WW I, Balfour and San Remo

WW I, Balfour and San Remo

• By danadler
• 28 June, 2014
• No Comments

Today is June 28, 2014 which marks the 100 year anniversary of the outbreak of World War I, a global war centered in Europe that began in 1914 and lasted until November 1918. The total number of military and civilian casualties in World War I was over 37 million, ranking it among the deadliest conflicts in human history. WW I paved the way for major political changes. Four massive empires crumbled in its aftermath and were divided up into nation-states: the German, the Austro-Hungarian, the Russian and the Ottoman empires.

The fall of the 400 year-old Ottoman empire, which sided with Germany against the allies, created the possibility of fulfilling the aspirations of two ancient peoples who were deprived of independence for centuries: the Arab people and the Jewish people.

On December 11, 1917, which was the eve of Hanukkah, General Allenby led the British troops into Jerusalem. Allenby was hailed as the savior of the Jews, especially in light of the fact that one month earlier Britain had issued the Balfour Declaration.

Many people know the Balfour Declaration of Nov. 2, 1917 and the U.N. Vote on the Partition Plan on Nov. 29, 1947 as the two main international political events that led to Israel’s Declaration of Independence on May 14, 1948.

However, there is a misconception that the Balfour Declaration was just a letter of intent, and not a binding legal document. The reason for this misconception is that most people are not aware of the San Remo Conference which took place on April 19, 1920, lasted for seven days and published its resolutions on April 25, 1920. These seven days laid the political foundation for the creation of the 22 Arab League States and the one and only Jewish State of Israel. The full text of the Balfour Declaration became an integral part of the San Remo resolution and the British Mandate for Palestine, thereby transforming it from a letter of intent into a legally-binding foundational document under international law.

Here is a short clip explaining the legal significance of the San Remo Conference:

Did the Arabs oppose the creation of a Jewish State at San Remo? The answer is a resounding NO! At that time they were focused on the creation of independent Arab states and had no objection to the establishment of a tiny Jewish state in Palestine. This was formalized in the Weizmann-Feisal agreement which led to the League of Nations recognizing the Land of Israel (then Palestine) as the homeland of the Jewish people.

Here is part of the text of the agreement (see link below for full text). Note that Feisal distinguishes “The Arab State” from “Palestine” which is understood to mean “The Jewish State”:

“His Royal Highness the Emir Feisal, representing and acting on behalf of the Arab Kingdom of Hejaz, and Dr. Chaim Weizmann, representing and acting on behalf of the Zionist Organization, mindful of the racial kinship and ancient bonds existing between the Arabs and the Jewish people, and realizing that the surest means of working out the consummation of their national aspirations, is through the closest possible collaboration in the development of the Arab State and Palestine, and being desirous further of confirming the good understanding which exists between them, have agreed upon the following articles…

The Arab State and Palestine in all their relations and undertakings shall be controlled by the most cordial goodwill and understanding and to this end Arab and Jewish duly accredited agents shall be established and maintained in their respective territories…

In the establishment of the Constitution and Administration of Palestine all such measures shall be adopted as will afford the fullest guarantees for carrying into effect the British Government’s Declaration of the 2nd of November, 1917 (the Balfour Declaration)…

All necessary measures will be taken to encourage and stimulate immigration of Jews into Palestine on a large scale, and as quickly as possible to settle Jewish immigrants upon the land through closer settlement and intensive cultivation of the soil. In taking such measures the Arab peasants and tenant farmers shall be protected in their rights, and shall be assisted in forwarding their economic development.”

In the following video you can watch first-hand testimony by one of the British diplomats who was actually in the negotiation rooms about how the Emir Faisal and Lawrence of Arabia both supported the establishment of a Jewish homeland in Israel, and how the document known as the Faisal-Weizmann Agreement came about:

At 2:30 watch how the Jewish Legion fought alongside the Arabs and British to capture the east bank of the Jordan river from the Ottomans in 1918.

At 4:30 watch Anwar Nusseibeh explain how Arabs in Palestine saw themselves as pan-Arabists who were part of Syria. They did not have any notion of an independent “Palestinian people” and no separate identity beyond pan-Arabism.

At 9:20 watch Noble Peace Prize winner Philip Noel Baker explain how Faisal and T.E. Lawrence (Lawrence of Arabia) convinced him to support Zionism.

Emir Faisal, the sole recognized representative of the entire Arab people in 1918, fully supported the claim of the Jewish people to their historic homeland, while he had his eyes on the bigger prize: Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Lebanon, Egypt (none of which were independent before WW I). In fact, very few of today’s nation-states existed before World-War I.

Let this sink in for a moment: before the San Remo conference there did not exist a single Arab independent nation state. Not one. All 22 Arab states that exist today (as part of the Arab League) became nation states either as a direct result of the San Remo conference, or much later. Therefore, the legitimacy of Israel as a Jewish state is exactly equal or greater to the legitimacy of any of the Arab nation states.

Indeed, World-War I is considered the dawn of most modern nation-states. Four massive empires crumbled in its aftermath and were divided up into nation-states: The German, Austro-Hungarian, Russian and Ottoman empires. At that time, nations that had aspirations for self-determination stepped forward and presented their claims for independence to the League of Nations (the precursor to the United Nations). The Arabs stepped up as one single unified nation, and the Jews stepped up as another.

As you can see from eyewitness reports in the video above, the Arabs of Palestine viewed themselves as Syrian and as pan-Arabs. They had no aspirations for independence. Only later, once they secured all the rest of their Arab lands, did the Arabs change their story and put the Land of Israel under the microscope, redefining the conflict as Jews against Palestinian Arabs within that small territory, rather than what it originally was: returning a small patch of Ottoman empire land to its rightful owners, the Jewish people, while dividing 99% of the land among the Arabs.

The results of the Paris (1918) and San Remo (1920) conferences of the League of Nations was the Mandate for Palestine, granted to the British government for the sole purpose of establishing a Jewish homeland in the Land of Israel:

Fifty-one member countries – the entire League of Nations – unanimously declared on July 24, 1922:

“Whereas recognition has been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country.”

There are two key legal points in the above statement (as pointed out by Dore Gold in the video at the end of the blog) which establish the Jewish people as the indigenous people of Palestine, and shatter the “Zionists are Colonialists” fallacy.

1. It recognizes that the “historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine” is a pre-existing right (“grounds for“), not a newly-granted right.

2. It calls for “reconstituting” their national home, not building a new national home from scratch.

In 2003, Attorney Howard Grief brought the minutes of the San Remo Conference and the text of the San Remo Resolution out of the dusty British Archives. Grief addresses the 90th Anniversary commemoration of the San Remo Conference about the importance the Conference and Resolution as the legal foundation of the modern State of Israel under International Law.

The Mandate as issued in San Remo in 1920 included both sides of the Jordan river for the Jewish home.

It was unanimously adopted by the League of Nations (thereby ratifying the Balfour Declaration as much more than a British document).

In 1922, with no international debate or resolution, Britain unilaterally exercised Article 25 of the Mandate, cut off the east bank of Palestine and named it Trans-Jordan. This was not based an any explicit League of Nations decision or any explicit mandate to create an Arab state in Jordan.

Trans-Jordan, more than 3 times the size of Israel, was handed over by Britain to about 300,000 Hashemite nomadic beduins, who originated in Saudi Arabia, in gratitude for their help against the Ottomans (The Arab Revolt as romanticized in the film Lawrence of Arabia).

Furthermore, Britain did not allow any Jews to settle or buy lands in Trans-Jordan, but allowed Arabs to continue and increase the rate of settling in Palestine. Thus, Jordan became the only country in the history of the world that was judenrein by design, and Palestine (from the Jordan to the Sea) became the only area in dispute between Jews and Arabs. Here is the text of Article 25, and you can see that there was no intention there to create a permanent Arab state in Jordan:

“In the territories lying between the Jordan river and the eastern boundary of Palestine as ultimately determined, the Mandatory shall be entitled, with the consent of the Council of the League of Nations, to postpone or withhold application of such provisions of this mandate as he may consider inapplicable to the existing local conditions, and to make such provision for the administration of the territories as he may consider suitable to those conditions”

On June 30, 1922, The US senate adopted Lodge-Fish Resolution [Joint Congressional Resolution (360)]: using stronger language than the Balfour declaration favoring the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people:

“Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled. That the United States of America favors the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which should prejudice the civil and religious rights of Christian and all other non-Jewish communities in Palestine, and that the holy places and religious buildings and sites in Palestine shall be adequately protected.” .

On September 21, 1922, President Warren G. Harding signed the joint resolution of approval to establish a Jewish National Home in Palestine. For more details, please see this link.

The formal recognition of Israel as the Jewish national home became binding international law not in 1947 or 1948, but in 1920, when the resolutions of the San Remo conference were included as part of the Treaty of Sèvres (August 1920), and were adopted and signed unanimously by all 51 countries of the League Of Nations:

ARTICLE 95.

The High Contracting Parties agree to entrust, by application of the provisions of Article 22, the administration of Palestine, within such boundaries as may be determined by the Principal Allied Powers, to a Mandatory to be selected by the said Powers. The Mandatory will be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2, 1917, by the British Government, and adopted by the other Allied Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.

Here is one more video that explains in more detail why the San Remo resolution of 1920 is even more important than the UN partition plan of 1947:

You can find more detailed information about the San Remo conference and the legal foundations of Israel as the Jewish homeland at Eli Hertz’s excellent website: http://www.mythsandfacts.org/. This includes a printable PDF and a PowerPoint Presentation which you can use to present this material.

Israel's History - a Picture a Day (Beta) A Post-Script to American Interests in the Holy Land An Incredible Picture from the Rijksmuseum

Israel's History - a Picture a Day (Beta)

---

A Post-Script to American Interests in the Holy Land An Incredible Picture from the Rijksmuseum Posted: 13 Apr 2017 08:01 PM PDT The world's great libraries and archives continue to digitize and post photographic treasures.  We publish this photo from the archives of the Rijksmuseum of Amsterdam. With its amazing resolution, this photo from the Bonfils studio reveals fascinating details, including the American Consulate inside the Jaffa Gate of Jerusalem's Old City. Inside the Jaffa Gate of Jerusalem, See "Bonfils" signature on the bottom right. The Rijksmuseum dates the picture as "circa 1895-1915." Several historical facts dictate it was taken prior to 1898. Here are some of the interesting details in the photo: 1. The moat on the right side of the photo behind the shops was filled in in 1898 so that German Emperor Wilhelm's carriage could ride into the city through a breach in the wall. The picture, therefore, was taken before 1898. 2. While attempts were made to appoint an American Consul already in the 1830s, the American Consulate was established in the Old City in the latter half of the 1800s. Centered in Bonfils' photo is the American Consulate building, obtained in 1857, with the U.S. seal on the second story window.  Note the American seal (eagle) on the building. A drawing and blueprint of the building can be found in Ruth Kark's American Consuls in the Holy Land, 1832-1914. Kark's book states that this picture was drawn by an American traveler and cites a report in the U.S. National Archives by U.S. Consul Frank deHass on April 28, 1877. Note the U.S. flag. Bonfils photographs for sale 3. Other oddities in the Bonfils photo include an advertisement for Bonfil's own photographs. Pictures and postcards were major tourist souvenirs. 4. Note the advertisement for the Thomas Cook Tourist Agency.  Many of the major visits and expeditions to the Holy Land were outfitted by Cook's. 5.  Also note the advertisement for "Valero." The Jewish Valero family arrived in the 1840s and opened the first private bank in the land.  Their office was inside the Old City. A detailed feature on the Valeros appeared in these pages in July 2012. The family also held valuable areas of Jerusalem real estate outside of the Old City. Chaim Aharon Valero (1845-1923)

You are subscribed to email updates from Picture a Day - The Holy Land Revealed.

What Is Donald Trump Going To Do? Boeing Company now looking for US government approval to to sell Iran 60 jets,

What Is Donald Trump Going To Do? The Boeing 737 MAX aircraft, which Boeing wants to sell to Iran During the presidential campaign, two major issues that Donald Trump ran on were: opposition to the Iran deal with no loosening of sanctions, and stimulating job growth in the United States. With Boeing Company now looking for US government approval to to sell Iran 60 jets, Trump has a decision to make. If Trump approves the deal: - Thousands of jobs will be created in the US. - Sanctions against Iran go out the window, and Iran will reap the results of megadeals with companies around the world; its economy and military capabilities will surge. - Iranian aggression will increase as it becomes emboldened by having beaten the "great Satan"; Israel and the Middle East will be increasingly threatened.  If Trump does not approve the deal: - An economic opportunity is missed, no new US jobs are created due to no deal, with no stimulus to the US economy. - The US maintains the high ground by maintaining the sanctions against Iran currently in place, stifling Iran and hopefully, its nuclear and weapons programs. - Iran will attempt to sign deals with other countries only too willing to abide, while the US applies pressure against them from doing so. - While Iranian economic and military modernization may be stymied in the short term, other countries will ignore the sanctions and overlook Iranian aggression in the Middle East (and elsewhere), and eventually try to sell to Iran anyway. Times of Israel: Boeing signs new $3b deal with Iranian airline WSJ Market Watch: Boeing agrees to first plane sale to Iran under Trump What is Donald Trump going to do? WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO?   Back to Top Mark Langfan on the Palestinian-Arab Demographic Terror Threat Yesterday we wrote about the threat Israel faces from the north. Today we focus on another threat: that of mass Arab immigration into land currently controlled by the Palestinian Authority in Judea and Samaria. AFSI's chairman, Mark Langfan, spells it out succinctly in his latest article in Arutz Sheva: The problem is, if a 'West Bank State' is created, or even if substantial contiguous pockets of Palestinian Arab control are really created, and the PA is granted the sovereign right to import population, the PA would clearly be able to bring many of the so-called 8,000,000 Palestinian refugees into its state.  And the Palestinian Arabs can invite anyone else they want into their state, including thousands of Hezbollah and tens of thousands of Iranian volunteers for Palestine. How to get 1 million more terrorists into the Palestinian Authority  One of the many famous "Langfan maps"

Syria’s Civil War Produces a Clear Winner: Hezbollah

Syria’s Civil War Produces a Clear Winner: Hezbollah


The Lebanese militant group, labeled a terror organization by the U.S., has grown stronger through its support of the Assad regime, battling Syrian rebels alongside Russian forces and training local Shiite fighters


Few wars have seen such a tangle of combatants as Syria’s, from obscure and morphing rebel groups to Russians, Turks, Kurdish and Iraqi militias. From the chaos, one clear winner is emerging.

Returning to his ancestral Syrian town of Qusayr after years away, a man named Mohammed discovered a new militia patrolling the neighborhood. Patches on the men’s camouflage uniforms called them the Islamic Resistance of Syria. Their identity became clearer when he found a notice on his house claiming it for Hezbollah, the Lebanese militant group.

“Many houses have been confiscated with notices that they’ve been reserved for this or that family,” Mohammed said.


Hezbollah, founded in the early 1980s to fight Israel’s occupation of southern Lebanon, became involved in the civil war next door to protect its patrons in Damascus and a supply line of Iranian weapons. After years of growing engagement, including training thousands of mostly Shiite Muslim fighters and beginning to provide social services, Hezbollah is today stronger, more independent and in command of a new Syrian militia that its officials say is ready to be deployed to other conflicts in the region.

Hezbollah now fights alongside Russian troops, its first alliance with a global power. It was Hezbollah that devised the battlefield plan for Aleppo used by Syrian and Russian forces last year, according to Arab and U.S. officials who monitor the group.


Thanks to money and arms from Tehran, Hezbollah now stands almost on a par with Iran as a protector of President Bashar al-Assad’s government, and as a sponsor of Shiite fighting forces in Syria.

“It’s hard to see people rising through Syrian intelligence or military ranks without the blessing of Hezbollah or the Iranians,” said Andrew Exum, until January a U.S. deputy assistant secretary of defense for the Middle East.

With its growing might, this arch-foe of Israel, a group long labeled terrorist by the U.S., has gained a modicum of international recognition. It participated in negotiations sponsored by Russia following the rout of rebels from Aleppo. When China’s special envoy to Syria visited Lebanon in December, he carved out time to see Hezbollah’s foreign-relations chief.

Even before the Syrian civil war, Hezbollah had evolved beyond its guerrilla-group origins into a business and political enterprise that holds positions in Lebanon’s government and runs social programs such as schools and clinics. Now it is poised to capitalize on what many Middle East analysts expect will be an eventual end to the Syrian war that leaves Mr. Assad in power. Syria will have $180 billion of war-reconstruction needs, by a World Bank estimate. Hezbollah has experience at that. After a 2006 conflict with Israel, the group efficiently organized the rebuilding of battered Beirut suburbs.

“Hezbollah is well-positioned to make a lot of money” from Syrian reconstruction, said Matthew Levitt, director of the Washington Institute’s Stein Program on Counterterrorism and Intelligence, a veteran of the Treasury and State departments.

U.S. and Israeli officials have watched the growth of Hezbollah with concern, worried it could draw on its Syrian recruits to pressure Israel from a new front along the Golan Heights, captured by Israel 50 years ago. In March, Hezbollah announced the formation of a Syria-based “Brigade for the Liberation of the Golan” devoted to wresting the heights back for Syria.

“Israel knows that what has happened in Syria has changed Hezbollah, which has developed from not just defending against Israel, but attacking it,” said a senior official from an alliance of Hezbollah, Syria and Iran. “It has now developed traditional and nontraditional means of war. It fights like a guerrilla army but also like a conventional one.”

Israel hasn’t waited for a Hezbollah attack in the Golan, sending aircraft to strike Iranian shipments of sophisticated arms to Hezbollah.

Premier Benjamin Netanyahu told President Donald Trump during a February U.S. visit that Hezbollah’s expanded arsenal also endangers American warships in nearby waters, said diplomats briefed on the meeting.

The U.S. is well aware of Hezbollah’s expanding capabilities and will continue working closely with partners in the region to address threats the militant group poses, a State Department official said, adding that disrupting Hezbollah’s terrorist and military capabilities was a top U.S. priority.

Hezbollah’s new clout is adding to fears among Gulf states that Iran’s power also is growing, drawing Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates to agree to work with Israel. Their focal point is now Yemen, where Mr. Trump has agreed to provide a Saudi-led alliance with stepped-up U.S. military assistance to counter the Houthis, who were trained by Hezbollah and supported by Iran. The Gulf states, in turn, have tentatively agreed to try to bring the Palestinians to the negotiating table with Israel.

Religious power
Hezbollah’s role has implications for eventual postwar arrangements in Syria, given how its religious influence will likely compete with the secular politics of the Assad regime. Before the war, that government was improving relations with Saudi Arabia and once even considered a peace treaty with Israel. The improved ties have broken down, with the Saudis supporting Syrian rebel groups. Diplomats in the region say any normalization of relations after the war ends, likely with Mr. Assad still in power, will be even more difficult given Hezbollah and Iran’s newfound clout in Syria.

Hezbollah has helped the Assad regime survive partly by propping up its undisciplined military, which is plagued by corruption and defections. In Syrian villages retaken from rebel control, Hezbollah fighters have been seen holding Syrian soldiers by the wrist or collar and forcing them to return appliances or furniture looted from homes.

Syrian civilians say Hezbollah fighters sometimes openly disrespect Syrian troops on battlefronts, a stark change from its previous deference. Cars with blacked-out windows and Lebanese license plates screech up to Syrian checkpoints, the Hezbollah commanders inside refusing to get off their phones during identification checks or to answer questions posed by their Syrian allies.

When Russia and Syria wanted to put priority on retaking Islamic State’s capital of Raqqa last year, Hezbollah, along with Iran, insisted the focus instead be dislodging rebels from Aleppo to force them to the negotiating table, according to Mr. Exum and a Hezbollah official.

The strategy worked. The rebels evacuated Aleppo and agreed to participate in Russian-sponsored political negotiations now taking place in locations outside Syria.

When formed in the 1980s, Hezbollah was trained by Iran’s Quds Force, an arm of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps that manages Iranian clients across the region. Hezbollah gave Lebanon’s disenfranchised Shiite community political power and won its loyalty by providing free schooling and health care in addition to protection.

Militarily, it remained a guerrilla force, better at launching rockets from the bushes than spearheading offensives on urban centers—until Syria’s civil war began in 2011. After wading in to protect its Iranian arms flow, Hezbollah stepped up its military commitment to counter Sunni extremists such as Islamic State, which regards Shiite Muslims such as Hezbollah as infidels. Hezbollah expanded its arsenal by gaining access to Russian and Syrian weapons under the cover of the civil war’s chaos.

Shipments from Iran gave the Lebanese group precise and powerful armaments that it previously lacked, such as Russian-made Yakhont missiles, said a former State Department official. Cooperation with Russia on the battlefield further increased the flow of weaponry.

“Russian stocks are open to Hezbollah,” said a Hezbollah official who travels frequently to Damascus. “Our fighters eat and sleep alongside theirs and we’re sharing everything, always.” While an end to Syria’s civil war could change the dynamics, Middle East analysts generally think Hezbollah’s expanded access to weapons is secure.

Damascus was once considered a Hezbollah proxy master, but Western diplomats say the Lebanese group is carving out its own zones of influence across Syria by training local fighters. They include Shiites and Alawites, the latter being adherents of a branch of Shiite Islam that includes the Assad family.

Western diplomats estimate the number of these fighters loyal to Hezbollah’s command, which Hezbollah calls al-Ridha Forces, and known locally as “Hezbollah in Syria,” in the tens of thousands. Hezbollah officials say it is lower. Hezbollah’s presence in Syria stretches 250 miles from the northern tip to the south, longer than the length of Lebanon.

Ryan Crocker, a former U.S. ambassador to both Iraq and Syria, said the autonomy Hezbollah enjoys in Syria arises partly because “Iraq is more important for Iran in many ways than Syria is,” while to Hezbollah, next-door Syria is more important.

Messrs. Crocker and Exum said Hezbollah’s strategy in Syria mirrors the Lebanese group’s involvement in Iraq after the 2003 U.S. invasion. At that time, Hezbollah provided training inside Iran to Iraqi Shiite militiamen. Iran relied on Arabic-speaking Hezbollah officers to bridge a language gap that Iran’s Farsi-speaking Quds Force couldn’t overcome. A collateral result was to seed a Hezbollah social influence in parts of Iraq that persists.

In Syria, Hezbollah is playing for lasting political and social influence, Western and Arab diplomats say. The group has broadened its mandate from countering Israel to fighting Sunni extremist groups across the region to protect religious minorities—not only Shiites but also Christians. It has begun replicating inside Syria the social programs that brought it loyalty and political success at home.

Hezbollah has created a Syrian branch of its Imam al-Mahdi youth movement, a Boy Scouts-type group whose Facebook page shows videos of children getting coloring books, saluting at military parades and somersaulting over fire pits. Part of the idea is to funnel young people to Hezbollah-sponsored local fighting groups and to the larger ranks of Syrian civilians—accountants, hairdressers and farmers—who maintain a fierce dedication to what they call the resistance.

Among Hezbollah supporters in Syria, deference to the Damascus regime is eroding. Photos on the walls in Syrian towns show dead fighters, described as martyrs, against a backdrop of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah and Iranian revolutionary leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomenei. There are few photos of Mr. Assad.

Coffins of Syrians who fought with Hezbollah used to come home draped with both Syria’s flag and Hezbollah’s bright yellow banner showing a green hand holding up a rifle. Over the past year, they have started arriving with just the Hezbollah flag.

War spoils
In Qusayr, the Syrian town where Hezbollah has confiscated homes for its supporters, Hezbollah militants held a military parade in November showcasing antiaircraft systems and tanks. “To host a military parade commending yourselves in another country is as bold as you can get,” said a former State Department official. “It’s telling your masters ‘We’re here now.’ ”

The boldness carries over to the negotiating table in talks to decide Syria’s fate. Hezbollah has dangled offers to Syrian rebel groups weary of fighting. A pending deal with one called Saraya Ahl Alsham, in the southwest Syrian town of Qalamoun, would allow people who fled to return with a promise of protection from Syrian government prosecution or conscription. Hezbollah has said it would guarantee the agreement.

“Hezbollah is in charge of the whole region, and they control everything here,” said Abu Ishak, a spokesman for Saraya Ahl Alsham. Tweaking an Arabic proverb to describe the Syrian regime’s absence from the negotiating table, he said, “Hezbollah designs it, and the Syrian regime wears it.”


https://www.wsj.com/articles/syrias-civil-war-produces-a-clear-winner-hezbollah-1491173790?mod=e2tw

Israel's Northern Front: A Large And Growing Threat

Israel's Northern Front: A Large And Growing Threat

 

There has been ominous evidence for some time now that Israel's northern front has become exceedingly more dangerous, with the growth, experience and sophistication of the terrorist organization Hezbollah. Born in the 1980's as a local Lebanese guerrilla force, Hezbollah now has the trappings of an army to be contended with on several fronts. While maintaining its grip on Lebanon, especially in the south, over the past few years it has shifted its focus to Syria, fighting the mainly Sunni terrorist groups there, and assisting Iran in preventing the downfall of President Assad and his regime. In Syria, despite significant losses in manpower, Hezbollah has gained valuable fighting experience.

Along with its increased military capabilities, Hezbollah's threat to Israel has grown significantly. It now possesses at least 150,000 missiles - more than that possessed by most countries - with many pointed at Israel. By allying itself with Iran in Syria, Hezbollah has been transformed into a strategic threat to Israel and is a force to be contended with.

Israel has been watching the situation in Lebanon and Syria very closely, and there are regular reports of Israeli strikes in Syria, with the aim of interdicting shipments of advanced weapons to Hezbollah in Lebanon.

These developments have raised the following question in Israel, which has been debated at the highest levels: What is the greater threat to the country, Hezbollah, with its 150,000+ missiles and capable fighting force, or Iran, with its long range ballistic missiles, ongoing nuclear weapons program, and growing threat to the entire Middle East and beyond?

There are those who maintain that the immediate, short-term threat from Hezbollah is more critical, as its missiles can now hit the entire country, and now with enhanced guidance systems, can be aimed at specific sites.

Others posit that Iran is the "mother of all threats", and thus dealing with Iran should be given priority.

Whichever side gains sway, by necessity, Israel continues to develop and deploy defensive and offensive systems to deal with all threats, short and long term.

Yesterday's Wall Street Journal contains an in-depth report on Hezbollah, which can be accessed by subscription HERE. Interestingly, the article is available unedited and in full via this link (click HERE), which is the website Pakistan Defence.

The Jerusalem Post ran the following article about a week ago: WHAT THREATENS ISRAEL THE MOST - HEZBOLLAH ROCKETS OR IRANIAN NUKES?, which lays out the arguments of both sides.

Today, the Jerusalem Post published two pertinent articles which merit reading:

IRAN ARMS MANUFACTURING FACILITIES IN LEBANON ARE NEW KIND OF THREAT 

IS ISRAEL READY TO FACE THOUSANDS OF HEZBOLLAH MISSILES?

Air Force 1-A for South Africa President Zuma, the current South Africa leader.- U.S. Aid to S.A over $571,000,000!

Air Force 1-A for South Africa

President Zuma, the current South Africa leader.

 President Zuma, is the current leader of South Africa. He has purchased the most expensive aircraft in the world for his own personal use and those of his hirelings and underlings.

 BOEING 747-8 for President Jacob Zuma

Welcome aboard the custom-built plane that makes Air Force One look likeThe Wright Brothers' first effort.  These extraordinary images show an enormous jumbo jet that has been converted into a luxury home for ZUMA

Complete with bedrooms, multiple lounges and an on board restaurant.

The custom-built Boeing 747 is believed to have cost South African taxpayers $400million.

Making it one of the most expensive purchases of all time.

 The jumbo jet would normally carry up to 600 passengers – but this version was built for just one insane man, although he will be able to fit dozens of guests.

The level of luxury is out of this world.

The plane wouldn't look out of place on Cribs.

Of course cable television and Internet are among the perks.

No need to fight for sofa space either, just the 14 TVs dotted about the vessel.

More sleeping space is provided in the "aeroloft" on the top deck of the vessel, with eight double beds for passengers who prefer to get some shut-eye on flights.

You know it's good when your plane has a stateroom.
Look out for this baby flying above you.

 Does the United States of America provide aid to South Africa?

 Yup- over $571,000,000!
Does Canada provide aid to South Africa?
Yup - over $120,000,000!

Enough to pay for this toy, with a little ($291,000,00) in change leftover.

Isn't it heartwarming to see how our "Foreign Aid" is benefiting the underprivileged of other countries.