Middle East Press On: Israel, Media, Trump, Palestine, South America, Jews, Genocide Hamas, Armenia New Age Islam's Selection, 22 December 2025
By New Age Islam Edit Desk
22 December 2025
Dave Chappelle Criticizes Israel, Media Double Standards in New Netflix Special
As Trump Talks Peace, Israel Decides Where to Attack Next – Analysis
‘If Palestine Dies, Humanity Dies’: The Critical Case for Palestinian Solidarity with South America
‘Lullaby’: A Song of Solidarity, Memory, and Resistance for Palestine
Floodgate: Greenstein on Israel’s Far Right and Weaponization of Antisemitism
Hatred of Jews so often fixates on the Land of Israel
Genocide accusations against Israel ignore Hamas’s explicit ideology
From distance to dialogue: Rethinking Israel- Armenia ties
Economic recovery must be Israel’s priority for 2026
-------
Dave Chappelle Criticizes Israel, Media Double Standards in New Netflix Special
December 22, 2025
By Romana Rubeo
When American stand-up comedian Dave Chappelle released his latest Netflix special, ‘Dave Chappelle: The Unstoppable’, on December 19, early commentary largely focused on his open contempt for liberal media figures and his confrontational remarks directed at fellow comedian Bill Maher.
However, a central moment of the special involved a sharp and explicit criticism of Israel, delivered during a segment addressing the backlash over Chappelle’s appearance at a Saudi comedy festival earlier this year.
In the routine, Chappelle contrasted the international outrage surrounding the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi with what he described as the far higher number of journalists killed by Israel in Gaza, framing the comparison as evidence of a media double standard.
Khashoggi and the Politics of Moral Outrage
Between September 26 and October 9, 2025, Chappelle performed at the inaugural Riyadh Comedy Festival in Saudi Arabia.
The timing was immediately seized upon by critics: the festival coincided with the seventh anniversary of the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, killed inside the Saudi consulate in Istanbul in 2018.
By appearing in Riyadh, critics argued, Chappelle had compromised his principles and tacitly legitimized a state responsible for a notorious political assassination.
The argument was framed as a defence of press freedom, human rights, and journalistic lives.
On October 3, Maher amplified this framing on Real Time, mocking Chappelle’s remark that it was “easier to talk” in Saudi Arabia than in the United States.
Counting the Dead
In ‘The Unstoppable’, Chappelle dismissed Maher’s critics. “Yes, Saudi Arabia killed a journalist,” he said, explicitly honouring Khashoggi and acknowledging the brutality of his murder.
But then he continued: “Israel’s killed 240 journalists in the last three months, so I didn’t know y’all were still counting.”
Through this line, Chappelle exposed a hierarchy of grief that has become normalized: one journalist’s death is endlessly memorialized, while the systematic killing of Palestinian journalists in Gaza is treated as background noise, statistical clutter, or worse, an inconvenience to dominant narratives.
Through this line, Chappelle drew attention to what he presented as an unequal public and media response to the killing of journalists.
Chappelle explicitly acknowledged the gravity of Khashoggi’s murder, emphasizing that his remarks were not intended to minimize that crime. Instead, the point was directed at what he characterized as an inconsistent moral framework, in which certain victims are treated as emblematic while others remain marginal in mainstream coverage.
Co-option and Control of Public Speech
In the final portion of Dave Chappelle: The Unstoppable, Chappelle addresses the broader risks faced by public figures who occupy highly politicized spaces. He refers to Charlie Kirk, the conservative activist who was assassinated on September 10 while speaking at an event at Utah Valley University in Orem, Utah.
Chappelle used Kirk’s death to illustrate his concern about how public voices can become targets once they are seen as aligned with a fixed ideological position.
Chappelle framed the reference as an example of how speaking publicly in a contentious political environment can carry personal danger.
Within this context, he introduced the idea of a “code word” — a phrase that would signal to the audience that his own voice has been compromised and should no longer be taken at face value.
He chose “I stand with Israel” as the hypothetical code word because, within the logic of the routine, it represents a position so opposed to his stated views in the special that its utterance would indicate he had been influenced or manipulated beyond his own intent.
https://www.palestinechronicle.com/dave-chappelle-criticizes-israel-media-double-standards-in-new-netflix-special/
--------
As Trump Talks Peace, Israel Decides Where to Attack Next – Analysis
December 21, 2025
By Robert Inlakesh
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is sizing up his next target and, according to reports, will request greenlights upon his planned visit to Mar-a-Lago later this month. Meanwhile, US President Donald Trump continues to claim that he has achieved “peace in the Middle East.”
Far from any kind of comprehensive peace deal, the Trump administration has managed to not only set up the entire region for catastrophe. This has been done through giving Israel a free hand, as well as securing a decisive victory over international law at the United Nations.
NBC News, citing anonymous US officials, has released a report claiming that Israel is growing increasingly worried about Iran’s rapid development in the sphere of ballistic missile production and alleged reconstruction of nuclear facilities, struck this June by both the US and Israeli air forces. Given Tel Aviv’s anxiety, Netanyahu is said to be seeking Washington’s support in a new offensive campaign against the Islamic Republic.
Although it has long been hinted that a new round, acting as a continuation of the 12-Day War earlier this year, is only a matter of when and not if, a new assault on Iran is not the only point of concern in the region.
An aggressive propaganda campaign has been launched domestically by the Israeli Hebrew media over the past months, working to convince the population that a brief war of aggression is required in order to combat any potential threats from Lebanese Hezbollah.
This warmongering propaganda has proven successful, as polling data collected by the Israeli Institute for National Security Studies (INSS) for the month of November suggests the following:
“…Most respondents believe the situation in the north requires a return to fighting. When asked whether the current security situation in the north provides sufficient security for residents or requires renewed fighting, only 34% of the public said it provides security. Another 41.5% favour resuming limited fighting, while 10.5% support a return to intensive fighting, including ground manoeuvres. Overall, a majority (52%) believes fighting should be renewed, although most prefer limited fighting rather than a broad campaign.”
According to this same data, roughly 74% of respondents said Iran is a cause of concern, 65% agreed that Gaza is, and 64% said the same of Lebanon. Overall, the situation in the West Bank ranked number one; however, 77% said they were worried about the issue. This is a reflection of a greater trend among Israelis, that they feel the security situation is dire.
The occupied West Bank aside, which is a much easier fix for the Israeli military to manage and is also of increasing concern due to the settler issue in general, it is clear that the three primary targets for further war are Iran, Gaza, and Lebanon. Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich also recently commented that the military may have to launch campaigns against the Gaza Strip and Lebanon prior to next year’s election.
The ‘Ceasefire’ and the Death of International Law
With the glorified pause currently in place in the Gaza Strip, which has resulted in a slower pace in Israeli operations and a lower daily civilian death toll, the Israeli leadership has been granted a period to design brand new attack plans and devise various strategies with the intent of attaining “total victory.”
The “ceasefire” in the Gaza Strip is only a ceasefire for the Palestinian resistance groups, as the Israelis have not stopped their offensive operations for a single day, only limiting their pace. Phase One of the ceasefire has essentially been completed, adding the caveat that the Israelis do not adhere to it properly.
Following October 8, when the ceasefire deal was announced, I had argued at the time that what would likely occur was a pause that would get stuck somewhere between Phase One and Phase Two. During this time, the Israelis have had the opportunity to repair military vehicles, devise new plots, and attempt to use the international involvement in the spectacle to achieve outcomes that proved impossible through their all-out genocidal campaign.
On November 17, 2025, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) voted through the most disgraceful resolution in its history, undoing decades of work by the various organs of the UN and unravelling progress on international law. UNSC Res 2803 represented the day the United Nations died.
This vaguely worded resolution eliminated any pledge for Palestinian statehood, eliminated all past resolutions on the Palestine–Israel issue, and erased the Geneva Conventions. With the exceptions of Russia and China, which appeared to be the only independent nations in the UNSC, all of the other states went along with the colonialist plan for Gaza. This included the anti-democratic “Palestinian” Authority.
Resolution 2803 authorized Donald Trump to become the de facto dictator of Gaza, under the Orwellian-named “Board of Peace,” while a multinational invasion force, the “International Stabilization Force” (ISF), was authorized to commit a regime-change operation. This was an open reward for Israel’s genocide and the whole “ceasefire” process has now resulted in US boots on the ground in southern occupied Palestine, as the American armed forces construct a military base and run the so-called “Civil-Military Coordination Centre” (CMCC).
Be that as it may, the ISF that the Trump administration envisages being launched sometime next month appears to be falling apart before it is even born. There is no way this version of Phase Two can work. Another issue is that this is the only version of Phase Two that the Israelis will accept.
In other words, expect the so-called ceasefire to drag on until the Israelis find it untenable and decide that the time has come for them to accelerate their genocide once again. This could take many months, but it appears to be the most probable outcome nonetheless.
War Scenarios: Iran, Lebanon, or Both
However, collapsing the ceasefire would be dangerous if it were done prior to completing Israel’s set tasks on the other fronts. Syria could flare up at any moment, but it is not a significant military threat. It is likely that some armed groups could root themselves in southern Syria, at least temporarily, but will not receive the backing of the administration in Damascus that remains on a knife-edge as it is. An ISIS insurgency in Syria could additionally be on the cards, providing an opportunity to the Israelis, more than posing a threat.
So then we have Iran and Hezbollah, the two real threats to Israel. If they are both fought independently of one another, the Israelis have proven themselves capable of fighting them to a stalemate. Yet, if both Hezbollah and Iran are fighting as a unified force in a coordinated effort, the Israelis could be in for some major trouble. Israel is clearly the aggressor and is constantly provoking both, but this does not negate the fact that there is a real threat there.
Understanding this, the Israelis have three options: attack Lebanon first, attack Iran first, or launch an offensive with US backing against both.
Perhaps the most obvious strategy would be to launch an attack on Lebanon first. The upside of such a strategy would be to try and weaken Hezbollah militarily and politically again, with the goal being to take them out of a future confrontation with Iran, robbing Tehran of a ground force with which to attack the Israelis.
The downsides of this strategy are numerous. To begin with, the Israelis do not want to get dragged deep into Lebanese territory and bogged down in a costly war that could last many months. It would grind down their forces and leave them vulnerable. All Hezbollah has to do to ensure the war continues is to ignore calls for a ceasefire and continue firing at a steady pace toward targets in Haifa and Tel Aviv, which will make it hard for the Israeli army to withdraw and force them to keep expending soldiers and resources on the ground.
Israel’s best bet in the event of war on Lebanon is to carry out more high-profile assassinations, but only one will really make a difference: the murder of Hezbollah’s Secretary General, Sheikh Naim Qassem. This would indeed deal a significant blow to Hezbollah. Yet, if they fail, the absence of this tactical victory will put Tel Aviv in a tough position. It is clear that unless they have another pager-style attack up their sleeves, they cannot achieve much else beyond assassinations and hitting some military sites; neither will result in the total defeat of their enemies.
Even worse, if they try and fail with their assassination strategy, only to begin suffering unexpected blows, Hezbollah will quickly revive its image and place itself in a much stronger position politically in Lebanon. The only potential contingency that Israel has is to weaponize Salafist militant groups and use them to cause instability, similar to how they are currently causing chaos across Syria, even with the president being a former ISIS and al-Qaeda leader.
To attack Iran first, the idea would be to go after significant figures in the opening round, perhaps achieving the assassination of Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, then striking critical infrastructure and attempting to use collaborator proxies to stir civil unrest across the nation. This could, of course, backfire massively, even triggering groups like Hezbollah and the Iraqi PMU to get involved.
Attacking both at the same time is a different game altogether. It guarantees an enormous war, but the potential upside is reaching a quicker stalemate as the situation deteriorates. If the Israelis can receive US backing throughout, then perhaps the thinking is to land significant blows to Iranian infrastructure that will weaken the government in the long run, while also committing mass-scale destruction across Lebanon.
Under such a scenario, the US role is vital because the Israelis will require American help to land any serious blows on Iran, especially as their attacks on Lebanon would involve bombing campaigns comparable to what was done in Gaza. Israel’s style of warfare has always been to start its attacks with major blows through assassinations, then adjust the scale of its bombing according to the responses it receives. There could therefore be a feeling-out process in such a war.
The potential downsides to this strategy are tremendous. If Iran truly is seeking to deal much larger blows in any upcoming conflict, Israel may suffer major hits to its critical infrastructure. Also, within the first weeks of any conflict with Tehran, air defence munitions will begin running out. That means that if the war lasts a month, both Iran and Hezbollah will be able to saturate Israel with drones around the clock that they will not be able to stop.
Should Ansarallah in Yemen and the PMU in Iraq play support roles, they will also enjoy much greater success than they previously did with their own drone and missile attacks. If Hezbollah also decides to go on the offensive, Israeli ground forces may suffer enormous casualties among their ranks, the likes of which cannot be covered up.
A best-case scenario for Israel in a war with both Lebanon and Iran is to make it short, using US leverage to broker a ceasefire within the first few weeks. If that fails, it is difficult to imagine Israel faring well. Victory will hinge upon successful assassinations and large hits to civilian infrastructure, scoring blows designed to do long-term damage.
Realistically, Iran and Hezbollah—assuming they possess the capabilities and survive the initial blows—will seek to drag the war out for as long as possible. If they can remain in the fight for months, refusing calls for a ceasefire, they can dictate the future terms of any agreement after bringing Israel to its knees. Evidently, this is easier said than done and such a conflict could go in any direction.
It suffices to say that with Israel seeking these wars, it has truly done this to itself. The desire is to achieve total victory, meaning weakening its enemies to the degree that it becomes the undisputed power in West Asia and is free to pursue its “Greater Israel Project” vision, including broad Arab normalization deals in the process. Failure could lead to total downfall.
https://www.palestinechronicle.com/as-trump-talks-peace-israel-decides-where-to-attack-next-analysis/
--------
‘If Palestine Dies, Humanity Dies’: The Critical Case for Palestinian Solidarity with South America
December 21, 2025
The current geopolitical climate is defined by an intensifying use of “maximum pressure” by the US administration. This strategy, combining crippling economic sanctions, diplomatic isolation, and the labelling of resistance movements as “terrorists” has been applied with precision to both Palestine and its most vocal allies.
War on Global South
In late 2025, the US naval presence in the Caribbean and the “State Sponsor of Terror” designations for Cuba and Venezuela are seen by analysts not as isolated foreign policy decisions, but as a coordinated effort to dismantle the autonomy of the Global South.
For Palestinians, these nations are fellow travellers on a roadmap of enforced scarcity and systematic erasure.
Palestinian support for these nations is a rational response to decades of unwavering, principled commitment. Cuba remains the bedrock of this alliance; as the first nation in the hemisphere to recognize the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and the provider of medical education to thousands of Palestinians, Havana offers a model of internationalism that resists even under a sixty-year blockade.
In Venezuela, the Bolivarian movement has consistently used its oil wealth and diplomatic platform to amplify the Palestinian cause. By rejecting the Abraham Accords and maintaining that “the Palestinian cause is the cause of all humanity,” Caracas has positioned itself as an essential buffer against the total diplomatic liquidation of Palestinian rights.
Supporting Venezuela is, for Palestinians, a defence of the very diplomatic infrastructure that prevents their cause from being silenced in international forums.
Palestine as a Rally Cry
The Palestine-Global South alliance has expanded significantly with the emergence of South Africa and Colombia as legal and moral leaders. South Africa’s historic filing at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), supported by Colombia, Bolivia, and Chile, has redefined the conflict as a legal struggle against genocide.
Colombia’s transition under Gustavo Petro from a military client of Israel to a leading voice for a global arms embargo highlights the crumbling of traditional colonial alliances.
Palestinians recognize that Colombia’s internal struggle — to move past a history of state violence and paramilitary repression — is inextricably linked to the Palestinian struggle against occupation. When Petro declares that Si “muere Palestina, muere la humanidad” – if Palestine dies, humanity dies – he is articulating a shared destiny that transcends geography.
The true durability of this bond lies in “people-to-people” solidarity, often operating ahead of official state policy.
In Brazil, while the government maintains pragmatic trade, the Movimento dos Trabalhadores Rurais Sem Terra (MST) and various trade unions have launched massive boycotts against Israeli agribusiness, linking the dispossession of Brazilian peasants to the theft of Palestinian land.
This union-led resistance is mirrored in Colombia and South Africa, where port workers and labour federations have refused to handle Israeli cargo. These acts of “labour internationalism” transform solidarity from a sentiment into a material force.
For the Palestinian worker, the sight of a South African dockworker or a Colombian coal miner risking their livelihood to halt the machinery of genocide is the ultimate validation of their struggle.
New World Order
The alliance between Palestine and these targeted nations is an analytical necessity. It recognizes that the mechanisms used to occupy Gaza are the same as those used to destabilize Latin American democracies: the weaponization of the dollar, the monopolization of military technology, and the criminalization of dissent.
By standing with Cuba, Venezuela, Colombia, and other countries, Palestinians are not just reciprocating support; they are participating in a global project to build an alternative world order. This is a front where sovereignty is indivisible, a conviction that the liberation of the Palestinian people is the final, necessary chapter in the decolonization of the entire Global South.
https://www.palestinechronicle.com/if-palestine-dies-humanity-dies-the-critical-case-for-palestinian-solidarity-with-south-america/
------
‘Lullaby’: A Song of Solidarity, Memory, and Resistance for Palestine
December 21, 2025
By Romana Rubeo
This December, a powerful new single titled Lullaby emerged not simply as a piece of music, but as a cultural and political intervention, one rooted in Palestinian history and directed toward tangible humanitarian support for Gaza.
Released as part of the Together for Palestine initiative, the song reimagines a well-known Palestinian folk melody, Yamma Mwel El Hawa, transforming it into a collective act of remembrance and solidarity at a time when Gaza’s devastation at the hands of Israel has been relentlessly normalized.
The decision to release Lullaby followed months of large-scale mobilization by Together For Palestine, including a major benefit concert held at London’s OVO Arena Wembley, which brought together Palestinian and international artists and raised millions in humanitarian aid for Gaza.
Crucially, Lullaby is not an external gaze imposed on Palestine. Its foundation lies in Palestinian cultural memory.
The melody itself belongs to a long oral tradition in which lullabies function not only as songs of comfort, but as vessels of survival, intimacy, and continuity under conditions of dispossession.
By working from this tradition rather than composing an abstract ‘song for Gaza’, the project situates itself inside Palestinian experience, not alongside it.
The artists involved reflect that grounding. Palestinian vocalists Nai Barghouti, Lana Lubany, and Amena El Abd are central to the track, not decorative. Their voices carry the emotional weight of the song, shaping its tone and restraint.
They are joined by international artists, including Peter Gabriel, Brian Eno, Neneh Cherry, Celeste, Dan Smith, Leigh-Anne Pinnock, and the London Community Gospel Choir, who participate in a clearly supportive role, lending reach without displacing authorship.
This balance is deliberate, and it sharply distinguishes Lullaby from earlier eras of humanitarian pop.
For decades, Western charity music has relied on a white-saviour framework: Africa or the Middle East as an abstract site of suffering, redeemed through Western conscience and celebrity visibility. Those projects frequently cantered on the moral performance of the artist rather than the political reality of those affected.
Lullaby seems to reject that model entirely. It does not aestheticize Palestinian pain, nor does it frame Gaza as a passive recipient of empathy. There is no narrative of rescue here, no call for salvation from the outside.
Instead, the official video insists on dignity, and its power lies in refusing to translate Palestinian grief into something palatable for Western consumption.
The campaign surrounding Lullaby reinforces this ethic. All proceeds are directed through the Together for Palestine fund and distributed to Palestinian-led humanitarian organizations, including Taawon, the Palestine Children’s Relief Fund, and the Palestine Medical Relief Society, supporting medical care and essential services for children and families under siege.
Lullaby does not ask the world to feel sorry for Palestine. It asks the world to listen to a people who have always spoken, sung, and remembered, even when every condition has been imposed to silence them.
https://www.palestinechronicle.com/lullaby-a-song-of-solidarity-memory-and-resistance-for-palestine/
-------
Floodgate: Greenstein on Israel’s Far Right and Weaponization of Antisemitism
December 21, 2025
In a wide-ranging interview on the Floodgate podcast, journalist Robert Inlakesh spoke with British author and anti-fascist activist Tony Greenstein about Israel’s long-standing relationship with the far right, the political uses of antisemitism, and the dangerous realignment now unfolding inside Western right-wing movements.
Drawing on Greenstein’s book Zionism During the Holocaust, the discussion traced how Zionism has historically converged with antisemitic forces, how Islamophobia has replaced older conspiracy narratives, and why Israel’s present political strategy may ultimately accelerate its own isolation.
What follows are five key takeaways from the conversation.
A Cover for Antisemitism
Greenstein challenges the widely promoted idea that antisemitism and anti-Zionism are interchangeable. Instead, he argues that support for Israel has often served as a shield for explicitly antisemitic actors, allowing them to “kosher” their racism.
“We see repeatedly people who are antisemitic being excused because they are pro-Israel,” Greenstein said. “Despite the fact that when it comes to Jews as individuals, they are as atrocious as any common-and-garden anti-Semite.”
He pointed to historical cases where regimes that persecuted Jews internally maintained close military and diplomatic ties with Israel, using that relationship as proof that they could not be antisemitic — even while Jews were being tortured, disappeared, or murdered.
“The argument was always the same,” he added. “They can’t be antisemitic because they support Israel — despite persecuting Jewish people.”
From “Jewish Conspiracy” to “Islamic Threat”
The interview traced how far-right conspiracy politics have shifted over time. While Jews once occupied the central role in imagined global conspiracies, Muslims now serve as the primary racialized “enemy” in Western far-right discourse.
“Muslims today are taking the place that Jews previously occupied in the 1930s,” Greenstein explained. “They are the major scapegoats — the ‘other’ for racists and ruling elites.”
He argued that Zionism has actively facilitated this transformation by positioning Israel as a civilizational outpost against Islam, thereby aligning itself with Islamophobic movements across Europe and North America.
“Zionism has aided and abetted that every step of the way,” he said. “It fits perfectly with the dominant racism in Europe and the United States today.”
Israel’s Alignment with the Far Right Is Structural
Responding to questions about whether Israel’s far-right alliances represent a strategic error, Greenstein rejected the idea that this shift is merely tactical or recent.
“Zionism was always a settler-colonial project,” he said. “And when there’s a conflict between socialism and nationalism, Zionism always wins.”
While early Labour Zionists marketed Israel as a progressive, egalitarian society, Greenstein argued that this was largely a public relations strategy aimed at Western audiences.
“They were cleverer in the past,” he said. “They spoke the language of social democracy, but underneath, nothing has really changed.”
Today’s openly racist and genocidal rhetoric, he argued, is not a deviation but the unmasking of a project that no longer feels the need to disguise itself.
Gaza Has Accelerated the Right’s Internal Fractures
Inlakesh and Greenstein discussed growing divisions within the US right over Israel, particularly following the genocide in Gaza. While some factions remain fiercely pro-Israel, others have begun to question US support — not out of concern for Palestinians, but due to nationalist and isolationist impulses.
Greenstein warned that this shift carries serious risks.
“For those on the right who identify Israel with Jews, if they turn against Israel, they’ll turn against Jews,” he said.
He argued that Jewish communities aligning themselves with far-right movements are placing themselves in profound danger.
“The right is not, and never has been, your friend,” Greenstein said. “If you ally with forces like this, you cannot complain when they turn against you.”
Holocaust Memory Has Been Weaponized
The interview concluded with a sharp critique of mainstream Holocaust institutions, which Greenstein accused of abandoning universal anti-racist principles in favour of unconditional defence of Israel.
“Not one single Holocaust memorial organization has spoken clearly about the genocide in Gaza,” he said.
Instead, Greenstein noted, institutions have condemned comparisons, retracted statements, or remained silent — even as mass civilian destruction unfolds.
“Their message is not ‘Never Again’ in any universal sense,” he said. “It is support for apartheid in Israel and everything that follows from it.”
Rather than preventing atrocities, Holocaust memory has been transformed into a political instrument — one that justifies violence rather than confronting it.
The Biggest Disaster
Throughout the interview, Greenstein returned to a stark conclusion: Israel’s current path is unsustainable.
“Zionism is the biggest disaster Jewish people have ever had,” he said. “It brought them no safety, and it has aligned them with forces that will ultimately turn against them.”
As younger generations, including younger Jews, increasingly reject apartheid and genocide, the gap between state power and moral legitimacy continues to widen.
Whether Zionism can survive that contradiction, Greenstein suggested, is no longer an open question.
https://www.palestinechronicle.com/floodgate-greenstein-on-israels-far-right-and-weaponization-of-antisemitism/
-------
Hatred of Jews so often fixates on the Land of Israel
By URI PILICHOWSKI
DECEMBER 22, 2025
Anti-Semitism’s the hatred of the Jewish people. Hatred of the Jews focuses on many aspects of the Jewish people. It accuses Jews of killing Jesus, controlling the governments of the world, having an outsized influence on the world’s economy, and even killing non-Jewish children as part of Jewish ritual. Yet, of all the hate aimed at the Jewish, the attention on the Jewish people’s relationship with the Land of Israel has always been a recurring theme of antisemitism.
Rabbi Shlomo Yitzhaki, commonly known by the Rabbinic acronym “Rashi,” was a French rabbi and commentator who lived from 1040 to 1105 and authored comprehensive commentaries on the Talmud and the Bible. He is widely regarded as one of the greatest Jewish scholars to have ever lived, and his works have been studied by millions of Jews every single day since his death.
In one of the first comments he ever published, he asked, “The Torah which is the law book of Israel, should have commenced with the verse (Exodus 12:2) ‘This month shall be for you the first of the months,’ which is the first commandment given to the Jewish people. What is the reason, then, that it commences with the account of the Creation?”
Rashi explained that God began the Torah with the recording of the Creation so that He could give the basis for the Jewish people to take the heritage of other nations. For should the nations of the world accuse the Jewish people of being robbers – because the Jewish people took the lands of the seven nations of Canaan by force when they conquered it after the exodus from Egypt – the Jewish people can respond by saying that the entire earth belongs to God, and he can give it to whomever He wants.
Rashi’s explanation and the principle he taught about the justification for the Jewish people ruling, settling, and living in the Land of Israel is just as relevant today as it was a thousand years ago when he wrote his commentary.
As Ida Audeh the editor of Jerusalem Story, wrote, “Throughout their conquest of Palestine, Zionists adopted propaganda storylines that they took over a “land without a people” and “made the desert bloom” upon creating their state in 1948. It was a way of turning their wholesale theft and ethnic cleansing of an inhabited land into a miraculous tale. Far from taking over a barren, uninhabited landscape, Zionist forces and Jewish settlers violently and brazenly took over an intact, ready-made country.”
Israel and the Christian world
The Catholic Church spent centuries teaching that the proof of God rejecting the Jewish people was their exile from the Land of Israel. As Dr. Amnon Rammon, senior researcher at the Jerusalem Institute for Policy Research wrote, “The establishment of the State of Israel in 1948 posed a ‘complex theological challenge’ to the churches and the Christian world. How should the Christian world refer to the Jewish people’s success in establishing a sustainable Jewish state in the Holy Land, in light of the traditional Christian conception according to which the Jewish people were sentenced to punishment by exile and constant humiliation?”
Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik focused on this rejection of Catholic theology as one of the most important aspects of the establishment of the State of Israel. “The theological arguments of Christian theologians to the effect that the Holy One has taken away from the Community of Israel its rights to the Land of Israel, and that all of the biblical promises relating to Zion and Jerusalem now refer in an allegorical sense to Christianity and the Christian Church, were all publicly shown to be false, baseless contentions by the establishment of the State of Israel,” he wrote, saying that “the central axiom of Christian theology was shattered.”
There is a teaching in the Talmud, “God irrigates the Land of Israel Himself, and the rest of the world by a representative.” In his commentary on the homiletic portions of the Talmud, the Rashba wrote, “The Land [of Israel] is called God’s treasure, and God’s ‘will’ is within it. The Land of Israel, the chosen land, was given to the Jewish people, the chosen people…The events in the Land of Israel are not directed by an angel or representative; all of the events occurring in the Land of Israel are always under the providence of God Himself.”
According to Rashba, God relates to the land through specific providence, rather than general providence as He does in other lands. General providence is what we call nature, i.e., the regular set patterns under which the world operates. While created by God, He does not dictate every individual act of nature. The Land of Israel is the only place in the world where all events are always under the providence of God Himself and is a sign of God’s unique relationship with the Jewish people.
For anti-Semites, the Jewish people’s relationship to the land stands as a constant reminder that the Jewish people play a unique theological role among the community of nations, which is an abomination to those who hate the Jews. Anti-Semites focus so much of their hate on the Land and State of Israel in order to reject the notion that the Jewish people play a unique theological role.
This hate acts as a lesson for the Jewish people to appreciate their exceptional role in the world and the centrality of the Land of Israel to Judaism and their nation. Far from being just a place to live, the Land of Israel is an essential aspect of Jewish identity and can never be separated from Judaism and the Jewish people.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-880680
------
Genocide accusations against Israel ignore Hamas’s explicit ideology
By ROBERT RABIL
DECEMBER 21, 2025
A troubling and increasingly influential narrative has taken hold worldwide, one that seeks to delegitimize Zionism, demonize Israel, and justify rising hostility toward Jews. Israel is now routinely accused of committing genocide against Palestinians.
This charge has become the rhetorical backbone for claiming that anti-Zionism is wholly distinct from antisemitism. It circulates across social media, on university campuses, and even in mainstream news, often accompanied by language portraying Israelis and Jews as inherently barbaric or subhuman.
But such sweeping and inflammatory accusations demand scrutiny. According to the UN Genocide Convention, genocide requires intent to destroy “in whole or in part” a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group. The critical question – rarely asked – is: where is Israel’s intent to destroy the Palestinian people?
It was Hamas, not Israel, that initiated the current war with the atrocities of October 7. Those attacks were not spontaneous, nor were they merely acts of resistance. They were the brutal enactment of a long-standing ideological commitment – one that is openly genocidal.
Hamas’s 1988 founding charter proclaims:
“Israel will exist until Islam will obliterate it.”
“There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad.”
All of Palestine is a permanent Islamic endowment that cannot be ceded.
Jews are portrayed as behind wars, revolutions, and world disasters.
These are not stray phrases; they reflect the organization’s worldview. Even the 2017 revised charter – often described as a “moderate revision” – does not renounce violence, does not accept Israel’s existence, and still frames the conflict as a religious struggle requiring “resistance” until “liberation.”
Hamas operates within an ideological network that reinforces and legitimizes its eliminationist aims. Iran’s Islamic Republic has long portrayed Jews as enemies of Islam and Israel as an entity that must be removed. Ayatollah Khomeini asserted that Jews conspired against Islam from its earliest days; Ayatollah Khamenei has repeatedly referred to Israel as a “cancerous tumour that must be eliminated.”
Hezbollah, Iran’s primary regional proxy, echoes this view in its 1985 manifesto: “Our struggle will end only when this entity is obliterated.” These are direct, unambiguous statements of intent, not political hyperbole.
Where genocidal intent actually lies
The events of October 7 were thus the predictable outcome of a doctrine that glorifies death and treats civilians as tools. Hamas embeds fighters, rockets, and command centres in densely populated areas – schools, mosques, hospitals – precisely to maximize civilian casualties. Every Palestinian death is exploited to indict Israel while shielding Hamas from responsibility.
This is not a miscalculation; it is a method. One Hamas spokesman infamously declared: “The wombs of our women will replace the martyrs many times over.” Human life becomes a renewable military resource, not a sacred value.
Yet despite this documented ideology, the accusation that Israel is committing genocide dominates international discourse. This is a profound moral inversion. Israel is responding to an attack intended to kill as many Jews as possible. It faces an enemy that embeds itself among civilians and openly seeks the destruction of the Jewish state.
But on many campuses and in protests across Western democracies, Hamas’s explicit genocidal aims are ignored or rationalized, while Israel is cast as the primary villain. This distortion does more than misrepresent the conflict; it fuels the delegitimization of Israel and normalizes antisemitism, now cloaked in the mantle of human rights and social justice. It also erodes the moral framework needed to protect civilians, Israeli and Palestinian alike.
A truthful accounting begins with a basic, vital fact: Genocidal ideology lies at the core of Hamas’s project, not Israel’s.
To deny this is to reward extremism and encourage further violence. Mislabelling Israel’s war against Hamas as genocide not only distorts reality; it obscures the true obstacles to peace and incentivizes the forces most committed to perpetual conflict. The Jewish people – who have endured millennia of persecution culminating in the Holocaust – now see their national home portrayed as uniquely illegitimate, even murderous. Meanwhile, the openly genocidal intent of Israel’s enemies is dismissed as irrelevant or excused as resistance.
The world urgently needs clarity – not slogans. Confronting Hamas’s ideology honestly is essential for protecting civilians, upholding human rights, and preserving any hope for coexistence. Only by rejecting this dangerous inversion of truth can we begin to move toward a more just and peaceful future for both Palestinians and Israelis. Thank you.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-880884
------
From distance to dialogue: Rethinking Israel-Armenia ties
By DIVYA MALHOTRA
DECEMBER 21, 2025
For decades, Israel and Armenia have maintained a polite but cautious diplomatic distance: two small democracies separated by strategic calculations, competing regional alignments, and persistent diplomatic underinvestment. These were not natural barriers. They were artefacts of geopolitics that allowed mistrust to grow and genuine areas of convergence to remain unexplored.
Today, however, shifting regional realities offer an opening for a deeper, more meaningful relationship; one grounded not only in shared interests but in the profound historical and cultural ties that both nations have long overlooked.
The most visible source of tension has been military asymmetry. Israel’s long-standing defence partnership with Azerbaijan, including the supply of advanced weapons systems used in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflicts, left many in Yerevan feeling strategically outmatched and diplomatically sidelined.
Armenia’s subsequent 2024 recognition of the state of Palestine, framed domestically as a principled stance, was interpreted by many Israelis as a signal of political distance at a moment of heightened regional volatility. Each side saw the other through the lens of alignment rather than opportunity.
It is no coincidence that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s 2025 recognition of the Armenian genocide carried enormous symbolic power. Despite political differences, Israelis and Armenians understand the language of memory, trauma, and survival. Their identities are shaped by parallel narratives of persecution, diaspora endurance, and cultural reconstruction against overwhelming odds.
Armenia is seeking new partners
A striking recent development underscores how fluid Armenia’s foreign policy is becoming and why Israel cannot let this moment slip.
On November 25, Armenian Deputy Foreign Minister Vahan Kostanyan visited Jerusalem for high-level consultations with Israeli officials signalling Yerevan’s interest in recalibrating ties beyond traditional alignments. The talks touched on opportunities in hi-tech, medicine, agriculture, and tourism as areas of mutual interest and formed part of the 12th round of political consultations between the two foreign ministries, reflecting a degree of diplomatic momentum not seen in years.
Interestingly, earlier this month, Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan publicly stated that he hopes Turkey will “open its border with Armenia and establish diplomatic relations.” But given the long history of conflict with Ankara and its deep alliance with Azerbaijan, any such rapprochement will be cautious and calculated: not based on trust but national interest and strategic necessity.
This reality should signal to Jerusalem that Armenia is actively seeking new partners who can assure its security and sovereignty, presenting Israel with a compelling moment to reach out before these openings tilt toward other great-power influences.
Armenia's living heritage in Jerusalem
Jerusalem itself embodies this shared inheritance. The Armenian presence in the Old City dates back over 1,600 years, with the Armenian Patriarchate establishing its seat there in the 4th century CE. Today, approximately 2,000 Armenians live in the Armenian Quarter, maintaining churches, archives, monastic institutions, and cultural landmarks that have survived empires, wars, and geopolitical upheavals.
What is less known but profoundly important is that Armenian pilgrimages remain a vibrant link between Yerevan and Jerusalem. According to community organizations, over 1,000 Armenians visit Jerusalem annually for religious festivals, heritage tours, and cultural programs, generating both economic and emotional sustenance for the local Armenian community. These pilgrimages are not passive tourism; they are acts of historical continuity that bind Armenian identity to Jerusalem’s sacred landscape.
Armenian artisans have also shaped Jerusalem’s material culture: its iconic blue-and-white ceramics, its tilework, and its artistic motifs, a legacy preserved today through the work of Armenian ceramic studios still active in the city.
This living and breathing Armenian heritage is one of Israel’s most under-leveraged diplomatic assets. It offers a natural platform for cultural diplomacy, archival cooperation, educational exchanges, and museum partnerships. In an era when soft power matters more than ever, these connections can humanize bilateral relations and build constituencies for collaboration.
Toward a strategic reset
Rebuilding ties does not begin with grand gestures. It begins with steady, practical engagement: expanding cooperation in water technology, agriculture, medical innovation, and civilian cyber capacity: areas free of geopolitical friction. But technical cooperation alone is insufficient.
Israel should also invest in heritage diplomacy, which includes supporting restoration initiatives in the Armenian Quarter, facilitating research exchanges, and strengthening the relationship with the Armenian Patriarchate. These initiatives cost little yet build symbolic capital that transcends transactional politics.
Importantly, none of this requires Israel to dilute its partnership with Azerbaijan. Strategic diversification is not strategic betrayal. A confident regional actor must be capable of balancing multiple relationships without becoming hostage to zero-sum assumptions.
In parallel, an Israel-Armenia Strategic Dialogue should be institutionalized to quietly address sensitive issues, including defence exports, regional signalling, and crisis communication. Friendly countries like India, Greece, Cyprus, along with the US, could also be included in multilateral forums or talks, as observers or partners.
Israel and Armenia are bound by more than geopolitical convenience. They are nations whose identities are anchored in memory, whose diasporas influence global conversations, and whose cultural footprints stretch across millennia. As the South Caucasus undergoes a profound transformation and the Middle East enters a new diplomatic era, Israel has a rare chance to convert dormant affinities into durable strategic capital.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-880888
------
Economic recovery must be Israel’s priority for 2026
By ROBERT SINGER
DECEMBER 21, 2025
For more than two years, Israel has lived under conditions that would have broken most societies. War on multiple fronts, mass displacement, economic disruption, international pressure, and internal strain have tested the country’s resilience to its limits.
Nonetheless, a striking truth has emerged: Israel is not merely surviving. It is recovering, and in some respects, outperforming most of the world.
Earlier this month, The Economist ranked Israel as having the third-strongest economy in 2025, noting that “Israel has continued its strong recovery from the chaos of 2023.”
In a year when investors were told to temper expectations, the publication observed that no other country had delivered better stock-market performance in local-currency terms than Israel.
This performance did not happen by accident. It is the product of deep economic fundamentals, technological innovation, disciplined financial institutions, and, above all, a society that refused to surrender its future.
Prioritizing economic recovery
However, resilience alone is not a strategy. Israel now stands at a critical juncture: whether to rely on its historic ability to endure, or to actively prioritize economic recovery as the foundation for national renewal.
That choice matters, because the scars of the past two years are real and their effects still linger.
At the same time, the state must give special attention to reservists, right in the prime working ages, who drive the economy, and recognize that they are not only an essential security force but also a vital engine of economic growth that must be protected, especially given the hundreds of days of reserve service and unique challenges they face.
The latest Israeli Society Barometer, published by the Centre for Jewish Impact, in partnership with the Geocartography Knowledge Group, offers a sober but hopeful snapshot of the country’s mood.
Conducted after the return of all living hostages from Gaza, an emotional turning point for the nation, the survey reveals a society balancing cautious optimism with deep fatigue and unresolved strain.
A national mission
or Israelis themselves, the message is clear. Economic recovery now tops the national priority list, cited by 22% of respondents, ahead of even security concerns. Younger Israelis, in particular, see economic stability as the gateway to rebuilding their lives after years defined by uncertainty. Without jobs, growth, and opportunity, no amount of military success or diplomatic positioning will translate into long-term resilience.
Encouragingly, optimism is rising. Forty-five percent of Israelis believe life will improve in the next six months, a significant jump from earlier in the year. Two-thirds believe Israel can once again become a unified society, even if that confidence is cautious. A strong majority, 76%, continues to express pride in Israeli citizenship, a powerful anchor in turbulent times.
Yet warning lights are flashing. Only one-third of Israelis currently rate their sense of personal security as good. Trust in institutions remains fragile, and social cohesion is strained. The relationship between Israel and Jewish communities worldwide, historically a pillar of Israel’s strength, is perceived by half of Israelis as having grown more distant.
This is precisely why the economy must now move from being a by-product of resilience to a national mission in its own right.
Economic recovery is not only about GDP growth or stock prices. It is about restoring trust, rebuilding the social contract and giving citizens a sense that tomorrow can be better than today. It is about enabling families to return to routine, businesses to invest with confidence, and young people to imagine their future inside Israel rather than elsewhere.
Global trade
It is also about global economic ties.
Israel’s strongest recoveries have always been outward-looking. Trade, investment, innovation partnerships, and diaspora economic engagement are not luxuries; they are strategic assets. At a time when Israel’s legitimacy is contested in international forums, its indispensability to global markets, technology, and supply chains remains one of its most under-appreciated sources of strength.
Reprioritizing the economy means accelerating infrastructure investment, supporting small and medium-sized businesses that bore the brunt of wartime disruption, and ensuring that Israel remains a magnet for global capital despite political and security challenges. It means recognizing that economic confidence feeds national confidence, and that prosperity is a high form of security.
Israeli society today is carrying deep pain and fatigue, yet is simultaneously demonstrating remarkable civic resilience. That resilience has carried Israel through the darkest period.
Nonetheless, recovery requires something more deliberate – a leadership that understands that economic stability is not a secondary goal, but the platform on which unity, security, and global standing are rebuilt.
Israel has proven it can survive and endure. The task of 2026 is to ensure it can thrive and flourish, not despite the past two years, but because it chose to rebuild wisely after them.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-880891
-------
URL:https://newageislam.com/middle-east-press/middle-east-israel-genocide-gaza/d/138105
New Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism