extending to the west, hemmed in by political borders on its three other sides. Added to all this was the security distress of a divided city threatened by terrorism and the Jordanian army.

     

    After the war, of course, the situation changed completely. Israel acted out of intense fear that if it did not quickly settle the area surrounding the city, Jerusalem would once again revert to border-town status in the future. Hence, the country embarked on extensive settlement activity.

     

    Today, about a million people live in the Jerusalem metropolis. About 800,000 reside within the Jerusalem municipality, including about 500,000 Jews and about 300,000 Arabs.In addition, in the greater metropolis, another approximately 200,000 Jews live in four settlement blocs:

    • The western settlement bloc (almost all within the Green Line), which includes Mevasseret Zion, Har Adar, Beit Zayit, Motza Illit, Even Sapir, Ora, and Aminadav, totaling about 40,000 people.
    • The southern settlement bloc (mostly over the Green Line), which includes the settlements of the Gush Etzion Regional Council, Efrat, Betar Illit, Mevo Betar, and Tzur Hadassah, totaling about 80,000 people.
    • The northern settlement bloc (over the Green Line), which includes Givat Zeev, Givon HaHadasha, and Beit Horon, totaling over 16,000 people.
    • The eastern settlement bloc (over the Green Line) – relevant to our concerns here – which includes the city of Maale Adumim and the area of the E1 plan. This bloc comprises about ten communities and totals about 65,000 people.

    About three-fourths of the 200,000 residents of metropolitan Jerusalem live within the area of the West Bank (Judea and Samaria) and about one-fourth within the Green Line.8 In addition, some 50,000 Arabs live in communities within metropolitan Jerusalem, in the part of the Wet Bank designated as Area C. At the end of the 1990s, the Israeli government sought to institutionalize the natural link between Jerusalem and the surrounding Jewish communities. The first Netanyahu government sought to create a common, overarching municipality for the city of Jerusalem and its metropolitan communities. Professional reports provided an outline for their joint administration. However, for political reasons – primarily U.S. opposition – the decision was not implemented. Washington disapproved any Israeli application of powers for such a municipality over communities beyond the Green Line.9

    Oslo Agreement Map of Jerusalem Area Showing E1 Located in Area C (Israeli) and Not in Area B (Palestinian)

Map of 1995 Oslo II Interim Agreement showing eastern approaches to Jerusalem. Areas marked in yellow are “Area B” where the Palestinian Authority has full civilian jurisdiction including zoning and planning authority. White areas in the West Bank are “Area C” where Israel has full security responsibility and civilian authority over zoning and planning. The main connection between Jerusalem and Maale Adumim must clearly run north of Abu Dis and Azariya, which is precisely where E1 is located. Unfortunately, the Palestinians have been building illegally in Area C close to the main road connecting Jerusalem and Maale Adumim, thereby narrowing the corridor between them. If Israel fails to build in E1, the area will be taken over by Palestinian construction.

Map of 1995 Oslo II Interim Agreement showing eastern approaches to Jerusalem. Areas marked in yellow are “Area B” where the Palestinian Authority has full civilian jurisdiction including zoning and planning authority. White areas in the West Bank are “Area C” where Israel has full security responsibility and civilian authority over zoning and planning. The main connection between Jerusalem and Maale Adumim must clearly run north of Abu Dis and Azariya, which is precisely where E1 is located. Unfortunately, the Palestinians have been building illegally in Area C close to the main road connecting Jerusalem and Maale Adumim, thereby narrowing the corridor between them. If Israel fails to build in E1, the area will be taken over by Palestinian construction.

 

The Security Component of the Metropolitan Jerusalem Concept

Former prime minister Yitzhak Rabin said that forgoing the construction of E1 would mean severing Maale Adumim from Jerusalem and probably changing Maale Adumim into what Mount Scopus was from 1948 to 1967. In those years Mount Scopus was an Israeli enclave in the heart of an Arab area. Only a narrow road provided access to it, and Israel was dependent on the mercies of the Jordanian regime and the United Nations to preserve even such a minimal connection. Rabin expressed apprehension that if Israel were to fail to link Jerusalem to Maale Adumim with a continuity of Jewish settlement, the latter city would indeed experience the same fate as Mount Scopus.10 Rabin was the first Israeli prime minister to promote the E1 plan, aimed at creating that very continuity.

 

In 1996, Shimon Peres, Rabin’s successor as prime minister, discussed with the head of the IDF Central Command, Gen. Ilan Biran, and chief of staff Gen. Amnon Lipkin-Shahak, the security-settlement concept regarding Jerusalem. Biran explained, “Without territorial continuity in the areas surrounding Jerusalem, it will be hard to ensure Israeli rule. Everything must be done to create a continuity of Jewish settlement between Maale Adumim to the east, Givat Zeev to the north, and Har Gilo to the south.”The Biran plan spoke, among other things, of paving roads and arteries between all the points of Jewish settlement, thereby creating continuity to the east between Maale Adumim and Mount Scopus (the E1 area), to the north between Givat Zeev and Neve Yaakov, and to the south between Har Gilo and Jerusalem. During the presentation, Biran emphasized that if such Jewish territorial continuity was not created, then the Arab settlement blocs surrounding the capital would create their own continuity and “strangle” Jerusalem.11

 

In essence, Biran outlined a minimal version of the “defensible borders” doctrine, which is a necessary condition for Israel’s security. A slightly more developed version was presented later by Gen. Yaakov Amidror, formerly head of the Research and Assessment Division of IDF Military Intelligence and currently Israel’s national security adviser.12 He, too, specified the area between Jerusalem and Maale Adumim as vital to defending the country.

 

In the early 2000s, an extra-governmental team of experts, composed mainly of professionals in the urban-planning and military fields, also recommended to the government that it design the borderline of Jerusalem in a way that would ensure the urban continuity of the Jewish neighborhoods. A secret document that the team submitted to the Sharon government, which at that time became a sort of political master plan for the Israeli leadership, stated:

 

Between the border that is outlined in the agreement and the border that is not outlined in the agreement, Israeli Jerusalem and most of the Jewish satellite settlements that surround the city (Maale Adumim, Givat Zeev, and smaller community settlements) will be situated. The course of the borderline must ensure quantities of land for the continued growth of the Jewish population in the areas of metropolitan Jerusalem….The borderline must be capable of withstanding changing situations of security tensions, and must enable, to the extent that is required, control, impenetrability, and/ or separation between the populations….The borderline of Jerusalem will include within it, as much as possible, areas that topographically control Jewish neighborhoods….The borderline of Jerusalem will ensure the physical continuity of Jewish neighborhoods.

 

The recommendations adopted by the political echelon also stated: “One must enable the Palestinian population to maintain a continuous transportation connection between Bethlehem and Ramallah outside the borders of Jerusalem. According to need, use should be made of bridges or tunnels without transferring ownership of the land above the tunnels or under the bridges.”This recommendation is of great importance; it touches directly on the claim that the E1 plan interrupts Palestinian continuity between the northern and southern West Bank, a subjected addressed at length below.

Israel’s Need for Strategic Depth

Israel’s need for strategic depth as a component of defensible borders is endorsed today by most Israeli military and security professionals. This strategic depth must include sufficient combat space to deploy defensive forces that will be able to maneuver within it, a reserve force capable of mounting a counterattack if needed, and sufficient distance from the strategic home front.

 

The area between Maale Adumim and Jerusalem, along with the area to the east in the direction of the Dead Sea, is essential to providing Israel with strategic depth in case of the reemergence of threats to the east. In a time of regional instability marked by regime changes, but also in quieter periods, it is forbidden to dismiss the possibility of an eastern front that threatens Israel again taking shape. Hence, the strategic depth provided by the area from Jerusalem through Maale Adumim to the Dead Sea must be regarded as vital for defending the borders of the State of Israel.

 

In the 1980s, security officials noted that “the spatial dimension in the security context of defending Jerusalem must be such that it can make a contribution to military victory in time of need.”They further asserted:

 

It therefore must include territorial features that will help the IDF cope with the maximum possible war scenarios, from a surprise on the part of the enemy to an offensive initiative by the IDF. Those features must give the IDF a containment capacity on the ground and in the air at the outskirts of Jerusalem, without the city itself being harmed.13

 

Gen. Amidror has noted that, in case of a future war, Israel must ensure Jerusalem’s security in two regards:

  1. Control of the access roads to the city must remain in Israel’s hands.
  2.  Any war over the city must be waged on the way to it and not within it.14

The City of Maale Adumim

Maale Adumim was established by a decision of the Israeli government in 1977. The cornerstone-laying ceremony for the first residential quarters was held two years later, and three years after that, in 1982, the first residents entered the new neighborhoods. In 1991, the state recognized Maale Adumim as a city, the first Israeli settlement in the West Bank to attain such status since Jewish construction there was renewed in the wake of the Six-Day War. Today Maale Adumim numbers about 40,000 residents. A revision of the city’s master plan carried out in recent years updated its aims. The new population target for the city is 103,000 residents, compared to the previous target of 70,000.

 

At the same time, because of political constraints and the resulting decrease in construction, the city’s rate of growth in recent years has been very modest. Instead of about 500 housing units per year, in recent years no more than a few dozen new units have been built annually.

Location and Nature

Maale Adumim is located on about seven square kilometers east of Jerusalem on the Jerusalem-Jericho road, close to the northern Jerusalem neighborhoods of Pisgat Zeev, French Hill, and Ramat Eshkol. The city’s buildings extend to the Judean Desert, 450 meters above sea level. Despite being situated at the edge of the desert, the city and its buildings do not have a desert-like nature. Instead, there are broad boulevards, squares, and numerous wide open public areas. Buildings are constructed in the stone-faced Jerusalem style. Maale Adumim’s dependence on Jerusalem for employment, commerce, culture, and education, and the lack of a significant urban center in the city, make Maale Adumim in many regards a suburb of Jerusalem.

The Link between Jerusalem and Maale Adumim15

Between Maale Adumim and Jerusalem lie a number of Arab villages: Abu Dis, Azariya, A-Zaim, and Isawiya. The road that connects Jerusalem and Maale Adumim is Highway 1, which ends at the entrance to Maale Adumim. Access to Highway 1 from Jerusalem is in the French Hill area and also via the newer Mount Scopus road. Using that road, one can get from Jerusalem to Maale Adumim in about five minutes. Despite their physical separation, the two cities’ geographic proximity makes them mutually visible. Maale Adumim can be seen clearly from Mount Scopus and the Mount of Olives. From Maale Adumim one can see Jerusalem with the three towers that adorn its skyline: the Hebrew University tower, the Augusta Victoria tower, and the tower of the church in A-Tur.

 

As noted, Maale Adumim does not provide all the public services that its residents need. There is no hospital in the city. Cultural amenities are relatively limited, and most of the public transportation from Maale Adumim goes to Jerusalem. Hence, Maale Adumim’s residents are to a large extent reliant on Jerusalem, which also contains many of the government offices that residents sometimes need.

 

In addition, 80 percent of the city’s manpower is employed in Jerusalem. There are, however, also a number of ways in which Maale Adumim serves or will serve the residents of Jerusalem. Among these are the Mishor Adumim industrial zone, where thousands are employed. The garbage dump for metropolitan Jerusalem is also located within Maale Adumim’s jurisdiction and is under its responsibility. This dump is now being shut down. The long-term plan for the area is to establish a center for service, employment, and business in the E1 area that will serve both Jerusalem and Maale Adumim residents.

Other Attributes of Maale Adumim

Maale Adumim’s jurisdiction extends over about 65,000 dunams. These include residential areas, afforestation areas, an industrial zone, leisure areas, and other locations. Much of the territory within the Maale Adumim master plan cannot be used for residential building. Some of this territory is used for IDF firing ranges; other parts are intended for roads and other public services.

 

Eighty-three percent of the residents are native Israelis; 81 percent are secular and traditional and 18 percent are religious. Some 8,300 children attend the city’s schools, and 2,000 are in its nursery schools and kindergartens. There are 9,000 residential units in the city.

 

E1 Area Connecting Jerusalem and Maale Adumim

Jerusalem and EI area boundaries

Jerusalem and EI area boundaries

The E1 Area

The site known as E1 encompasses an area of about 12,100 dunams (4.6 sq. miles), most of it state land, to the north and west of the Jerusalem-Maale Adumim road. In 1991 during the Shamir government, then-defense minister Moshe Arens signed a document transferring part of this area to the Maale Adumim Local Council.16

 

In January 1994, the Settlement Subcommittee of the Supreme Planning Council for Judea and Samaria issued a new plan that widened the previous Maale Adumim master plan. This plan constituted the basis for the future E1 plan, and then-prime minister Rabin ordered his housing minister, Benjamin Ben-Eliezer, to begin planning a neighborhood to be situated in E1. Since then the planning procedures for the E1 neighborhood have advanced very slowly due to international and Palestinian opposition.

 

The E1 area extends over the hills between Maale Adumim and Jerusalem, which dominate the main roads in the area.17 E1 includes areas north of Highway 1 (the Jerusalem-Jericho road) and a small piece of land south of it. The boundaries of E1 (in the area designated for industry and commerce) verge on those of municipal Jerusalem. To the southeast, E1 is bordered by Highway 1, Azariya, Abu Dis, and lands of the Jahalin Bedouin tribe. To the west it is bordered by Issawiya, the eastern slopes of Mount Scopus, A-Zaim, and Anata. The northern boundary is Road 437 in the area of the Hizme checkpoint.

View of the E1 area and Maale Adumim (on right) as seen from Jerusalem (Mount Scopus).

View of the E1 area and Maale Adumim (on right) as seen from Jerusalem (Mount Scopus).

 

Google Earth Map – View from Jerusalem to the Dead Sea

Google Earth Map – View from Jerusalem to the Dead Sea

Google Earth Map – View from Jerusalem to the Dead Sea

 

The E1 plan has several parts, not all of which have been approved:

  1. The E1 residential quarter (east), which was approved, designates an area of 1,271 dunams for a residential neighborhood with 2,182 apartments. Also planned in this framework are a commercial center, gardens and parks, a school, a community center, synagogues, a mikveh (ritual bath), and a public institution. The intention is to implement this plan in two stages of 967 apartments and 1,215 apartments.
  2. The E1 residential quarter (south), which was approved, designates an area of 829 dunams for a residential neighborhood with 1,250 apartments. Also planned in this framework are an elementary school, kindergartens, day care centers, synagogues, a mikveh, parks, and public gardens.
  3. The E1 residential quarter (north), comprising an area designated for the construction of about 1,500 homes of the “build your own home” type. This plan has not advanced because the topography in the area is extremely difficult, and connecting the area to the existing and planned road networks is also difficult.These three residential neighborhoods would extend to the north of Maale Adumim and north of Highway 1. They would not interrupt any existing continuity of Palestinian construction, despite reports to the contrary.
  4. Metropolitan Center for Work and Business will encompass 1,345 dunams for joint activity between Jerusalem and Maale Adumim in the economic realm. The plan for this center, which was submitted by the Ministry of Industry and Trade, was approved in 2002 and all its building permits are in force. The center is intended to provide employment to both Palestinians and Israelis. This project has, in effect, been suspended after a reassessment of the cost of the land. It turned out that many of its sections are privately owned by Palestinians. Hence the project is viewed, at least at this stage, as impractical. If, in the future, a way is found to implement it, this part of the plan will make it possible to link the jurisdictional areas of Jerusalem and Maale Adumim. That linkage, if and when it is created, also will in no way interrupt any existing continuity of Palestinian building.Indeed, the opposite is closer to the truth: southwest of the area of the proposed Metropolitan Center – which for now is frozen – the Palestinians have been trying for years to create a continuity of building and to link Anata to the north with A-Zaim to the south. Such a continuity, if created, will leave Maale Adumim as an enclave behind an unbroken string of Palestinian settlements, and Maale Adumim will remain connected to Jerusalem only by a road.Recently, the area on the eastern slopes of Mount Scopus, which the two Arab settlements seek to reach and link up with, was declared a national park where all building is prohibited, whether by Jews or Arabs. The area of the national park, which in earlier plans was marked as a green area, comprises about 700 dunams. The area, which is of high scenic value, constitutes the eastern entrance to Jerusalem. It contains about 80 antiquities sites, caves, cisterns, churches, and burial sites from the Second Temple and Byzantine periods, along with an attractive landscape that features habitats for desert and Mediterranean flora, as well as about 40 different species of birds.18 Apart from all that, the planners do not conceal the fact that its designation as a construction-free national park will prevent a linkup between Anata and A-Zaim, which would entail severing Maale Adumim from Jerusalem.
  5. The Headquarters of the Judea and Samaria District Police was relocated to the E1 area in 2006 on a tract of 179 dunams designated for this purpose. Around the headquarters an extensive network of roads and water and electricity infrastructure was prepared, which are to serve the residential neighborhoods along with other future uses in the context of the E1 plan. However, the sewage infrastructure has not yet been built. Every few weeks a large truck arrives to empty the large septic tank that serves the E1 police station.
  6. Over 50 percent of the E1 lands are defined and planned as green areas.
Maale Adumim (right) and the Israel Police station (left) in the E1 area. E1 is meant to connect Maale Adumim to Jerusalem.

Maale Adumim (right) and the Israel Police station (left) in the E1 area. E1 is meant to connect Maale Adumim to Jerusalem.

The Palestinian Bypass Road

The main charge of the Palestinians and the international community against Israeli building in E1 is that it will prevent the state of Palestinian from having territorial continuity and a link between the northern and the southern West Bank, thereby thwarting any attempt to arrive at a permanent settlement.

 

Israel is offering a feasible solution to the problem in the form of a bypass road, which is already partially paved. The route of the completed road will run from north to south, between Jerusalem and the Adumim Bloc, linking the northern West Bank to the southern part as an alternative to other existing roads. The Palestinians reject this solution.

A completed section of the Palestinian bypass road. Its final completion will enable transportation continuity between the northern and southern West Bank, similar to other existing “fabric of life” roads built for the Palestinians.

A completed section of the Palestinian bypass road. Its final completion will enable transportation continuity between the northern and southern West Bank, similar to other existing “fabric of life” roads built for the Palestinians.

 

In September 2007, Israel expropriated 1,408 dunams of the lands of Abu Dis, A-Sawahra a-Sarkia, Nebi Musa, and Khan al-Ahmar for the purpose of paving the bypass road to connect Ramallah to Bethlehem.19 The section of the road from Hizme to the A-Zaim checkpoint has already been paved, at a cost to Israel of close to NIS 300 million, passing through a tunnel under the Jerusalem-Maale Adumim road. Thus the Palestinians can have transportation continuity without breaking Israel’s link between Maale Adumim and Jerusalem.

 

The road has yet to be completed due to budgetary constraints and opposition by the United States and the Palestinians. The Palestinians fear that paving the road will vitiate their claim about the severance of the northern and southern West Bank, which is at the heart of their campaign against Israeli building in E1. Part of the already-existing bypass road is divided by a wall in the middle, separating Israeli and Palestinian traffic.

 

The bypass road, when completed, stands to provide a good and fair solution to the problem that the Palestinians raise. Israel cannot accept the opposition to the building of E1 and the bypass road for two main reasons:

  1. In the area between Maale Adumim and Jerusalem, along the Jerusalem-Jericho road and in E1, Palestinians are engaged in illegal building on a large scale that threatens to diminish and even interrupt and preclude Israeli continuity between Jerusalem and Maale Adumim. (See the section below on “Illegal Palestinian Building in the Maale Adumim Area.”) If Israel refrains from creating continuous settlement between Jerusalem and Maale Adumim, the inevitable outcome will be
    a different, competing, Palestinian continuity running north to south.
  2. The Palestinian opposition to the bypass road, based on the contention that they cannot settle only for a transportation link between the northern and southern West Bank, ignores the reality that has emerged since the Oslo accords. In this reality, the roads in the West Bank became important arteries for both the Palestinians and the Israelis, with a dual use. In addition to ordinary transportation use, the roads create separation between the communities and prevent friction between them.

In recent years, this has led to the creation of a number of roads that are either for Israeli or Palestinian traffic only. Palestinian communities that supposedly are severed from each other by the presence of Israeli communities are in fact linked by such roads, even if traffic is sometimes restricted for security reasons. Likewise, Jewish communities that seemingly are cut off from each other by existing Palestinian communities are, in fact, connected by roads. Even if this reality is not always convenient for the two sides, they accept it as an existing fact of life.

 

Linkages of this kind exist, for example, between Jewish communities such as Avnei Hefetz, Einav, and Kedumim; between Kedumim and Yitzhar; from Maale Ephraim and the Jordan Valley to the Tapuach Junction and Ariel; between Ateret, Ofra and Shiloh; between Tekoa and Efrat; between Telem and Adora; and between Gush Etzion and Kiryat Arba. The connection from Jerusalem south to Gush Etzion also passes through the “tunnel road,” part of which has become a transportation corridor through Palestinian communities. After the Oslo accords, numerous bypass roads were paved for the Jewish population. These circumvent  Palestinian population concentrations and enable safer movement for Jews, even if, not infrequently, travel time has been lengthened.

 

Traffic between Palestinian communities and hubs of life and work are subject to security restrictions because of past acts of terror. It will be possible to ameliorate this situation in the future when the security situation permits doing so.

 

In any case, there is separate Palestinian traffic, for example, on the underpass road between Bidu and el-Jib in the Givat Zeev area. Road 443 between Jerusalem and Modiin, which mostly serves the Jewish population, is crossed by passageways that serve Palestinians only. The old Road 60, running north-south along the central mountain ridge from the Wadi Harima area southward to the Beit El and Ramallah areas, currently serves Palestinians only. The section of old Road 60 from Karmei Tzur in the direction of Halhoul also serves Palestinians only, as does the road eastward from Ofra through Taibe in the direction of Kochav Hashachar and Rimonim, and the passage through Beitin (between Ofra and Beit El). Nor, today, are Jews allowed to travel on the old Jerusalem-Hebron road that passes Solomon’s Pools and Deheishe; only Palestinians may use it.

 

It is important to emphasize that these separate roads are currently operating and are not “apartheid” roads. Rather, they provide direct and convenient transportation links that enable both Israelis and Palestinians to reach their desired destinations  without having to unnecessarily pass through areas that would complicate and lengthen their travel time.

 

In recent years the IDF has formulated a plan for paving new roads for exclusive Palestinian use. The plan includes parallel roads and roads to replace those now blocked by the separation fence.20

 

These roads are considered bypass (“fabric of life”) roads. The website of the Military Advocate General’s Office, which frequently has to defend the roads in the Supreme Court, explains that the bypass roads are

 

an inseparable part of the security-fence project and are intended mainly to replace roads whose access has been severed or disrupted by the building of the fence. These roads are paved by the defense establishment for the Palestinian population and their purpose is to allow the Palestinian residents, whose flow of movement and “fabric of life” linkages have been compromised, movement that is as continuous as possible, and convenient linkage between their communities and the main towns in the area. A ruling by the Supreme Court recognized the great importance of the “fabric of life” roads as an important and inseparable component of the building of the security fence.

 

A similar concept is embodied by the planned bypass road linking the northern and southern West Bank – the road whose completion the Palestinians now oppose.

 

It is important to recall that the basic principle of the road as a tool not only for transportation, but also for solving political problems, was initially accepted by the Palestinian Authority. In the framework of the Oslo accords, its representatives agreed to the creation of a “safe passage” between Gaza and the West Bank. That arrangement was not implemented, since Israeli-Palestinian negotiations ran aground. In principle, however, the sides agreed, and have not abjured this agreement, to a land passage from the West Bank to Gaza that would constitute a substitute for territorial continuity. (Although Israel and the Palestinians remain divided on the course and nature of the Israeli presence in the passage, agreement prevails regarding its creation as part of the permanent settlement.)

 

The bypass road that is planned to enable Palestinian traffic from north to south is not fundamentally different from the safe passage route between the West Bank and Gaza. These two areas of Palestinian settlement, which are relatively distant from each other, would be linked only by a road rather than have territorial continuity. On the safe passage between Gaza and the West Bank, the Palestinians and the Israelis compromised. The Palestinians gave up land continuity and settlement continuity between Gaza and the West Bank; the Israelis agreed to the creation of a passage that in some ways turned some of its territory into an ex-territory. A similar understanding could be reached regarding the link between the northern and the southern West Bank. The nature of the road, and the traffic arrangements on it, could be decided through negotiations.

 

Illegal Palestinian Building in the Maale Adumim Area

By delaying its implementation of the decision to build E1, Israel incurs a double cost. First, the linking of Jerusalem and Maale Adumim, to ensure that this strategic area will remain part of Israel, is yet to be achieved. After years in which a consensus prevailed on keeping this an Israeli territory in the context of the permanent settlement, the delay erodes this national consensus. Second, Palestinian and Bedouin settlement is encroaching on this space all the time, the great majority of it illegal: that is, this Palestinian construction is executed without any building permit. According to the Oslo II Interim Agreement, the territory between Jerusalem and Maale Adumim has been designated as Area C, meaning that the powers of zoning and planning were retained here by Israel. Illegal Palestinian construction enables the takeover of vitally important land, some of it within the E1 area.

 

Palestinian Construction Encroaching on the Jerusalem-Maale Adumim Highway (1989 vs. 2012)

The West Bank town of A-Zaim (at bottom) and the Jerusalem neighborhood of A-Tur (at top) taken in 1989 (left) and in 2012 (right). The photos illustrate how the expansion of Palestinian construction over the years has constricted the area around the Jerusalem-Maale Adumim highway, effectively constricting the corridor connecting these two Israeli cities. This is precisely the challenge Israel faces all along this route including in the area of E-1.

The West Bank town of A-Zaim (at bottom) and the Jerusalem neighborhood of A-Tur (at top) taken in 1989 (left) and in 2012 (right). The photos illustrate how the expansion of Palestinian construction over the years has constricted the area around the Jerusalem-Maale Adumim highway, effectively constricting the corridor connecting these two Israeli cities. This is precisely the challenge Israel faces all along this route including in the area of E-1.

Israel has refrained from tackling this phenomenon, particularly because of international pressure and activity by leftist movements that provide support to this illegal settlement activity. Even Israel’s attempt to fulfill the letter of the law and settle the illegal interlopers, after evacuations, within permanent and legal settlement sites – such as the one set up at the end of the 1990s on the outskirts of Abu Dis – has not gone well. More recently, the Bedouins of the Jahalin tribe – who are under the sway of the Palestinian Authority and European organizations – rejected two further Israeli offers to create two additional permanent sites for their settlement, one south of Jericho and the other north of it (most of the Jahalin live in Jericho).

 

Moreover, some of the interlopers who in the past vacated lands in the area of Maale Adumim-Jerusalem and settled, in an arrangement with the state, at the permanent site in Abu Dis, sold their houses to others and went back to illegal building in their previous area of residence.21

Israel built this permanent community for Bedouin on the outskirts of Abu Dis. Some sold their apartments and returned to illegal construction sites in the Adumim area.

Israel built this permanent community for Bedouin on the outskirts of Abu Dis. Some sold their apartments and returned to illegal construction sites in the Adumim area.

 

A tour of the area to observe the illegal Palestinian settlement activity reveals the following picture:

The Palestinians’ invasion and illegal construction begins within municipal Jerusalem north of Highway 1 at a site called Sha’ar Mizrach. This is mostly Jewish-owned territory occupying about 180 dunams in the Anata area. Although this tract of land has potential for linking Jerusalem to E1, currently the state is not allowing the land’s owners to exercise their ownership and also is not taking action against the illegal Palestinian building there.

 

A visit to the police station in the heart of E1, looking westward, reveals a further concentration of illegal Palestinian building, widely dispersed on rocky land. There are a hundred buildings made of iron, wood, blocks, and cement, with laundry lines hung between them. Some are covered with cloth, apparently for purposes of camouflage. Also visible are horses, goats, a water tank, and a mobile restroom. Not far away is a smaller cluster of more improvised and temporary structures made of tin, wood, and iron.

 

Such a “landscape” is typical of many of the dozens of illegal Bedouin-Palestinian outposts in the area. Such concentrations, each having individual structures sometimes numbering in the dozens, can also be found near the sewage purification plant south of Road 437 in E1, and also north of this road, as well as northwest of the Mahane Yishai junction, north of Highway 1.

 

Not all of these concentrations may be characterized as “spontaneous” building. Sometimes the building is supported by European organizations or by elements associated with the Palestinian Authority – and also, according to military sources, by the PA itself. Not infrequently in these clusters of illegal housing, new, cloth-covered structures appear. One also sees large water containers, and restroom structures of a kind not typical of Bedouin communities.

 

Prefab buildings br ought in without permits by Bedouin in the Mishor Adumim area, next to Route 1.

Prefab buildings br ought in without permits by Bedouin in the Mishor Adumim area, next to Route 1.

 

A water meter installed by Mekorot, Israel’s national water company, next to an illegal Bedouin construction site near Nahal Og.

A water meter installed by Mekorot, Israel’s national water company, next to an illegal Bedouin construction site near Nahal Og.

 

The areas that are attractive for illegal Palestinian settlement are those along Highway 1. Palestinians from Areas A and B can easily enter and build along this artery. The “magnet” is a spring that never runs dry: the pipeline of Mekorot, the Israeli water corporation. Many hundreds of pirate hookups have already been seen along this pipeline. Whoever travels on the road immediately grasps the situation: there are pick-up points for students and residents at every intersection, tractors that move at slow speed along a major highway, herds of goats crossing the road. The state and the Public Works Authority have invested many millions to build a road of the highest safety standards, a wide highway that connects Jerusalem to the Dead Sea area. Mountains were moved for this purpose; yet if the present process continues, soon this splendid road will wend its way through a large Bedouin village. The state is not dealing with the plague of pirate hookups and theft of water from the Mekorot pipeline; on the contrary, it is passively acquiescing.  Recently, Mekorot installed a faucet with a meter, and the PA has been paying for the water that the Bedouins consume.

 

Another notable phenomenon is the Palestinians’ illegally accessing electricity by linking up to the street-lighting poles along the road, which has become widespread.

 

Also helping to entrench the illegal permanent presence of the Bedouin in the area is UNRWA (the United Nations Relief and Works Agency), which provides them with food and winter equipment while tending to their medical needs as if they are refugees. European organizations support the schools the Bedouin have set up and, with help from the PA, supply them with buildings and water containers.

Water tanks at an illegal construction site in the Maale Adumim area, supplied by the humanitarian organization ACF and the European Union.

Water tanks at an illegal construction site in the Maale Adumim area, supplied by the humanitarian organization ACF and the European Union.

 

The Neglect of Illegal Palestinian Building

The state does not automatically open files on illegal building in the area. Occasionally it does so, and even issues demolition orders for buildings created without permits. The main problem is reluctance to implement these orders. In almost all cases the transgressors, with the help of various organizations, petition the Supreme Court against the Civil Administration, which issues the demolition and work-stoppage orders. The petitions present supposedly factual claims and various legal claims. The petitioners request that the demolition order be canceled, and succeed in delaying its implementation until the court rules on the petition. Because the demolition of a building is an extreme and irreversible step, the court usually accedes to the request. The judges issue an interim order until making a further ruling, and request the state’s response to the petition.

 

This is where the problem begins: the state submits repeated requests to defer the date and thereby drags out the case for years, until the patience of the court registrars runs out. The file is then canceled on grounds of inaction, and the interim order blocking demolition remains in force. Hence, in effect, the demolition orders that the Civil Administration issues are nullified, without serious discussion of the petitioners’ claims.

 

The Civil Administration’s Central Supervisory Unit became aware of this problem and reported in 2006:

The petitions to the Supreme Court have unfortunately become “part of the statutory process.”The phenomenon emerged and became increasingly common because of the slow, very slow, treatment, to the point of total suspension of activity, by the Supreme Court Division of the Justice Ministry….

 

The illegally-building Palestinian population was well aware that when submitting a petition to the Supreme Court, the illegal-building file usually goes to the archive and the chances of reviving it are close to zero. The Palestinian population, of course, makes use of this time to complete the construction and to populate it so as to hinder or thwart the demolition.

 

The report of the Civil Administration Central Supervisory Unit for 2008 (published in 2009) made similar observations:

There are hundreds of illegal-building files from recent years that in fact do not receive appropriate treatment, owing to manpower limitations of the Attorney General’s Office and the State Attorney’s Office. The result is that we are forced to remove from the agenda dozens of illegal-building files that prompted a petition to the Supreme Court, despite the fact that a considerable part of them are apparently in areas of importance, which also are defined as such in the priorities (p. 4).

 

The report also states:

The year 2008 was characterized by an almost total freeze of enforcement with regard to the illegal Palestinian building. Freezing the demolitions and other enforcement actions pertaining to infrastructure transmits a negative message to the population and enables the creation of facts that we will have difficulty coping with in the future (p. 1).

 

The State Attorney’s Office, in addressing these claims in the reports of the Civil Administration Central Supervisory Unitstated that the policy of the Supreme Court Division reflected the general priorities for enforcement in this sphere.22 In other words, there apparently is no reason to pursue the case in court and have the petition rejected when, in any case, the enforcement authorities (that is, the Civil Administration) have no intention to demolish the buildings because of priorities related to a shortage of resources.

 

On May 1, 2011, the Supreme Court held a hearing on a petition (Supreme Court 9815/09) submitted by the Regavim movement, calling for the renewal of procedures on all the petitions of this kind that had been canceled or delayed because of inaction, while leaving the interim orders in force. (Regavim is a public movement that works for the preservation of state lands and assets and the prevention of their illegal takeover by various actors.) In the framework of this petition, the positions of the Civil Administration and the State Attorney’s Office were clarified. The discussion allowed the justices to hear the state’s defense against the charges, including an affidavit on the issue by the head of the infrastructures unit of the Civil Administration. The judges ruled that the phenomenon the petition called into question – the suspension of the cases – was no longer occurring and the petition was out of date.23

 

Yet a further inquiry, based on information obtained through the Freedom of Information Law, revealed that no significant change had occurred in the treatment of the demolition-order cases for illegal structures in the West Bank, in general, and the Maale Adumim area, in particular. According to an inquiry conducted in 2011,24 at that time, in the Supreme Court there were 162 petitions pending that had been submitted by Palestinians beginning in 2008, and on which interim orders had been issued forbidding the Civil Administration to demolish structures built in the West Bank without authorization.

 

In many cases, it turned out, more than ten consecutive requests had been submitted – in some of the cases, sixteen consecutive requests – to defer the date of the state’s response to the petition. In many instances the Supreme Court registrars had issued four or five warnings before cancellation on grounds of inaction, and in some cases seven such warnings had been issued. In these cases no discussion was held on the petition, the state having refrained from submitting its response to the petition and to the interim order. In such cases the interim order remains in force and, in effect, prevents the demolition. The upshot of these cases, like hundreds of others, is the effective cancellation of hundreds of demolition orders against illegal Palestinian building that have been issued in the West Bank, in general, and in the Maale Adumim area, in particular.

Illegal building by Bedouin next to Route 1

Illegal building by Bedouin next to Route 1

 

The Role of the State Attorney’s Office

The State Attorney’s Office is deliberately delaying action on these demolition orders. This behavior may be explained in statements by former Deputy Attorney General Malkiel Blass, written in the name of the attorney general, on April 11, 2009, in response to an earlier petition by the Regavim movement.

 

In his letter, the deputy attorney general writes that he has not found any problem in the state attorney’s conduct when declining to renew the procedures in the demolition cases for illegal Palestinian building. Blass explains that “in the area of planning and construction in Israel and the West Bank, there is a gap between the quantity of the demolition orders for structures that were not built according to the law, and the actual implementation of the demolitions,” and that “under these circumstances there is a need to determine orders of priority for carrying out the demolitions.” In the West Bank, he notes, “the considerations are quite complex….The attorneys are not the ones who set the priorities in carrying out

 

the demolition and many state authorities are involved in setting the order of priorities.” In sum, he states that “the issue requires the consideration of many other officials in the Israeli public administration and it is more complex than the consideration accorded by the attorneys in their handling of a certain case.”

 

A possible explanation is that political considerations are preventing the demolition of the illegal structures. Presumably, the root cause is pressure from the international community. In other words, Israel does not have the political latitude to demolish hundreds of illegal structures in the Adumim area and thousands more elsewhere in the West Bank. The Palestinian population is, of course, well aware of this reality, leading to still more illegal construction.

 

Because of pressure by groups like Regavim and various publications in the media, the state’s longstanding policy of avoiding demolition of illegal buildings has moderated somewhat in recent years. Yet the state is still far from dealing effectively with even half of these violations. On November 15, 2011, a meeting was held by the director of the Supreme Court Division of the State Attorney’s Office, attended by the head of the Civil Administration, the director of the Civil Administration Central Supervisory Unit, and representatives of the attorney general, to discuss the state’s position on cases (which were submitted to the Supreme Court) where work-stoppage and demolition orders were not implemented. It was decided that in such cases court injunctions should be issued “in accordance with the orders of priority of the responsible parties.”25

 

Nevertheless, in an event covered extensively in the media,26 when in January 2013 members of the Palestinian “Popular Committees” set up a protest encampment in E1, after the government’s decision to advance the planning processes for construction there, the state acted quickly, with the approval of the Supreme Court, to evacuate the encampment.

 

Over the years this situation, in which Israel has had difficulty coping with extensive illegal building, has reduced the width of the corridor between Jerusalem and Maale Adumim from about two kilometers approximately fifteen years ago to one kilometer and even less at present. This also constricts the possibilities for building in E1 and the adjacent areas.

 

Security officials, who concur with this assessment, warn that if Israel does not take significant steps to stop the Palestinian takeover of these areas, in the future it may be impossible to carry out the E1 plan as envisaged, particularly in the northwestern area that abuts Anata. Security officials believe that some of the Bedouin migration into the E1 area stems from fear of being left outside the route of the separation fence, which is intended to incorporate the Adumim bloc (including E1) into Israeli territory.

 

From an Israeli standpoint, then, the E1 building plan is virtually the only obstacle to the endeavor described in Nahal’s plan, since the international community does not allow Israel to act extensively and effectively against the illegal-building phenomenon. Over the years the Palestinians, for their part, have not concealed their goal of preventing Israeli building in E1. Faisal Husseini, the Jerusalem-based Palestinian leader who died in 2001, stated forthrightly that unauthorized building in the Jerusalem area was one of the Palestinians’ weapons in the struggle against Israel.27 As far back as 1993, Muhammad Nahal, an expert in urban planning at the Institute for Arab Studies that was part of Orient House, prepared a plan for the construction of three cities in the Jerusalem area that would surround the Jewish neighborhoods built in the Jerusalem area after 1967. One of the cities that Nahal planned was supposed to occupy lands of the villages of Azariya and Abu Dis, and its purpose was the encirclement of Jerusalem from the east.28

 

While Ehud Barak was prime minister, the Palestinians indeed formally requested that the E1 area be transferred to their control as part of Area B (where they have full civilian rule while security control remains in Israel’s hands). Their request was refused.29 At present, the Palestinian Authority provides support to illegal building, in general, and in the Maale Adumim area, in particular. In an event held at the illegal building site known as Khan al-Ahmar, Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad called the residents “the Bedouin land guardians.”30

 

After Israel evacuated the protest encampment at E1 in January 2013, the Fatah movement called this dismantlement a “crime” and averred that “this is not the end of the campaign to assert the Palestinian right to all of the Palestinian lands.”31

 

Maale Adumim and E1: The Heart of the Israeli Consensus

During a Knesset session on October 5, 1994, Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin declared: “United Jerusalem would also encompass Maale Adumim as well as Givat Zeev as the capital of Israel under Israeli sovereignty.” Six months earlier, in April, it was Rabin who submitted the documents for the annexation of E1 to Maale Adumim Mayor Benny Kashriel.32 After Rabin’s assassination, Prime Minister Shimon Peres reaffirmed the government’s position that Israel would claim the application of Israeli sovereignty to Maale Adumim in the framework of a permanent settlement.33

 

At the beginning of April 2005, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon stated: “E1 is a plan ten years old, and the aim is to continue it.”34 Likewise, the defense minister in the Sharon government, Shaul Mofaz, said during a tour of E1 that he supported the plan to create Jewish continuity between Jerusalem and Maale Adumim.35 A public information video by the City of Maale Adumim36 shows major figures, over the past decade, affirming their belief in Maale Adumim and E1 and explaining their significance:

 

Ariel Sharon (former prime minister): “Maale Adumim will continue to be built as a permanent part of the State of Israel. I foresee a great future for Maale Adumim.”

 

Ehud Barak (former prime minister and defense minister): “Our possession of the E1 corridor must be translated into action. Unless we are prepared to build a continuity that will link Mount Scopus to Maale Adumim, Maale Adumim is in danger. If we do not embark immediately on political action, by establishing facts on the ground, we are at risk of losing Maale Adumim.”

 

Ehud Olmert (former prime minister): “I see in my vision, not as something distant but as a reality of life, all the way from Maale Adumim to Jerusalem and all the way from Jerusalem to Maale Adumim as a single urban continuity, which does not stop. There are things that are beyond all debate, beyond all controversy, and all the area surrounding Jerusalem will forever remain part of Jerusalem and the State of Israel, and Maale Adumim is part of this area.”

 

Benjamin Netanyahu (prime minister): “We want to create the continuity of metropolitan Jerusalem from west to east and the Palestinians want to create a continuity of construction from north to south, and someone will prevail over someone. They will not give in. They seek to strangle Jerusalem from one side and to separate it from Maale Adumim from the other. We have to prevail over them and build E1.”

 

Silvan Shalom (former foreign minister): “The linking of Maale Adumim to Jerusalem in the long term is inevitable.”

 

Knesset Member Tzahi Hanegbi (former chair of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee): “No prime minister or government will dare raise a hand against Maale Adumim, a city that protects Jerusalem. A city in which many people live. Maale Adumim has passed the point of no return. Don’t worry.”

 

Knesset Member Reuven Rivlin (former speaker of the Knesset): “The E1 plan is a mission we will never abandon….If Yitzhak Rabin were alive he would give an unequivocal order to implement E1.”

 

Meir Porush (former deputy housing minister): “If you want to strangle Jerusalem, don’t build E1.”

 

In past Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, the Israeli team insisted on Israel retaining E1 and the connection between Jerusalem and Maale Adumim. This was also part of the peace proposal made by former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to Mahmoud Abbas.

 

Israeli Diplomatic Behavior on the E1 Issue: A Dual Message?

Along with the frequent declarations of commitment to Maale Adumim and the E1 building plan, all recent prime ministers have acceded to requests by U.S. administrations and agreed to freeze, or to coordinate with the United States, the actual building in E1. Israeli leaders, too, after announcing that the planning processes for E1 would go forward, made clear that the plan had not yet reached the implementation stage.

 

This dual behavior pattern is marked by a built-in contradiction. On the one hand, domestic audiences hear the message that Israel is going to build E1, a location extremely vital to the country’s interests. On the other hand, world leaders receive another message through private diplomatic channels – that Israel will meanwhile heed the position of the international community. This behavior inevitably makes it very difficult for Israel to respond to international and Palestinian protests against the E1 plan.

 

The result on the ground is that the plan is not implemented, and despite the talk of “advancing” it, it has not even approached the implementation stage. Even after the December 2012 decision of the Supreme Planning Council for Judea and Samaria to deposit the plan for public approval (a decision not yet carried out), a long path still lies ahead. Many months must pass until the public-approval process is completed. The council then has to decide whether to accept all of the objections that are raised, reject all of them, or accept some of them. Assuming that the plan passes, the council then has to authorize it. Only then can the Housing Ministry prepare tenders for marketing the land for construction. Publication of the tenders also requires approval by the political echelon.

 

The Palestinian Decision to Fight over E1

It was immediately after the Taba talks in January 2001 that the Palestinians decided to fight the E1 plan and recruit the world to the struggle. During the talks, Israel showed the Palestinian delegation a map of Maale Adumim that included the E1 area. Up to that time, the Palestinians had tended to agree to Israeli annexation of most of the settlement blocs, including Maale Adumim, in the context of territorial swaps. The Israeli assertion that the Maale Adumim bloc included E1, as well as land further east toward the Dead Sea, prompted a shift in the Palestinian position, and they retracted their prior agreement regarding Maale  Adumim.37

 

The 2001 Taba talks, then, were the point at which E1 became a red flag for the Palestinians, even though previously they had not opposed it. And they indeed were able to harness the international community to their cause. Nevertheless, the dual message of the Israeli leadership – on the one hand, strong declarations on E1; on the other, delays and deference to the international community – has made it very hard to realize the supreme Israeli interest in building E1.

 

Already in Rabin’s day, Israel had refrained from carrying out the construction plans for the area because of an understanding with the Clinton administration that its fate would be determined in negotiations.38 Netanyahu, in his first term, tried to promote the plan and even initiated a decision to create a joint municipality for Jerusalem and the settlements surrounding it, but this too was stymied by U.S. opposition. Prime Minister Barak also spoke in favor of continuity and linking Jerusalem and Maale Adumim, but he allowed Israel’s negotiating team to discuss the future of this area in the framework of the permanent-settlement negotiations with the Palestinians.

 

The prime minister who succeeded Barak, Ariel Sharon, also supported continuity between Jerusalem and Maale Adumim and building in E1, but he, too, came up against U.S. opposition and in fact promised not to build there without coordinating with Washington. As his close adviser Dov Weisglass described it, there was never an Israeli commitment not to build, but it was agreed that such building would be announced in advance and carried out in coordination with the Americans.39

 

It was Sharon’s successor, Ehud Olmert, who gave the United States an explicit undertaking on this matter. In an interview to the Jerusalem Post in September 2005, Olmert publicly confirmed that Israel had promised the U.S. administration it would not build between Maale Adumim and Jerusalem. “The State of Israel made a commitment to freeze construction…therefore, we would be acting irresponsibly if we were to build there.” At the same time, Olmert, too, emphasized that this did not mean the plan had come to an end. He made similar statements to Mayor Kashriel of Maale Adumim in meetings held in recent years.

 

Conclusions

  1.  It is necessary to speed up the approval process of the E1 plan immediately with the aim of implementing it, or at least reaching a situation of immediate preparedness to do so.
  2.  In parallel, a public information campaign must be launched in Israel and abroad that, among other things, will use material from this study, with the aim of countering and mitigating the predictable international onslaught against the promotion and implementation of the plan.
  3.  Even if the plan is not implemented at this stage, Israel must act immediately against the illegal building in the Maale Adumim-Jerusalem area, while overcoming the obstacles in the Civil Administration, the State Attorney’s Office, and on the political level that so far have prevented effective measures against this phenomenon.
  4. The paving of the bypass road should be renewed immediately, so that it can be fully built and made available to the Palestinians. The laying of the road should be accompanied by explanations of why this road constitutes a solution to the “continuity problem” as the Palestinians portray it, citing similar precedents that already exist.
  5. The linking of the E1 area to metropolitan Jerusalem can already begin. The building authorizations for the Metropolitan Center for Work and Business have been valid for some time. A joint legal team should be created for the Jerusalem and Maale Adumim municipalities, to be tasked with solving the legal problems that are delaying the work on constructing the Metropolitan Center. In the joint employment area on the seam line between Jerusalem and Maale Adumim, similar to the Barkan industrial zone in Samaria, both Jews and Arabs are to be employed, and this is a point to be emphasized.
  6. The international community has been acting with a lack of good faith when it complains that Israel is violating international law just over its announced intention to build in E1, while maintaining silence regarding Palestinian conduct in the area. The international community should be expected to honor signed agreements, and if the Oslo Agreements are still considered to be in force, then the Palestinians are forbidden to build in Area C. The Palestinians, as well, must honor the agreements under whose framework the Palestinian Authority was established, which controls more than 95 percent of the Palestinian population.
  7. The dual message that Israel conveys on the E1 issue – we will build the neighborhood vs. we will acquiesce to the world’s position and not build – makes it very difficult to explain the Israeli interest in developing E1. If the plan is so vital, why is it not being implemented despite the international community’s opposition? If the plan can be delayed, then perhaps it is not so vital? If there is indeed an intention to build, the time to act is now; but if the real aim is to keep deferring to international sensitivities, one should state this plainly and at least reap the dividends of doing so.

* * *
Notes

 

1. Barak Ravid and Natasha Mozgobia, “The United States Harshly Condemns the Intention to Build in E1,” Ha’aretz website, December 3, 2012 (in Hebrew).

2. “Catherine Ashton: ‘The Building around Jerusalem Is Unprecedented,’” Maariv-nrg website, December 20, 2012.

3. A dunam is equal to one thousand square meters, or roughly one-fourth of an acre.

4. See the video by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, “Indivisible Jerusalem,” https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=98DMPOC-dUQ.

5. Conference on settlement and security with the participation of members of the Settlement Division of the Jewish Agency, security officials, and those involved in the planning of settlements, held at the Jewish Agency at the end of the 1990s.

6. For elaboration on this concept, see the report “Metropolitan Jerusalem: Master Plan and Development,” prepared for the Ministry of Interior, the Ministry of Housing, the Israel Land Administration, and the City of Jerusalem, 1994 (in Hebrew). Research team headed by Shmarya Cohen and Adam Mazor in cooperation with the Jerusalem Institute for Israel Studies. Nadav Shragai, “Jerusalem: The Dangers of Division,” Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, 2008, pp. 24-25.

7. Maia Hushan et al., “About Your Data,” Jerusalem Institute for Israel Studies, 2012, p. 7 (in Hebrew).

8. The data are based on the book by Aryeh Hess, Jerusalem and Her Daughters, self-published, 2009, pp. 28-30 (in Hebrew). However, the numbers were updated with the help of the database of the Interior Ministry and the relevant local and regional councils, and they are accurate as of the end of 2011.

9. Shragai, “Jerusalem,” pp. 24-25.

10. See, e.g., statement by former Knesset Speaker Reuven Rivlin on words in this spirit by Rabin and past leaders of the Labor Party, on the Megaphone site, article by Zvi Singer, “The Government Unanimously Rejected the UN General Assembly Resolution,” December 2, 2012 (in Hebrew).

11. Yossi Levy, “Gen. Biran: Only Territorial Continuity Surrounding Jerusalem Will Ensure Israeli Control,” Maariv, February 25, 1996, p. 15 (in Hebrew).

12. For elaboration on the issue of defensible borders in general and in the area east of Jerusalem in particular, see “Defensible Borders: A Necessary Condition for Israel’s Security,” Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, 2005, article by Yaakov Amidror, “Israel’s Requirements for Defensible Borders,” and the appendix: “Military-Strategic Aspects of the Topography of Judea and Samaria for Israel’s Security” (in Hebrew; versions in English also available).

13. Appendix 7 of “Jerusalem: Links and Borders,” prepared by a professional team for the Ministerial Committee for Jerusalem Affairs during the 1980s (in Hebrew).

14. A lecture by Gen. Yaakov Amidror at the Lander Institute in 2007, at a conference on the unity of Jerusalem.

15. The facts presented at the beginning of this section are based on a survey prepared by the engineer of the Maale Adumim municipality, Gadi Brandeis.

16. Regulations Concerning Local Councils (Exchange of Maps) (Maale Adumim), 1991. Cited in Shmuel Berkovitz, The Wars over the Holy Places (Jerusalem: Jerusalem Institute and Hed Arzi, 2000), p. 171 (in Hebrew).

17. Map of the E1 plan.

18. From Protocol of the District Committee of Jerusalem No. 2011005, April 5, 2011 (in Hebrew).

19. Akiva Eldar, “Israel Expropriated Lands of Four Villages in the West Bank,” Ha’aretz, October 9, 2007 (in Hebrew); Aluf Benn, “The United States Demanded Clarifications on Israel’s Intention to Expropriate Palestinian Lands in E1,” Ha’aretz, October 14, 2007 (in Hebrew).

20. See “Paving Alternative Roads for Palestinians,” website of the B’Tselem organization, January 1, 2011 (in Hebrew).

21. Sources in the Civil Administration.

22. Response of the State Attorney’s Office, February 25, 2009, to the director of the Supreme Court Division (in Hebrew).

23. Ruling of Justices Beinisch, Grunis, and Hayut, Supreme Court 9815/09, January 5, 2011 (in Hebrew).

24. Letter by Amir Fisher, attorney for Regavim, to the director of the Supreme Court Division of the Justice Ministry, Attorney Osnat Mandel, December 25, 2011 (in Hebrew).

25. From the response of the State Attorney’s Office, December 18, 2011, to the request of the Regavim movement to participate in Supreme Court Case 9715/07 (in Hebrew).

26. See, e.g., Chaim Levinson, “The Police and the IDF Evacuated within Hours the Palestinian Encampment Set Up in E1,” Ha’aretz, January 14, 2013 (in Hebrew).

27. Husseini said at the time: “The most important Palestinian activity at this time is construction and even without a license.” See Nadav Shragai, “Jerusalem Is Not the Problem but the Solution,” in Moshe Amirav, ed., Mr. Prime Minister: Jerusalem (Carmel and the Floersheimer Institute, 2005) (in Hebrew).

28. A report in the local paper Jerusalem during that period. See also in Hagai Huberman, “The Battle forMevasseret Jerusalem,” Makor Rishon, December 14, 2007 (in Hebrew).

29. Huberman, ibid.

30. Yariv Mohar, “Palestinian-Bedouin Gesture in Appreciation of Human Rights Activists,” Mahlaka Rishona, May 16, 2011,  https://www.news1.co.il/Archive/003-D-59703-00.html (in Hebrew).

31. “Fatah: Evacuation of the Outpost at E1 – A Crime,” website of Reshet Bet, Israel Radio, January 13, 2013 (in Hebrew).

32. Huberman, “Battle for Mevaserret Jerusalem.”

33. Protocol, meeting between Peres and Benny Kashriel, January 24, 1996 (in Hebrew).

34. Natan Guttman, “Sharon: We Will Continue the Project to Link Jerusalem to Maale Adumim,” Ha’aretz, April 5, 2005 (in Hebrew).

35. Nadav Shragai, “Mofaz: A Continuity of Settlement between Jerusalem and Maale Adumim,” Ha’aretz, March 3, 2003 (in Hebrew).

36. The video’s title translates to “Caution: They Want to Strangle Her.”

37. Ir Amim, position paper, December 2012, p. 4 (in Hebrew).

38. According to a minister in Rabin’s government.

39. Shomo Tzena, “Misunderstanding,” Israel Hayom, December 7, 2012 (in Hebrew)

 

TOP


gatestone-institute-logo

Europe in Free Fall

by Guy Millière
23August2026 at 5:00 am

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/22801/europe-in-free-fall

 

  • [T]he terrifying fact [is] that Europe’s erasure as a civilization is underway.
  • Economically, Europe is in ghastly shape.
  • For nearly five decades, the European Union’s economic growth and productivity rates have lagged behind those of the United States.
  • European Union countries have established welfare states that have steadily expanded since 1980 and stifle economic growth.
  • The European Union has also proliferated stifling regulations that place a heavy encumbrance on businesses. Restrictions on gas and electricity production, combined with a drive for a rapid and extremely costly transition to “renewable energy”, have resulted in natural gas prices in Europe that are now three to five times higher than in the US, and electricity prices that are 2 to 4 times higher than in the US. To survive, many European companies have relocated production outside Europe.
  • International investment is turning away from Europe. Nine of the world’s top ten tech companies are American; the tenth is Taiwanese.
  • Although heatwaves have been affecting Europe for more than two decades, the continent remains resistant to air conditioning, viewing it as an expensive luxury (AC consumes costly electricity)…. In 2003, a heatwave in Europe killed more than 20,000 people. Almost nothing was done to prevent a recurrence, so in 2026, another heatwave has already claimed 25,000 lives.
  • Pessimism about the future — fueled by the questionable narrative berating “man-made global warming” and the hyped-up fear that the planet may become uninhabitable — is on the rise in Europe.
  • Most new immigrants in Europe come from the Muslim world and appear to have no interest whatever in assimilating or becoming more westernized. Many are emphatically discouraged from doing either by the leaders of their communities, for instance, by “honor killings….” There appears to be a growing demand among immigrants, in fact, to make Europe more like the Third World countries they abandoned.
  • The proportion of Muslims in the United Kingdom, France, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Sweden has been increasing decade after decade – with consequences that anyone even slightly versed in history could have expected. Warnings have gone unheeded.
  • Political parties defending Western civilization and values — while asserting their opposition to the Islamization of Europe and “civilizational erasure” — are gaining electoral momentum. Meanwhile, political leaders across major European nations and at the helm of the EU appear determined to prevent those parties from governing.
  • The “offense” of those political parties disfavored by Europe’s “elites” consists of defending the values of the West, fighting the Islamization of Europe, and opposing the erasure of European civilization. These political parties are consequently subjected to exclusionary maneuvers and are relentlessly harassed by rival political leaders who not only seem to disagree but are also dragging the continent into a free fall and a possible cultural death.
Europe's erasure as a civilization is underway. Europe is on a path toward rapid, widespread decline — potentially irreversible. It is already extremely late in the day. Unless drastic actions are taken to reverse firmly entrenched trends, European civilization, simply demographically, will soon be part of the past. (Image source: iStock)

Europe’s erasure as a civilization is underway. Europe is on a path toward rapid, widespread decline — potentially irreversible. It is already extremely late in the day. Unless drastic actions are taken to reverse firmly entrenched trends, European civilization, simply demographically, will soon be part of the past. (Image source: iStock)

 

On February 14, 2026, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio delivered a laudatory speech about Europe and its legacy at the Munich Security Conference. He noted, however, that Europe is weakening. “We don’t want our allies to be weak,” he said.

 

His remarks initially were well received by the European political leaders and journalists in the room; not for long. Several journalists soon mentioned that, while Rubio appeared friendlier toward Europe than US Vice President J.D. Vance’s had been a year earlier, he was still “arrogant” in presuming that Europe needed advice on how to be stronger.

 

Some recalled that the Trump administration’s November 2025 National Security Strategy had warned that Europe faces the “prospect of civilizational erasure” — a claim they described as an “insult” to Europe.

 

Political leaders were also quick to express their rejection of what Rubio had said. The European Union’s foreign affairs and security policy chief, Kaja Kallas, in her own speech in Munich, declared: “Contrary to what some may say… Europe is not facing civilizational erasure.”

 

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz made a point of emphasizing that “European values” were not those championed by the Trump administration.

 

These reactions unfortunately have not changed the terrifying fact that Europe’s erasure as a civilization is underway. Europe is on a path toward rapid, widespread decline — potentially irreversible. It is already extremely late in the day. Unless drastic actions are taken to reverse firmly entrenched trends, European civilization, simply demographically, will soon be part of the past.

 

Economically, Europe is in ghastly shape. In 1980, the nine member states of the European Economic Community (today’s 27-member European Union) accounted for approximately 27% of global GDP, according to the IMF. By the end of 2025, the figure for the same nine countries (plus the former East Germany) had fallen significantly to just 15.5% of global GDP. Some European economists explain this disparity by citing the rapid development of China and the East Asian nations. A look at the US economy, however, shatters that explanation: in 1980, the United States accounted for 25.3% of global GDP — less than the EU’s share. By the end of 2025, the United States accounts for approximately 26% of global GDP — slightly more than in 1980.

 

For nearly five decades, the European Union’s economic growth and productivity rates have lagged behind those of the United States. Statistics also show that the total general government tax revenue as a percentage of GDP has increased in almost all member countries of the European Union — a trend not seen in the United States. Today, general government tax revenue accounts, on average, for more than 40% of the European Union’s total GDP. The figure for some countries is lower (22.4% for Ireland), but higher for several others: Denmark (45.8%), France (45.3%), Belgium (45.1%), and Italy (42.6%). The total general government tax revenue (federal, state, and local taxes plus social security) in the United States in 1980 was 25.6% of GDP. Today, it is still 25.6%. On average, populations in European Union countries pay far higher total taxes than Americans do, despite significant US investment in defense. The gap between the European Union and the United States has become immense.

 

European Union countries have established welfare states that have steadily expanded since 1980 and stifle economic growth. Today, social spending accounts for nearly 40% of total government budgets across the European Union — a figure far higher than that of the United States. Social insurance mandatory contributions in Europe are 2 to 2.5 times higher than in the United States for the same gross salary. This burden significantly increases labor costs for European companies and explains why employee take-home pay is lower in Europe than in the US. On average, in Europe, paying a monthly salary of €2,000 ($2,300) costs a company €3,800 ($4,375). In the US, paying a monthly salary of $2,000 costs a company only $2,200 to $2,800, depending on the state where it operates. The difference is considerable, and helps explain why unemployment in Europe is higher than in the United States.

 

The European Union has also proliferated stifling regulations that place a heavy encumbrance on businesses. Restrictions on gas and electricity production, combined with a drive for a rapid and extremely costly transition to “renewable energy”, have resulted in natural gas prices in Europe that are now three to five times higher than in the US, and electricity prices that are 2 to 4 times higher than in the US. To survive, many European companies have relocated production outside Europe.

 

International investment is turning away from Europe. Nine of the world’s top ten tech companies are American; the tenth is Taiwanese. There are no major European players in this crucial sector, and Europe is almost entirely absent from the field of artificial intelligence.

 

Although heatwaves have been affecting Europe for more than two decades, the continent remains resistant to air conditioning, viewing it as an expensive luxury (AC consumes costly electricity). On average, only 20% of households in EU countries have air conditioning. In 2003, a heatwave in Europe killed more than 20,000 people. Almost nothing was done to prevent a recurrence, so in 2026, another heatwave has already claimed 25,000 lives.

 

Other factors are also contributing to Europe’s decline.

 

Pessimism about the future — fueled by the questionable narrative berating “man-made global warming” and the hyped-up fear that the planet may become uninhabitable — is on the rise in Europe. Polls show that 63% of Europeans now believe their best years are behind them, and 77% believe that life in their country will be harder for the next generation. This pessimism is accompanied by a sharp drop in birth rates, with figures indicating that the population is rapidly aging. The average birthrate in the European Union now stands at 1.34 live births per woman, well below the generational replacement level of 2.1. This reflects an accelerating aging process that places an increasingly heavy obligation on pension and healthcare systems. In Spain, the figure is 1.10 live births per woman; in Italy, it is 1.14, and in Poland, it is also 1.10. Without major changes, Spain, Italy, and Poland will experience rapid population decline. Figures show that there were 3.46 million births and 4.81 million deaths in the European Union in 2025.

 

A trend toward downplaying traditional family roles is gaining ground in Europe, further exacerbating the problem of demographic replacement. In several European countries — Spain, Sweden, France, and the UK — sex education goes hand in hand with school textbooks explaining “gender identity,” “the possibility of sex reassignment” and “diverse family structures,” including having two mothers or two fathers. Across Europe, the number of same-sex and single-parent families is rising, and statistics show that such families generally have fewer children than families with both a father and a mother.

 

Europe’s population is decreasing, but mass migration, at this stage anyway, might be more of a burden on Europe’s finances than a contribution to its workforce or economic growth. Bureaucratic reports rosily predict “long term” gains. Even if mass migration were an economic benefit, it nevertheless is leading the European continent to cultural death.

 

Most new immigrants in Europe come from the Muslim world and appear to have no interest whatever in assimilating or becoming more westernized. Many are emphatically discouraged from doing either by the leaders of their communities, for instance, by “honor killings.” In addition, Muslim women have more children than non-Muslim women. In the UK, Muslim men may have up to four wives if married abroad, each of whom receives extra social welfare benefits. Muslims are doctrinally directed to despise Europe’s tolerance of the gay way of life; reject what is taught to their children regarding both history and sex education; see Europe as decadent and contemptible, and to openly reject the new societies in which they chose to live. There appears to be a growing demand among immigrants, in fact, to make Europe more like the Third World countries they abandoned.

 

The proportion of Muslims in the United Kingdom, France, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Sweden has been increasing decade after decade – with consequences that anyone even slightly versed in history could have expected. Warnings have gone unheeded.

 

Most Muslims arriving in Europe come from countries where antisemitism and hatred of Israel are widespread. Once settled in Europe, they remain antisemitic and hateful toward Israel, and contribute aggressively to the sharp rise of Jew-hate and anti-Israel bias in the countries where they now live. Many native Europeans ally themselves politically with them, declare themselves “anti-Zionist” (hostile to the existence of Israel), and show immense tolerance for Muslim antisemitism.

 

In the UK, the Equality and Human Rights Commission established in an October 29, 2020 report that the Labour Party was guilty of “inappropriate political interference” by Jeremy Corbyn’s office in several antisemitism cases. Corbyn was suspended from party membership and, in 2024, expelled from the party. He created a separate party with another former Labour member, Zarah Sultana, an “anti-Zionist” Muslim. Both were reelected in 2024 and are still MPs.

 

In France, the main left-wing party, La France Insoumise (France Unbowed) is “anti-Zionist,” openly supports Palestinian organizations, and refuses to define Hamas as a terrorist organization. Some of its leaders who have made antisemitic remarks have been prosecuted but not convicted.

 

Starting immediately with the terrorist group Hamas’s invasion of Israel and massacre of October 7, 2023, and throughout Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza, anti-Israel demonstrations chanting slogans in support of Hamas were on the march in all major Western European cities. Appallingly, since the massacre, antisemitic attacks have seen a sharp increase across Western Europe, while Jews continue to leave Europe.

 

A poll conducted for the European Jewish Congress (EJC) shows that a majority of Jews still in Europe would like to leave. Ariel Muzicant, the president of EJC said in 2024, “We’re losing the battle. 57% of European Jews are considering leaving. In a few years, 50% of the communities may no longer exist.”

 

Political parties defending Western civilization and values — while asserting their opposition to the Islamization of Europe and “civilizational erasure” — are gaining electoral momentum. Meanwhile, political leaders across major European nations and at the helm of the EU appear determined to prevent those parties from governing (such as here, here and here).

 

In Germany, Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) leads in polls of voter intentions but faces a boycott by other parties known as the Brandmauer (“firewall”), with all other national and state parties forming alliances that exclude the AfD to prevent it from forming or even participating in governments.

 

In the United Kingdom — no longer part of the EU — Reform UK won many recent local elections and might be positioned to eclipse the Conservative Party. Meanwhile, a national poll conducted on July 26-27, 2026, revealed that the Labour Party had reached a record low among potential voters: 22%, the worst results for a British governing party since the 1940s. With no general election due until 2029, Keir Starmer resigned as prime minister, and his successor, Andy Burnham, was appointed by the Labour Party, apparently trying to avoid a new general election as long as it can.

 

In France, the National Rally (NR) has been the country’s most popular party for years. During the 2024 legislative elections, the NR appeared poised to win an absolute majority. Just before the election’s second round, President Emmanuel Macron urged all other parties to form a “Republican Front.” Their leaders called for votes to go to whichever candidate stood the best chance of defeating the NR contender: leading moderate right-wing voters to vote for far-left candidates, and left-wing and far-left voters to vote for moderate right-wing parties. The result was a fragmented National Assembly, unable to form a government cohesive enough to make policy decisions.

 

France’s economic situation was already concerning; it has since worsened. Unemployment is at 8% and is rising. Bankruptcies among small and medium-sized enterprises are increasing (in 2025, 69,957 businesses went bankrupt). National Rally’s Marine Le Pen has been leading the polls for the 2027 presidential election. She had been sentenced to three years in prison and 45 months (with 30 months suspended) of a public office ban, for actions that had previously led to dropped charges for Jean-Luc Mélenchon, the leader of France Unbowed. The alleged crime was that Le Pen and Mélenchon allowed parliamentary assistants to Members of the European Parliament to work in Paris for the MEPs they served. Le Pen appealed the case to the Court of Cassation, France’s supreme court of appeal, which suspended the sentence.

 

Le Pen’s conviction has not diminished her popularity. The Court of Cassation has stated it will issue its ruling before the 2027 presidential election, and the court’s president has hinted that the conviction will be upheld — meaning that if elected, Le Pen would become the first French president to win office while under a prison sentence. Mathilde Panot, president of the France Unbowed group in the National Assembly, declared that her party would not recognize the legitimacy of Le Pen’s election should she win, and would call for an uprising.

 

The “offense” of those political parties disfavored by Europe’s “elites” consists of defending the values of the West, fighting the Islamization of Europe, and opposing the erasure of European civilization. These political parties are consequently subjected to exclusionary maneuvers and are relentlessly harassed by rival political leaders who not only seem to disagree but are also dragging the continent into a free fall and a possible cultural death.

Dr. Guy Millière, a professor at the University of Paris, is the author of 27 books on France and Europe.

 

TOP

Crocodile Strike


Click To Play

Copyright © 2026 Suzanne Schulman Butterfield

Copyright © 2026 Suzanne Schulman Butterfield

עָצְמָה יְהוּדִית, Otzma Yehudit

עָצְמָה יְהוּדִית, Otzma Yehudit

Copyright © 2026 Suzanne Schulman Butterfield

Copyright © 2026 Suzanne Schulman Butterfield

BACKGROUND: Nile Crocodiles to be stationed outside security prisons

 

TOP

Yom Yerushalayim יום ירושלים


Six Day War – Israeli victory – Documentary – War of Redemption

26 Iyar: Six-Day War (1967)

In the spring of 1967, the Arab capitals paraded their arms and openly spoke of overrunning the Land of Israel and casting its inhabitants into the sea. The international media was almost unanimous in its belief that the small Jewish state, outflanked and outgunned by its enemies, stood little chance of survival. It seemed that, for the second time in a generation, the world was going to stand by and allow the enemies of the Jewish people to slaughter them in the millions.

On Iyar 26 (June 5, 1967), Israel launched preemptive strikes on its southern and northern frontiers. In just six days, the Jewish army defeated five Arab armies on three fronts and liberated territories of its promised homeland amounting to an area greater than its own size, including the Old City of Jerusalem and the Temple Mount (see “Today in Jewish History” for Iyar 28).

The openly miraculous nature of Israel’s victory spawned a global awakening of the Jewish soul, fueling the already present and growing teshuvah movement of return to G‑d and Jewish traditions. The Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, of righteous memory, called it a moment of biblical proportions, an “opportunity the likes of which has not been granted for thousands of years.” Many thousands of Jews flocked to put on tefillin and pray at the newly liberated Western Wall of the Temple Mount.

Link: The Rebbe on the Six-Day War (video)

 

28 Iyar: Jerusalem Liberated (1967)

The Old City of Jerusalem and the Temple Mount were liberated during the 1967 Six-Day War (see “Today in Jewish History” for Iyar 26). The day is marked in Israel as “Jerusalem Day.”

 

29 Iyar: Hebron Liberated (1967)

One day after Israeli forces liberated eastern Jerusalem in the course of the Six-Day War, another of the holy cities, Hebron, was also liberated.

Following the creation of the State of Israel in 1948, Jordan took over the control of Hebron along with the rest of the region. During this time, Israelis were not allowed to enter the holy city. The Jewish Quarter was destroyed, Jewish cemeteries were desecrated, 58 synagogues were destroyed and an animal pen was built on the ruins of the Patriarch Abraham Synagogue.

 

2 Sivan: Israel Captures Golan Heights (1967)

Until the Six-Day War (see “Today in Jewish History” for Iyar 26), the Syrian army was deployed in strong fortifications on the Golan Heights, from which they repeatedly shelled the Israeli settlements below. On the fifth day of the war, the Israeli Army broke through the Syrian front. Facing very difficult topographical conditions, they scaled the steep and rugged heights. The Engineering Corps cleared the way of mines, followed by bulldozers which leveled a route for the tanks on the rocky face. After more than 24 hours of heavy fighting, the Syrian deployment collapsed and the Syrian forces fled in retreat.

the Jewish Virtual Library. logo https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org

the Jewish Virtual Library. logo https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org

Jewish Holidays: Yom Yerushalayim – Jerusalem Day

https://jewishvirtuallibrary.org/yom-yerushalayim-jerusalem-day

 

Yom Yerushalayim (Jerusalem Day) is the anniversary of the liberation and unification of Jerusalem under Jewish sovereignty that occurred during the Six Day War. It is one of four holiday (in addition to Yom HaShoah, Yom HaZikaron, and Yom HaAtzmaut) that were added to the Jewish calendar in the 20th century. Yom Yerushalayim is celebrated on the 28th of the month of Iyar (one week before Shavuot).

 

The liberation of Jerusalem in 1967 marked the first time in thousands of years that the entire city of Jerusalem, the holiest city in Judaism, was under Jewish sovereignty. The destruction of Jerusalem was a watershed event in Jewish history that began thousands of years of mourning for Jerusalem, so, it follows, that the reunification of Jerusalem should be a joyous celebration that begins the process of reversing thousands of years of destruction and exile. Jerusalem is central to the Jewish tradition. Jews face in the direction of Jerusalem and all of the prayer services are filled with references to Jerusalem.

 

The observance of Yom Yerushalayim outside of the city cannot compare to its celebration in reunited Jerusalem. In Jerusalem, thousands of people march around the city and walk through the liberated Old City, where Jews were denied access from 1948 to 1967 while it was under Jordanian control. The march ends at the Kotel (Western Wall), one of the ancient retaining walls surrounding the Temple Mount, Judaism‘s holiest site. Once everyone gets to the Kotel, there are speeches and concerts and celebratory dancing.

 

Rare in the Jewish liturgy, a festive Hallel is recited during the evening prayers. This practice is only done on the first night (and, outside of Israel, on the second night) of Passover and Yom Ha’atzmaut. The Chief Rabbinate of Israel declared that the holiday version of Pseuki d’Zimra and Hallel should be recited. According to the major religious Zionist halakhists (decisors of Jewish law), even those who do not recite the blessing over Hallel (psalms of praise) on Yom Ha’atzmaut should recite it on Yom Yerushalayim because the liberation and reunification over the entire city of Jerusalem is said to be of an even greater miracle than Jewish political sovereignty over part of the land of Israel.

 

Many religious leaders also hold that the mourning restrictions of 33 days of the omer are lifted on Yom Yerushalayim for those who observe them after Lag B’omer. …

 

… The Israeli government decreed in 2004 that each year on Jerusalem day a national memorial ceremony would be held to commemorate and acknowledge the desires and contributions of the Ethiopian Jewish community.

 

Sources: Yom Yerushalayim, WUJS.
Overview: Yom Yerushalayim.
My Jewish Learning/
Udi Shaham, Paying Tribute to the Ethiopian Jews who Didn’t Make it, Jerusalem Post, (June 2, 2016).

 

TOP


Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs logo-new

Israel celebrates Jerusalem Day

Jerusalem, capital of Israel, divided during the 1948 War of Independence, was reunited in June 1967. On May 29 2022 (28 Iyyar 5782) Israel celebrates Jerusalem Day, marking the reunification of the nation’s capital.

Type: Information Topic: About Israel Israel Experience Secondary topic: Facts about Israel History Publish Date: 29.05.2022
https://www.gov.il/en/pages/israel-celebrates-jerusalem-day-29-may-2022

Western Wall-Rabin-Dayan-Narkis GPOIlan Bruner

Western Wall-Rabin-Dayan-Narkis
GPOIlan Bruner

 

Since the time of King David, except for the 19 years between 1948 and 1967, there has always been a Jewish presence in the ancient city of Jerusalem, the capital of Israel. From 1948 until 1967, the western part of the city was in Israeli hands, while the ancient, eastern part – apart from a small Israeli enclave on Mount Scopus – was under Jordanian control.

 

Jerusalem, divided during the 1948 War of Independence, was reunited in June 1967.

 

“Peace has now returned with our forces in control of all the city and its environs. You may rest assured that no harm whatsoever shall come to the places sacred to all religions. I have requested the Minister of Religious Affairs to get in touch with the religious leaders in the Old City in order to ensure regular contact between them and our forces, so as to make certain that the former may continue their spiritual activities unhindered.”

– Prime Minister Levi Eshkol, June 7, 1967

 

King David made Jerusalem the capital of his kingdom and the religious center of the Jewish people in 1003 BCE. Some forty years later, his son Solomon built the Temple (the religious and national center of the people of Israel) and transformed the city into the prosperous capital of an empire extending from the Euphrates to Egypt.

 

Exiled by Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar in 586 BCE, who conquered Jerusalem and destroyed the Temple, the Jews were allowed to return and rebuild the city and the Temple some 50 years later by the Persian King Cyrus.

 

Alexander the Great conquered Jerusalem in 332 BCE. The later desecration of the Temple and attempts to suppress Jewish religious identity under the Seleucid ruler Antiochus IV resulted in a revolt led by Judah Maccabbee, who rededicated the Temple (164 BCE) and re-established Jewish independence under the Hasmonean dynasty.

 

A century later, Pompey imposed Roman rule on Jerusalem. King Herod, installed as ruler of Judah by the Romans (37 – 4 BCE), established cultural institutions in Jerusalem, erected magnificent public buildings and refashioned the Temple into an edifice of splendor.

 

Jewish revolt against Rome broke out in 66 CE, as Roman rule after Herod’s death became increasingly oppressive. In 70 CE, Roman legions under Titus conquered the city and destroyed the Temple. Jewish independence was briefly restored during the Bar Kochba revolt (132-135), but again the Romans prevailed. Jews were forbidden to enter the city, renamed Aelia Capitolina.

 

After Byzantine conquest of the city (313), Jerusalem was transformed into a Christian center under Emperor Constantine, with the Church of the Holy Sepulcher the first of many grandiose structures built in the city.

 

Muslim armies invaded the country in 634, and four years later Caliph Omar captured Jerusalem. Only during the reign of Abdul Malik, who built the Dome of the Rock (691), did Jerusalem briefly become the seat of a caliph.

 

The Crusaders conquered Jerusalem in 1099, massacred its Jewish and Muslim inhabitants, and established the city as the capital of the Crusader Kingdom. Synagogues were destroyed, old churches were rebuilt and many mosques were turned into Christian shrines. Crusader rule over Jerusalem ended in 1187, when the city fell to Saladin.

 

In 1247 Jerusalem fell once more to Egypt, now ruled by the Mamluks, until the conquest by the Ottoman Turks in 1517. Suleiman the Magnificent rebuilt the city walls (1537). After his death, the central authorities in Constantinople took little interest in Jerusalem and the city declined.

 

Jerusalem began to thrive once more in the latter half of the 19th century. Growing numbers of Jews returning to their land, waning Ottoman power and revitalized European interest in the Holy Land led to renewed development of Jerusalem.

 

The British army led by General Allenby conquered Jerusalem in 1917. From 1922 to 1948, Jerusalem was the administrative seat of the British authorities in the Land of Israel (Palestine), which had been entrusted to Great Britain by the League of Nations.

Mandelbaum Gate 1964 GPOMoshe Pridan

Mandelbaum Gate 1964 GPOMoshe Pridan

 

Division and reunification

Upon termination of the British Mandate on May 14, 1948, and in accordance with the UN resolution of November 29, 1947, Israel proclaimed its independence, with Jerusalem as its capital. Opposing its establishment, the Arab countries launched an all-out assault on the new state, resulting in the 1948-49 War of Independence. The armistice lines drawn at the end of the war divided Jerusalem into two, with Jordan occupying the Old City and areas to the north and south, and Israel retaining the western and southern parts of the city.

 

When the Six-Day War broke out in June 1967, Israel contacted Jordan through the U.N. as well as the American Embassy, and made it clear that if Jordan refrained from attacking Israel, Israel would not attack Jordan. Nevertheless, the Jordanians attacked west Jerusalem and occupied the former High Commissioner’s building. Following heavy fighting, the IDF recovered the compound and removed the Jordanian army from east Jerusalem, resulting in the reunification of the city.

 

From the IDF website:
“The eagerly awaited command to take the Old City was given at sunrise on the third day of the war, 7 June 1967. The Command assigned this task to the paratroopers, who started with an attack on the Augusta-Victoria hills and the Mount of Olives, overlooking the Old City. After firing in the direction of the breakthrough path, the Lions Gate, the force from the east advanced forward very quickly and broke through into the Old City. The paratroopers ran towards the Dome of the Rock, located next to the last remains of the Temple, the Western Wall, where, in the presence of the sector commander and the deputy head of the armed services, General Rabbi Shlomo Goren, the chief chaplain of the IDF blew a long blow on the rams horn, announcing the release of the Western Wall and the Old City of Jerusalem. Jerusalem, the divided and split capital of Israel, was reunited.”

 

After the liberation of the city by the IDF, the walls dividing the city were torn down. Three weeks later, the Knesset enacted legislation unifying the city and extending Israeli sovereignty over the eastern part of the city.

 

The reunification of the city was also a fundamental moment in the history of religious tolerance, opening the city of Jerusalem to worshippers of all faiths, permitting Jews to return to the Western Wall and other holy sites, and allowing Israeli Muslims and Christians to visit those sacred places in eastern Jerusalem from which they too had been barred since 1948.

 

One year later, in 1968, it was decided that the day marking the liberation and reunification of Jerusalem – 28 Iyar according to the Jewish lunar calendar – would be national holiday in Israel. On Jerusalem Day we celebrate the reunification of the city and the Jewish people’s connection with Jerusalem throughout the ages.

 

TOP


breslev-magazine-co-il-logo

From Mandelbaum Gate to Chut Shel Chessed

After the miraculous events of the Six Day War (26-Iyar to 2-Sivan), Jews were allowed to return to their city. The Mandelbaum Gate, formerly the physical gate to Jerusalem, became Chut shel Chessed, the spiritual gate to Jerusalem.

Rabbi Jacob Rupp | Posted on 25May2025 | https://breslev.com/259784/

From Mandelbaum Gate to Chut Shel Chessed

From Mandelbaum Gate to Chut Shel Chessed

 

For years, we watched in desperate envy and frustration as foreigners passed into the holy city unmolested while we could only stand at Mandelbaum Gate and watch.

 

Our nation is pursuing a dream. To some, our dream may seem trivial; to others, impossible to attain. Millions have worked towards it and thousands of years have passed, but we remain unabashed in our efforts to merit its fulfillment.

 

For two thousand years we have waited to come home. We have longed to gather in Eretz Yisroel, to rebuild our Third Temple, and to renew the close relationship with God that we once had.

 

The path to this goal has been paved with hardships. The monuments of our struggles and misery lie scattered throughout the world. They are found in nearly every country, from the remains of the Death Camps in Poland to Masada in Eretz Yisrael. Yet, despite our struggles, we persevere. From the story of Yosef and his brothers, we learn that before God gives us a test, He gives us the tools to overcome it. Like the night is the darkest right before dawn, oftentimes, the very article of our despair becomes a key to our salvation.

 

Today, we are plagued by an almost ironic taste of our redemption. We get so close to complete destruction and then, overnight, we can almost sense the beginning of our salvation. We can all but see the hand of our Creator guiding us. Who could have ever imagined the broken, bloodied souls limping out of Auschwitz, all the way to the holy city of Jerusalem?

 

Today, we are blessed to live in and visit the old city of Jerusalem. Nearly forty years ago, however, that was impossible. Today, the streets of Meah Shearim are full of commerce, shouting children, young families, and vibrant Yiddishkeit. Four decades ago, the area was a virtual war zone, located on the border between Israel and her hostile Arab neighbor. Where today schools and homes stand, one journalist described the area from 1948-1967 as “a ramshackle affair of corrugated tin checkpoints separated on each side by a wide, cobblestone expanse of street.” The bullet holes in the buildings testify to the violence that was an almost daily affair. For close to two decades, we suffered everything from kidnapping and beatings to sniper fire. But even more painful than the violence we endured was the knowledge that the Kotel, the last remnant of our Holy Temple, remained just beyond our reach.

 

Following the war of Independence, the entire Old City, including the Kotel, was under Jordanian control. The Arabs destroyed our synagogues, desecrated hundreds of our graves, and reduced the Old City into a crumbling, desolate village. Sewage ran down the main streets, and farm animals defecated on the stones upon which our holy sages had once walked.

 

Jerusalem was divided between East and West; old and new. Mandelbaum Gate was the only point of connection between the no man’s land that split the city. It was through this passage that people – Christian pilgrims, Western journalists, and Arabs, but no Jews – could cross into the Old City.

 

For years, we watched in desperate envy and frustration as foreigners passed into the holy city unmolested while we could only stand at Mandelbaum Gate and watch. We were so close to our enemy that we could see and speak to those Jordanian soldiers who refused to allow us entry. Every day we would see them stand on our holy ground while we remained powerless to remove them. At times the area was calm, at other times the soldiers would fire at us and our children.

 

Yet we never lost hope. People would climb onto the roofs of the highest buildings to watch the sun set over our holy city held hostage. All this came to an end, when, during the miraculous events of the Six Day War (26-Iyar to 2-Sivan), Mandelbaum Gate was torn down. We were allowed to return to our city.

 

Now, fast forward to today; the Old City has been rebuilt and is a popular place to visit, spend time, and pray. Meah Shearim has developed into a gem of traditional Judaism. But where Mandelbaum Gate once stood as a dreary symbol of Jerusalem divided, something amazing is going on.

 

On the site of so much frustration and despair, a new flame is being kindled! Jewish men are discovering their roots. The sound of Torah learning emanates from a building which had once, on a very physical level, separated us from our roots.

 

In what can only be described as a miracle, Chut Shel Chessed Institutions was given the privilege of changing Mandelbaum Gate from a source of spiritual frustration to a fountain of spiritual growth.

 

TOP


breslev-magazine-co-il-logo

Go and Take Possession of the Land 

Rabbi Arush gives an impassioned plea to live in Eretz Yisrael. There is no reason to be afraid. The more Jews who come, the greater the blessings will be. We are so close to building the Beit Hamikdash! Now, more than ever, is the time to come!

Rabbi Shalom Arush | Posted on 06January2026   |  https://breslev.com/4842746/

Go and Take Possession of the Land-by Rabbi Shalom Arush

Go and Take Possession of the Land-by Rabbi Shalom Arush

 

Translated from Rabbi Arush’s feature article in the weekly Chut shel Chessed newsletter. The articles focus on his main message: “Loving others as yourself” and emuna.

 

And I am in Exile 

In my latest trip to the diaspora, I visited many communities in France. I met Jews who felt very persecuted and frightened, the ground under their feet was unstable. This situation is shared by many Jews throughout the world. Antisemites have come to power in France. And in its neighbor, England, the change of government doesn’t bode well.

 

Every place I came to, I did my best to strengthen the people and teach them the perfect emuna (faith) that Hashem will do only good for us and will never abandon the Jewish People, and that we have no one to depend upon except our Father in Heaven. But at the same time, I called to them there, and I will continue to call to all Jews in the world, to immigrate to the Land of Israel.

 

This message is true for all of us: We, too, who are living in the Holy Land, must participate in the great effort to bring all Jews to Israel. And the effort on our part is mainly through our obligation to pray, as we wrote last week. We must know that an inseparable part of prayer for the Jewish People is the prayer for diaspora Jews, that Hashem should protect them wherever they are. Hashem should awaken them all to come on Aliyah to the Land of Israel, grant them the willingness and the ability to do so, and grant that there will be agreement of all family members to come to Israel. It is not for nothing that we pray three times a day in the Amidah about the ingathering of the exiles.

 

All of us must understand, on the one hand, the tremendous danger that is threatening Jews all over the world – both a material and a spiritual threat. Jewish institutions and shuls throughout the world are receiving the highest level of threats. On the other hand, we must understand the tremendous difficulty involved in coming on Aliyah. For many Jews this is an extremely difficult step to take. It is very hard to leave large and beautiful homes, jobs, good living conditions, household help, institutions, society, language, and a familiar culture – and to move to the Land of Israel and start life anew. For us, too, who live here, it can be difficult to find apartments and jobs; for diaspora Jews it is certainly hard, then. And therefore, we must help them with our prayers!

 

Love of the Land

Therefore, the first thing to pray for is the desire to make Aliyah! On the one hand, we, in Israel, must pray that all Jews will have the desire to come on Aliyah, and we must pray for ourselves as well, that we will be able to appreciate the merit of living in the Land of Israel. And, on the other hand, the diaspora Jews should pray that they will long for the Land of Israel and will want, to the best of their ability, to make Aliyah.

 

Even someone who doesn’t see any chance of coming on Aliyah, even if he doesn’t see any way that he can make a living and purchase an apartment in Israel, and even if part of his family is totally against coming on Aliyah – still, in any case one can always want to! Who is preventing you from wanting? Who is preventing you from asking Hashem that you be given a strong and real will? True, it is forbidden to force things on other family members, and so one must pray that all family members, children included, will want to come on Aliyah.

 

Don’t confuse ability and desire. Under no circumstances should you stop wanting. For sure, sooner or later the desire will produce results, because the way a person wishes to go is the way that he is led. And the yearning for the Land of Israel is a positive thing, and has tremendous segulot, affecting both material and spiritual things. In the material – it is brought in Sefer Hamiddot: “Thanks to the yearning that a person yearns to come to Eretz Yisrael – by that yearning one receives an abundance of parnasah (livelihood).” 1

 

And, of course, the same thing is true about spiritual matters. There are countless sources for the fact that all the kedushah (holiness) and emuna (faith) and prayers open Divine Providence; good middot (traits) are rooted in the kedushah of the Land of Israel. Because the Land of Israel is not a physical place; rather, it is the only spiritual place that can provide the Jewish People with the ability to thrive spiritually.

 

Rabbi Nachman says: “Every person must ask from Hashem yitbarach (May He be blessed) that he feels yearning and longing for the Land of Israel. And, that all the tzaddikim should long for the Land of Israel, and this is a segula against anger and sadness… in other words, we ask for and long for the Land of Israel, and that way we are granted emuna…” 2

 

Rabbi Levi Yitzchak Bender would encourage the avreichim (married students) to remember every minute that they are in the Land of Israel and to be happy to have that merit, and to think: “I am walking in the Land of Israel, I am learning, praying, doing mitzvot, busy with chessed (acts of loving kindness), eating and sleeping – in the Land of Israel.” And he even said, “You can test me on this: When you think about the Land of Israel at every free moment – you will experience a great spiritual illumination and great success in all your service of Hashem!”

 

We have a general rule, that anyone who yearns for something holy – even if he doesn’t actually receive it – that holy thing begins to illuminate him and influence him! And therefore, even someone who is still in the diaspora, if he manages not to distract himself and every moment that he does remember he yearns for the holiness of the Land of Israel – he too will merit a “shot” of increasing emuna and tefilla, and will produce real chiddushei Torah (new insights in Torah) and in everything connected with serving Hashem.

 

The Land is Very, Very Good

Therefore, we must first of all pray for the will, but we must also pray for all the details and the details of the details, and ask Hashem to build for us millions of apartments that will be ready to receive all those millions of Jews, and that all of them – parents, children, and youths – will have communities, shuls, educational institutions, good sources of income, jobs, and vessels to absorb the material good and the spiritual good; and that all the immigrants will be received with love and joy and welcoming smiles. And when they arrive here, all of them will merit, together with all the residents of the Holy Land, to connect to the holiness of the Land of Israel, and that the light of emuna and tefilla will shine upon them and us to a greater extent and with greater power.

 

And it is clear as light that the Land of Israel is the safest place for Jews in the whole world.

 

The more Jews who live in the Land of Israel, the more the Land’s kedushah shines. This means that the holy emuna shines more, and that the tefilla shines more, and that we merit great, miracles that are above nature. Then, of course, the Jewish People are much better protected.

 

And that is the thing that brings the Geula (Redemption) closer the most, because “the main [cause of] galut (exile) is only lack of emuna”, and the Land of Israel and emuna, tefilla (prayer) and miracles are one thing, as brought in Likutei Moharan (Kitzur Likutei Moharan, 7): “Prayer and miracles and the Land of Israel are all one aspect and they all depend on one another… the main point of emuna, the aspect of tefilla, the aspect of miracles is only in the Land of Israel… and this is the way the Geula will come.”

 

It comes out that when we pray for the diaspora Jews to immigrate to Israel, we are actually praying for the complete Geula!

 

And that is what we see in parshat Devarim. Moshe bids farewell to the Jewish People before they enter the Land, because he is not going to enter it with them. He stands facing the Land of Israel and begins his final speech with a great rebuke of the people about the Sin of the Spies. He calls them to repair the sin of their forefathers who spurned the cherished land, and throughout the Torah he praises the Land and longs for it and prepares the Jewish people to live in it with emuna and connection to Hashem and His Torah.

 

The Sin of the Spies caused a weeping lasting through many generations. That means that all of us still need to correct this sin. And as they spurned the Land of Israel – we must fix that sin and yearn for and want that Land. We must pray and long for the kedushah of the Land of Israel and to do what we can to observe the mitzvah of living in the Land of Israel devotedly.

 

We see with our own eyes how Hashem is building and developing the Land, and how much blessing there is in the Land. Even better and more abundant natural resources will be discovered here. There will be tremendous abundance.

 

Therefore, there is no reason to be afraid, and all Jews should come on Aliyah to the Land of Israel. And the more Jews who come, the greater the blessing will be, and they will all live in abundance and in happiness. The Beit HaMikdash (Temple) will be built, and the Three Weeks will become a joyous time, Amen.

 


Editor’s Note:

1 Sefer HaMiddot, “Land of Israel”, second part, number 3

2 Likutei Moharan I, 155:3

 

TOP


Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs logo-new

The Six-Day War (June 1967)

Within the brief span of six days, the IDF overran the Sinai peninsula took the entire West Bank of the River Jordan and captured a great part of the Golan Heights. The culminating event was the capture of the Old City of Jerusalem.

https://www.gov.il/en/pages/the-six-day-war-june-1967

Type: Information< Topic: About Israel Secondary topic: Facts about Israel Publish Date: 12.06.2002

Paratroopers at the Western Wall in Jerusalem, June 1967© GPO/David Rubinger

Paratroopers at the Western Wall in Jerusalem, June 1967© GPO/David Rubinger

 


 

The year 1967 began with confident predictions that it would not bring war.  Nasser, it was argued in Israel, had learned the lesson of 1956 and would not start a war unless he was ready. In any case, his relations with Jordan were notoriously bad and a coalition between Nasser and King Hussein was out of the question.

 

In quick succession, events gave the lie to these predictions. A clash in the air, in which Syria – Russia’s closest ally in the Middle East – lost 13 planes, provided the opening signal. As a result of Soviet prodding, Nasser mobilized and sent 100,000 troops to Sinai. He demanded that the Secretary General of the United Nations withdraw UNEF forthwith, and – probably to his own surprise – succeeded immediately and the “firemen” departed. Then Nasser announced the closing of the Straits of Tiran to Israeli shipping (May 23) – a clearcut casus belli. He ended by taunting Yitzhak Rabin, Israel’s Chief of Staff: “Let him come, I’m waiting.”

 

Meanwhile he succeeded in bringing about close coordination with the Syrian army. King Hussein, in an abrupt about-face, flew to Egypt and signed an agreement placing his forces under overall Egyptian comand. It was to cost him half his kingdom.

 

Israel, its reserves fully mobilized, its nerves taut to the snapping point, waited for three long weeks. The situation seemed the reverse of 1956; Israel was alone, against a powerful Arab coalition. The Big Powers, vague promises notwithstanding, did nothing to reopen the Straits and Israel decided to go it alone.

 

On 5 June 1967 a cluster of planes flying from Egypt to Israel was seen on King Hussein’s radar screen. Convinced by the Egyptians that the planes were theirs, he promptly gave the order to attack – in Jerusalem! In fact the planes were Israel’s, returning from their devastating attack against the Egyptian airforce, which surprisingly had been taken by surprise; after taunting Rabin, Egypt was not ready when he came.

 

Within the brief span of six days, the IDF overran the whole Sinai peninsula, up to the Suez Canal; took the entire West Bank of the River Jordan; and in the last days, without the benefit of surprise, captured a great part of the Golan Heights, including the dominant Mount Hermon – from then on “the eyes and ears of Israel”. The culminating event was the capture of the Old City of Jerusalem and the re-encounter with the place most revered by Jews, the Western (Wailing) Wall. The blowing of the shofar at the Western Wall reverberated throughout the world.

 

776 Israeli soldiers fell in the Six-Day War.

 

Whilst all branches of the service had performed well, the Air Force had, for the first time, played a decisive role: clearing the skies at the outset made all that followed possible. This was the War of the Air Force.

 

Diplomatic efforts to bring to an end the by-now 40 years of conflict, which predated the establishment of Israel by more than two decades, came to nought. In November 1967, after months of deliberations, the Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 242, calling for peace and recognition of the “right of every nation to live free from threat within secure and recognized boundaries”, in return for Israel’s withdrawal “from territories”, not “all the territories”, nor “the territories captured in the course of the recent hostilities”. However, the Arab League, in its session in the Sudan (1967) adopted a different resolution, the “Three No’s” of Khartoum: No peace, No negotiations, No recognition of Israel.

 

From “The Arab-Israeli Wars” by Netanel Lorch

 

TOP


Arutz Sheva http://www.israelnationalnews.com/

Hidden and revealed miracles

When future historians come to write of our era, they will write of all the miracles but they will also discover another hidden miracle.

Daniel Pinner /  25May2025, 10:49 PM (GMT+3) / https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/408953

Paratroopers at the Western Wall in Jerusalem, June 1967© GPO/David Rubinger

Paratroopers at the Western Wall in Jerusalem, June 1967© GPO/David Rubinger

 

First a brief note on the name of this day. Too many people call this day Yom Yerushalayim, the Day of Jerusalem, or more idiomatically Jerusalem Day.

 

A terrible name! The appellation “Yom Yerushalayim” appears once in the Tanach:

 

“Remember, O Hashem, to the sons of Edom, יוֹם יְרוּשָׁלִַם, the Day of Jerusalem, when they said Destroy1 Destroy! To its very foundations!” (Psalms 137:7). Yom Yerushalayim is the day that Jerusalem was destroyed. The day that Israel liberated Jerusalem 57 years ago is far better called יוֹם חֵרוּת יְרוּשָׁלַיִם or יוֹם שִׁחְרוּר יְרוּשָׁלַיִם, Jerusalem Liberation Day.

 

And now, having clarified the name of this day:

 

We have an ancient and well-established tradition of reading one chapter of Pirkei Avot (Chapters of the Fathers, or more idiomatically Ethics of the Fathers) each Shabbat from Pesach to Shavuot. Jerusalem Liberation Day falls on the 28th of Iyyar, and on the preceding Shabbat we invariably read chapter 5.

 

This includes an observation on miracles:

 

“Ten miracles were done for our ancestors in Egypt, and ten at the Red Sea” (Pirkei Avot 5:4).

 

It is intuitive that the ten miracles in Egypt were the Ten Plagues; yet all of the major commentators (the Rambam, Rabbi Ovadia of Bartenura, Rabbeinu Yonah of Gerona, Tosfot Yomtov, Tiferet Yisrael, among others) agree that the ten miracles in Egypt were not the ten plagues in and of themselves, but rather that in each case we were saved from the plagues.

 

Only thus did G-d demonstrate not only that He controls nature, but that He controls nature for the sake of the Jewish People.

 

Though Pirkei Avot does not specify which ten miracles were wrought at the Red Sea, various Midrashim (Tanchuma, Beshallach 10 and Mechilta de-Rabbi Yishmael, Beshallach 5 among others) enumerate them:

 

The Sea was split for them, and became a dome covering them;

It was divided into ten channels, as G-d said to Moshe, “Stretch forth your hand over the sea and divide it” (Exodus 14:16);

It became completely dry, so they would not even get their feet muddy, as it says, “…and the children of Israel walked on dry ground” (ibid 14:29);

It became like thick, muddy clay, miring the Egyptians, as it says, “You trampled them in the sea with Your horses, with clay of mighty waters” (Habakkuk 3:15);

The waters crumbled as it says, “You crumbled the sea with Your might” (Psalms 74:13);

The waters became piles of rocks against which the Egyptians were smashed, as it says, “He smashed the sea serpents’ heads against the water” (ibid);

The water was cut into pieces, as it says, “To He Who cut the sea into pieces” (ibid 136:13);

The water was heaped into piles, as it says, “At the wind of Your nostrils the waters were heaped up” (Exodus 15:8);

It became a solid wall, as it says, “The flowing waters stood erect like a solid wall” (ibid);

Sweet water flowed out from the midst of the salt water for them, and the water froze, becoming like a glass jug, as it says, “The deep waters froze” (ibid).

 

So far, so easy to understand. G-d wrought ten miracles for our ancestors while they were yet in Egypt, and another ten at the Red Sea, and all were open, clear miracles which no observer could deny.

 

But Pirkei Avot continues: “Ten miracles were wrought for our forefathers in the Holy Temple:

 

No woman ever miscarried due to the aroma of the meat of the sacrifices;

The meat of the sacrifices never rotted;

No fly was ever seen in the place where the sacrificial meat was butchered;

No nocturnal emission ever happened to the Kohen Gadol (High Priest) on Yom Kippur [which would have rendered him impure and unfit for Temple service];

The rains never extinguished the fire of the wood-pile on the Altar;

The wind never disturbed the vertical column of smoke [arising from the Altar];

No disqualifying defect was ever found in the Omer or in the two Loaves [for Shavuot] or in the Showbread;

Though the people were crowded together when they stood, they had sufficient space to prostrate themselves full-length on the ground;

No snake or scorpion ever injured anyone in Jerusalem;

And no one ever said to his fellow, The place is too small for me to overnight in Jerusalem” (5:5).

In this list there is no single event that is miraculous in and of itself. The Jew who made the tri-annual pilgrimage to Jerusalem would not have gazed in awe at a pregnant woman not miscarrying from the aroma of the roasting meat of the sacrifices; no Jew would have been awestruck at seeing meat which had not rotted, or been overwhelmed at not seeing a fly around the meat-hooks set in the sides of the cedar-wood blocks on the eight stone benches to the north of the Altar or on the adjacent marble tables where the carcasses were flayed.

 

Similarly, the fact that the Kohen Gadol did not suffer a nocturnal emission on a specific Yom Kippur, or that the rain on any given Festival did not extinguish the fire of the wood-pile on the Altar, or that no disqualifying defect was found in the Omer or in the two Loaves or in the Showbread in a given year was not an open miracle. After all, how likely was it for any of these events to occur?

 

But after a total of 830 years (410 for the first Holy Temple and 420 for the second), the pattern would have become undeniable. For sure, the individual pilgrim who spent a week or two in Jerusalem without being bitten by a snake or stung by a scorpion would not have seen anything miraculous. But when no pilgrim – uncountable millions of Jews through those centuries – was ever harmed thus throughout 830 years of pilgrimages to Jerusalem, then the miracle becomes undeniable.

 

Just as the Ten Plagues and the Splitting of the Red Sea were physically impossible, so too the perfect functioning of all these systems of the Holy Temple without even a single mishap over 830 years was statistically impossible.

 

The fact that Pirkei Avot uses the identical phraseology – “ten miracles were wrought for our forefathers” – both for the open, revealed miracles in Egypt and at the Red Sea and also for the hidden, “mundane” miracles in the Holy Temple, suggests that the Mishnah places them on the same level, regards them as equally miraculous.

 

This year 5785 (2025) marks 58 years since the Six Day War, and Monday 28th Iyyar (26th May) is celebrated as Jerusalem Liberation Day, the day that the paratroopers liberated Jerusalem and restored it to Jewish sovereignty for the first time since the Roman general Pompey invaded Jerusalem in 63 B.C.E. and installed Hyrcanus as High Priest and vassal king of Rome.

 

In many ways the Six Day War straddles the boundary between hidden miracles and revealed miracles:

 

Israel was surrounded by a vast military coalition of Arab and Muslim states, whose stated purpose was to exterminate Israel and the Jews therein. Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Algeria, Morocco, Libya, Kuwait, Tunisia, Sudan, and Pakistan outnumbered, outgunned, and outmanned Israel on four borders. The sole neutral border was with the Mediterranean Sea, into which the Arab armies had vowed to push Israel.

 

Many of the individual battles which Israel won can be explained rationally: Israel enjoyed specific tactical advantages – shorter supply-lines, superior communications, a fortuitous wind in the Sinai Desert which raised a dust-storm at just the right moment, the rising sun dazzling the Egyptian soldiers on the morning of the first day of the war, the setting sun dazzling the Jordanian soldiers that evening, Egyptian soldiers who were unable to read the instructions for their missiles and were therefore unable to fire them…the list goes on.

 

But the statistical likelihood of all these events occurring by pure happenstance is vanishingly tiny.

 

Israel had zero margin for error.

Hostile Jordanian forces stationed in the centre of Jerusalem (half of which was under illegal Jordanian occupation) and throughout Judea and Samaria, reinforced with Iraqi and Saudi divisions, were poised to sweep across Israel from east to west, to link-up with the Egyptian army, reinforced with Libyan, Algerian, and Tunisian divisions, preparing to invade from the south-west.

 

Meanwhile the Syrian Army, reinforced with Iraqi, Libyan, Yemeni, and Saudi divisions, was preparing to attack from the north and then sweep through the country to link-up with the other Arab forces in the Tel Aviv region.

 

Had any Arab army – any one at all – won even one single land battle, then Israel would have been destroyed. Israel had no strategic depth, no opportunity to recover from a single lost battle.

 

Under those circumstances, Israel’s very survival was precarious, to say the least.

 

The Israel Army made enormous mistakes during the Six Day War at every level, from the overall planning (or lack thereof) to general strategy to battlefield tactics, failures of command, breakdown of coordination between different units, breaches of discipline, and in several other areas. But all these errors were – again miraculously – not enough to lose Israel even a single battle, let alone the entire war.

 

And ultimately, Israel’s victory was so impressive, so overwhelming, so dazzling, that all those myriad mistakes became mere footnotes in the history books.

 

And when future historians will come to write of our era, they will discover another hidden miracle:

 

Throughout the decades since the Six Day War, every government of Israel has tried with all their might to get rid of those parts of Israel which the Army liberated during that war. On the 11th of Sivan 5727 (19th June 1967), just nine days after the war finished, Israel declared that she was willing to withdraw from the Golan Heights, the Sinai Desert (including the Gaza Strip), and Judea and Samaria (the “West Bank”) in return for peace treaties, normalisation of relations with the Arab states, and guarantee of navigation through the Straits of Tiran.

 

The Arab response was expressed in the Khartoum Conference two months later: “No peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, no negotiations with it”.

 

Israeli governments ever since have pleaded, begged, cajoled Arab countries to take back the territories that they lost in the Six Day War. Successive Israeli governments (the present one no less than previous ones) have yearned to give away the Temple Mount – Judaism’s holiest site – to anyone who was willing to talk to them: the PLO, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the UN, the Arab League, the European Union, Switzerland, the Vatican, the Organisation of Islamic Conference – anyone.

 

Decades of political chicanery, secret discussions, Israel’s most brilliant and experienced diplomats, negotiations, classified agreements, more secret discussions, Israeli government officials pleading with the USA to enforce some kind of agreement – and in spite of all these massive efforts by successive Israeli governments, the Temple Mount and the entire Old City of Jerusalem remains under Israeli sovereignty.

 

It is a miracle no less than the miracles which the Mishnah records were wrought for our forefathers in the Holy Temple that the Temple Mount is still under Israeli control and sovereignty. True, it does not seem miraculous that any one of the Israeli government’s attempts to give away the Temple Mount failed: after all, international diplomacy is a history filled with failures.

 

But the statistical likelihood that after well over half-a-century of non-stop appeals by the Israeli government to give away the Temple Mount not one foreign power would ever accept is vanishingly tiny.

 

The Six Day War was indisputably a series of miracles. And the aftermath – well over half-a-century – has been a series of miracles no less.

 

TOP


chabad-org-logo

The Rebbe on the Six-Day War

August 12, 1967

as recalled by Chaim Gutnik
Courtesy of MeaningfulLife.com https://www.chabad.org/therebbe/article_cdo/aid/357101/jewish/The-Rebbe-on-the-Six-Day-War.htm

A Lubavitcher dons Tefillin with an Israeli soldier

A Lubavitcher dons Tefillin with an Israeli soldier

 

The following is a transcript of the Rebbe‘s remarks given in a private meeting on Av 5, 5727 (August 12, 1967), shortly after the Six-Day War, as recalled by Rabbi Chaim Gutnick of Melbourne, Australia, and published (in Hebrew) in Kfar Chabad Magazine, issue no. 806:

 

…Three times in our generation, G‑d has granted us an opportunity for the beginning of the Redemption. But these opportunities were missed, and it is the Jewish leadership which is to blame.

 

The first opportunity was in 1948. You know that I have a particular enthusiasm for Rashi‘s commentary on the Torah. Well, Rashi says regarding the waters of the Flood that, at first, G‑d brought down “rains of blessing”1 upon them and waited to see if they would repent; only after they failed to do so did this turn into the very opposite of “rains of blessing,” G‑d forbid.2

 

In 1948, G‑d sent “rains of blessing.” This was a time when even the Russians supported the Jewish people against the British, who had attempted to annihilate the nation of Israel. This was a time of opportunity. But the Jewish leaders stood by and debated whether or not to make mention of G‑d’s name in the “Declaration of Establishment.”3 Thus the Redemption was put off by fifty years.

 

The second opportunity was the Sinai Campaign [of 1956]. If the Jewish people would have believed that their salvation would come from G‑d rather than from French MIGs and British warplanes, all would have been different.

 

But never has there been an opportunity such as this one. This was a war won by Torah and mitzvot. There can be no doubt of this. A Jew in Moscow recited Psalms, and a Jew in Buffalo, New York, put on tefillin, and this helped the Jews defeat their enemies in the Land of Israel.

 

If the Jewish leaders would have utilized the opportunity to rouse the people to the observance of Torah and mitzvot, our situation today would be entirely different. Think about it: a young man in Israel was summoned, handed an Uzi, and told: “Leave your wife and children at home and go to El-Arish to fight.” In every war there are draft-dodgers; here, no Jew, not even one for whom the word “Jew” is nothing more than an appellation, refused to fight. It was a time when the entire people of Israel were in a state of “We shall do and we shall hear.”4 When this young man fought at El-Arish, his Torah and mitzvot fought for him. The Shechinah (Divine Presence) came down into the trenches to assist the soldier fighting on the borders of the Land of Israel.

 

If the Jewish leaders would have told that soldier to utilize the reserves of faith and courage that were revealed in him during the war toward a commitment to Torah and mitzvot, with the same “We shall do and we shall hear,” he, and the entire Jewish nation, would have responded, and everything would have been different. But again the leaders were silent, and the great opportunity was lost. They were too timid to tell the Jew the truth: that this is the time for a return to Torah.

 

The very first chapter of the first section of the Shulchan Aruch (Code of Jewish Law) begins not with Maimonides‘ “Thirteen Principles of Faith,” but with the Rama‘s ruling that “One should not be intimidated by mockers.” Why? Because when one does not fulfill this rule, one is prevented from fulfilling the entire Shulchan Aruch. Perhaps I speak too sharply, but the Jewish leadership is bankrupt. They avoid me because they know that I will demand of them to speak the truth. Their timidness to speak the truth, contrary to the rule, “One should not be intimidated by mockers,” is holding back the Redemption.

 

Jews must be told to keep Torah and mitzvot. I initiated the tefillin campaign—this is only the beginning. My hope is that through the mitzvah of tefillin, the Jewish people will be brought closer to other mitzvot—to keep kosher and Shabbat, and ultimately the entire Torah. My aim is that millions of additional hands should become tefillin-wearing hands.

 

The Jewish people will respond when spoken to about Torah and mitzvot. Not only teenagers—also forty-year-olds, people advanced and established in their lives, are ready to hear the truth, if only their leaders will speak it to them.

 

We still have not lost the opportunity. It’s still not too late. Now it is August.6 If we will do our job, if the shluchim6 will do their job and tell the world the truth, we can bring the Redemption…

 

Footnotes

1. I.e., beneficial rainfall.

2. Rashi on Genesis 7:12.

3. The Israeli “declaration of independence,” adopted on May 14, 1948. Most of the 37 signatories opposed any mention of G‑d in the document. In the end, they compromised by including an oblique reference to “the rock of Israel” in its last paragraph.

4. Cf. Exodus 24:7.

5. I.e., only two months after the war.

6. “Emissaries”–the men and women dispatched by the Rebbe to Jewish communities in every part of the globe to encourage the observance of Torah.

 

TOP

“The Long Return”


What the Farca-tweet-26June2026-The Long Return
“The Long Return”
I film made by me.
Seen around the world.
Now on X

What the Farca-tweet-26June2026-The Long Return

What the Farca-tweet-26June2026-The Long Return

 

 

TOP

Be careful with what you say about Eretz HaKodesh (the Land of Israel).


Rabbi Shalom Arush-Breslev English-tweet-13August2026-Be careful with what you say about Eretz HaKodesh
Rabbi Aharon teaches us to be careful with what you say about Eretz HaKodesh (the Land of Israel).

1st story:

Rav Yosef Eichler z”ל, one of the first attendants of Rabbi Aharon of Belz zt”l, related:

Once, on an exceptionally hot summer day, one of the Tel Aviv Rebbes came to visit Rabbi Aharon. He was seated in his usual holy manner, wrapped in a tilip (a fur-trimmed bekeshe [Shabbat coat]) as though it were the middle of winter.

The guest remarked, “It is extremely hot outside! The Rebbe should remove his Tilip.” Rabbi Aharon replied, “It is a bit warm, but this warmth is necessary for the fruits of Eretz Yisrael so that they should grow well.”

After the guest departed, Rabbi Aharon commented, “One must be careful not to speak negatively about Eretz Yisrael. The Meraglim [Spies] spoke negatively about Eretz Yisrael.”

https://worldofbelz.org/rebbes/rabbi-aharon-of-belz/

2nd story:

Rabbi Aharon of Belz zt’’l used to eat his daily meal late at night, which also included a fruit compote composed of fruits from Eretz Yisrael. From time to time, Maran asked his attendant Reb Yitzchok Landau if he was sure the fruits were from Eretz Yisrael. (For those days, obtaining fruits grown in Eretz Yisrael was hard). And he answered that the fruit was from Eretz Yisrael.

Once, in the middle of eating the compote, Rabbi Aharon spoke as to himself, within earshot of his attendant, saying, “What significance is it to me if I don’t know if I’m eating fruits from Eretz Yisrael, though you can’t compare, but the Ari HaKadosh zt’’l was stringent to eat fruits from Eretz Yisrael every day.”

One day, R’ Yitzchok obtained an apple he knew was grown in Eretz Yisrael. He was excited to cook the apple compote and served it to Rabbi Aharon. When Rabbi Aharon asked if it was a fruit from Eretz Yisrael, R’ Yitzchok confidently answered, “Yes! Without a doubt!”

Rabbi Aharon asked him, “How are you sure it’s from Eretz Yisrael?” R’ Yitzchok replied, “Because you can tell on the apples that they’re small and green.” (In those days, growth was stunted in Eretz Yisrael.)

Rabbi Aharon was startled and agitated by his response. Rabbi Aharon couldn’t bear hearing unfavorable words about Eretz Yisrael’s fruits, and he reproached R’ Yitzchok, saying, “How do you dare speak badly on fruits from Eretz Yisrael?”

Rabbi Aharon told R’ Yitzchok to repeat together with him three times, “It’s big, it’s nice, it’s red, and it’s sweet.”

And only after that Rabbi Aharon was able to calm down.

https://worldofbelz.org/chassidishe_story/%d7%98%d7%95%d7%91%d7%94-%d7%94%d7%90%d7%a8%d7%a5-%d7%9e%d7%90%d7%93-%d7%9e%d7%90%d7%93-%d7%a9%d7%9c%d7%97-%d7%99%d7%93%d7%96-2/

Rabbi Shalom Arush-Breslev English-tweet-13August2026-Be careful with what you say about Eretz HaKodesh

Rabbi Shalom Arush-Breslev English-tweet-13August2026-Be careful with what you say about Eretz HaKodesh

 

TOP


breslev-magazine-co-il-logo

Jerusalem’s Future Depends on … Us!

Regardless of years of political discourse and negotiations about Jerusalem, her future depends on each of us!

 

Rabbi Lazer Brody / Posted on 20May2025 /  https://breslev.com/266242/

 

Jerusalem’s Future Depends on … Us! by Rabbi Lazer Brody

Jerusalem’s Future Depends on … Us! by Rabbi Lazer Brody

 

In tractate Chagiga 14a, the Talmud teaches us that Yerushalayim wasn’t destroyed until the “men of faith” disappeared. In other words, as long as there were a few people around with emuna, uncompromising faith in Hashem – happy all the time because they’re glad to be alive, happy to be Jews, glad to have Torah and mitzvot, and appreciative of all of Hashem’s blessings – Jerusalem wasn’t destroyed.

 

Hashem created this whole universe for only one reason – emuna, so that people would learn emuna. emuna is the key to the entire creation. Rebbe Nachman of Breslev writes that emuna and Eretz Yisroel are one entity; the security, welfare, and very existence of Israel depend on emuna!

 

Jerusalem is called Kirya Ne’emana – the city of emuna. As such, it was destroyed because of the weakening of emuna. Let’s take a look at the cause of this weakening of emuna. Where did it come from? How did it happen?

 

Let’s look at the Torah in Parshat Shlach, where the meraglim – the twelve spies – return from their reconnaissance mission in Eretz Yisroel. They had to gather as much intelligence on the country as possible, so they toured from south to north and from west to east. After they saw giants, with the exception of Calev ben Yephuneh and Yehoshua (Joshua) bin Nun (the son of Nun), none of the spies – and each one was a leader of his respective tribe – believed that the Jewish people could defeat such adversaries. The emuna of the meraglim had crumbled! They returned to Moshe (Moses) and the Children of Israel encamped in Sinai and totally discouraged the people. That night was Tisha B’Av, the first disastrous Tisha B’Av in our people’s history. The Children of Israel didn’t believe Calev and Yehoshua, but they did believe the ten other spies, which was tantamount to a total lack of faith in Hashem. The people cried all night long.

 

The Talmud teaches us, in tractate Sota 35a, that Hashem said to the children of Israel, “You’re crying tonight for nothing? I’ll make sure that you cry for generations to come!”

 

That was the first Tisha B’Av. Subsequently, Tisha B’Av witnessed the destruction of the 1st and 2nd temples, the fall of Beitar, the expulsion from Spain in 1492, and the beginning of the Holocaust and other disasters.

 

Something seems to be wrong here. Hashem runs the world according to the ATFAT principle, A Turn For A Turn. That’s how Hashem educates us. So we have to ask, If we cried for only one night, why did we have to suffer on Tisha B’av ever since? Is that fair? Is that ATFAT? Where’s the proportion here?

 

Let’s try to understand. First of all, crying for nothing demonstrates a complete lack of emuna. Crying and complaining on the way out of Egypt evidenced extreme insensitivity. Hashem performed phenomenal miracles for the children of Israel in Egypt and on the way out. He fed, clothed, and provided health care for millions of people in the desert for forty years! Imagine the size of the budget necessary to care for so many people for so many years. Look at the difficulty the US Government had in care for 800,000 homeless people after hurricane Katrina; and that was for less than a year in the “Land of Opportunity” with all its riches, resources, and modern technology! Now think about what Hashem did for so many more people for 40 years in the world’s biggest wasteland. There’s hardly anything in Sinai but sand, rocks and mountains!

 

Let’s take a closer look at Hashem’s miracles. The ten plagues hit the Egyptians selectively, without harming a hair on a Jewish head. Look what Hashem did to the entire Egyptian Army when He split the Red Sea. During the 40 years in the desert, Hashem personally fed and clothed over 2 million Jews. Not a single person died from a scorpion bite or anything similar.

 

So, instead of thanking Hashem for these incredible miracles, the people complained. “Hashem wants to send us to some dangerous place . . . these giants are going to kill us!”  They voiced all kinds of complaints, and even worse, they had a sour attitude. This was not simply a lack of gratitude; it was amnesia and a lack of faith!

 

Suppose the children of Israel had looked at their world through emuna eyes. They would have said, “Baruch Hashem. Hashem has taken care of us until now; He will continue to do so in the future!” Instead they cried out and complained.

 

Doesn’t this sound terrible? Guess what, the root of ignorance, ingratitude and complaint is still in us. In every generation, it sprouts more poisonous shoots of lack of faith.

 

The future of Yerushalayim doesn’t depend on Israeli or American politicians. It depends on us, whether or not we make ourselves anshei amana, people of faith. If each of us makes a concerted effort to strengthen his or her emuna and replace complaints with praises to Hashem for all the wonderful blessings He bestows on us, we will be doing our part to strengthen Yerushalayim and hasten the full redemption of our people and the rebuilding of the Beit HaMikdash. Amen.

 

TOP


israpundit-org-logo

Stories of Immigration and Absorption

15May2026 https://www.israpundit.org/stories-of-immigration-and-absorption/

By Ari Bussel

Translated by Peloni

 

I come from a family of immigrants, half of them illegal immigrants for they broke the British Mandate over Palestine: My mother arrived through the illegal “Aliyah Bet” immigration from Europe, from the DP (Displaced Persons) Camps after the Second World War. My father arrived to the State of Israel exactly two years after Israel’s rebirth.

 

My father’s father fought the Nazis in General Anders’ Polish Army, and at the end of the war found himself in Italy, from where he joined his brother in New York. The two brothers lived in Manhattan, one with his wife in Upper East Side and the other with his second wife (the first was murdered during the Holocaust) in Upper West Side, this until the end of their lives.

 

Even before the Second World War, part of the family on my mother’s side (Edelson, Gordon, …) emigrated to the United States, and today, a hundred years later, the family numbers five generations, an enormous and sprawling tree. My great aunt married the love of her life in Chicago during the Great Depression, and at their wedding a full orchestra played, something that cost five dollars. Since then they wandered westward and settled in Los Angeles.

 

When young Israel turned to adulthood (in human years), the Israeli part of the family continued on to the United States, where I was born. My life story is almost entirely in the United States. The only debt I had to repay, according to my grandmother, was military service in the IDF. My grandmother who survived both the Nazis and the Soviets claimed: “Even if you were not born, did not live, and will not live in the country, this is your debt and your duty.” That is what she said, and that is how it was.

 

During my military service, my girlfriend and I were both officers, but in different branches of General Headquarters, and Dagnit was one rank higher than me. When I completed my service and returned to the United States, our paths parted. Three decades later, we met at the opening event of a Christian Media Summit in Jerusalem — I as one of the conference invitees who arrived from about fifty countries, and Dagnit as Director General of the Ministry of Immigration and Absorption among those welcoming us.

 

Dagnit’s parents belong to the community that immigrated to Israel from India (from them I learned, for example, to eat amba; also the respect to one’s vocation and to public service). Like Dganit’s and my backgrounds, immigration and absorption are not unusual for any Israeli – for modern Israel is a country made up of an amazing tapestry of people who for two millennia craved to return to their homeland and finally gathered and came.

 

Several years passed since our encounter, and I just read an article announcing that Dganit had been selected for the position once again, because of her rich experience and the acute need for a functioning ministry, especially due to the increase in Antisemitism around the world in the past two and a half years and the need to be prepared to absorb massive waves of immigrants.

 

Israel in the past dealt with waves of immigration. The older generations will remember the tent transit-camps, all the communities that arrived from Arab countries from which they were expelled, as well as the Survivors of the inferno that burned everything to the ground in Europe.

 

The middle generation will remember the Russian immigration (and the development of the city of Rishon LeZion into one of the largest cities in the country because of it, as well as Avigdor Lieberman’s unexpected electoral success; where he reamins to this very day) and the Ethiopian immigration and its unique difficulties.

 

The younger generation is aware of the immigration from France (after the immigrants bought apartments in Eilat and in the coastal cities, most of them returned to France, knowing that in time of need they would be able to escape comfortably to Israel) and perhaps that from Argentina (which did not quite reach Israel — those fleeing Argentina stopped and became “stuck” in Miami or Spain).

 

Modern Israel just celebrated its 78th birthday. If a generation is generally accepted to last 25 years, then three generation-lengths have experienced different groups of immigrants and have dealt differently with each. There is one common denominator though: The children born in Israel are all Israelis, and everyone who served in the IDF was forged into a most extraordinary mold and has become an Israeli through and through.

 

Fighting Antisemitism

If immigration and the birth pangs of absorption are not new to the Israeli landscape, certainly Antisemitism is very well known to every Jew wherever he may be throughout the world. For very many centuries we have been the scapegoats, experienced persecution and hated simply because we are Jews.

 

In recent years people in Israel have been very interested in “antisemitism” and in the outbursts that we feel abroad. Like everything in Israel, everyone is an expert in everything, especially in things about which they do not know the first thing. I cannot forget one of the official delegations that arrived in Los Angeles “to learn” about Antisemitism on the ground. They were not interested to hear, see or learn a thing. They knew everything in advance, before even stepping foot in the Tom Bradley International Terminal at LAX. When we sat in the yard of a private home in North Beverly Hills with members of the delegation and local hosts, they simply dismissed with contempt the descriptions of what happens in high schools and even elementary schools against Jewish students. It did not match their idea of “antisemitism” or what they “knew.” They were so arrogant until the moment the dam burst. Parent after parent confessed what their children experience.

 

Did anything sink in?

The Israelis came, investigated, were impressed, ignored, and returned full to the brim with old knowledge and impressions that had nothing to do with what is really happening on the ground; all they had before the visit. And what was done with this knowledge? Nothing. Was there continuity to those visits? Of course not. Good money and great effort thrown away without benefit. The main thing was that it was determined — as had been known in advance — that there is “antisemitism” and therefore more and more programs and government offices that do nothing need to be budgeted.

 

Therefore, when I met Dagnit I asked whether her Ministry had contingency plans for absorbing sudden, massive immigration, one that is not voluntary but forced by circumstances. Dagnit understands contingency plans; like me, she served in the GHQ, and in the IDF one prepares and trains for every scenario. At least that was how it was in our time. I hoped that at minimum, at a certain point she would remember that inquiry of mine, because when something is recorded somewhere in our gray cells, and at another time it is mentioned once again, perhaps even in another context, and once again etc., eventually the person will relate to the issue as though the person had invented it at that very moment.

 

Years before, I raised exactly the same issue in writing as well as in a chance meeting with the ministry’s Director General and members of his entourage who arrived at the Herzliya Conference. Antisemitism was not very popular then, and the ministry, like every other government office, did not like additional work or ideas that could lead to it. Most likely I was dismissed as a foreign correspondent who knew not what he was asking (at that time, no one cared about “antisemitism”).

 

Writers write, report, tell and warn, and nothing is done. We warned about the preparations of the Radwan Force to invade and conquer the Galilee and beyond, as well as about what looked like tunnels being dug, but this was all dismissed. Hamas-ISIS implemented the same, as they did a few years ago with the abduction of one Gilad Shalit. We wrote and warned of the arrival of the Turkish terror flotilla to liberate Gaza, only to sit later at the National Inquiry into the Mavi Marmara and the lynching of Israeli navy seals and hear the Chief of General Staff gives testimony that if he had to do it again, he would act differently. Likewise in the USA, colleagues of ours went into mosques in NYC and warned about what was taking place there, but nobody bothered to pay attention. It sounded too crazy, until 9/11 happened.

 

A day will come when the State of Israel will have to deal with sudden, massive immigration, not voluntary but forced by circumstances, and then Israel will apparently find herself unprepared, as though this were a blow that fell from the skies and was impossible to prepare for or foresee in advance. As though the signs were not there, and all the warning lights had not flashed with full force for a long time.

 

On that day, apparently, it will be very unpleasant and uncomfortable. There will be no surplus budgets. There will be no available person-power. There will be no operational plans, contingency plans, training, table-top exercises or past experience. We will need to improvise, invent, innovate, and cope. If the transit tent-camps of the past left the society with a deep scar, imagine what will happen when the Jews of Britain or New York or Los Angeles arrive. (In Los Angeles alone there are about a million Jews and Israelis, and we are spoiled and lazy and not used to hardships.) Without their property. With virtually nothing except their lives.

 

For those who say, “This is not realistic, this is utterly impossible, this simply will not happen:” The Jews of France also thought so. The Jews of Argentina too. Yes — also all the enlightened Jews in Warsaw (from where my father came) or in Germany a hundred years ago. In 1978 the Israelis in Tehran were evacuated by jumbojets sent by the State of Israel. The Iranian Jews found their way through Italy and England to “Tehrangeles.” Almost all of them left with nothing; only their lives did they manage to save.

 

Israel is not prepared, as preparations seem to be an unnecessary burden. This will cost us dearly.

Ari Bussel

May, 2026
Ceasefire of the “The Lion’ Roar” War
Los Angeles, Iyar 5786

 

TOP

Before the 1948 War

Israel created a State under the noses of the British Mandate for Palestine before World War 2

20 Iyar: Mt. Scopus Hospital (1939)

The Hadassah University Hospital and Medical Center was opened on Mt. Scopus, Jerusalem. The hospital, designed by renowned Bauhaus architect Erich Mendelssohn, opened as a modern, 300-bed academic medical facility.

 

21 Iyar: Kfar Chabad Established (1949)

The Chabad-Lubavitch village in Israel, Kfar Chabad, was founded by the sixth Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Yosef Yitzchak Schneersohn, on Iyar 21 of 1949. The first settlers were mostly recent immigrants from the Soviet Union, survivors of the terrors of World War II and Stalinist oppression. Kfar Chabad, which is located about five miles south of Tel Aviv and includes agricultural lands as well as numerous educational institutions, serves as the headquarters of the Chabad-Lubavitch Chassidic movement in the Holy Land.

 

28 Sivan: Rebbe Arrives in US (1941)

After escaping Nazi-occupied Paris, and many perilous months in Vichy France, the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson (1902-1994), and his wife, Rebbetzin Chaya Mushka (1901-1988), boarded the SS Serpa Pinto in Lisbon, Portugal. On Monday, June 23–Sivan 28 on the Jewish calendar–at 10:30 A.M., they arrived in New York.

 

Shortly after his arrival, the Rebbe’s father-in-law, the then Lubavitcher Rebbe Rabbi Yosef Yitzchak Schneersohn (who had been rescued from Nazi-occupied Warsaw in 1940), appointed him to head the social and educational outreach programs of Chabad-Lubavitch. Thus the Rebbe began his decades-long revolutionary work to revitalize Jewish life in the Western Hemisphere, which spread, by means of the emissaries (“shluchim”) he dispatched from his New York headquarters, to every part of the world.

 

Links:
Inspiring the Jewish American Revolution
World Jewry Thrives Seven Decades After Rebbe’s U.S. Arrival

 

 

 


Honest Reporting New Logo

What Was the Land of Israel Like Before 1948?

Looking at the geographical and geopolitical landscape in the twenty-first century, the Land of Israel before 1948 is almost unrecognizable When we see modern-day Israel – an ultra-modern country of more than 9 million citizens…

David Brummer 27February2020 12:00 am https://honestreporting.com/land-of-israel-before-1948/

Israel before 1948-The city of Jaffa around the year 1900

Israel before 1948-The city of Jaffa around the year 1900

Looking at the geographical and geopolitical landscape in the twenty-first century, the Land of Israel before 1948 is almost unrecognizable

 

When we see modern-day Israel – an ultra-modern country of more than 9 million citizens – it is often difficult to conceptualize what the country was like before 1948. Looking at the skylines of many of Israel’s cities, with gleaming, shiny multi-story office blocks, apartment buildings – and increasingly skyscrapers (at least in Tel Aviv), the geographical landscape is utterly unrecognizable.

 

The changes and differences, however, do not end there. Before David Ben Gurion, the first Prime Minister of Israel, announced Israel’s Declaration of Independence on May 14, 1948, 600,000 Jews lived in the land. According to estimates, approximately one-fifth – or up to 120,000 Jews were living in Jerusalem – the newly-declared capital of the nascent state. Approximately 2,000 Jews lived within Jerusalem’s 500-year-old city walls – as they had done for legitimately centuries – certainly since the return from exile in Babylon in the 6th century BCE.

 

Outside of Jerusalem, Jews were widely dispersed across Mandate Palestine. Approximately half of the remaining 480,000 Jews living in the country – 244,000 people – lived in the Tel Aviv area. The city’s first Jewish neighborhood – Neve Tzedek – was only established in 1887, the result of a lottery of an initial 60 families; and a need for space in Jaffa, a majority Arab town at the time. Tel Aviv itself was established in 1909. Prior to the civil war between Palestine’s Jews and Arabs in 1947-48 and then the international conflict that followed Israel’s Declaration of Independence, the land was sparsely populated.

 

Israel Zangwill, a Jewish British novelist and playwright (and someone deeply involved in the women’s rights movement, wrote a series of articles early in his career, in which he described Palestine as “a wilderness… a stony desolation… a deserted home” and a land that had “gone to ruin.”

 

A popular view of the country at the time was that Palestine was a “land without a people, waiting for a people without a land.” That is not entirely accurate – as there were obviously people populating Palestine, but they were not organized in a way that even gave the impression of a functioning country. It was an administrative backwater of the rapidly crumbling Ottoman Empire, which ruled the region for 400 years and did barely anything to develop it.

The Arabs in the Holy Land

But what of the local Arab population?

 

By the end of Ottoman rule, there were several thousand living in Jerusalem, and as for the rest – for the most part, they were widely dispersed – mostly in villages and small towns – throughout Judea and Samaria and the Galilee. During the Ottoman period, most lived as tenant farmers in a somewhat feudal system with landowners, but some lived in towns such as Gaza, Hebron, Haifa and elsewhere.

 

At the end of the 19th century there were stirrings of Arab nationalism, which included wealthier Palestinian Arabs urging Turkish authorities not to allow Jewish refugees and pioneers from settling in the country.

 

One of the most vexing questions – or issues – today, is the notion that somehow all Palestinian Arabs were unceremoniously expelled from their land – or at the very least denied appropriate remuneration for it. That is simply not the case. It was only in 1856 that the Ottomans had passed a law allowing foreigners to buy land in the empire under the tanzimat reforms, which were a belated and somewhat half-hearted attempt at permitting people to feel part of the state by giving them rights.

 

By 1881, the Ottomans began banning land purchases by Jews and Christians, also declaring that Jews were still permitted to immigrate to the Ottoman Empire – but with the exception of Palestine. As with so many functions of Turkish rule, official declarations made in Constantinople, were much diluted when it came to Palestine.

 

The legal path to Jewish acquisition of land in Palestine remained open, and the Yishuv made the most of the opportunity. Arabs were willing to sell to wealthy Jews – such as Moses Montefiore or Baron Edmond de Rothschild – often at inflated prices. The Jewish National Fund was also able to purchase large tracts of land from the Ottomans and much of this was utilized by an enduring legacy of the Second Aliyah (1904-1914); namely the kibbutz movement. The records for those who would wish to open their eyes to see them are clear.

 

Palestine’s main port was Jaffa, the major point of entry in the Land of Israel before 1948. In the late 1920s, the British developed Haifa as a deep-sea port, attempting to take advantage of the oil found in Persia prior to the outbreak of World War I.

 

It seems ironic now that the Arab Revolt between 1936-1939 – a violent nationalist Palestinian Arab uprising, in part to protest growing Jewish immigration – led to the development of Tel Aviv as a port. The use of Jaffa was considered too precarious, and an effort to effect systemic change in the country, not for the first time, backfired massively on those it was intended to help. Palestine’s Jews meanwhile, continued to build the infrastructure of a potential state, acquiring land, investing in water technology, continuing to develop the Hebrew language and attempting to create a civic society that would be essential in the future.

 

The civic society of the Jewish part of Mandate Palestine,  known as the Yishuv, included functioning quasi-governmental institutions. The Yishuv’s position was complex – it had to grapple constantly with fluctuating fortunes with regard to the British and their attempts to play Palestinian Arabs and Jews against each other.

 

A crucial moment arrived in November 1917 with the Balfour Declaration; a hard-won acknowledgment, from an imperial superpower, of the Jews’ long historical connection to the Land of Israel  and which, despite its (possibly deliberate) ambiguity, seemed to guarantee a homeland for the Jewish people. Other imperial powers also discussed the fate of Yishuv, particularly in April 1920 in the Italian town of San Remo. Britain, France, Italy and Japan convened to discuss the division of the land that had been held by the Ottoman Empire.

 

Palestinian Arabs were infuriated that as a result of this, the Jews would have a national home in Palestine. Their response – as was so often the case – and in a pattern that has repeated for more than a century – was to react with violence. The riots in Jaffa in 1921 began to see a more coordinated Jewish defense, manifested in the creation of the Haganah.

 

In 1922, the Yishuv was dealt a further blow as Winston Churchill, who had until then been seen as a friend to the Zionist cause, decided to redraw the map of the Middle East. He cleaved away the portion of Palestine that was east of the Jordan River and created the country of Transjordan (later known as just Jordan).

 

The Jewish state that the Yishuv thought it would receive at the Mandate’s end would now be 75% smaller than they had been led to think. It would shrink further still in the decades to come, although they could not have known it at the time. However, despite this massive setback, the overarching goal of achieving a state was still central to the Zionist cause. Ben-Gurion and others were pragmatic enough to understand what that would mean and what that would cost.

 

The Rapid Development of Israel Before 1948

The Land of Israel before 1948 was a curious mixture of ancient, slow-moving and traditional ways of life and also a place bursting with pioneering spirit. During the early 20th century, a period when the ossifying Ottoman Empire was still dominant, Jewish immigration and land purchases were increasingly changing a seemingly forgotten place. Jewish immigrants rapidly reinvigorated a land that had barely seen any infrastructure or modernization during a 400-year rule.

 

The physical landscape changed as advancements in water technology – which continued apace during the British Mandate period – particularly, irrigation and the ability to use even brackish water for agriculture, showed that even in the desert, human life could be sustained.

 

In addition, small towns began to grow into cities and new neighborhoods began to spill out from existing conurbations. In that atmosphere, the Hebrew language developed further, used in books, newspapers, radio and theater – a continued resuscitation from the dead. Political organizations were also critical, as the levers of the state – before there was even a state – were exercised on a daily basis. They created the building blocks of the thriving, modern state of Israel that we see today.

 

Enjoyed reading this article? Follow the Israel In Focus page on Facebook to read more articles explaining Israel’s history, politics, and international affairs. Click here to learn more!

 

Image Credit: Israel before 1948

 

TOP

How the Muslims treated the Jews

Hen Mazzig-tweet-3October2023-Israel was established in 1948. But Jews lived in the region for thousands of years.
Israel was established in 1948. But Jews lived in the region for thousands of years.

Before Israel existed, here’s what Jews in the Middle East could NOT do:
1.Could not ride horses
2. Be eye level with Muslims
3. Had to pay tax not to be murdered and pillaged
4. Could not testify against a Muslim in court
5. Could not bear arms
6. Could not move freely after certain hours
7. Couldn’t dress without imposed Jewish symbols (like the yellow stars we saw in the Holocaust.)

In 1941, my grandma survived the Farhud. It was massacre against the Jewish community of Iraq, encouraged by the Nazis. Thousands of Jews were attacked by a mobs, which was backed by the Iraqi government.

My grandma had to flee Iraq – they even took her citizenship. So did with other 150,000 Jews.

Today there are no Jews in Iraq.

They were ethnically cleansed.

This didn’t just happen in Iraq. Jews were ethnically cleansed throughout the Middle East and North Africa.

Almost a million Jew ran for their lives. The only place to take them wasn’t America, or Britain— it was Israel.

Israel saved my Iraqi mother and my Tunisian father.

It will continue to save Jews from everywhere else.

Hen Mazzig-tweet-3October2023--Israel was established in 1948. But Jews lived in the region for thousands of years. <br><br>Before Israel existed, here’s what Jews in the Middle East could NOT do:1.Could not ride horses 2. Be eye level with Muslims 3. Had to pay tax not to be murdered and pillaged 4. Could not testify against a Muslim in court 5. Could not bear arms 6. Could not move freely after certain hours 7. Couldn’t dress without imposed Jewish symbols (like the yellow stars we saw in the Holocaust.) In 1941, my grandma survived the Farhud. It was massacre against the Jewish community of Iraq, encouraged by the Nazis. Thousands of Jews were attacked by a mobs, which was backed by the Iraqi government. My grandma had to flee Iraq - they even took her citizenship. So did with other 150,000 Jews. Today there are no Jews in Iraq. They were ethnically cleansed.

Hen Mazzig-tweet-3October2023–Israel was established in 1948. But Jews lived in the region for thousands of years.

 


 

TOP

How many Arabs lived in “Palestine” before the establishment of the State of Israel?


Dr. Eli David-tweet-27April2024-How many Arabs lived in Palestine before the establishment of the State of Israel
How many Arabs lived in “Palestine” before the establishment of the State of Israel 🇮🇱?

A list of facts with historical sources:

🔸In 1785, Constantine Francois Volney describes the “ruined” and “desolate” state of the country: “We with difficulty recognized Jerusalem… The population is supposed to amount to twelve to fourteen thousands…”

🔸In 1843, Alexander Keith wrote that “in this [Volney’s] day the land had not fully reached its last prophetic degree of desolation and depopulation.”

🔸In 1816, J.S. Buckingham had described Jaffa as “a poor village”, and Ramleh as a place “where, as throughout the greater portion of Palestine, the ruined portion seemed more extensive than that which was inhabited.”

🔸In 1835, Alphonse de Lamartine gave this description: “Outside gates of Jerusalem, we saw indeed no living object, heard no living sound. We found the same void, the same silence as we should have found in the enrombed gates of Pompeii and Herculaneum… a complete, eternal silence resigns in the town, in the highways, in the country… The tomb of a whole people.”

🔸In 1857, the British consul in Palestine, James Finn, reported back to England: “The country is in a considerable degree empty of inhabitants and therefore its greatest need is that of a body of population.”

🔸In 1867, Mark Twain wrote in The Innocents Abroad: “Stirring senses… occur in this valley no more. There is not a solitary village throughout its whole extent – not for thirty miles in either direction.” He goes on to describe Galilee, Judea, and around Jerusalem as deserts devoid of population. And for the country as a whole: “Palestine sits in sackcloth and ashes. Over it broods the spell of a curse that has withered its fields and fettered its energies… Palestine is desolate and unlovely… It is hopeless, dreary, heartbroken land.”

🔸In 1881 (the year designated by Arafat as the beginning of the Zionist “invasion” and “displacement” of the local population), English cartographer Arthur Penrhyn Stanley wrote: “In Judea it is hardly an exaggeration to say that for miles and miles there was no appearance of life or habitation.”

🔸By the third quarter of the 19th century, the total population of the entire country, Arabs and Jews, was only 400,000. Less than 3% of today’s figure.

Dr. Eli David-tweet-27April2024-How many Arabs lived in Palestine before the establishment of the State of Israel

Dr. Eli David-tweet-27April2024-How many Arabs lived in Palestine before the establishment of the State of Israel

 

TOP

Dome of the Rock before the Six Day War-June 1967


Nioh Berg-tweet-29February2024-Dome of the Rock before the Six Day War June 1967
Dome of the Rock, overgrown and in disrepair, long before 1948.

Curious how they never cared about these iconic sites before it became a matter of fighting the Jews.

Nioh Berg-tweet-29February2024-Dome of the Rock before the Six Day War June 1967

Nioh Berg-tweet-29February2024-Dome of the Rock before the Six Day War June 1967

 


 

TOP

The German consulate in the Fast Hotel, 1933. (Wikimedia, Tamar Hayardeni) The Hotel Fast building was abandoned in 1967 and torn down in 1976 to make way for the Dan Pearl Hotel.

The German consulate in the Fast Hotel, 1933. (Wikimedia, Tamar Hayardeni)
The Hotel Fast building was abandoned in 1967 and torn down in 1976 to make way for the Dan Pearl Hotel.

the Jewish Virtual Library. logo https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org

the Jewish Virtual Library. logo https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org

Arab Riots of the 1920’s

by Jacqueline Shields https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/arab-riots-of-the-1920-s

At the end of World War I, discussions commenced on the future of the Middle East, including the disposition of Palestine. On April 19, 1920, the Allies, Britain, France, Italy and Greece, Japan and Belgium, convened in San Remo, Italy to discuss a peace treaty with Turkey. The Allies decided to assign Great Britain the mandate over Palestine on both sides of the Jordan River, and the responsibility for putting the Balfour Declaration into effect. Arab nationalists were unsure how best to react to British authority. The two preeminent Jerusalem clans, the el-Husseinis and the Nashashibis, battled for influence throughout the mandate, as they had for decades before. The former was very anti-British, whereas the latter favored a more conciliatory policy.

 

One of the el-Husseinis, Haj Amin, who emerged as the leading figure in Palestinian politics during the mandate period, first began to organize small groups of suicide groups, fedayeen (“one who sacrifices himself”), to terrorize Jews in 1919 in the hope of duplicating the success of Kemal in Turkey and drive the Jews out of Palestine, just as the Turkish nationalists were driving the Greeks from Turkey. The first large Arab riots took place in Jerusalem in the intermediary days of Passover, April 1920. The Jewish community had anticipated the Arab reaction to the Allies’ convention and was ready to meet it. Jewish affairs in Palestine were then being administered from Jerusalem by the Vaad Hatzirim (Council of Delegates), appointed by the World Zionist Organization (WZO) (which became the Jewish Agency in 1929). The Vaad Hatzirim charged Ze’ev (Vladimir) Jabotinsky with the task of organizing Jewish self-defense. Jabotinsky was one of the founders of the Jewish battalions, which had served in the British Army during the First World War and had participated in the conquest of Palestine from the Turks. Acting under the auspices of the Vaad Hatzirim, Jabotinsky lead the Haganah (self-defense) organization in Jerusalem, which succeeded in repelling the Arab attack. Six Jews were killed and some 200 injured in Jerusalem in the course of the 1920 riots. In addition, two Americans, Jakov Tucker and Ze’ev Scharff, both WWI veterans, were killed resisting an Arab attack on the Jewish settlement of Tel Hai in March 1920. Had it not been for the preliminary organization of Jewish defense, the number of victims would have undoubtedly been much greater.

 

After the riots, the British arrested both Arabs and Jews. Among those arrested was Jabotinsky, together with 19 of his associates, on a charge of illegal possession of weapons. Jabotinsky was sentenced to 15 years imprisonment with hard labor and deportation from the country after completion of his sentence. When the sentence became known, the Vaad Hatzirim made plans for widespread protests, including mass demonstrations and a national fast. Meanwhile, however, the mandate for Palestine had been assigned to Great Britain, and the jubilation of the Yishuv outweighed the desire to protest against the harsh sentence imposed on Jabotinsky and his comrades.

 

With the arrival in Jerusalem of the first High Commissioner, Sir Herbert Samuel, British military government was superseded by a civilian administration. As a gesture toward the civilian population, the High Commissioner proclaimed a general amnesty for both Jews and Arabs who had been involved in the April 1920 riots. Jabotinsky and his comrades were released from prison to an enthusiastic welcome by the Yishuv, but Jabotinsky insisted that the sentence passed against them be revoked entirely, arguing that the defender should not be placed on trial with the aggressor. After months of struggle, the British War Office finally revoked the sentences.

 

In 1921, Haj Amin el-Husseini began to organize larger scale fedayeen to terrorize Jews. Colonel Richard Meinertzhagen, former head of British military intelligence in Cairo, and later Chief Political Officer for Palestine and Syria, wrote in his diary that British officials “incline towards the exclusion of Zionism in Palestine.”

 

BRITISH POLICE officers corral Jewish men during the 1920 Jerusalem riots (photo credit: Wikimedia Commons)

BRITISH POLICE officers corral Jewish men during the 1920 Jerusalem riots
(photo credit: Wikimedia Commons)

In fact, the British encouraged the Arabs to attack the Jews. According to Meinertzhagen, Col. Waters Taylor, financial adviser to the Military Administration in Palestine 1919-23, met with Haj Amin a few days before Easter, in 1920, and told him “he had a great opportunity at Easter to show the world…that Zionism was unpopular not only with the Palestine Administration but in Whitehall and if disturbances of sufficient violence occurred in Jerusalem at Easter, both General Bols [Chief Administrator in Palestine, 1919-20] and General Allenby [Commander of Egyptian Force, 1917-19, then High Commissioner of Egypt] would advocate the abandonment of the Jewish Home. Waters-Taylor explained that freedom could only be attained through violence.”

 

Haj Amin took the Colonel’s advice and instigated a riot. The British withdrew their troops and the Jewish police from Jerusalem, and the Arab mob attacked Jews and looted their shops. Due to Haj Amin’s overt role in instigating the pogrom, the British arrested him. Yet, despite the arrest, Haj Amin escaped to Jordan, but he was sentenced to 10 years imprisonment in absentia. A year later, however, British Arabists convinced High Commissioner Herbert Samuel to pardon Haj Amin and to appoint him Mufti.

 

Samuel met with Haj Amin on April 11, 1921, and was assured “that the influences of his family and himself would be devoted to tranquility.” Three weeks later, however, riots in Jaffa and Petah Tikvah, instigated by the Mufti, left 43 Jews dead. Following these riots England established the Haycraft Commission to evaluate the cause of these riots. The appendix of the report reads, “The fundamental cause of the Jaffa riots and the subsequent acts of violence was a feeling among the Arabs of discontent with, and hostility to, the Jews, due to political and economic causes, and connected with Jewish immigration, and with their conception of Zionist policy as derived from Jewish exponents . . . the Arab majority, who were generally the aggressors, inflicted most of the casualties.”

 

Following these riots, Haj Amin consolidated his power and took control of all Muslim religious funds in Palestine. He used his authority to gain control over the mosques, the schools and the courts. No Arab could reach an influential position without being loyal to the Mufti. As the “Palestinian” spokesman, Haj Amin wrote to Colonial Secretary Winston Churchill in 1921, demanding that restrictions be placed on Jewish immigration and that Palestine be reunited with Syria and Transjordan. Churchill issued the White Paper of 1922, which tried to allay Arab fears about the Balfour Declaration. The White Paper acknowledged the need for Jewish immigration to enable the Jewish community to grow but placed the familiar limit of the country’s absorptive capacity on immigration. Although not pleased with Churchill’s diplomatic Paper, the Zionists accepted it; the Arabs, however, rejected it.

 

Despite the disturbances in 1920-1921, the Yishuv continued to develop in relative peace and security. Another wave of riots, however, broke out in 1924 after another wave of pogrom’s sent 67,000 Polish Jewish refugees to Palestine. After a week of skirmishes in Jerusalem between the Haganah and Arab mobs, 133 Jews and 116 Arabs lay dead. The Yishuv’s main concern at that time was its financial difficulties; the economic crisis of 1926-1928 led many to believe that the Zionist enterprise would fail due to lack of funds. Zionist leaders attempted to rectify the situation by expanding the Jewish Agency to incorporate non-Zionists who were willing to contribute to the practical settlement of Palestine.

 

The prospects for renewed financial support for the Yishuv upset Arab leaders who feared economic domination by the Zionists. Led by Haj Amin al-Husseini once again, rumors of a Jewish plot to seize control of Muslim holy places began to spread in August 1929. Violence erupted soon after, causing extensive damage. Rioting and looting were rampant throughout Palestine. In Jerusalem, Muslims provoked the violence and tensions by building and praying on or near the holiest place in the world for Jews, the Western Wall. By late August, the Arabs, in well-organized formation, attacked Jewish settlements near Jerusalem. The disturbances spread to Hebron and Safed, including many settlements in between, and on the Kfar Dorom kibbutz in the Gaza Strip.

 

TOP

On August 23, 1929, Arabs murdered 67 Jews in a massacre in Hebron. Three days later, the British evacuated the 484 survivors, including 153 children, to Jerusalem.

Hebron Massacre of the ancient Jewish community by Arab killers in 1929

JusticeVSpropaganda 08June2011

This is the first documented massacre in the holy land, however Arabs murdered Jews also in the 1920th, and until our days this hate to Jews, later using the term of Zionist ‘occupation’ as a convinient excuse for this savage brutal hatefull massacres. What could be the reason in 1929 to slaughter by torture and corrupt the bodies of the ancient Jewish community members who lived in Hebron hundreds of years? Only a Nazi ideology of annihilation; The ‘Palestinian people’ was not invented yet for propaganda purpose: These were ‘just’ Arabs expressing rage and sadistic desires towards the helpless victims. Only few people among Arabs hid and rescued some of their Jewish neighbours, while the majority either participated or witnessed the horrors. What ‘occupation’ could be the excuse for this? So, after being aware to this forgotten detail in history, can someone still consider Jewish settlers in Hebron, as ‘illegal’?

 

And besides: nearly million Jews were forced to flee from Arab countries due to persecutions. Why are those refugees and survivors not mentioned in mainstream media, and the horrors they have been through?

credits to user aviramoz for the vid, and to artist azam ali for the music

 


Israel and Stuff-tweet-30June2018-A continuous Jewish presence existed in Hebron
A continuous Jewish presence existed in Hebron
for centuries until 1929.
Then 67 Jews were murdered by Arabs.
The remaining Jews were forced to flee.

Of course anti-Israel organizations, BDS or delusional far-left groups touring Hebron omit this historical fact.

#ISupportIsrael

Israel and Stuff-tweet-30June2018-A continuous Jewish presence existed in Hebron

Israel and Stuff-tweet-30June2018-A continuous Jewish presence existed in Hebron

 

This Land was Stolen by Arabs

This Land was Stolen by Arabs

After six days of rioting, the British finally brought in troops to quell the disturbance. Even though Jews had been living in Gaza and Hebron for centuries, following these riots, the British forced Jews to leave their homes and prohibited Jews from living in the Gaza strip and Hebron to appease Arabs and quell violence. By the end of the rioting, the death toll was 133 Jews, including eight Americans, and 110 Arabs (most killed by British security forces).

 

More than 200 Arabs and 15 Jews were tried and sentenced for their role in the unrest in 1929. Out of 27 capital cases involving Arabs, only three of the death sentences were carried out, the others were granted “mercy” and their sentences were commuted to life in prison. Muhammad Jamjoum, Fuad Hijazi, and Ataa Al-Zir were put to death on June 17, 1930, because they were convicted of particularly brutal murders in Safad and Hebron.

 

The British approved payment of nearly 100,000 pounds to Jews for “loss of life and permanent incapacity, and proportionately up to the limits of the sum available in respect of damage to property” by Arabs in the 1929 riots. A “special Jewish Fund for relief and reconstruction purposes to repair the losses suffered by the disturbances of 1929” allocated another 433,000 pounds.

 

Like the riots earlier in the decade, afterward the British appointed Sir William Shaw to head an inquiry into the causes of the riots. The Shaw Commission found that the violence occurred due to “racial animosity on the part of the Arabs, consequent upon the disappointment of their political and national aspirations and fear for their economic future.” The report claimed that the Arabs feared economic domination by a group who seemed to have, from their perspective, unlimited funding from abroad. The Commission reported that the conflict stemmed from different interpretations of British promises to both Arabs and Jews. The Commission acknowledged the ambiguity of former British statements and recommended that the government clearly define its intentions for Palestine. It also recommended that the issue of further Jewish immigration be more carefully considered to avoid “a repetition of the excessive immigration of 1925 and 1926.” The issue of land tenure would only be eligible for review if new methods of cultivation stimulated considerable growth of the agricultural sector. The Shaw Commission frustrated Zionists, but the two subsequent reports issued on the future of Palestine were more disturbing.

 

The Hope Simpson report of 1930 painted an unrealistic picture of the economic capacity of the country. It cast doubt on the prospect of industrialization and incorrectly asserted that no more than 20,000 families could be accommodated by the land. The Hope Simpson report was overshadowed, however, by the simultaneous release of the Passfield White Paper, which reflected colonial Secretary Passfield’s deep-seated animus toward Zionism. This report asserted that Britain’s obligations to the Arabs were very weighty and should not be overlooked to satisfy Jewish interests. Many argued that the Passfield Paper overturned the Balfour Declaration, essentially saying that Britain should not plan to establish a Jewish state. The Passfield Paper greatly upset Jews, and interestingly, also the labor and conservative parties in the British Parliament. The result of this widespread outcry to the Secretary’s report was a letter from British Prime Minister MacDonald to Dr. Chaim Weizmann, reaffirming the commitment to create a Jewish homeland.

 

The Arabs found rioting to be a very effective political tool because the British attitude toward violence against Jews, and their response to the riots, encouraged more outbreaks of violence. In each riot, the British would make little or no effort to prevent the Arabs from attacking the Jews. After each incident, a commission of inquiry would try to establish the cause of the riot. The conclusions were always the same: the Arabs were afraid of being displaced by Jewish immigrants. To stop the disturbances, the commissions routinely recommended that restrictions be made on Jewish immigration.

 

Thus, the Arabs came to recognize that they could always stop Jewish immigration by staging a riot. Despite the restrictions placed on its growth, the Jewish population increased to more than 160,000 by the 1930s, and the community became solidly entrenched in Palestine. Unfortunately, as the Jewish presence grew stronger, so did the Arab opposition. The riots brought recognition from the international Jewish community to the struggle of the settlers in Palestine, and more than $600,000 was raised for an emergency fund that was used to finance the cost of restoring destroyed or damaged homes, establish schools, and build nurseries.

Sources: Mitchell G. Bard, The Complete Idiot’s Guide to Middle East Conflict. 4th Edition. NY: Alpha Books, 2008.
Ahron Bregman, A History of Israel, Palgrave MacMillan; New York, 2002.
The Irgun Site
The Jewish Agency for Israel and The World Zionist Organization.
Leslie Stein, The Hope Fulfilled: The Rise of Modern Israel. CT: Praeger Publishers; 2003.
Michael Oren, Power, Faith and Fantasy: America in the Middle East, 1776 to the Present. NY: W. W. Norton & Company, 2007.

 

TOP


Arutz Sheva http://www.israelnationalnews.com/

“I do not shake hands defiled with Jewish blood”

Rav Kook held the acting commissioner responsible for British inaction during the Hevron massacre and refused his outstretched hand.

Rabbi Chanan Morrison / 22November2024, 2:36 PM (GMT+2) http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/399613

 

1929 Hevron massacre aftermath

1929 Hevron massacre aftermath

“Sarah died in Kiryat Arba, also known as Hevron, in the land of Canaan. Abraham came to eulogize Sarah and to weep for her.” (Gen. 23:2)

 

A somber gathering assembled in Jerusalem’s Yeshurun synagogue. The large synagogue and its plaza were packed as crowds attended a memorial service for the Jews of Hevron who had been killed during the Arab riots six months earlier, on August 24th, 1929.

 

On that tragic Sabbath day, news of deadly rioting in Hevron reached the Jewish leaders in Jerusalem. Yitzchak Ben-Zvi, then director of the National Committee, hurried to Rav Kook’s house. Together they hastened to meet with Harry Luke, the acting British High Commissioner, to urge him to take immediate action and protect the Jews of Hevron.

 

The Chief Rabbi demanded that the British take swift and severe measures against the Arab rioters.

“What can be done?” Luke asked.

Rav Kook’s response was to the point. “Shoot the murderers!”

“But I have received no such orders.”

“Then I am commanding you!” Rav Kook roared. “In the name of humanity’s moral conscience, I demand this!”

 

Rav Kook held the acting commissioner responsible for British inaction during the subsequent massacre. Not long after this heated exchange, an official reception was held in Jerusalem, and Mr. Luke held out his hand to greet the Chief Rabbi. To the shock of many, Rav Kook refused to shake it.

With quiet fury, the rabbi explained, “I do not shake hands defiled with Jewish blood.”

 

The day after the rioting in Hevron, the full extent of the massacre was revealed. Arab mobs had slaughtered 67 Jews — yeshiva students, elderly rabbis, women, and children. The British police had done little or nothing to protect them.

 

The Jewish community of Hevron was destroyed, their property looted and stolen. The British shipped the survivors off to Jerusalem.

 

The tzaddik Rabbi Arieh Levine accompanied Rav Kook that Sunday to Hadassah Hospital on HaNevi’im Street to hear news of the Hevron community by telephone. Rabbi Levine recalled the frightful memories that would be forever etched in his heart:

 

When [Rav Kook] heard about the murder of the holy martyrs, he fell backwards and fainted. After coming to, he wept bitterly and tore his clothes “over the house of Israel and God’s people who have fallen by the sword.” He sat in the dust and recited the blessing, Baruch Dayan Ha’Emet (“Blessed is the True Judge”).

 

For some time after that, his bread was the bread of tears and he slept without a pillow. Old age suddenly fell upon him, and he began to suffer terrible pains. This tragedy brought about the illness from which the rabbi never recovered.

 

The Memorial Service

Six months after the massacre, grieving crowds filled the Yeshurun synagogue in Jerusalem. A mourning atmosphere, like that on the fast of Tisha B’Av, lingered in the air as they assembled in pained silence. Survivors of the massacre, who had witnessed the atrocities before their eyes, recited Kaddish for family members murdered in the rioting.

 

Rabbi Jacob Joseph Slonim, who had lost his son (a member of the Hevron municipal council) and grandchildren in the massacre, opened the assembly in the name of the remnant of the Hevron community.

 

“No healing has taken place during the past six months,” he reported. “The murder and the theft have not been rectified. The British government and the Jewish leadership have done nothing to correct the situation. They have not worked to reclaim Jewish property and resettle Hevron.”

 

Afterwards, the Chief Rabbi rose to speak:

 

The holy martyrs of Hevron do not need a memorial service. The Jewish people can never forget the holy and pure souls who were slaughtered by murderers and vile thugs.

 

Rather, we must remember and remind the Jewish people not to forget the City of the Patriarchs. The people must know what Hevron means to us.

 

We have an ancient tradition: “The actions of the fathers are signposts for their descendants.” When the weak-hearted spies arrived at Hevron, they were frightened by the fierce nations inhabiting the land. But “Caleb quieted the people for Moses. He said, ‘We must go forth and conquer the land. We can do it!’” (Numbers 13:30)

 

Despite the terrible tragedy that took place in Hevron, we announce to the world, “Our strength is now like our strength was then.” We will not abandon our holy places and sacred aspirations. Hevron is the city of our fathers, the city of the Machpeilah cave where our Patriarchs are buried. It is the city of David, the cradle of our sovereign monarchy.

 

Those who discourage the efforts to restore the Jewish community in Hevron with arguments of political expediency; those who scorn and say, “What are those wretched Jews doing?”; those who refuse to help rebuild Hevron — they are attacking the very roots of our people. In the future, they will be held accountable for their actions. If ruffians and hooligans have repaid our kindness with malice, we have only one eternal response: Jewish Hevron will once again be built, in honor and glory!

 

The inner meaning of Hevron is to draw strength and galvanize ourselves with the power of Netzach Yisrael, Eternal Israel.

 

That proud Jew, Caleb, announced years later, “I am still strong… As my strength was then, so is my strength now” (Joshua 14:11). We, too, announce to the world: our strength now is as our strength was then. We shall reestablish Hevron in even greater glory, with peace and security for every Jew. With God’s help, we will merit to see Hevron completely rebuilt, speedily in our days.

 

Addendum

While some Jewish families did return to Hevron in 1931, they were evacuated by the British authorities at the outset of the Arab revolt in 1936. For 34 years, there was no Jewish community in Hevron — until 1970, when the State of Israel once again permitted Jewish settlement in Hevron. This return to Hevron after the Six-Day War was spearheaded by former students of the Mercaz HaRav yeshiva, disciples of Rav Kook’s son, Rabbi Zvi Yehuda Kook.

 

In 1992, Rav Kook’s grandson, Rabbi Shlomo Ra’anan, moved to Hevron. Six years later, an Arab terrorist stabbed the 63-year-old rabbi to death. But soon after, his daughter — Rav Kook’s great-granddaughter — along with her husband and children, moved to Hevron, thus continuing the special link between the Kook family and the city of the Patriarchs.

 

(Stories from the Land of Israel. Adapted from Malachim Kivnei Adam, pp. 155-157; 160; 164-165)

 

TOP


israpundit-org-logo

A Factual Chronicle of the Palestine Mandate

In simple language “How the  British f-cked the Jews  and in  the end  they too are getting f-cked !!

Israel becoming Palestine and London  becoming Londonstan 

Harry Liberman  11August2026  https://www.israpundit.org/a-factual-chronicle-of-the-palestine-mandate/ 

Under the face of the Sphinx and from left to right : Winston Churchill, Gertrude Bell and T.E. Lawrence

Under the face of the Sphinx and from left to right : Winston Churchill, Gertrude Bell and T.E. Lawrence

A few of the 39 participants of the en:1921 Cairo Conference, under the face of the Sphinx and from left to right : Winston Churchill, Gertrude Bell and T.E. Lawrence. By George M. Georgoulas – Gertrudebell.ncl.ac.u (Note: original picture is owned by Newcastle University library, see Collectionscaptured.ncl.ac.uk . Public Domain, Link

 

The Indigenous Foundations and the Ottoman Era

For four centuries leading up to World War I, the geographic region of the southern Levant was governed under the administrative divisions of the Ottoman Empire. Historically, the land’s deep-rooted identity was tied to its ancient inhabitants. In textual records, the Hebrew Bible mentions the city of Jerusalem over 600 times, establishing it as the historic and spiritual heartland of the Jewish people. Conversely, the literal name “Jerusalem” or its Arabic equivalent “Al-Quds” does not appear anywhere within the text of the Quran. Islamic tradition subsequently linked Sura 17:1’s reference to the “farthest mosque” (al-Masjid al-Aqsa) to the Temple Mount in Jerusalem decades after the death of the Prophet Muhammad. Extensive archaeological records beneath the soil systematically document thousands of years of continuous Jewish civilization, validating the Jewish people as the indigenous population of Judea, Samaria, and Jerusalem.

Following the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, the League of Nations instituted the Mandate system to redraw the map of the Middle East. This international apparatus carved out entirely new sovereign Arab states, including Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq, across the former Ottoman territories. Concurrently, the 1922 League of Nations Mandate for Palestine was enacted with a distinct, singular international obligation: charging Great Britain with the responsibility of securing the establishment of a “Jewish national home” and explicitly recognizing the pre-existing historical connection of the Jewish people to that specific land.

 

The Displacement of Ambitions and the 1921 Partition

The administrative execution of the Mandate immediately diverged from its foundational text due to parallel colonial negotiations.

In 1916, Sharif Hussein bin Ali of Mecca led the Arab Revolt against the Ottoman Empire, establishing the lineage of Hashemite royalty.

In 1920, his son, the Hashemite prince Faisal, established a short-lived Arab Kingdom of Syria in Damascus but was swiftly expelled by French forces following the Battle of Maysalun. His brother, Emir Abdullah I, subsequently marched a military force north from the Hejaz to the towns of Ma’an and Amman, intending to attack the French or carve out a Hashemite throne in Syria. To avert an imperial conflict with France, British Colonial Secretary Winston Churchill intervened at the 1921 Cairo Conference. In a unilateral move that fundamentally altered the geography of the promised Jewish national home, Britain lopped off approximately 77% of the total mandate territory—everything east of the Jordan River—and handed its administration to Emir Abdullah, establishing the Emirate of Transjordan and permanently barring Jewish settlement from the eastern bank.

 

The Sequence of Administrative Truncation (1930–1946)

This initial territorial partition set a precedent for a series of restrictive British policies west of the Jordan River. Following local Arab riots, the British government issued the 1930 Passfield White Paper, which sought to impose immediate, severe restrictions on Jewish immigration and land acquisition. This policy of Jewish containment culminated in the anti Jewish  MacDonald White Paper of May 1939.

The 1939 document explicitly rejected the creation of a Jewish state, capped Jewish immigration at a strict maximum of 75,000 individuals over a five-year period, and made all future immigration entirely contingent upon Arab consent. The historical timing of this policy was devastating; it sealed the borders of the designated sanctuary at the precise moment when millions of European Jews were seeking refuge from Nazi persecution and the unfolding Holocaust.

By 1946, Great Britain finalized its eastern territorial policy by granting full independence to the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, successfully guiding Transjordan to full sovereignty and changing Abdullah’s title from Emir to King, permanently removing 77% of the original mandate territory from the scope of Jewish statehood.

 

The 1947 Rejection and the 1948 Armed Invasion

In November 1947, the United Nations proposed a further partition of the remaining 23% of the land west of the Jordan River. While the Jewish leadership accepted the compromise, the Arab states and local Arab leadership rejected the UN plan entirely, opting for military mobilization. Upon the formal British withdrawal on May 15, 1948, Israel declared its independence, and five regular Arab armies immediately launched a coordinated invasion. 

The vanguard of this assault was Transjordan’s Arab Legion—an army entirely organized, armed, and sustained by Great Britain.

The British government financed the Legion with an annual subsidy of £2 million to £2.5 million and seconded active British regular army officers to command its tactical operations, led by Commander-in-Chief General John Bagot Glubb (Glubb Pasha). This military apparatus advanced into the Jewish mandate territory, launching a fierce artillery bombardment against western Jerusalem and besieging the ancient Jewish Quarter. This deployment of British resources drew sharp condemnation within the British Parliament itself; on May 23, 1948, Winston Churchill protested that the Arab Legion, “led by forty British officers, armed with British equipment and financed by a British subsidy, has fired on the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem,” identifying it as a direct assault on mandatory compliance.

 

The Rebranding of Judea and Samaria to the West Bank

During the 1948 war, the British-led Arab Legion captured the historic mountain heartland west of the Jordan River. For millennia, this region had been universally known by its geographic and biblical names, Judea and Samaria—terms explicitly utilized by the United Nations in its own 1947 partition maps. In 1950, Jordan and Britain – Iraq ,Pakistan –  illegally  annexed this territory and unilaterally renamed it the “West Bank” to obscure the land’s deep Jewish historical associations and legitimized their military conquest.

The international community overwhelmingly rejected Jordan’s unilateral annexation as illegal. It received formal diplomatic recognition from only three countries in the world: Great Britain, Iraq, and Pakistan—the latter itself a state created in August 1947 out of the partition of British-occupied India :

Had the 1922 international instrument been designated as an Arab mandate instead of  the  legitimate Jewish  Palestine  Mandate  the right of local sovereignty would have been absorbed into the broader pan-Arab claims to the region,  with no need to invent  an Arab Islamic   “Palestinian Narrartive in order to de legitimze  Jewish  rights to their  ancestral lands of  Judea renamed  Syria   Palaestina ( after  the greeks )  during the  Roman Occupation of  Judea in the   first century – they renamed  Jerusalem  as well – Aelia  Capitolinia   yet  the irony – only one of the two name  changes  is  acknowledged  by the  anti Israel cabal – Aelia  Capitolina   not a convenient name for  Jesus  walk  through  Jerusalem  where  after he was  crucified  along with thousands of other  Jews  which   explains why   Zionism is  important to  Christians – Zion  means  Jerusalem-  Christians Zionism  .

The Great Geopolitical Reversal:  The  British Empire is in  steep   decline – yipppeeee !!!!

The subsequent decades produced a complete inversion of global fortunes.

Following its administrative exit from the Middle East and its actions against the nascent Jewish state, the British Empire entered a period of rapid and irreversible collapse, losing its global territories and forfeiting its status as a premier world superpower within a single generation. Conversely, the State of Israel survived the coordinated 1948 invasion and grew exponentially.

Defying severe diplomatic and economic isolation,post October 07 2023 ,  Israel transformed into an even more  advanced technological powerhouse and a formidable, self-reliant military superpower. NATO /UK France  /EU/ Canada /  etc   did not join  America  in its  war against an  existential  threat to the  Middle  East , Europe ,  Canada , and  America  :

Israel and  America   carried the weight to dismantle  the  Islamic Iranian  Nuclear Bomb   on  their own  while  NATO – financed  by America (Marshal Plan ) .  America  is the  Benevelont  Hegemony  rebuilding  Europe  post  WWII  comes to an end  with President  Trump !  The  British   Empire is no more .  The  Arab  armies    did not have  to fight a war into Britain  or  Europe .  They just walked in  in  the name of  open borders ,Socialism ,  and  using   the sword of  Democracy … (kind of funny  eh – wonder how Charles  Martel would react  if he could see  what  France looks like  today ?) 

In the long theater of history, the British Empire that repeatedly compromised its international mandates to secure its regional influence lost its entire global footprint, while the sovereign nation of  ISRAEL whose birth it systematically restricted emerged as a highly resilient global force post  October 07 2023 … 

Smile ,sit back, GRAB A BAG OF POPCORN  ,  and watch  how  the  Europeans   are currently   paying the  price for   what they have   done  to the Jews  !! Remember the Evian Conference ? No one  liberated the  Jews , in fact they cheered  on  the Nazis while Jews  were being  thrown  into cattle  cars to become slaves  and  ashes – the “Allied  Forces  liberated  Europe . 

They arrived when the  war  was over to see  what was left of the  Jews ! 

 

The Historical Pretence: Persecution Before the State

The argument that modern antisemitism is driven by Israel’s actions collapses under the simplest reading of history.

What was the excuse for the slaughter, expulsion, and systematic degradation of Jewish people for the nearly 2,000 years before 1948?

  • The Roman Erasure: In 135 CE, following the Bar Kokhba Revolt, Roman Emperor Hadrian sought to completely sever the Jewish connection to their ancestral homeland. Rome renamed the province of Judea to Syria Palaestina—explicitly naming it after the Philistines, the historic biblical enemies of the Jews—solely to humiliate the conquered population and erase Judean sovereignty.
  • Centuries of Stateless Vulnerability: Long before a modern Israeli military or the West Bank existed, Jews were subjected to the Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition, centuries of forced confinement in European ghettos, and the industrialized slaughter of the Holocaust.

History proves that antisemitism does not require a Jewish state to justify its existence; it merely shifts its vocabulary to match the ideology of the era.

The Geopolitical Realities of 1938–1948

The historical events of the 1930s and 1940s profoundly shaped Jewish perspectives on security, self-reliance, and international diplomacy. The lack of international intervention during the Holocaust and the intense geopolitical struggles surrounding the 1948 Arab-Israeli War created a foundational belief within Israel that the nation must ultimately rely on its own capabilities for survival. This belief was forged by a succession of global betrayals:

  • The Évian Conference (1938): Convened to address the Jewish refugee crisis in Europe, the Évian Conference resulted in the vast majority of the 32 participating nations—including the United States and Great Britain—refusing to expand their immigration quotas, leaving European Jews with very few places of refuge before World War II.
  • The British White Paper of 1939: To secure regional stability and Arab alignment ahead of World War II, the British government issued the White Paper of 1939, which severely restricted Jewish immigration to the Palestine Mandate and limited land purchases, heavily restricting a primary escape route for European Jews during the Holocaust.
  • The 1948 Arms Embargo: During the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, the United States maintained a strict arms embargo on the region, forcing the newly declared State of Israel to rely on clandestine weapons shipments, primarily from Czechoslovakia, to defend itself.
  • The Arab Legion and Transjordan: Jordan’s Arab Legion was trained, financed, and led by British officers, notably Lieutenant General John Bagot Glubb (Glubb Pasha). Following the 1948 war, Jordan annexed the West Bank and East Jerusalem, subsequently expelling the Jewish population from those areas, barring Jewish access to holy sites, and destroying or desecrating historic Jewish properties and cemeteries, such as the Mount of Olives.

Strategic Self-Reliance and Strategy in a Hostile World

These historical lessons prove that international guarantees, treaties, and external alliances are inherently unreliable when a nation’s survival is at stake. Compromising on vital territory or defensible borders for the promise of peace places Jewish lives at an unacceptable risk. From this viewpoint, deterrence through absolute military superiority and territorial depth is the only dependable safeguard against regional adversaries who deny Israel’s right to exist.

In managing these existential threats, geopolitical strategists often point to the “Madman Theory.” This is a political and strategic concept where a leader intentionally convinces foreign adversaries that they are irrational, volatile, or unpredictable. The goal is to force the adversary to back down or make concessions out of fear that the “mad” leader might take extreme, reckless, or destructive actions if provoked.

For a nation surrounded by adversaries openly committed to its destruction, projectable unpredictability and a fierce, unyielding posture are not choices—they are mandatory mechanisms of deterrence. When the international community has repeatedly shown its willingness to let Jews stand alone, Israel’s message to the world must remain clear: it will do whatever is necessary to survive, regardless of global approval.

 

The True Nature of Anti-Zionism

In the Middle Ages, Jews were hated for their religion. In the 19th and 20th centuries, they were hated for their race. Today, in the 21st century, they were hated for their nation-state. Anti-Zionism is simply the latest mutation of this ancient prejudice. It demands that of all the nations on earth, only the Jewish people should be denied the right to self-determination in their indigenous lands. To look at the current global assault on Jewish life and still maintain that anti-Zionism is detached from antisemitism is a profound act of historical illiteracy. Progressive Jews who trade their heritage for Marxist approval are not champions of justice; they are simply the latest iteration of a tragic historical pattern, abandoning their people to appease a world that has never required an excuse to turn on them.

 

The comparison between the survival of the Jewish people and the survival of Indigenous nations highlights a profound historical parallel: both groups faced systematic, state-sponsored efforts to erase their sovereignty, culture, and connection to their ancestral lands, yet both defied the odds of erasure.

The Jewish / First Nations Shared Reality of Indigenous : 

Canada  is  as  Canadian  as  Maple Syrup  !

 

As proven by history, maple syrup is not a Canadian colonial invention; it was entirely researched, engineered, and mastered by the victims of  Colonialism – The First Nations groups using birch bark baskets and heated stone evaporation techniques. [12345]

 

 Canada is 159 years old, while the historical region and Nation of Judea is approximately 3,000 years old. [1]

 

TOP


Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs logo-new

Divided Jerusalem (1948-1967)

https://www.gov.il/en/pages/divided-jerusalem-1948-1967

Type: Information Topic: About Israel Secondary topic: Israel in Maps Publish Date: 07.11.2021

 

On November 30, 1948, following the cessation of the battle between the two armies in Jerusalem, two officers – Lt. Col. Moshe Dayan of the Israeli army and Lt. Col. Abdallah A-Tal of the Jordanian army – drew in thick wax pencils an inaccurate cease-fire line on a map of Jerusalem. This line, including the No Man’s Land between the two sides, was later included in the Israel-Jordan Armistice Agreement of 3 April 1949. The City Line divided Jerusalem between Israel (in the western part) and Jordan (in the eastern part, including the Old City and the Temple Mount) for 19 years, until The Six Day War in June 1967 when Israel re-united the city.

 

During these 19 years, the Jordanian army placed snipers on the City Line and initiated frequent shooting incidents at citizens and other targets on the Israeli side of the city, making life in the near-by Israeli neighborhoods almost unbearable. In addition, the Jordanians breached their commitment (in the Armistice Agreement) to allow free access of Jews to the holy sites, mainly to the Western Wall and to the cemetery on the Mount of Olives. They also desecrated Jewish holy sites.

 

Map Divided Jerusalem (1948-1967)

Map Divided Jerusalem (1948-1967)

 

TOP


breslev-magazine-co-il-logo

The City That Doesn’t Forget Her Children

28-Iyar: Yom Yerushalayim: I put my hand on the stones but the tears that flowed were not mine. They were the tears of all Israel, tears that scorched and burned the heavy gray stone. A MUST READ!!

Rebbetzin Esther Jungreis | Posted on 06June2024 | https://breslev.com/1073929/

The City That Doesn’t Forget Her Children-by Rebbetzin Esther Jungreis

The City That Doesn’t Forget Her Children-by Rebbetzin Esther Jungreis

 

Of all the Arab armies, Jordan’s Arab Legion was the best trained and fiercest. Moreover, the border with Jordan was the most difficult to defend, so it was no surprise that, when King Hussein’s army first attacked, the Israeli military was convinced that the shots were just tokens to accommodate Nasser, and that Hussein would not risk war. But Jordan kept pounding away, its artillery and bullets raining upon Jerusalem. Still, Israel requested the UN Truce Supervision Office to convey to Jordan assurances of peace. But it was all to no avail, and Israel had no choice but to open a second front. The Jordanians possessed hundreds of Patton tanks, and tens of thousands of Legionnaires, powerful warriors, equipped with the most sophisticated weapons, who were prepared to fight to the end. The battles were fierce and savage, made all the more complicated by orders given to Israeli paratroopers to avoid damaging the many sites in the Old City. Many brave young men were injured or lost their lives – the sacrifice was great, but so were the miracles.

 

The Holy City was not prepared for battle. There were hardly any bomb shelters to protect the civilian population. Shells fell and did not explode, and many that fell and did explode caused no injury. A shell landed on Shaarei Tzedek Hospital’s baby nursery. Fearing the worst, nurses rushed in to save the infants, but miraculously, they were all unharmed. A shell penetrated the roof of the Mirrer Yeshivah but did not explode. Over the centuries, Jerusalem was ravaged and sacked many times, but G-d made a promise that the Wall, the remnant of the Holy Temple, would stand eternally and bear witness to the homecoming of our people. And now, almost two thousand year later, the moment had come. I have read countless reports from journalists and soldiers who participated in the battle for Jerusalem, and all their stories had one focus – “the Wall”.

 

Moshe Amirav, a paratrooper, describes the first minutes at the Wall: “Forward! Forward! Hurriedly, we pushed our way through the Magreb Gate, and suddenly we stopped, thunderstruck. There it was, before our eyes! Gray and massive, silent, and restrained. The Western Wall!

 

“Slowly, slowly, I began to approach the Wall in fear and trembling, like a pious cantor going to the lectern to lead the prayers. I approached it as the messenger of my father and my grandfather, of my great-grandfather and of all the generations in all the exiles who had never merited seeing it – and so they had sent me to represent them. Somebody recited the festive blessing, ‘Blessed are You, Oh L-rd our G-d, King of the Universe, Who has kept us alive and maintained us and brought us to this time.’ I put my hand on the stones and wept, but the tears that started to flow were not my tears. They were the tears of all Israel, tears of hope and prayer, tears of Hassidic tunes, tears of Jewish dances, tears that scorched and burned the heavy gray stone.”

 

And who can forget the photograph of our soldiers standing in awe – just looking up at the Wall? And who can forget the report of the IDF radio announcer: “…Suddenly, we recognized the familiar voice of the commander of the paratroops brigade, Colonel Mordechai ‘Motta’ Gur, giving orders to the battalion commanders to occupy the Old City: ‘Attention, all battalion commanders! We are sitting on the mountain range that looks down on the Old City, and are about to enter it. The Old City of Jerusalem that all generations have been dreaming about and striving toward. We will be the first to enter it.’

 

“With us on the roof,” the announcer continued, “was General Shlomo Goren, at that time, the Chief Rabbi of the Israeli Army. Rabbi Goren informed Gur over the walkie-talkie that he was on his way to meet him so as to be among the first to enter the Old City. As far as I remember, we were the only ones in the whole area running without helmets or weapons. Goren was armed only with a shofar and a prayer book and we carried only a tape recorder and a knapsack filled with batteries and rolls of recording tape.

 

“We ran, while trying to stay as close as we could to the Old City Wall to our right, but exposed to the sniper fire coming from the Mount of Olives on our left. As we ran, we passed two lines of paratroopers who were progressing carefully toward the Lions Gate. Goren was determined to get to the head of the line as quickly as possible. At the top of the street leading to the Lions Gate, we passed a still-smoking Jordanian bus. We stopped only at the Gate itself, which was blocked by an Israeli Sherman tank that had gotten stuck in the entrance. We climbed over the tank and entered into the Old City.

 

“Now the excitement reached its peak. Goren did not stop blowing the shofar and reciting prayers. His enthusiasm infected the soldiers, and from every direction came cries of ‘Amen!’”

 

The shofar was sounded in Jerusalem and its call reached Jewish hearts in the four corners of the world. The effect was magical. Our people because spiritually rejuvenated. Even those who had never believed, those who were hardened agnostics, felt something in their hearts. The Wall called them, and despite themselves, they felt a need to respond, to touch its stones, to place a note with a prayer in its crevices, to pour out their hearts and cry.

 

My husband and I made a decision. We knew that no matter what, we too had to be there, and so we took our four small children and traveled to Jerusalem. The city was congested with people – there wasn’t a hotel room to be had. For a moment, I panicked, but then my husband reminded me of the teaching of our Talmud: In Jerusalem, no one ever complained of discomfort, in the City of G-d, every man had a place, everyone was welcome.

 

It was Friday, Erev Shabbat, when we arrived, and there was no time to lose – the Sabbath Queen was quickly approaching and the entire city was readying herself for the arrival of the royal guest. Everywhere, stores were closing and public transportation was coming to a halt. As the siren was sounded, a stillness descended on the Holy City.

 

Suddenly, scores of people spilled into the streets. They came from every direction: young and old, men and women, Israelis and tourists, students and soldiers, pious Chassidim in long black coats and westernized Jews in business suits. They spoke in many tongues, espoused many ideas, and wondrously, they all merged into one. All of them were rushing, running to the same place, to the Wall.

 

We too, melted into the crowd. We didn’t know our way, but we followed the others. My heart beat faster and I clutched my children’s hands. I saw tears in my husband’s eyes. We were in Jerusalem.

 

We made our way through the dark alleyways. My son tugged at my sleeve. “Ima,” he asked, “how did our soldiers do it? How did they liberate the city? How did they get through these gates, these alleys?”

 

“Jerusalem’s time has come,” I answered, “and G-d Himself opened the gates.”

 

Then suddenly, without warning, the Wall was before us, more majestic than I could ever have imagined. We could not speak; there were only tears. For two thousand years we had waited for this moment. Our ancestors had prayed for this day. What would they not have given to stand here, even for a fleeting second, and yet they were denied the privilege. How strange that our generation, which was unworthy and wanting in faith, was the one to stand here in the presence of sanctity.

 

I looked up at the Heavens and searched for my grandfather. Surely the angels had gathered his ashes from Auschwitz and brought them as an offering to this very spot.

 

Zeide, Zeide,” I cried into the night, “please walk with me, for here I cannot stand alone.”

 

All around us, people were praying and our voices became one with theirs. I poured out my soul. I looked up at the greenery sprouting from the crevices. Strange, I thought to myself, how these little branches grow without being watered. But then I saw the people around me and I understood from whence the branches received their nourishment. They were watered by the tears of a nations that had been waiting for two thousand years.

 

Walking back to our hotel we met a young soldier who had been among those who liberated Jerusalem. He told us about his best friend who had fallen on the Temple Mount on the very spot where once, long ago, the Alter had stood.

 

“I ran to my friend,” he told us. “I tried to help him, but it was too late. I broke down and wept, and as I cried, I heard an eerie sound. It was the braying of a donkey echoing in the night. The donkey actually seemed to sob with me, crying in pain as if imploring to be allowed to carry Messiah into the Holy City.”

 

Never before in the annals of mankind did a war last only six days.

 

Coincidence? Or was the seventh day begging to come? – The seventh day that is all Sabbath, the day that is Mashiach.

 

For a very brief moment, it appeared as if our people might just understand and be prepared to respond to this awesome challenge. But all too soon, the magic of the moment evaporated, and once again, we failed the test.

 

We reverted to our old ways – we congratulated ourselves on our success and came to take all those miracles for granted. Those of us who lived it have forgotten, and those were not yet born were never touched by it.

 

The fundamental law of Jewish survival stipulates that we cannot assimilate or become “like all the other nations of the world.” This law holds true not only in the countries of our exile, but in Israel as well. G-d did not bring us back to our ancient land so that we might become like all other nations and convert Jerusalem into New York, Parish, or London.

 

Just consider the tragedy that has befallen us. To live in the Land of the Patriarchs and yet spurn their legacy; to speak Hebrew impeccably, and yet not know how to pray; to live in the Land of G-d, and yet lack faith in Him.

 

We have failed the test.

 

But even if we failed the test, even if we forgot G-d, He does not forget us. His covenant and love are eternal and He will continue to call us. If we are blind to His miracles, He will find other ways to awaken us. So it is that since those heady days of the Six Day War, we have suffered many painful wake-up calls, but sadly, we have remained impervious to all. Nevertheless, G-d continues to call.

 

Many of us have heard the call, many are committed and live genuine Torah Jewish lives, but there are still so, so many who have yet to hear the call.

 

As we enter the final stages of our history, we have a choice – to stand straight and tall, to embrace with open arms and loving hearts our G-d-given covenant and sing His praise, or to continue to be blind and obdurate and delude ourselves into believing that we can live our lives without Him. But even as we stumble through the darkness, He will be holding our hand. He will not let go. He will not forget us. He will not forsake us. So let us return to Him with willing hearts, with love. Let us pass our test.

 

***

From “Life is a Test” by the author, rights are reserved for publishing “Bina”.

 

TOP

“It always has been Arab Muslim Orthodoxy that “Palestine” actually is the entire country of Israel, not merely Judea and Samaria. All PLO terror aimed is to drive the Jews out of Tel Aviv, Haifa, Ra’anana, and other cities, towns, and villages in pre-1967 Israel and “into the [Mediterranean] sea.”

This is what it means to be “Pushed into the Sea”.

Ben & Jerry's-Push the Jews into the Sea Salt and Caramel flavor Ice Cream

Ben & Jerry’s-Push the Jews into the Sea Salt and Caramel flavor Ice Cream

Cannons of eight Arab states: Sudan, Algeria, United Arab Republic (then Egypt), Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon. Lebanese daily Al-Jarida, May 31, 1967.

Cannons of eight Arab states: Sudan, Algeria, United Arab Republic (then Egypt), Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon. Lebanese daily Al-Jarida, May 31, 1967.

Egyptian pamphlet literally titled 'Throw the Jews into the sea' before the 1967 war

Egyptian pamphlet literally titled ‘Throw the Jews into the sea’ before the 1967 war

Tank forces of the UAR, Syria, Jordan and Lebanon. Lebanese daily Al-Khayat, May 31, 1967

Tank forces of the UAR, Syria, Jordan and Lebanon. Lebanese daily Al-Khayat, May 31, 1967

Egyptian Newspaper cartoon shortly before the 1967 Six-Day War

Egyptian Newspaper cartoon shortly before the 1967 Six-Day War

Gaza “protesters” loft molotov cocktail on swastika kite over Israeli border

Gaza “protesters” loft molotov cocktail on swastika kite over Israeli border

Friday, 11 July 2014 Miracle in Ashdod: Direct Hit on Gas Station, no Fatalities What's the war like in Ashdod?

Friday, 11 July 2014 Miracle in Ashdod: Direct Hit on Gas Station, no Fatalities What’s the war like in Ashdod?

Israel Defense Forces tweet-24July2014-A rocket fired from Gaza hit an apartment building in the Israeli city of Ashkelon this morning.

Israel Defense Forces tweet-24July2014-A rocket fired from Gaza hit an apartment building in the Israeli city of Ashkelon this morning.

“Israel is attempting to achieve balance of power with the Arabs. The Arab reply: This will be the only balance.”

“Israel is attempting to achieve balance of power with the Arabs. The Arab reply: This will be the only balance.” Egyptian review, Roz-el-Yussef, February 14, 1966.

“Israel is attempting to achieve balance of power with the Arabs. The Arab reply: This will be the only balance.” Egyptian review, Roz-el-Yussef, February 14, 1966.

 


 

If you reject peace and start a war, you can’t claim victimhood


Israel Foreign Ministry-tweet-15May2026-reject peace-start-war-you can’t claim victimhood
In 1947, the UN offered a two-state solution. The Jews said YES. The Arabs said NO. Neighboring Arab countries invaded the young Israel.

If you reject peace and start a war, you can’t claim victimhood. History matters. 🇮🇱

Israel Foreign Ministry-tweet-15May2026-reject peace-start-war-you can’t claim victimhood

Israel Foreign Ministry-tweet-15May2026-reject peace-start-war-you can’t claim victimhood

 

4 Arab Armies move on Zion-14May1948-Daily News

4 Arab Armies move on Zion-14May1948-Daily News

 

TOP

15 Seconds in Sderot, Israel

 

TOP

Kyle Orton’s Blog

Arab Statements of Exterminationist Intent Before the 1967 War

By Kyle Orton (@KyleWOrton) on 19 June 2024  https://kyleorton.co.uk/2024/06/19/arab-statements-of-exterminationist-intent-before-the-1967-war/

Jersalem Temple Mount Liberation-7June1967 Soldiers watching the Temple Mount | Photo: GPO

Jersalem Temple Mount Liberation-7June1967 Soldiers watching the Temple Mount | Photo: GPO

 

Israel pre-emptively struck against the Arab armies massing on her borders on 5 June 1967 and routed them by 10 June. The intention of the Arab States in 1967 had been plainly expressed over nearly twenty years. After the pan-Arab invasion had failed to destroy the Jewish State in 1948, Arab leaders—speaking directly and through their State-run media—made clear that they intended to wage another war that would succeed in eliminating Israel. As the Arab armies moved into position in May 1967, the Arab governments openly proclaimed that this was that long-awaited war.

 

Below is a far-from-exhaustive compilation of Arab statements in the lead-up to the Six-Day War:

 

In September 1953, after a false report that Adolf Hitler was still alive and living in Brazil, one of the Egypt’s State-owned newspapers, Al-Musawar, asked various public figures what they would want to say to the Führer. A number of the responses were negative. One was very notably positive: “I congratulate you with all my heart, because, though you appear to have been defeated, you were the real victor. … There will be no peace until Germany is restored to what it was … As for the past, I think you made some mistakes, such as opening too many fronts or Ribbentrop’s short-sightedness in the face of Britain’s old man diplomacy. But you are forgiven on account of your faith in your country and people. That you have become immortal in Germany is reason enough for pride. And we should not be surprised to see you again in Germany, or a new Hitler in your place.” The author of this statement was Anwar al-Sadat,[1] the man who a year earlier had read out the proclamation of the “Free Officers’ revolution” that toppled the Egyptian monarchy.

 

  • A year later, in 1954, after Gamal Abdel Nasser consolidated his control over Egypt, Al-Sadat would become the founding editor of Al-Gomhuria, the premier official outlet of the Nasser regime. After Nasser’s death in 1970, Al-Sadat became president and famously made Egypt the first Arab State to sign a peace accord recognising Israel in 1978-79. Al-Sadat was assassinated in 1981.
  • Nazi infiltration in the Middle East after 1940 had been very extensive, and the German propaganda apparatus took antisemitism to a mass Arab audience in a way never seen before, with effects that last to this day. Overt support for Hitler and the Nazis lasted in the Arab world long after the Third Reich was demolished. “Nazi” and “Hitlerite” started to become insults among Arabs in the later 1950s and were used near-universally as epithets by the end of the 1960s, but this was a mark of the increasing influence of the Soviet Union, not a substantive revision of opinion about the Nazi experience.
  • Even during the transition period from c. 1955 to 1970 when lexicographical changes were being made and States like Egypt were coming under Soviet domination, Arab officials with backgrounds as Nazi supporters and collaborators, such as Nasser and Al-Sadat, made no effort to hide the fact; rather to the contrary. The Arab leadership in Palestine’s wartime alliance with the Nazis and the spread of Nazi ideology among Arab populations were among the factors that made the 1948 war against Israel so existential for the Jews, and the dynamic had not gone away by 1967. In some ways, things had gotten worse by the second time around: antisemitism in the “proper” sense—not an ethnic prejudice but the belief that Jews are the source of cosmic evil—was more widespread in the Arab world in 1967 than it had been in 1948.[2]

 

July 1959, Nasser: “We want a decisive battle in order to annihilate that germ, Israel. All the Arabs want a decisive battle.”[3]

 

2 February 1960, Radio Cairo: “We are getting ready for the decisive battle, and, at the right moment, we will strike with power and with speed. All our coming battles with Israel will be battles of life or death.”

 

10 March 1960, Radio Damascus: “The Arabs are determined that Israel shall be uprooted from their midst at any price.”

 

30 March 1960, “The Voice of the Arabs” transnational show on Radio Cairo: “The guarantee for peace in the Middle East lies in our weapons, in the strength of our own army, and we shall impose the peace, O Israel. We shall impose the peace on the day we will drive you into the expanse of the sea.”

 

15 September 1960, Jordan’s broadsheet Falastin: “In all frankness, we want to eliminate Israel … and care not when Israel protests that we contemplate war and jeopardise her security … because this is exactly our aim.”

 

29 April 1961, Egypt’s Al-Gomhuria, declared: “Today, it is in our power to defeat Israel. … The day will yet come when we shall … purge our country [i.e., the ‘Arab nation’] of the very existence of Israel.”

 

15 May 1961, Radio Amman: “There is no doubt that our war with Israel is imminent. … We will strengthen our forces and liquidate Israel completely so that she will disappear from the face of the earth.”

 

16 June 1961, Radio Amman: “We see in Israel a plague that should be utterly rooted out.”

 

12 July 1961, Radio Amman: “The establishment of peace in the area will be made possible only through the liquidation of the enemy State.”

 

17 August 1961, Nasser: “We will act to realise Arab solidarity and the closing of the ranks that will eventually put an end to Israel. …We will liquidate her.”

 

23 December 1962, Nasser: “We feel that the soil of Palestine is the soil of Egypt and of the whole Arab world. Why do we mobilise? Because we feel that the land is part of our land, and are ready to sacrifice ourselves for it.”

 

3 March 1963, Jordan’s Falastin: “It would appear, on the face of it, that the concentration of the Jews in the Occupied Region [i.e., Israel], militates in favour of Zionism. In our view, however, in the long run it will favour the Arab nation. … Why? Because this will turn Israel into one huge, worldwide grave for this whole Jewish concentration. And the day draws near for those who await it.”

 

21 March 1963, Egypt’s Al-Gomhuria carried an official government statement: “The noose around Israel’s neck is tightening gradually.” On the same day, Hassan Ibrahim, a member of the Egyptian Presidential Council, said: “Egypt has rocket bases capable of destroying Israel within a short time, and panic reigns in that country.”

 

  • The Egyptian missile program in the early 1960s was being developed with assistance from fugitive Nazi war criminals.[4]

 

2 April 1963, Nasser: “Israel emerged because the Arab world was weak and divided … but unity will mean triumph and the liquidation of Israel.”

 

4 April 1963, Egyptian State newspaper, Al-Akhbar: “The liquidation of Israel will not be realised through a declaration of war against Israel by Arab States, but Arab unity and inter-Arab understanding will serve as a hangman’s rope for Israel.”

 

19 August 1963, Syria’s Defence Minister General Abdullah Ziadeh: “The Syrian Army stands as a mountain to crush Israel and demolish her. This army knows how to crush its enemies.”

 

22 February 1964, Nasser: “The possibilities of the future will be war with Israel. It is we who will dictate the time; it is we who will dictate the place.”

 

12 April 1964, Jordan’s King Husayn: “Jordan, with its Left and Right Bank, is the ideal jumping ground to liberate the usurped homeland.”

 

27 July 1964, president of Ba’thist-led Iraq, Abd al-Salam Arif: “A war with Israel is inevitable. There is no escaping that war.”

 

30 October 1964, Chief of Staff in Ba’thist Syria, Salah Jadid: “Our army will be satisfied with nothing less than the disappearance of Israel.”<

 

16 September 1965, Nasser: “The war with Israel is an inevitable thing. … The Arabs waited seventy-five years until they succeeded in chasing out the Crusaders.” It has always been a common theme in Arab perceptions that Israel will perish as the Crusader States did.

 

13 March 1966, Syria’s daily Al-Ba’th newspaper: “The revolutionary forces in the Arab homeland, and the Ba’th at their head, preach a genuine Arab Palestine liberation … Our problem will only be solved by an armed struggle to … put an end to the Zionist presence. The Arab people demands armed struggle, and day-by-day incessant confrontation, through a total war of liberation”.

 

22 May 1966, Syria’s president Nureddin al-Atassi told troops during an inspection: “We want a full-scale popular war of liberation … to destroy the Zionist enemy.”

 

  • Soon after Al-Atassi had come to power in the February 1966 coup within the Syrian Ba’th Party regime,[5] Syrian-backed terrorists began being sent into Israel, often through Lebanon and Jordan; this policy was labelled “popular war” and this was the formal announcement of it.
  • Arab fedayeen terrorists had been attacking Israel since the early 1950s, mostly sent from Egypt and Jordan.

 

24 May 1966, Syria’s Defence Minister Hafez al-Asad: “We shall never call for, nor accept peace [with Israel]. We shall only accept war. … We have resolved to drench this land with our blood, to oust you, aggressors, and throw you into the sea for good.”

 

18 August 1966, Radio Damascus: “Syria has resolved to pursue its way, and continue preparing itself to bring about the liberation by way of popular revolutionary war. Our last punitive operations were … [a] warning the bandit State that the hour of liberation is drawing nigh, and the Arab masses are tired of waiting. … [Syria] is convinced of victory, because all the Arab masses are behind her, tensed for action. Behind Syria, too, stand her friends in the socialist camp.”

 

17 May 1967, “The Voice of the Arabs” on Radio Cairo: “Egypt with all her resources—human, economic, and scientific—is prepared to plunge into a total war that will be the end of Israel.”[6]

 

25 May 1967, Radio Cairo: “The firm resolve of the Arab people is to wipe Israel off the map.” On the same day, Nasser himself added: “If we have succeeded in restoring the situation to what it was before 1956 [by reoccupying the Sinai], then there is no doubt that God will help us and enable us to restore the situation to what it was before 1948 [when there was no Israel].”

 

30 May 1967, Radio Cairo: “In the light of the blockade of the Gulf of Aqaba, two possibilities are open to Israel, each one of them soaked in blood. Either she will die from strangulation of the Arab military and economic blockade, or she will die in the hail of bullets of the Arab forces surrounding her in the south, the north, and the east.”

 

1 June 1967, Iraq’s president Arif: “My sons, this day is the day of the battle and of revenge for your brothers who fell in 1948. … With the help of God we will meet together in Tel Aviv and Haifa.”

 

2 June 1967, founder of the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) Ahmad al-Shuqayri: “We shall destroy Israel and its inhabitants and as for the survivors—if there are any—the boats are ready to deport them!”[7]

 

  • Al-Shuqayri had been sent to Jordan by Nasser after Jordan’s King Husayn had been to Cairo on 1 June 1967 to secure what he thought was a defence pact with Nasser that turned out to entail putting the Jordanian army under Egyptian control. Husayn did not like Al-Shuqayri—few did—but the King was in no position to refuse to this guest, a client of the man he had just surrendered his armed forces to. Husayn’s attempt to keep Al-Shuqayri in Amman failed. Al-Shuqayri went to Jordanian-occupied East Jerusalem, where he led a Friday prayer on 2 June,[8] and subsequently made the comment quoted above at a press conference.
  • Al-Shuqayri’s comment would become a source of considerable controversy after the 1967 because it was often summarised, and sometimes even quoted, as Al-Shuqayri having said that the invading Arabs intended to “throw the Jews into the sea”. Arab propaganda before the war had said just that, and Al-Shuqayri was clearly in the same thematic zone. Nonetheless, it is not quite what he said.
  • There are also, inevitably, multiple variant sources and translations of Al-Shuqayri’s statement. For example, a report in the Lebanese outlet Al-Yawm on 3 June 1967 claimed that Al-Shuqayri was asked what would happen to Israelis if the Arabs conquered their State, and he replied: “We will endeavour to assist [the Jews] and facilitate their departure by sea to their countries of origin.” When asked for clarification about the Jews born in the Holy Land, Al-Shuqayri reportedly responded: “Whoever survives will stay in Palestine, but in my opinion no one will remain alive.”
  • Note: even in the Yawm report that is favoured in the most apologetic renderings of what Al-Shuqayri said, it is clear: (1) he expects all the Jews in Israel to be slaughtered in the war; (2) he has no opposition to this outcome; and (3) any survivors will be ethnically cleansed. This is not much of a defence, and it does little to support the idea that an “Israeli information campaign” after the war is the reason this statement was interpreted as so threatening: it was not unreasonable for Israelis (or anyone else listening) to feel a touch alarmed that the Arabs’ publicly-declared plan was to murder or expel all the Jews in the Holy Land.
  • The Jordanian Prime Minister during the 1967 crisis, Saad Jumaa, recorded in his memoirs: “When [Shuqayri] left the mosque [in Jerusalem] on Friday [2 June 1967], he held a press conference. On this occasion he uttered his famous statement that Israel exploited so maliciously: ‘We shall destroy Israel together with its inhabitants, and for those who remain—if any do—the boats will be waiting to banish them’.” This obviously matches the above in its essentials. In terms of evidence-against-interest, Jumaa did not like Al-Shuqayri, but he liked Israel even less, and the anger in the passage where he wrote this is against Al-Shuqayri for damaging the Arab cause by saying something that fostered international sympathy for Israel.
  • Al-Shuqayri spent several years after 1967 denying he had said the Arab forces intended anything even approximating “throwing the Jews into the sea”, and blamed “Zionist” propagandists for a campaign of slander against him. In 1971, however, Al-Shuqayri published a memoir, Dialogues and Secrets with Kings, and there he defended himself on quite different grounds: Al-Shuqayri admitted that he had spoken in terms of destroying Israel and pushing the Jews into the sea, but—and he was quite correct about this, as you can see from the above—those were the terms in which all Arab participants in 1967 spoke about the war they were preparing to launch against the Jewish State, so it was grossly unfair that his remarks should have been singled out as if they were aberrant extremism.

 

5 June 1967, “The Voice of the Arabs” on Radio Cairo: “Destroy them and lay them waste and liberate Palestine. Your hour has come. Woe to you Israel. The Arab nation has come to wipe out your people and to settle the account. This is your end, Israel. All the Arabs must take revenge for 1948. This is a moment of historic importance to our Arab people and to the holy war. Conquer the land.”
______________

NOTES


 

[1] Bernard Lewis (1986), Semites and Anti-Semites: An Inquiry into Conflict and Prejudice, p. 161.

 

[2] Semites and Anti-Semites, pp. 204-05.

 

[3] In 1959, Nasser was technically president of the “United Arab Republic” that combined Egypt and Syria.

 

[4] Ronen Bergman (2018), Rise and Kill First: The Secret History of Israel’s Targeted Assassinations, pp. 108-19.

 

[5] Syria had been a very unstable polity since March 1949, when a military coup felled the government that had presided over the failure to destroy Israel at birth. There were two more military coups that year, in August and December, the latter resulting in a restoration of civilian governance, but it soon devolved into autocracy under Adib al-Shishakli. Another military coup in February 1954 removed Al-Shishakli and another brief period of constitutional rule followed, led by the elderly Hashim al-Atassi, who was soon shunted aside. Shukri al-Quwatli, a Nasserite, became president in September 1955, took Syria decisively into the Soviet camp, and in February 1958 took Syria into the so-called “United Arab Republic” (UAR), theoretically a union of Egypt and Syria that was in reality more an occupation of the former by the latter. The UAR was dissolved in September 1961 by yet another military coup in Syria. Nazim al-Qudsi’s new Western-oriented government did not last long. The March 1963 coup brought the Ba’th Party to power and returned Syria to the Soviet camp, where it would remain for the rest of the Cold War. The February 1966 coup directed by Chief of Staff Salah Jadid saw the Alawi faction of Ba’thists seize control. Al-Atassi was of Sunni origins and it was precisely for that reason he was made the formal president during Jadid’s de facto reign. Al-Atassi was the face of the regime to a Sunni-majority population that regarded Alawis as infidels. Hafez al-Asad prevailed in the November 1970 “corrective coup”, which settled the intra-Alawi contest within the Ba’th Party and established the dynasty that still rules Syria.

 

[6] George Mikes (1969), The Prophet Motive: Israel Today and Tomorrow, pp. 79.

 

[7] Ephraim Kam (1974), Husayn Poteah Be’milhama (Husayn Opens War), pp. 284-8, quoted in: Michael Oren (2002), Six Days of War: June 1967 and the Making of the Modern Middle East, p. 132.

 

[8] Oren, Six Days of War, pp. 130-32.

 

TOP

Yasser Arafat and the Six Day War


Captain Allen-tweet-6May2026-Yasser Arafat and the Six Day War
Did you know in 1967 — weeks before Egypt moved a single soldier into Sinai, closed the Straits of Tiran, or expelled UN peacekeepers — Yasser Arafat’s Fatah terror group had already set the wheels in motion for the Six Day War?

One example: this day (May 5) in 1967, Fatah terrorists shelled the peaceful farming community of Kibbutz Manara as part of its ongoing cross-border terror campaign targeting Israeli civilians.

In fact, between April and early May 1967, Fatah carried out more than a dozen attacks: planting mines and explosives, ambushing vehicles, and shelling border communities along Israel’s frontiers with Syria, Jordan, and Lebanon.

On May 5, the violence escalated sharply. Palestinian terrorists fired mortars and rockets into Kibbutz Manara, a quiet farming community in northern Israel.

Families huddled in shelters as shells rained down on homes, fields, and children playing outside.

This was not random. It was part of a calculated strategy of provocation and attrition — designed to bleed Israel psychologically and drag the Arab states into full-scale war.

Meanwhile, the famous Egyptian military build-up in Sinai and the closure of the Straits of Tiran casus belli for war did not begin until mid-May.

Fatah’s terror wave came first.

These constant raids created an atmosphere of unbearable tension. Israelis faced daily threats of mines on roads, ambushes on buses, and shelling of kibbutzim — long before Nasser made his dramatic moves. The terror played a significant role in maintaining constant tension and pushing the entire region toward the breaking point.

When the Six Day War erupted in June, it was not an Israeli war of choice.

It was the culmination of months of escalating Arab aggression — beginning with Arafat’s terror campaign in the spring of 1967.

Captain Allen-tweet-6May2026-Yasser Arafat and the Six Day War

Captain Allen-tweet-6May2026-Yasser Arafat and the Six Day War

 

TOP