Growing Anti-Semitism Causing Concern

When the subject of anti-Semitism is discussed many areas in the world are more likely to be included before anybody would even think of including the United States as a place of major concern. The most often chosen discussed areas where there is growing anti-Semitism are the Muslim Middle East and North Africa and Europe. The Muslim anti-Semitism is often claimed to be driven mostly over Israel and the Palestinian statehood issue. This is not the entire truth and more than likely being chosen as the reason behind anti-Semitism is done so as not to need to address the historic anti-Semitism which has risen periodically throughout Muslim lands since the inception of Islam in Mecca and especially Medina. Another misrepresentation has been the claim that after the Holocaust and the end of World War II that anti-Semitism had disappeared from Europe and the West. The truth is that anti-Semitism had simply retreated beneath the societal radar and had become unacceptable which only served to put it in apparent remission but did not cure these peoples of the disease called anti-Semitism. The proof of this having been the case is the rapid growth of the national socialist political parties which have adopted much of the original Nazi racial puritan ethic which has a definitive anti-Semitic strain driving the movement. This has been most evident in those countries which are experiencing economic difficulties or other stressful pressures on their social fabric. Still, much of the public try and dismiss these political groups as passing blips on the political spectrum and simply if ignored they will pass away before they cause any real harm. If my memory serves me, that was exactly the thoughts of polite European society about the rise of the national socialists in Germany and elsewhere prior to their rise to power in Nazi Germany, and the rest is, as they say, history.

 

North America and the United States in particular are considered to be paragons of acceptance where anti-Semitism is something which has been relegated to a miniscule minority whose numbers are so minute as not to be any actual concern. If this were only true. What masks much of the anti-Semitism is that it exists in the form of either anti-Israel or anti-Zionist political movements. The claim that virulent anti-Israel and anti-Zionist adherents are protesting only Israel and do not necessarily have any hatred towards Jews is more often a false premise than truth. This article is not intended to argue this point but rather to address the rise of anti-Semitism within North America and particularly within the United States. Where in the general society there is not much evident anti-Semitism in any of its incarnations; but in the arenas from which our future leadership is being molded and educated, the elite colleges and universities, the growth of anti-Semitism is extremely troubling. The initial foot in the door has been the anti-Israel, anti-Zionist, and pro-Palestinian movements and in particular the BDS Movement which demands Universities and whomever else they can persuade to fight Israel through Boycotts, Divestment, and Sanctions. The one item which these groups will stress and go to great lengths to emphasize are that under no circumstance are they or do they condone in any form anti-Semitism. To quote Macbeth, “The lady doth protest too much, methinks.”

 

The truth is in their actions and we need to judge these people by their actions and not simply listen to their words. On many campuses there exist different main events behind those utilizing the political difficulties concerning Israel in order to promote their masked anti-Semitism. These are BDS Protests and Palestinian Solidarity Weeks or Months. These events are often accompanied by general measures taken presumably to demonstrate the “sins” of the State of Israel. One such is to present eviction notices to certain students that they are to leave their dorm room within the next few hours as they are scheduled to be destroyed. This is done implying that Israel simply randomly destroys Palestinian homes for absolutely no reason other than just because they are Palestinian owned homes. The students whose doors receive the fake eviction notices are known Jewish students, Hillel members, and those known to support Israel. Another event is to place checkpoints around the campus where any students wearing Star of David jewelry, Yarmulkes, or other ways are known to be Jews are stopped and treated roughly and demeaned simply because they are Jews and presumed to support Israel. The truth is they seldom give such treatment to Christian or other supporters of Israel. Then there are the Walls of Shame where they place a wall that supposedly represents the anti-terror fence which in urban areas or areas where snipers have targeted Israeli homes and vehicles they erect actual walls but the vast majority of the barrier uses fencing. Often this wall is covered with the names of Palestinians who have been arrested by Israel on terrorist charges, also the names of terrorists Israel has killed in the commission of acts of terror and even the names of those who died in suicide bombings for which they blame Israel. As these demonstrations have grown in size and numbers there has come with them a general atmosphere on numerous campuses where all things Israel are condemned and anybody who supports Israel is scorned and many professors are known to grade these students harshly with some even being failed. Some campuses the atmosphere has grown so toxic that Jewish students have taken to hiding the fact that they are Jewish and those who have not taken such precautions are physically attacked. The situation has reached such epidemic proportions that there are currently lawsuits filed against Universities for not providing a safe and secure educational environment and not protecting students from religious persecutions in Federal Courts under civil rights laws.

 

But the problems of today will pale in comparison to what is likely to be coming in the near future. Directly resulting from the poisoned educational environment which casts Israel directly and Jews by inference as evil and undesirable entities and such premises tainting administrations especially in the social sciences will produce a core of future leaders tainted to varying extents as a result. The percentage does not need to be as significant as many would like to believe to do immense damage. The reality is that should the current trends continue to grow at the same rate as they have been growing in recent history, the problem will soon become a major influencing factor in our advanced educational systems. Studying such occurrences throughout history produces a very troubling picture where what begins as a small movement within the elite educational society will rapidly gain adherents and reach a societal movement often as quickly as a decade and more readily within three decades. The anti-Israel and anti-Zionist movement infecting the elite educational societies in the United States and in Canada are already closing in on their first decade and have grown significantly to the point that even some traditionally Jewish colleges and universities have supported BDS protests and Palestinian solidarity protests. One of the hotbeds of these movements has been the California College System, one of the largest university and college systems in the United States. The one factor which guarantees that these events and support structures driving them will remain well funded and will have all the resources they require is the simple fact that Saudi Arabia, Iran, the United Arab Emirates and other Muslim organizations will continue to supply monetary support. This support has been most evident when one researches the Middle East Departments of almost every American major university where Arabists hold most of the positions of power and influence. Where much of this problem has remained largely out of sight and is not covered in any depth in the mainstream media, the ramifications and ramifications of this situation will produce its foul and rotten fruit which will unfortunately become evident and recognized likely far too late to avoid the worst results even I might predict. This coming from one who is often dismissed as a pessimist but too often prove out in time to have been a realist.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Who Gets to Pick the Winner in Syria?

As the civil war continues to murder innocents with the latest estimate approaching one-hundred-thousand murdered civilians and over one and a half million refugees fled to neighboring Turkey and Jordan there is a group of nations attempting to influence who wins. The problem is that many of these outsiders are backing different forces which serve to extend the fighting possibly endlessly producing no winners, just increasing casualties in an endless procession. First we need to define the disparate groups and then find who is backing whom. The supposed home team definition would likely have to go the current President for life Bashir al-Assad and the Alawite tribe from which he comes. There are two sets that are considered rebel forces which sometimes cooperate and at other periods work either independently or actually impede each other. One rebel group consists mostly of members from the Muslim Brotherhood while the other consists of forces aligned with Jabhat al-Nusra which is the al-Qaeda terror group. Then there are two other groups which currently support Syrian President Bashir Assad but actually represent the Iranian interests and are likely to continue to engage in the war even after Assad collapses or is killed. These two groups are Hezballah, the terrorist group whose political wing currently leads the ruling coalition in Lebanon, and the IRGC, the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps, a group of fighters which make up a second military force roughly equivalent in size, equipment, training and capabilities to the Iranian Armed Forces used mostly to assist in foreign interventions, terrorist training internationally and domestically as required, and any other clandestine operations which may be assigned by the leadership of Iran. So, generally speaking there exist five groups vying to take control over all of Syria.

 

Oddly enough getting the teams all figured out who are operating within Syria is difficult enough, but trying to untangle the external interests and influences is far more complicated especially when dissecting their various motives. Let us first address the most up front, above board and obvious of the external influences. The most obvious is Turkey who is steadily supplying arms to both rebel forces for the most selfish of reasons, assuring their continued preeminence as the only stable rout for oil and gas pipelines. There is a further reason driving Turkey in providing arms for the rebel groups which is that there is no love lost between Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Syria President Bashir Assad as both view themselves as a leader in some future Muslim Caliphate, Assad as leader of the Arab nations in an Iranian Caliphate and Erdogan as leader of a reborn Ottoman Caliphate. Add to this that as long as there exists some sustained level of violence which would discourage construction of new oil and gas routes through Syria then Turkey, with its already existent pipelines, would remain the uncontested and sole route of pipelines for oil and gas from the Arabian Peninsula and related reserves.

 

Another supplier of arms to one of the rebel forces is Saudi Arabia who is backing the Muslim Brotherhood aligned rebels. The Saudi interest is the opposite of Turkey as the Saudis would very much like to have an additional player supplying pipelines to the Mediterranean Sea and into Europe as competition would result in lower prices for them in transporting their oil and gas. Furthermore, the Saudis are rivals of the Iranians and thus would love to see Bashir Assad removed from ruling Syria thus breaking the Iranian crescent in which Syria is a vital link connecting Iran and Iraq through to Lebanon and the ports of the Mediterranean Sea. The Saudi Arabians are supported by the rest of the members of the GCC, Gulf Cooperation Council; whose members are of far less military capabilities thus the Saudis make all the decisions. The Saudis are also counting on support by the United States but they may run into some surprises in that relationship which we will cover later.

 

Then there are those exterior forces supporting the Syrian military and Syrian President Bashir Assad and at the same time defending the Iranian interests. These two groups are the IRGC and the Hezballah terror group. Should Bashir Assad fall either by fearing being taken by the rebel groups who would likely give him treatment similar to that used to dispatch Libyan Dictator Muammar Gaddafi, a rather unpleasant death, these two groups would simply continue the fight in support of their true masters, the Iranians. To either of these forces the continuance of Bashir Assad as the President of Syria is simply something that makes their presence in the fight more readily explainable. Remove Assad and their real motivations are revealed and Iran would be uncovered as the true force behind Assad remaining in power. Another nation supporting Bashir Assad, even if in a somewhat limited manner, is Russia and its President Vladimir Putin. Russia has thus far limited their support to continuing to fill all past weapons orders they have agreed to with Syria and are preventing any overt support for the rebels such as interventions or establishment of a no-fly zone by the United States or NATO. The most disturbing participation by the Russians is their intent to follow through with the sale and supply of their S-300 Anti-Aircraft Missile Systems which would make any Israeli strikes to prevent chemical weapons or other game-changing weapons from being transferred to the Hezballah forces in Lebanon for use against Israel in the future more hazardous. There is one potential future situation which would prove most intriguing, if President Assad should be killed or otherwise removed from the situation, would Russia continue their support giving the future weapons shipments to the IRGC and Hezballah or would their interest in the situation in Syria be terminated.

 

And then there is the most troubling foreign influence, and that is the United States and President Obama. The obvious interpretation of the United States interests is that they are aligned with Saudi Arabia and supporting the Muslim Brotherhood and against the entirety of other forces. This façade also has another participant, Turkey, who also appears to work with the Saudis while also passing weapons to their intended recipient without question. Some of these weapons are intended for Jabhat al-Nusra as they are supplied from the al-Qaeda forces and influences who were involved in Libya. There have been rumors that the truth behind the catastrophe in Benghazi may have been related to attempts to prevent powerful and game-changing weapons, possibly stinger missiles, from being sent from Libya to undesirable recipients. Even if such a proposition were true, that is one truth that will never see the light of day. As is said, some secrets are secrets for a very good reason and as such must remain nothing more than a rumor, a whisper in the tempest and nothing more.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Turkey’s Erdogan and Russia’s Putin Ignore Obama’s Requests

The initial repercussions to President Obama dithering and retreating from enforcing his Syrian chemical weapons use “red line” have begun and the ramifications are far more damaging to world peace and security than anything that Syria’s Civil War could ever produce. The initial shot across the bow came from Turkey where Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan stated, “According to my plan, most probably I would be visiting Gaza in June.” Erdogan added referring to his intents to visit both Hamas leadership in Gaza and Mahmoud Abbas of the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah, “I place a lot of significance on this visit in terms of peace in the Middle East. I’m hoping that that visit will contribute to unity in Palestine.”

 

State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki responded to the news declaring that, “As we’ve said consistently, we oppose engagement with Hamas, a foreign terrorist organization which remains a destabilizing force in Gaza and the region. We urge all parties who share our interest in the creation of a Palestinian state to take steps that promote the resumption of peace talks between the Palestinians and Israel.” Additionally, Secretary of State John Kerry commented during his visit to Turkey that Prime Minister Erdogan’s trip to Gaza would be “better delayed” waiting until the time when the “right circumstances” existed. Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan struck back indignantly stating in response to Secretary Kerry’s impositions that “we wish he had not said that.”

 

Now the United States and the Obama Administration are facing a situation of explaining to Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu exactly what he gained and where were the promised reconciliations with Turkey that President Obama had implied as a promise should Israel apologize. The Israeli-Turkish relations remain in a deep freeze with the charges and other legal actions by Turkish citizens and government agencies proceeding apace despite the humbling position Netanyahu was forced into taking at the close of President Obama’s visit, the visit where the President had promised there would be no surprises. The result is a slightly weakened Israel who now has been forced into a submissive position with Turkey and appearing weaker to the entire run of nations in the Middle East and the rest of the Muslim World. The full ramifications of President Obama’s miscalculations and consistent demands on Israel along with his weakness showed Syria and his apparent subservience to the Muslim Brotherhood as he supports their rise to power resultant from the Arab Winter, Obama’s Arab Spring.

 

On another front which also has ramifications in Syria and throughout the Middle East comes from Russia. Despite the ramifications presented to Russian President Vladimir Putin by Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu on a recent visit in Moscow which advised that the selling of the anti-aircraft S-300 advanced missile systems to Syria thus changing dramatically the balance of power in the Middle East, the Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov stated in an interview with Lebanese-based Al-Mayadeen television, the Russian government “committed to the agreements” signed with Syria regarding the advanced missiles and will “fully carry them out.” Lavrov further explained, “We have no intention of breaking international law. However, we do not want our reputation as reliable suppliers of weapons to be affected.” These statements came two days after Prime Minister Netanyahu’s visit leaving no doubt whether the ramifications and effects on Israel were known and able to be part of the equation.

 

Further comments on what other driving influences were behind the Russian’s decision were recently provided by Russian parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee Alexei Pushkov. His supplementary information paints a troubling picture of the credibility possessed by President Obama and on his ability to influence anything concerning world affairs. Alexei Pushkov was quoted to say, “We’re opposed to no-fly zones, because they are the first step toward aerial attack. Syria asked Russia to help it defend itself from aerial assault.” He also went further in explaining that Russia’s decision to send S-300 missile systems to Syria is, in part, a message to the United States. A more forceful message was also made with the deployment of at least twelve warships to patrol near a Russian Navy base in Syria. This was likely to be a message to all parties including NATO members and Israel not to interfere in Syria as Russia will act to defend their interests.

 

Both of these situations cast strong aspersions on the ability of President Obama to apply pressure or power in any situation anywhere in the world. This is an obvious reaction to President Obama’s timidity concerning the reported use by Syrian troops’ use of chemical weapons. The rules of unintended consequences applies to these actions which were primarily resultant of President Obama’s inept mishandling over the Syrian red line threat yet Israel will also pay a hard price as well. Reinforcing these feelings were also the well documented examples of his slow and tepid response to any military situation. These include but are not limited to President Obama taking months to approve the mission against Osama bin Laden after he was advised that all was prepared and certainty of success was extremely high, his complete lack of concern in addressing the situation in Benghazi where the American Ambassador to Libya Stevens and three others were murdered when had immediate actions been taken or even proper security increased in a timely manner after receiving requests for more readiness, and the President dithering and almost losing the opportunity to interdict Somali pirates holding American hostages. One more item which has the potential to have devastating consequences is the Iranian drive for nuclear weapons. How is it possible for any world leader concerned over the Iranian nuclear program take seriously President Obama’s promise that he will act if such becomes necessary. He did not act in Benghazi, nor did he act after the Syrian use of chemical weapons, he took close to six months to pull the trigger on the Osama bin Laden raid, so how could anyone expect a timely response to prevent the Iranians from attaining not just one nuclear device but tens or even hundreds of such devices before President Obama even begins to consider acting. This threat does not only pose a large problem for Israel as it also has serious ramifications for Saudi Arabia and the other members of the GCC as well as Europe, though the Europeans have blinders on and refuse to even notice any threat. The world is facing the same type of threats that were evident towards the end of President Carter’s term in office with the Iranian Hostage Crisis, a Middle East on fire, and a Soviet threat spreading throughout much of the planet. The main difference is we will have four full years of these ramifications and not just ten to fifteen months as was the case with Jimmy Carter. President Obama will very likely fulfill the prediction some who were at the time dismissed as alarmist pessimists when claiming that he would be another President Carter except on steroids. If even the slightest possibility exists that such may prove true, that should scare the life out of anybody, it sure does many of us here at BTC.

 

Beyond the Cusp