Category: Politics

The Jerusalem Post was filled today with evaluations of the state of the war with Hamas and what we should do. Not all agreed, but there was a good deal of very good commentary. My own reflections this week agreed with some of the commentators. This week I was on a leaders’ retreat in the desert (Sde Boker) and also got the perspective of other leaders.

When Israel went to war after the terrible atrocities, Prime Minister Netanyahu declared that the goal was to end Hamas rule in Gaza and to dismantle the terror organization. Once this became the stated goal and was repeated numerous times (can anyone think it is less than 100 times?) anything less will be seen in the world especially the Arab world as a Hamas victory and will discredit Israel and empower Hamas. Some years ago, Lee Smith wrote the book The Strong Horse on the mentality of the nations in this part of the world. They want to bet on the strong horse and a weak-looking nation will not gain their alliance. The Abraham Accords was a bet on Israel as the strong horse to counter Iran’s power. New accords probably require Israel to defeat Hamas despite what these nations may publicly say.

However, I believe Israel’s leaders have fallen into a Hamas trap. One of the world leaders in game theory, a Nobel Prize winner, saw this trap clearly. By getting Israel to delay the war and focus on the hostages, the nation actually diminishes the chances of getting the hostages out and winning the war. With the Hamas propaganda machine estimated to reach 100 million, the more time that goes by the more Israel is under international pressure to end the war, which would be a disaster. Israel’s leaders originally said they had till January to win the war and then they would lose international support. But here it is April. Wow! And we are still dithering and talking about a cease-fire with only a third of the hostages released.

If Bibi had in the beginning said that Israel would punish Hamas badly and then withdraw, he could have declared victory. But now Israel is in danger of being the weak horse due to the claim. But Bibi was right in the goals because Israel had to end Hamas rule and the periodic terror in the south from Hamas rockets. But why did Bibi and his leaders think time was not on their side? Because the pictures of the destruction and civilian casualties would move the world against Israel since it was Israel’s bombs. Yes, Hamas is the real culprit and the one responsible for it. Despite the lying narratives about Israel violating International laws of war, the truth is that Israel does not violate the actual written laws, and although we do not know the civilian casualty numbers (we only have Hamas reports), Israel receives the brunt of the outrage, not Hamas. It is wrong and unjust and as John Spencer, the retired West Point expert on Urban warfare argues, Israel’s program to protect civilians and the proportion for urban war especially with civilian human shields, is very good.

Donald Trump tells Bibi, to get on with it, finish the job, and end Hamas rule. That seems like good advice and only such an advance might lead to a pause with hostage release.

The Jerusalem Post was filled today with evaluations of the state of the war with Hamas and what we should do.  Not all agreed, but there was a good deal of very good commentary.  My own reflections this week agreed with some of the commentators.  This week I was on a leaders’ retreat in the desert (Sde Boker) and also got the perspective of other leaders.

When Israel went to war after the terrible atrocities, Prime Minister Netanyahu declared that the goal was to end Hamas rule in Gaza and to dismantle the terror organization. Once this became the stated goal and was repeated numerous times (can anyone think it is less than 100 times?) anything less will be seen in the world especially the Arab world as a Hamas victory and will discredit Israel and empower Hamas.  Some years ago, Lee Smith wrote the book The Strong Horse on the mentality of the nations in this part of the world.  They want to bet on the strong horse and a weak-looking nation will not gain their alliance.  The Abraham Accords was a bet on Israel as the strong horse to counter Iran’s power.  New accords probably require Israel to defeat Hamas despite what these nations may publicly say.

However, I believe Israel’s leaders have fallen into a Hamas trap.  One of the world leaders in game theory, a Nobel Prize winner, saw this trap clearly.  By getting Israel to delay the war and focus on the hostages, the nation actually diminishes the chances of getting the hostages out and winning the war.  With the Hamas propaganda machine estimated to reach 100 million, the more time that goes by the more Israel is under international pressure to end the war, which would be a disaster.  Israel’s leaders originally said they had till January to win the war and then they would lose international support.  But here it is April. Wow!  And we are still dithering and talking about a cease-fire with only a third of the hostages released. 

If Bibi had in the beginning said that Israel would punish Hamas badly and then withdraw, he could have declared victory.  But now Israel is in danger of being the weak horse due to the claim.  But Bibi was right in the goals because Israel had to end Hamas rule and the periodic terror in the south from Hamas rockets.  But why did Bibi and his leaders think time was not on their side?  Because the pictures of the destruction and civilian casualties would move the world against Israel since it was Israel’s bombs.  Yes, Hamas is the real culprit and the one responsible for it.  Despite the lying narratives about Israel violating International laws of war, the truth is that Israel does not violate the actual written laws, and although we do not know the civilian casualty numbers (we only have Hamas reports), Israel receives the brunt of the outrage, not Hamas. It is wrong and unjust and as John Spencer, the retired West Point expert on Urban warfare argues, Israel’s program to protect civilians and the proportion for urban war especially with civilian human shields, is very good. 

Donal Trump tells Bibi, to get on with it, finish the job, and end Hamas rule.  That seems like good advice and only such an advance might lead to a pause with hostage release.

Israel is under enormous pressure from two directions. First, world leaders want a ceasefire in Gaza due to the number of civilian deaths in the Gaza War. They lie about what the International Laws of war say, and which laws Israel seeks to keep. They do not admit, as key analysts have noted that despite the level of human shielding, for an urban war, Israel’s percentage of civilian causalities is amazingly low. The world says that Israel should not go into Rafah. If she does not go, Hamas wins and can reconstitute and come into power again. 

 

The second pressure is from some of the hostage families. Not all of them agree. Their protests and the desire for some to see their family members released at any cost is rejected by the majority of Israelis, but their protests have led to awakening the pre-war protests against the Netanyahu government and are breaking down the strong national unity that characterized our nation back in November. 

 

However, could a temporary cease-fire and the release of hostages and Hamas murderers in Israel’s jails be the right decision to get the hostages back? Could such a cease-fire compromise Israel’s need to defeat Hamas? Maybe but maybe not. And these murderers could be killed in the onslaught after the cease-fire. Would that Israel have a death penalty for terrorist murderers? This would end trading for terrorists. 

 

The United States has pushed Israel not to invade Rafah, the last Gaza stronghold for Hamas, but there has been a “but.” The “but” is unless there is a credible plan to save the civilians whose number has burgeoned to maybe 1 ½ million in the very small area of Rafah. Israel could use the pause to get their plan in place to move most of the refugees in Rafah and other civilians back to the other areas of Gaza. They can set up checkpoints for all who return North, so no weapons can be taken with them. Until the actual cease-fire, they can clean up the other areas of Gaza so they can be re-occupied by civilians. Right now, it appears that Israel’s primary focus is now cleaning up the areas of Gaza outside Rafah. If Israel does adequate clean-up before the cease-fire, they can evacuate Rafah when the cease-fire ends. Yes, the war is drawn out, but maybe this is Israel’s strategy. 

 

The other big problem is Hezbollah in Lebanon. Israel does need to clean out Southern Lebanon and push the terrorists beyond the Litani River in Lebanon as is the UN resolution 1701. Israel should have done this 15 years ago. Would she continue to fight in Lebanon if there is a cease-fire? Probably not, but this is a huge problem since almost 100,000 Israelis have been displaced due to Hezbollah rockets. I do not see a solution to this. Prolonging their displacement until after a six-week ceasefire will be infuriating to them. Stay tuned. 

Do sign up for my Twitter account, Daniel Calvin Juster, to make sure you do not miss my writings.

 

Some of my friends and followers here may be confused about the idea of a two-state solution, a Jewish state and a Palestinian state living side by side in peace.  Twenty years ago, the majority of Israelis were in favor of a two-state solution to preserve the Jewish majority in the Jewish state and a way for Palestinian Arabs to have their own state where they could live with full national identity among the nations.   Many Messianic Jews in Israel supported this solution, but many did not.  Many were optimistic that this would happen.

Some Messianic Jews agreed with the right-wing nationalist Orthodox who looked at the book of Joshua and saw that Israel had a mandate to take the whole land.  Only by exercising faith and taking all the land from the Jordan to the Mediterranean can we have the blessing of God on Israel.  Palestinians who desire to live in peace and live with some level of autonomy but not citizenship can stay, and those who do not want to live in peace on this basis would have to leave.

Other Messianic Jews rejected this view called maximalist.  Why?  Because Israel has not repented of sin and come to fully embrace the Bible’s teaching on morals and life.  We have not come to Yeshua but even more, the state supports abortion, the LGBTQ agenda and so much more. Of course, the Orthodox Jews do reject these orientations.  We Messianic Jews believe in Israel and the return to the Land, but a counsel of taking the whole Land now may not have God’s favor.  It might bring destruction as the Zealots in the first century brought Roman destruction on Israel.  This is still a debate among Messianic Jews in the Land.

However, today the majority of Messianic Jews and the great majority of Israelis reject the two-state solution, at least for now.  This is not as wrongly perceived in the West because of the domination of the right-wing national Orthodox.  Rather, the Israelis are disillusioned with the Palestinians and the two-state solution. It is not religious reasons that drive them.  Here are the reasons.

1. Israel sought to have a two-state solution under Prime Minister Ehud Barak and Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. What happened?   The first big attempt was during the time of Yassir Arafat.  He rejected the plan negotiated with President Bill Clinton.  When he walked away, Clinton said to him, “You have made me a failure.” Prime Minister Olmert negotiated even more generous terms, terms that no Israeli government could go beyond.  He offered 97% of Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) and East Jerusalem for a Palestinian State.  He offered land swaps for the 3%. He offered a right of return to near relatives of Arabs living on the Israel side of the new border, but other refugees could return to the new state.  Mohammed Abbas rejected the plan.  Again, later there was another violent intifada uprising. Israelis became convinced that the Palestinians did not really want a two-state solution, but it was only a game played for the West.  Maybe Abbas was afraid of the radicals like Hamas and thought if he accepted peace, he would be killed.  Remember Anwar Sadat of Egypt.
2. Secondly, Israel under Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, who was pro-settling Judea and Samaria, came to believe that two-states were necessary to preserve Israel.  He withdrew all Israeli settlements from Gaza and turned this completely over to the Palestinians. It was a grand experiment.  There was no blockade.  They were totally free and were encouraged to make Gaza a great place.  This was very controversial.  Sharon’s desire was for them to succeed. If they did then he could withdraw from most of Judea and Samaria except for the big settlement blocks needed for Israel’s territory depth for defense and security.  He said he wanted to draw the border.  Because he did not think the Palestinians would accept any agreement, he decided that unilateral withdrawal was the way forward.

Gaza then came under Hamas rule. They killed Palestinian Authority government leaders and took over.  The population supported Hamas. Hamas did not want a two state solution but wanted to destroy Israel.  They turned Gaza into an armed military camp with offensive weapons galore.  This is the background for the present war.

1. After this, the left wing parties declined and never again came into power. Labor that had been so big dwindled to  be a tiny party.  Why?  As Israelis looked at this history, they came to believe that there was no real partner for peace.  Palestinian education was anti-Semitic.  The Palestinian authorities gave big support stipends to terrorists who were jailed or killed. This is called pay for slay.

Contrary to Western perceptions, Israel’s rejection of a two state solution was not due to the religious fanatics, but due to a hard evaluation of the history and the present situation.

Only a change of heart among the Palestinians can lead to lasting peace under any scenario.

As Israel prosecutes the war in Gaza, we reflect on the terrible hatred and atrocity of Hamas. When Israel left Gaza (Sept. 12, 2005), they offered Gaza freedom and development if only they would live in peace with Israel.  Instead, Hamas came to power and murdered the leaders of the Palestinian Authority.  They turned from the offer of liberty and self-determination to create a terrorist state that would be armed to destroy Israel.  Israel had no choice but to blockade Gaza to prevent offensive weapons import.  That blockade now shows itself to have been ineffective. Patrolling the sea and the borders did not prevent the importation of missiles and the manufacture of missiles.  How amazing that the leftists and apologists for Hamas describe the problem as Israel’s occupation and ignore what happened when Hamas came to power!  There would be no blockade in a peaceful Gaza.

The recent attack of Hamas shows us people under an ideology of hatred that pursues atrocities.  Despite this, on American University campuses there are demonstrations supporting Hamas and blaming Israel for the occupation and the blockade.  Such moral blindness shocks the hearts of those who have a moral sense.  These folks talk about Palestinian children who died in past Israel wars against Hamas.  They cannot distinguish between an Israel that seeks to not kill civilians but has no choice when Hamas uses them as human shields.  Hamas is responsible for killing their own women and children and then using it for propaganda. There are videos where they even admit this strategy.  The moral issue of intentionality is ignored.  So how did we get to this place of moral blindness?

The U. S. has Palestinians living in the country who demonstrate for Hamas. The most glaring example of the moral obtuseness of some of these is Rashida Tlaib, a congresswoman from Dearborn.  In this case, the moral obtuseness is due to ethnic prejudice and hatred that knows no boundaries. This leads to gross moral blindness.

However, what of the leftist university students and leftists on the streets of our cities?   The issue is moral relativism.  Since moral relativism now dominates the university faculties, moral bankruptcy is the result.  I remember studying Nietzsche in College. I was 19 and had lost my faith.  Meaningless hit me hard.  I cried as I read.  My quest for the next three years was to overcome both historical relativism and moral relativism and to find a place to stand.  I found it again in the Spring of 1970.  In knowledge relativism, there is no true historical knowledge.  There are only warring narratives and power assertions.  What really happened in Gaza in 2005 does not matter.  There is no facticity.  The left has chosen to designate Israel as a colonial state that oppresses the indigenous Palestinian people.  Therefore they assert that the atrocities are understandable.

Wow!  I was amazed that President Biden showed moral clarity in this fight.  He gave a great speech supporting Israel.   But I am grieved that the universities have removed moral and historical knowledge and now affirm a bankrupt morality based on power.  I will be writing more on this in the future  But I would like every person defending leftist anti-Semitism and anti-Israel, antisemitic and antibiblical, and anti-American views to answer two questions.  Do they believe that there is a historical reality and that we can approach knowing the truth of what really happened in history?  Is there true historical knowledge?  The second question is whether or not there are objective moral norms.  If they do not believe in historical knowledge or objective moral norms, we should shame them and not listen to them at all.  They have undercut the ground for moral behavior.

   

Some Christian Zionists and some Messianic Jews have a very strident position on possessing the Land promised to our people.  Their attitude is to take all the Land and don’t worry much about the Arab population in Samaria and Judea.  With Itamar Ben Gvir, leader of a very radical Otzma Yehudit party and Bazalel Smotrich, leader of the Religious Zionists, the heated rhetoric and actions toward “taking it all” have now become part of the landscape of the Netanyahu government.   Some Christians and a very small number of Messianic Jews applaud.

I want to argue that this is a foolish direction and akin to the first century Zealot Party that gained control of Judea and went to war against Rome.  Yeshua warned what would happen.  Jerusalem would be destroyed because they did not recognize their time of visitation (Luke 19:44).  Having not recognized Yeshua, even after his resurrection, propelled them into following a false way.  Let us recognize that we as a people still have not recognized that time of visitation.  Also, our lack of embracing the apostolic witness to this day, a witness given with great signs and wonders, is compounded history of antisemitism in the  historic churches.  Yet, the trajectory was set by the Sanhedrin and the post Jerusalem destruction Rabbis in Israel who did not turn to Him.  This is why I believe that this is not the time to pursue maximalist visions to take the Land.  The Religious Zionist party today is so different from its moderate predecessor, the National Religious Party (NRP).  This party with the Otzma Yehudit of Ben  G’vir is the return of the spirit of the Zealots.

When I teach on the return to the Land and declare myself a Biblical Zionist, it is based on Ezekiel 36:24 ff.  There we read that we will come back to the Land in significant numbers before we are given a new heart and before the Holy Spirit is given to us.  Until that day, and until we call upon Yeshua (Matthew 23:39,40), we may well be bringing a counsel that will bring harm to Israel if we council “Take it all.”  Let us remember that Israel has still not come to Yeshua.  Secular Israel fosters the most radical LGBTQ agendas.  Parades celebrate Israel as the most pro LGBTQ nation.  Abortion is rampant.  The Orthodox Jews still practice a faith that is partially right but which also blinds to Yeshua in a life of a plathora of commandments.  The spirit of the Talmud is mostly not in accord with the spirit of Yeshua.

My council is, let’s lovingly support Israel’s right to exist.  Let’s stand with Israel.  Let’s support the Jewish people in this Land.  However, let us not give counsel in agreement with the radical right wing views of “taking it all now.”  For this season, living with partial fulfillment of the Land promises I think is wise.  We also do care about the Arabs in the Land of Israel and want them to be treated with justice.