WoW!!

WoW - the Watchers Council- it's the oldest, longest running cyber comte d'guere ensembe in existence - started online in 1912 by Sirs Jacky Fisher and Winston Churchill themselves - an eclective collective of cats both cruel and benign with their ability to put steel on target (figuratively - natch) on a wide variety of topictry across American, Allied, Frenemy and Enemy concerns, memes, delights and discourse.   

Every week these cats hook up each other with hot hits and big phazed cookies to peruse and then vote on their individual fancy catchers.
 

Thusly sans further adieu (or a don"t) 

Council Winners

• *First place with 4 votes!–Joshuapundit–Ramadi Falls To ISIS In A Major Victory – And Why It’s Important
• Second place with 1 1/3 votes – The Glittering Eye –They Wrote What They Saw, Memorial Day, 2015
• Third place *t* with 1 vote –The Noisy Room – Di Blasio’s “Contract For Communism”
• Third place *t* with 1 vote –Nice Deb – Ralph Peters: Release of Bin Laden Docs Timed To Divert Attention From Ramadi Embarrassment
• Fourth place *t* with 2/3 vote –Ask Marion – EPA Supports Monsanto Roundup
• Fourth place *t* with 2/3 vote –Bookworm Room – Feminist claims that bad consensual sex equals rape victimize women just as surely as the McMartin trials victimized children
• Fourth place *t* with 2/3 vote –Don Surber – Stephanopoulos made the Clinton Foundation dirty
• Fourth place *t* with 2/3 vote –The Independent Sentinel – Words Matter: Michelle Obama Refers to the US as a Constitutional Democracy at Oberlin
• Fourth place *t* with 2/3 vote –The Razor – Islamic State a Leftist Nightmare
• Fourth place *t* with 2/3 vote –The Right Planet – How Democrats ‘Celebrate’ Memorial Day
• Fifth place *t* with 1/3 vote –VA Right! – Bill Janis Unleashes the Flying Monkeys!
• Fifth place *t* with 1/3 vote –Rhymes With Right – Be Kind To Wheelchairs

Non-Council Winners

• First place with 2 2/3 votes! –Sultan Knish – De-Islamization Is The Only Way To Fight ISIS submitted by Joshuapundit
• Second place with 2 votes – Mark Steyn –Nothing Another 42,000 Airstrikes Can’t Fix submitted by The Noisy Room
• Third place with 1 2/3 votes –Victor Davis Hanson –Disasters At Home And Abroad submitted by Nice Deb
• Fourth place *t* with 1 vote –The People’s Cube – Stages of the Progressive Agenda submitted by The Right Planet
• Fourth place *t* with 1 vote – Robert Tracinski/The Federalist – Why Does the Left Kowtow to Islam? submitted by The Watcher
• Fourth place *t* with 1 vote – NewsBusters – Bob Woodward: Wrong, Bush Did Not Lie Us Into Iraq submitted by The Watcher
• Fifth place *t* with 2/3 vote –Walter Russell Mead/Via Meadia –Obama, Anti-Semitism and Iran submitted by The Razor and The Glittering Eye
• Fifth place *t* with 2/3 vote –Quin Hillyer/NRO–At Sea in an Alien Culture, Where ‘Normal’ Is Defined as ‘Deviant’ submitted by Bookworm Room
• Fifth place *t* with 2/3 vote – The Daily Beast – With Help From ISIS, a More Deadly Boko Haram Makes a Comeback submitted by GrEaT sAtAn”S gIrLfRiEnD
• Fifth place *t* with 2/3 vote –TeaParty.Org – Pamela Geller Plans Muhammad Cartoon Bus Ads for Washington D.C. submitted by VA Right!

See you next week!

Future Middle East

Aha - don't need any Ouija Boards to predestine how Future Middle East is gon look!

Today's Middle East is arguably more volatile and more dangerous than it has been for centuries. The rise of Islamic State and the prospect of a nuclear Iran each represent an unprecedented threat to global security. All the while the West appears increasingly at a loss as to what to do about any of this. Britain and America's influence in the region has weakened, and this newly emerging reality looks set to create some strange and previously inconceivable alliances.

Reports have been emerging from Middle Eastern news agencies of a secret meeting recently held in Jordan. What was particularly intriguing about this previously unpublicized gathering was that it reportedly brought together Israeli diplomats with those from Arab countries that officially have no dealings with the Jewish State; we can assume that figures from the Gulf countries were among those in attendance.

All the more interesting, it is being widely reported that the meeting was essentially convened to plan for a Middle East from which America has more or less retreated. Other reports claim that some of the Sunni states expressed openness to entering into security cooperation with Israel. If true, this indicates just how concerned the Sunni states are about the rise of a nuclear Iran, and just how little faith they have in 44's strategy for negotiating Iran's nuclear program away.

Of course, we don't know that the approach adopted by 44 will outlive his presidency. But the worries of many of America's traditional allies in the region are clear. If America does continue to retreat from the Middle East, the vacuum left behind will quickly be filled by others. That could lead to an entire region that looks much as Iraq does today. Since Obama pulled U.S. forces out of Iraq at the end of 2011, the country has been lost to a tug-of-war between the Iranian-backed, Shiite-led government in Baghdad, and the Sunni Islamists militants who are now largely expressed through the Islamic State.

No one would deny that Iraq went through some dark days during the era of 43. But following the surge strategy launched in 2008, order was being restored, and it looked like there might be good reason for optimism. Now, as 44's administration increasingly disengages from the Middle East, the region is slipping into turmoil, hurtling from one crisis to the next. Desperate times indeed call for desperate measures, and if the Gulf states are now reaching out to Israel, we know just how desperate things have become.

The policies pursued by 44 in the Middle East have either simply failed, or worse, they have completely backfired. Take the airstrikes against ISIS that we were told would turn back the advancing jihadist tide. The recent fall of Ramadi makes clear that this approach isn't working. And then there is the administration's strategy on Iran, which was supposed to restrain Iranian ambitions and prevent nuclear proliferation in the Middle East. But the negotiations now look well on their way to achieving the opposite.

At the very time that Washington is pushing for reconciliation, the Iranians have been showing signs of becoming more belligerent, not less. By harassing international shipping along the Strait of Hormuz, as they have been in recent weeks, the Iranians are sending a pretty clear message - just in case the message of "Death to America" that continues to echo out across the public squares of Tehran wasn't clear enough.

Worse, it is not only the Iranians that have read the West's negotiation stance as a sign of weakness. No longer believing that 44's administration will stop Iran, the Saudis are now threatening to develop their own nuclear capabilities and match those of Iran. The very negotiations that are meant to be preventing nuclear proliferation in the region may now be about to trigger a nuclear arms race in one of the most unstable parts of the world.

As the Gulf countries have dramatically increased their spending on military hardware, it is also worth remembering that back in 2010 it emerged from WikiLeaks that the Saudis were preparing to allow Israel to use their airspace for a strike on Iran's nuclear infrastructure. It's always been fashionable to complain about American heavyhandedness in the Middle East.

Under 44 we are beginning to see what the alternative might look like.

China Strategy Paper 2015

After State Ran Media warned war with Great Satan was inevitable, the World's largest Collectivist State just put out her Strategic White Paper featuring China's  “active defense” military strategy

People’s Liberation Army Navy will expand its defense perimeter to include “open seas protection.” The air force will also expand its focus to include offensive as well as defensive military capabilities. “We will not attack unless we are attacked, but we will surely counterattack if attacked”

Accordingly, the paper said the navy of the People's Liberation Army will "gradually shift its focus from 'offshore waters defense' to a combination of 'offshore waters defense' and 'open seas protection'".

And

Regarding outer space, the paper reaffirmed China's opposition to the weaponization of outer space and its disapproval of an arms race in outer space.

As for cyber space, it said "China will expedite the development of a cyber force" and enhance its capabilities in cyber situation awareness and cyber defense.

The paper also noted that as Chinese national interests stretch further abroad, it will "strengthen international security cooperation in areas crucially related to China's overseas interests".

It said the PLA will engage in extensive regional and international security affairs, and promote the establishment of the mechanisms of emergency notification, military risk precaution, crisis management and conflict control.

The paper highlighted future cooperation with Russian armed forces, saying the PLA will foster a comprehensive, diverse and sustainable framework to promote military relations.

On cooperation with the US, China intends to build a "new model of military relationships" that conforms to the two nations' new model of major-country relations.

It will strengthen defense dialogues, exchanges and cooperation with the US military, and improve the mechanism for the notification of major military activities as well as the rule of behavior for safety of air and maritime encounters.

ISIS' Combat Bona Fides

The recent fall of Ramadi show ISIS had gained some hard won combat expertise...

Islamic State’s battlefield performance suggests the terrorist group’s tactical sophistication is growing—a development the Iraqis and the U.S.-led coalition have so far failed to counter

Islamic State commanders executed a complex battle plan that outwitted a greater force of Iraqi troops as well as the much-lauded, U.S.-trained special-operations force known as the Golden Division, which had been fighting for months to defend the city.

Islamic State commanders evaded surveillance and airstrikes to bring reinforcements to its front lines in western Iraq. The group displayed a high degree of operational security by silencing its social media and propaganda teams during the Ramadi surge.

The group also churned out dozens of formidable new weapons by converting captured U.S. military armored vehicles designed to be impervious to small-arms fire into megabombs with payloads equal to the force of the Oklahoma City bombing.

Over the three-day surge in Ramadi, Islamic State fighters launched at least 27 such vehicle-borne improvised explosive devices, or Vbieds, that destroyed Iraq security forces’ defensive perimeters and crumbled multistory buildings.

Military analysts said the new formidable weapon was the latest development showing how the group appears to be learning from battlefield defeats like the one in Kobani, Syria, last summer in pursuit of its goal to control the Sunni-majority areas of Syria and Iraq.

After the mid-April victories in the Albu Faraj and Sijariyah neighborhoods, an Islamic State commander told Islamic State’s radio station, Al Bayan, on April 27 that the group was ready to embark on its ultimate goal of winning control of Ramadi’s city center

On the same day, Islamic State distributed a military order hundreds of miles to the north in Aleppo, Syria, calling for a redeployment of the group’s most devout fighters to the front lines in Anbar and Salahuddin provinces in Iraq. Written in the name of Islamic State leader Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi, the order called for expert and religiously dedicated fighters for a one-time assignment, implying they would be used in suicide missions

By the end of April, officials in Anbar were reporting a surge of cars passing into Iraq from the Al Qaim border crossing—which Islamic State controls—near Syria. Officials in Ramadi said Islamic State fighters started arriving in groups of two or three in nondescript sedans, instead of the Toyota pickup trucks group members used to favor, in apparent efforts to blend in with civilian traffic and stay off radar of U.S. surveillance planes.

From early May, the group enforced a blackout of its own media posts from Ramadi. That was in contrast to other battlefields in the country, such as Beiji and Fallujah, where Islamic State supporters continued to post propaganda about battles

On May 5, Islamic State launched an attack on Ramadi’s city center, but Iraqi helicopters and the Golden Division repulsed the advance, Iraqi state media reported. Running battles along the bridges across the Euphrates River separating Ramadi’s southwestern Islamic State-held neighborhoods from the city center continued for days, with Iraqi forces holding their lines.

By May 13, Islamic State had established a team of snipers closer to where Iraqi police and army units were based, said Iraqi soldiers and state media.

The next day, Islamic State launched its surge by sending a single armored bulldozer to the concrete barriers on the outskirts of the government lines. The bulldozer worked unimpeded for close to an hour, removing concrete walls. Once the road was cleared, Islamic State fighters drove about six Vbieds, including an armored Humvee and armored dump truck, into the government complex.

Over the next 72 hours, the terrorist group set off at least another 20 Vbied and suicide bombs, U.S. officials said.

Islamic State took the government complex by May 15. The group launched another wave of vehicle suicide attacks on May 17, preventing Iraqi reinforcements from entering the city. The Golden Division, which had been cut off from the rest of the Iraqi forces, called for a retreat from town.

Once Islamic State’s black flag began flying from Ramadi’s city center, the group lifted its information blackout. It posted photos and eulogies for six suicide bombers it said were responsible for the initial wave of attacks.

Counter Terrorism Canada Style

From Mail Call...

The Islamic State terrorist group now commands the greatest army of foreign mercenaries in modern history. Current estimates of its size range from 20,000 foreign fighters to a Central Intelligence Agency figure of 31,000. This army of fighters is essential to IS’s battlefield power, at least in terms of providing it with cannon fodder, and critical to its effort to recruit believers from around the world to help it build the infrastructure of a state, and ultimately a caliphate. The greatest number of recruits globally for IS has come from Saudi Arabia and Tunisia; from European countries, France, Belgium and Britain are the leading contributors. Canadians have also left to join IS since its dramatic rise to power in Syria and Iraq, although we don’t have an exact fix on the numbers. But the Canadian Prime Minister has signalled his belief that one is too many, telling a Montreal audience that “there is no legitimate reason of any kind in this country for someone to become a violent jihadist or terrorist or to join any kind of group that is involved or advocates that kind of activity.”

The more that political rhetoric swirls around national-security threats such as the foreign-fighter problem, the more difficult it will be to establish the exact scale of the threat. In reality, the danger posed by the relatively small Canadian foreign-fighter stream is threefold – it bolsters IS psychologically; it conjures up concerns about battle-hardened veterans who might return to Canada to incite and commit terrorism; it puts Muslim communities in Canada under an unwanted spotlight and may create a new set of tensions for them as they work to contribute to de-radicalization measures. Our biggest concern is not about how we prevent Canadian foreign fighters from blowing things up in Iraq and Syria, or even blowing things up if they manage to return to Canada, but how we stop them from blowing up community stability and inciting tensions within Canada.

When the government first announced a counterterrorism strategy in 2012, it used a model borrowed from the British, with four “pillars”: Prevent, Detect, Deny, Respond. The respond pillar is meant to ensure a capacity to deal with terrorist attacks that occur on our soil. When the CT strategy was launched, there hadn’t been any. Now there have been two – the attacks in Quebec and near Parliament Hill in October of 2014. The one good thing the October attacks brought to light is the degree to which Canadian society poses a strong, innate resilience to terrorist violence.

The Deny capacity, when it comes to foreign fighters, has been strengthened in recent years by a variety of new legal tools to prevent would-be jihadis from travelling. That includes criminal sanctions, passport revocation and the imposition of peace bonds, including the physical monitoring of so-called “high-risk” travellers. The controversial anti-terrorism act (Bill C-51), currently before the Senate, would add yet further to these capacities, including through a strengthening of our no-fly list. Even without C-51’s new measures, Canadian authorities had the tools to stop Canadian jihadis from travelling, so we are in a relatively strong place.

The Detect pillar is all about old-fashioned intelligence work, with some new twists. These include the need to monitor social media for clues to terrorist intentions, a high level of operational pressure that puts stresses on agency resources and the importance of being able to work with affected Muslim communities for early warning. The recent Montreal airport interdiction against 10 young Muslims alleged to have planned to travel to the Middle East to join the Islamic State appears to show that detection is working, aided by social-media garrulousness, alarmed families and communities, and heightened security-agency focus.

But what about Prevent? Here, the greatest challenge lies, and potentially our greatest weakness. Some will always slip through the cracks, notably the convicted “Toronto 18” member, Ali Mohamed Dirie, whose incarceration and subsequent release did nothing to dissuade him; who obtained false identity documentation, travelled to Syria and was killed in the fighting in 2013. We risk failure on the “prevention” front if the RCMP’s efforts at community engagement do not gain a stronger foothold, if CSIS is too emboldened by its soon-to-be-granted “disruption” mandate and if the government (of whatever stripe after October, 2015) fails to find a better way to justify Canada’s actions in the world, especially its international efforts against terrorist groups.

WoW!!

WoW - the Watchers Council- it's the oldest, longest running cyber comte d'guere ensembe in existence - started online in 1912 by Sirs Jacky Fisher and Winston Churchill themselves - an eclective collective of cats both cruel and benign with their ability to put steel on target (figuratively - natch) on a wide variety of topictry across American, Allied, Frenemy and Enemy concerns, memes, delights and discourse.

Every week these cats hook up each other with hot hits and big phazed cookies to peruse and then vote on their individual fancy catchers.

Thusly sans further adieu (or a don"t) 

Council Winners

• *First place with 2 2/3 votes!–Bookworm Room – A phenomenal talk about the Constitution and how to make it meaningful to America’s young people
• Second place with 1 2/3 votes –Joshuapundit–BB King Makes The Passage 1925-2015
• Third place *t* with 1 vote –VA Right! – Meet the People Who Lost Their Jobs When Bill Janis Betrayed the Republican Party and Elected a Democrat
• Third place *t* with 1 vote –Don Surber – Cruz speaks out against Christian persecution — in the USA
• Third place *t* with 1 vote –The Glittering Eye –Why Did ABC Hire George Stephanopoulos?
• Third place *t* with 1 vote –Rhymes With Right – Hillary Declares That Any SCOTUS Nominee Will Be Ethically Unfit To Serve On High Court
• Fourth place *t* with 2/3 votes –Nice Deb – Rumor: Obama Admin Okayed Raid on Abu Sayyaf in Syria To Take The Sting Out Of Ramadi Failure
• Fourth place *t* with 2/3 votes –The Independent Sentinel – Deliberate or Not, Barack Obama’s Talking Points Are Straight Out of Iran
• Fourth place *t* with 2/3 votes –The Right Planet – Extreme Secrecy Erodes Support for Obama’s Trade Pact
• Fifth place *t* with 2/3 vote –The Noisy Room – Cities On Fire – Seattle
• Fifth place *t* with 2/3 vote –GrEaT sAtAn”S gIrLfRiEnD – Killing Morsi

Non-Council Winners

• First place with 2 1/3 votes! –Gates Of Vienna – Playing Nice submitted by Joshuapundit
• Second place with 1 2/3 votes – Weasel Zippers –More Proof Of Paid Protesters: Ad Asking For Protesters To Travel To Protest, List Of Payouts To #Ferguson Protest Organizers
  submitted by Nice Deb
• Third place *t* with 1 1/3 votes –Outside The Beltway – Hillary Misrepresents Citizen’s United, Says She’ll Demand Promises To Overturn From Nominees submitted by Rhymes with Right
• Third place *t* with 1 1/3 votes –Kurt Schlichter – Let’s Celebrate the Death of the Mainstream Media! submitted by The Watcher
• Fourth place with 1 vote –Michael Walsh/PJ Media – The Real Stephanopoulos Scandal submitted by The Glittering Eye
• Fifth place *t* with 2/3 votes –Matthew Vadum/FrontPage Magazine –Leaders Of The Lynch Mob submitted by The Noisy Room
• Fifth place *t* with 2/3 votes –Red Statements – Enough… I’m Tired submitted by The Right Planet
• Fifth place *t* with 2/3 votes –John Q.Public–One Airman’s View: Open Letter to the SARC submitted by Bookworm Room
• Fifth place *t* with 2/3 votes –Sultan Knish –Liberating Our Jerusalem submitted by The Independent Sentinel
• Sixth place *t* with 1/3 vote –Tickld.Com –Woman Realizes That She’s Been Accidentally Abusing Her Husband This Whole Time.. submitted by The Razor
• Sixth place *t* with 1/3 vote –Mark Steyn – Buy George, He’s Got It! submitted by The Watcher

See you next week!

Iraq War Debate Part LXIX

Direct Hit! Fire for effect!

We were right to invade Iraq in 2003 to remove Saddam Hussein, and to complete the job we should have finished in 1991.

Even with the absence of caches of weapons of mass destruction, and the mistakes we made in failing to send enough troops at first and to provide security from the beginning for the Iraqi people, we were right to persevere through several difficult years. We were able to bring the war to a reasonably successful conclusion in 2008.

When 44 took office, Iraq was calm, al-Qaeda was weakened and ISIS did not exist. Iran, meanwhile, was under pressure from abroad (due to sanctions) and at home (due to popular discontent, manifested by the Green uprising in the summer of 2009).

44's administration threw it all away. It failed to support the dissidents in Iran in 2009, mishandled the Iraqi elections in 2010, removed all U.S. troops from Iraq at the end of 2011, and allowed the Syrian civil war to spiral out of control from 2011 on.

We see, this week in Ramadi but this year throughout the Middle East, the predictable consequences of this disastrous policy of withdrawal and retreat.

And even though the threat is now clear as day, this administration shows no sign of changing course, as 43 did when it became clear his strategy in Iraq wasn't working.

I'm convinced it's no more true to say today that Iraq was always Mission Impossible than it was to claim in 2004 that Iraq was Mission Accomplished. But whatever one's judgment of 43's policies, or 44's, this new debate on Iraq provokes a serious discussion of our policy options moving forward.

If it does, Americans will come to the view that there's no alternative to American world leadership, and that such leadership must be backed by the threat of military strength and the willingness, in the right time and circumstances, to use it.

Angels Of Palestine

Since the Holy Poppa declared Palestine's Abu Mazen/M"moud Abbas an angel...

It's a cruel angel no doubt! 

Faced with the suffering of their own people, the Palestinians' leadership recently decided not to help. Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas rejected a deal with Israel brokered by the United Nations that would allow Palestinian refugees living in Syria to resettle in the West Bank and Gaza. Abbas stated unequivocally that "we rejected that and said it's better they die in Syria than give up their right of return." The Palestine Liberation Organization has also ruled out any military action to help the 18,000 or more refugees who are trapped in the Yarmouk camp near Damascus.

Abbas's cold-blooded response reveals something fundamental about Palestinian society and identity. Far more than territory, the key Israeli-Palestinian issue is the idea of a Palestinian "right of return"—the belief in a legal and moral right of Palestinian refugees, and more importantly their descendants from around the world, to return to ancestral homes in [Israel's part of] what was once Mandatory Palestine. This belief is so vital to Palestinian national identity that their leaders would rather they die than give it up and have a chance to live.

United Nations General Assembly Resolution 194 (III) of December 1948 supposedly codifies this "right." However, a closer look reveals it to be conditional: "refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbors should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and … compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return." The resolution also calls for the United Nations "to facilitate the repatriation, resettlement and economic and social rehabilitation of the refugees and the payment of compensation."

Interestingly, all the Arab States in the UN at the time (Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and Yemen) voted against the resolution, since it implicitly accepted the partition of Mandatory Palestine that recognized the Jewish right to a state. But the actual text of the resolution has been irrelevant since the beginning; Palestinian identity has crystallized around the dream of an unconditional "right of return," as has Palestinian propaganda to the world.

Since 1948, the "right of return" has been repeated innumerable times and has become rooted deeply in Palestinian culture. Abbas himself stated that "the right of return is a personal decision… neither the PA, nor the state, nor the PLO, nor Abu-Mazen [Abbas], nor any Palestinian or Arab leader has the right to deprive someone from his right to return." Put this way, which Palestinian would be the first to violate a cultural norm?

More amazing still is the extent to which this imaginary right has been embraced elsewhere. One example, of many, is the American Friends Service Committee, a leading architect of the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement against Israel, which calls for the "implementation of refugees' right of return, equality, and justice for Palestinians and Israelis." This simply means the end of Israel as a Jewish state, hardly equality or justice for both peoples. Such dishonesty about this pivotal Palestinian demand prolongs the crisis.

Abbas's statement takes that "right" a step further still. He has effectively said it is an obligation for Palestinians to die rather than return under the wrong circumstances by moving to the territories of the Palestinian Authority itself and renouncing the desire to settle in what is now Israel. The centrality of the "right of return" to Palestinian identity, along with the concept of "resistance" as a means to restore both "justice" and "honor," have reliably thwarted any consideration of resettlement. Now Abbas has laid out fully the idea of death before dishonor, or even the possibility of life under Palestinian Authority rule.

There have only ever been two solutions to the Palestinian problem, repatriation and resettlement. While at the beginning Israel offered to accept meaningful numbers of Palestinians, anything short of a complete restoration has always been off-limits politically among Palestinians. Now as Palestinians are dying, the barriers have been raised that much higher.

Al-Jazeera editor Mehdi Hasan recently wrote, "Now is the time for those of us who claim to care about the Palestinian people, and their struggle for dignity, justice, and nationhood, to make our voices heard," but added that "Our selective outrage is morally unsustainable. Many of us who have raised our voices in support of the Palestinian cause have inexcusably turned a blind eye to the fact that tens of thousands of Palestinians have been killed by fellow Arabs in recent decades."

That criticism applies first and foremost to the Palestinian leadership.

Killing Morsi

    

 

The backlash to the death sentence handed down to Mohamed Morsi on Saturday was swift: The EU and U.S. have condemned the trial of Egypt’s former president as inhumane and  “inconsistent with Egypt's international obligations and the rule of law.” Morsi’s political ally, Recept Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey, warned of regional turmoil if Morsi is killed. And Morsi’s Muslim Brotherhood movement warned that “all the world will pay” for his fate. But I think it’s premature to assume that this sentence will actually be carried out.

 

Since early 2014, Egyptian courts have sentenced hundreds of Muslim Brotherhood supporters to death in mass trials, but have carried out almost none of these executions. The only Morsi supporter believed to have been executed so far, Mahmoud Hassan Ramadan—hanged last March for throwing a man off a rooftop during clashes in 2013—was not actually a member of the organization. 

 

Part of this is the lengthy appeals process. Death penalties in Egypt, including Morsi’s have to be referred to the Grand Mufti, Egypt’s top religious authority, for approval (though the approval is not binding). Mufti Shawqi Allam rejected the death sentence of the Brotherhood’s spiritual leader last year and may do the same for Morsi, who appointed him to his position
 

The opacity of the process—the Mufti’s opinions aren’t usually made public and the judiciary seems to decide on a case to case basis whether to abide by them—works to the regime’s advantage. By sentencing Morsi and his supporters to death, Egypt sends an unmistakable message to his allies in Egypt and abroad. (The charges against Morsi include collusion with Iran and the Brotherhood’s Palestinian allies, Hamas.) But the sentence could always be commuted later on as a sop to Egypt’s western allies. For now, Morsi is a very valuable bargaining chip
 

When it comes to high-profile political cases, the Egyptian legal system seems to thrive on ambiguity. For instance, former leader Hosni Mubarak and his sons were sentenced to three years in prison earlier this month for embezzlement but it’s not clear whether they will actually serve any time—or whether the court will reopen murder charges that were overturned in January. President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi seems to prefer keeping potential rivals in a state of uncertainty and legal limbo than actually have their sentences carried out. Perhaps he’s been picking up some tips from his new friend Vladimir Putin 

Sino Confrontation Risk

From Jane's 360...

On 12 May, US media reported that the US military is considering sending military surveillance aircraft and naval vessels to within 12 nautical miles of Chinese-occupied features in the disputed Spratly Islands.

The normal territorial sea limit under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) is 12 nautical miles. The report appeared one day after the USS Fort Worth, a US Navy littoral combat ship, was allegedly shadowed by a Chinese navy frigate while patrolling in the South China Sea near the Spratly Islands, where China has conducted extensive land reclamation projects around a number of islets and reefs that it occupies. On 13 May, the Chinese Foreign Ministry expressed "serious concern" over the report and demanded US clarifications.

China claims most of the islets in the South China Sea, a claim that is actively disputed by the other states in the region, most importantly Vietnam and the Philippines. Although several Spratly claimants have conducted land reclamation, the Chinese efforts are notable for their speed and extent. Under UNCLOS, only natural land features permanently above sea level are entitled to surrounding territorial seas, whereas many of the Chinese-occupied features are submerged at high tide. Although the United States has never accepted Chinese claims of territorial waters around the periodically submerged features, to date US forces have refrained from traversing the 12-nautical-mile limit.

FORECAST

Any US air or naval patrol breaching the 12-nautical-mile limit would be regarded as in deliberate violation of Chinese sovereignty by Beijing, and would probably trigger a diplomatic confrontation between the US and China. Given the range of global security and economic issues which require Chinese co-operation, in particular the increasingly volatile situation in North Korea, the White House is unlikely to directly challenge Chinese territorial claims at this time. Instead, the US will probably respond to recent Chinese assertiveness by strengthening military co-operation with the other South China Sea states, as it did on October 2014, when it lifted its arms embargo against Hanoi, in place since the Gulf of Tonkin Incident in 1964. In the present scenario, US vessels are likely to patrol close to the 12-mile limit without breaching it.

Weekend Raid

The Syrian raid this past week end

delivered a “significant blow” to the Islamic State, which is known variously as ISIS, ISIL and Daesh.   

It was the first successful raid conducted by American commandos in Syria this year, and demonstrated a willingness by 44 to authorize covert operations despite a series of failed rescue operations during the past year in Syria and Yemen.

It also showed that the White House was willing to send combat troops into Syria — even if only temporarily — despite frequently promising to keep American forces out of the fighting there. The Obama administration has sent hundreds of U.S. special forces to the Middle East to train “moderate” anti-government Syrian rebels, but publicly vowed that there would be no American boots on the ground in either war zone.

Indeed, the fact that the White House gave the green light for an operation into Syria, combined with reports that the Delta operators removed a substantial trove of intelligence material from the site, might indicate that the raid could be the first in a series of such missions.

During the war against the Islamic State’s predecessor organization, al Qaeda in Iraq, Delta and the other components of the military’s Joint Special Operations Command developed a system called “F3EAD” — for Find, Fix, Finish, Exploit, Analyze, Disseminate — in which strike forces would raid objectives such as militant safe houses not only to kill or capture the militants but to gain as much material of intelligence value as possible. By sucking information out of hard drives and cell phones, as well as quickly interrogating anyone taken prisoner, Delta and other JSOC forces were able to launch several missions a night, each based on intelligence gained in the previous raid.

That dynamic could repeat itself here.

WoW!!

WoW - the Watchers Council- it's the oldest, longest running cyber comte d'guere ensembe in existence - started online in 1912 by Sirs Jacky Fisher and Winston Churchill themselves - an eclective collective of cats both cruel and benign with their ability to put steel on target (figuratively - natch) on a wide variety of topictry across American, Allied, Frenemy and Enemy concerns, memes, delights and discourse.

Every week these cats hook up each other with hot hits and big phazed cookies to peruse and then vote on their individual fancy catchers.

Thusly sans further adieu (or a don"t) 

Council Winners

• *First place with 2 2/3 votes!–The Right Planet – Which ‘Ism’ Will We Choose?
• Second place with 2 1/3 votes – Nice Deb – Video: Megyn Kelly Blasts “Fundamentally Confused and Wrong” Lib On Free Speech
• Third place with 2 votes –Don Surber – Melvin Garten, most decorated soldier, dies at 93
• Fourth place *t* with 1 1/3 votes –Bookworm Room – Will American capitalism be a victim of the rise of fascism-lite and the devaluation of language
• Fourth place *t* with 1 1/3 votes –Joshuapundit–How The Clintons Exploited Disaster In Haiti For Profit
• Fifth place with 2/3 vote –The Noisy Room – Cities On Fire – Dallas/Garland
• Sixth place *t* with 1/3 vote –VA Right! – Bill “Waffle Willie” Janis Birthday Breakfast has Cost Taxpayers $4,409,686,125.00 ($4.5 Billion) AND COUNTING!!!
• Sixth place *t* with 1/3 vote –The Glittering Eye –The Poorest In The United States

Non-Council Winners

• First place with 3 2/3 votes! –Mark Steyn –Stay Quiet and You’ll Be Okay” submitted by The Noisy Room
• Second place with 1 1/3 votes – American Digest – In Praise of Pamela Geller submitted by Joshuapundit
• Third place *t* with 1 vote –The Hoover Institution – The Sordid Origin of Hate-Speech Laws submitted by The Right Planet
• Third place *t* with 1 vote – Victor Davis Hanson–The First — And A Half — Amendment submitted by Bookworm Room
• Fourth place *t* with 2/3 votes –David French/NRO –I’m More Hateful Than Pamela Geller submitted by Nice Deb
• Fourth place *t* with 2/3 votes –Thomas Sowell – Race, Politics, And Lies submitted by Don Surber
• Fourth place *t* with 2/3 votes – Richard Dreyfuss/PJMedia – Election Coming: Nobody Knows Anything submitted by The Glittering Eye
• Fourth place *t* with 2/3 votes –Allen West – More ominous signs of Christian persecution submitted by The Watcher
• Fourth place *t* with 2/3 votes –The Diplomat – What the Pentagon Thinks of China’s Military submitted by The Watcher
• Fifth place *t* with 1/3 vote –Gay Patriot – Gays Provoke Muslims into Killing Them submitted by Rhymes with Right
• Fifth place *t* with 1/3 vote –Kirsten Powers/Daily Beast – How Liberals Ruined College submitted by The Watcher

See you next week!

Joyeuex Anniversarie Little Satan!

It's Nakbah Day! Shout out to Little Satan celebrating her 67th this year! Incredible - and soooo true. Despite the unhinged fact that nearly 300 million members of Arab League have tried and failed to put paid to a tiny tiny piece of real estate (with no oil) sweetly attended to by less than 7 million people.

Certain rowdy League members have learned the hard way not to send panzers, combat jets and conscripted infantry against Little Satan, yet there are several threats to her existence. 
 

Some things just get better as time goes by. And just like Great Satan, Little Satan continues to cruise. Totally off the hook in any endeavour - arts, academics, the Beatles, biz, communication, education, medicine, science, space exploration, tech - Little Satan is one sexy magical pixie.

Hotter than a firecracker and twice as loud, Little Satan is also nigh indestructable. 
 

Hanging in appearantly the only spot ever in the ME with like zero oil (compy speaking), no friendly homies on her borders, a tiny pop, little real estate (after the show ho's like Gaza, WB and Har Dov Farms included - Little Satan "occupies" less than 1% of the Arab world (and less than 1/10th of a % of mohammedist turf), no Suez Canal, no militias or resistance movements, Little Satan's very existence gives the eternal finger to all her failed, backwards, repressive hoodmates.

She is far superior, far more humane than Hosni's Egypt, Abdullah's (v2.0) Jordan, Bashar's Syria and ex colonies like Abbas' West Bank , HAMAS' Gaza Strip, Royal Saudiland and embattled Lebanon. 


Unlike her neighbors - Little Satan has real military prowess - yet she's unmilitaristc. She accommodated all faiths - yet remains secular. She absorbs refugees from the entire world - creating loyal, productive citizens throughout an Alamo - Masada environment that created sustained and maintained a tolerant, egalitarian democracy.

Beaches and biotches - Little Satan puts the 'HO' in "Holy Land." 
 

As one of the world's "Xceptionals" it is only cool and natch for Great Satan to hook up with Little Satan - just like best girlfriends forever - nigh indistinguishable.

"That is why they call her Little Satan, to distinguish her clearly from the country that has always been and will always be Great Satan – The United States of America."

Oh Snap!

Joyeuex Anniversaire Little Satan! 
 

Pic "Saluting an island of Western democratic values in a sea of despotism"

Strategic Stability In The 2nd Nuclear Age

Since the end of the Cold War, a new nuclear order has emerged, shaped by rising nuclear states and military technologies that threaten stability

During the Cold War, the potential for nuclear weapons to be used was determined largely by the United States and the Soviet Union. Now, with 16,300 weapons possessed by the seven established nuclear-armed states—China, France, India, Pakistan, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States—deterrence is increasingly complex. Since most of these countries face threats from a number of potential adversaries, “changes in one state’s nuclear policy can have a cascading effect on the other states.”

Though many states are downsizing their stockpiles, Asia is witnessing a buildup; Pakistan has the fastest-growing nuclear program in the world. By 2020, it could have a stockpile of fissile material that, if weaponized, could produce as many as two hundred nuclear devices. The author identifies South Asia as the region “most at risk of a breakdown in strategic stability due to an explosive mixture of unresolved territorial disputes, cross-border terrorism, and growing nuclear arsenals.”

Emerging technologies such as missile defenses, cyber and antisatellite weapons, and conventional precision strike weapons pose additional risks, Koblentz warns, and could potentially spur arms races and trigger crises.

The United States has more to lose from a breakdown in strategic stability than any other country due to its position as a global leader, the interdependence of its economy, and the network of security commitments it has around the world. The United States and Russia still possess more than 90 percent of the world’s nuclear weapons. Despite the increasing chill in U.S.-Russia relations, Washington’s highest priority should be to maintain strategic efforts with Russia and China, the two states with the capability and potential intent to launch a nuclear attack on the American homeland.

Cartoons And Allies

When it comes to gaining or losing allegiance, the sword is mightier than the pen.

Some cats often claim that the cartoons of the PBUH guy don’t just provoke terror, they also alienate Muslim friends and allies. Thus, even if one wishes to be defiant in the face of jihadist aggression, publishing the cartoons is still foolish because of the effect on our friends.

A senior fellow for the Middle East at the Center for National Policy, wrote that “the decision [to publish Mohammed cartoons] is counter-productive to the fight against Islamist extremists, as such depictions alienate many mainstream Muslims — the very allies we need to discredit the extremist ideologies of ISIL and Al-Qaeda.” Another fellow at the Institute for Social Policy and Understandings, claimed that Mohammed cartoons “alienate Muslims, who are American citizens and often first in line to report planned terrorist attacks.”

 

NYT correspondent Stephen Kinzer wrote in The Guardian (after the Danish Mohammed-cartoon controversy) that nominating former Danish prime minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen as secretary-general of the U.N. would threaten the mission in Afghanistan. Why? Because when he was prime minister, he refused to meet with Muslim ambassadors protesting the Mohammed cartoons. As a result, his nomination was foolish:   

"It would do more to alienate Muslims from Nato than almost any other step the alliance could take. What can Nato be thinking? Proceeding with this appointment would suggest that it has lost all contact with reality. Rasmussen’s qualifications are not the issue — what matters is the way his appointment would be perceived in the world’s most explosive region."

 

Yet this argument fundamentally misunderstands the nature of our challenge in the region. No western combatant in the history of the Middle East warfare has worked harder to be sensitive and responsive to cultural and religious concerns than America and its NATO allies.

 

Our leaders compliment Islam at every opportunity. Our soldiers are deluged with cultural-training sessions that go beyond extolling the virtues of Middle Eastern culture to downplaying or denying its many flaws – providing a distorted picture of reality. Our mainstream media is far more careful to avoid offending Muslims than any other religious group in American or European life.

Our allies on the ground, however, don’t really care about cartoons. They care about living or dying. In a world where strength matters, our incredible insistence on sensitivity is often seen as head-scratchingly weak. As Bing West has ably written, the Surge turned the corner in Iraq when local allies realized that we were the “strongest tribe" not the most sensitive tribe.

 

Two incidents stand out from my own time in Iraq — one humorous, one deadly.

I vividly remember meeting with local police leaders in Balad Ruz, Iraq, to discuss their recent successes in autonomous counterterror operations. They gleefully passed around their cell phones, which featured grinning local police posing next to al-Qaeda corpses. Giddy with their success, they passed around cans of whiskey (yes, cans). Each of us declined. When they asked why, our executive officer said, “We can’t drink alcohol because we don’t want to offend you.” They laughed, toasted us, and promptly drank their warm, canned whiskey with glee.

Nothing funny about the next incident. Local tribal leaders provided reliable intelligence about the meeting time and location of a particularly deadly terrorist cell. The catch? The cell met in a local mosque, during Friday prayers, and its leader just happened to be the imam. They begged us to raid the mosque. They pleaded with us strike the terrorists who had killed so many villagers and made their lives a living hell. But we couldn’t do it. Permission denied. So the cell kept meeting, and kept planting deadly IEDs, and was finally wiped out only when our soldiers were ambushed from the mosque — triggering a more than day-long firefight that destroyed much of the village. Our sensitivity cost lives.

Abandoning the Kurds until ISIS was on the outskirts of Erbil is far more dangerous than ten thousand Mohammad cartoons. Our precipitous withdrawal from Iraq alienated potential allies — driving them straight into Iran’s arms — far more than did Terry Jones (or anyone else) burning a Koran.

 

Did we send a message of sensitivity or stupidity when we armed Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood government, then suspended support for the el-Sisi regime, a stalwart enemy of jihad?

 

The bottom line is clear: Our politically correct sensitivity often broadcasts not respect for Islam but weakness in the face of bullies, and in the Middle East weakness is the one unforgivable sin. 

 

WoW!!

WoW - the Watchers Council- it's the oldest, longest running cyber comte d'guere ensembe in existence - started online in 1912 by Sirs Jacky Fisher and Winston Churchill themselves - an eclective collective of cats both cruel and benign with their ability to put steel on target (figuratively - natch) on a wide variety of topictry across American, Allied, Frenemy and Enemy concerns, memes, delights and discourse.

Every week these cats hook up each other with hot hits and big phazed cookies to peruse and then vote on their individual fancy catchers.

Thusly sans further adieu (or a don"t) 

Council Winners

• *First place with 2 2/3 votes!–The Right Planet – Garland and the Moral Equivalency Penchant
• Second place with 2 1/3 votes – Joshuapundit–Deep In The Heart Of Texas – Jihad As A Brand Name (Updated)
• Third place with 1 2/3 votes –Bookworm Room – Muslims Aren’t The Only Ones Engaged In An All Out War Against Christianity
• Fourth place with 1 1/3 votes –The Noisy Room – The Continuity of Government – The Mystery of Peters Mountain
• Fifth place with 1 vote –The Razor – Why An Alcoholic Supports the Legalization of Illicit Drugs
• Sixth place *t* with 2/3 vote –Don Surber – Bernie Sanders brings wealth of 19th century ideas to Democratic presidential sweepstakes
• Sixth place *t* with 2/3 vote –VA Right! – How Bill Janis Lost my Support in the Virginia Senate Race (VA-12)
• Seventh place *t* with 1/3 vote –Nice Deb – Community Organizer in Chief Pays Lip Service To Fallen NYPD Officer
• Seventh place *t* with 1/3 vote –Ask Marion – Why The Gun Is Civilization

Non-Council Winners

• First place with 2 votes! –Michelle Malkin – Debunking Obama’s Bilious Baltimore Babble submitted by Don Surber
• Second place with 1 2/3 votes –Andrew McCarthy/PJ Media –Beware Baltimore’s ‘No Justice, No Peace’ Prosecutor submitted by Nice Deb
• Third place *t* with 1 1/3 votes – Real Clear Defense – ISIS Tactics Are Similar to Nazi Germany’s | submitted by GrEaT sAtAn”S gIrLfRiEnD
• Third place *t* with 1 1/3 votes – Ben Crystal/Personal Liberty –Intolerance will not be tolerated submitted by The Noisy Room
• Fourth place *t* with 1 vote –Fred’s Blog – Woodrow Wilson And The Administrative State submitted by The Right Planet
• Fourth place *t* with 1 vote –Sean Davis/ The Federalist–PunditFact: A Case Study In Fact-Free Hackery submitted by Bookworm Room
• Fourth place *t* with 1 vote –Gateway Pundit – It Begins: Democrats Hand Out Anti-Semitic Flyer at Maryland Meeting submitted by Rhymes with Right
• Fourth place *t* with 1 vote – FOX News – ‘We will not obey’: Christian leaders threaten civil disobedience if Supreme Court legalizes gay marriage submitted by The Watcher
• Fifth place *t* with 1/3 vote –Marc Thiessen/WAPO – The Baltimore Democrats Built submitted by The Watcher
• Fifth place *t* with 1/3 vote – Daniel Halper/Weekly Standard –Frankenhillary submitted by The Watcher

See you next week!

U Boats

Up periscope!!

Das dreaded untersee boot - the submersible submarining U Boat - may be LOL"d as about as useful as ancient battleships. Easy to find and even easier to sink, genau?

Maybe baby - on the other hand, U Boats are continuing their bust out move in the world's Navies.

See, 

Submarines give navies around the world a huge strategic and tactical advantage.

Ballistic-missile submarines can serve as nuclear deterrents if a country's land-based launch systems have been destroyed. Meanwhile, nuclear-powered attack submarines can effectively hunt enemy subs and can sink enemy naval targets. During war games in March, a French Rubis-class sub even "sunk" a US aircraft carrier.

Smaller non-nuclear attack submarines, though incapable of operating underwater for as long as nuclear vessels, can be even more difficult to track than their nuclear-fueled counterparts. These subs can also be used for naval and anti-submarine warfare in shallower waters.

On average, the largest submarines in service are ballistic missile-armed. As these submarines are intended for nuclear strikes or long-range missile attacks, few nations have the need or desire to operate them. Today, only Russia, China, France, the US, and the UK have ballistic-missile submarines in their navies.

Likewise, the same five countries are the only nations to possess nuclear attack submarines, though the Indian Navy is operating a loaned Russian sub. These subs are generally slightly smaller than ballistic-missile submarines and are capable of staying submerged for months at a time.

In general, the greatest number of submarines owned and operated around the world are of the non-nuclear variety. These submarines are powered via air-independent propulsion, diesel-electric engines, or a combination of both.

Though these non-nuclear submarines are small and cannot remain submerged as long as nuclear subs, newer models can potentially run quieter than the nuclear-powered models, allowing them to evade detection and attack surface ships or other submarines.

The following graphic from Naval Graphics shows every model of submarine in service around the world as of 2015:



You can see the graphic in closer detail here»

Pentagon's New Leadership

A former commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan and the head of Transportation Command will be 44’s picks to lead the military during a time of swelling threats, widened missions, and budget uncertainty...

44 will tap Marine Corps Gen. Joseph Dunford to be the next chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff on Tuesday, a defense official confirmed late Monday.

44 will also nominate Air Force Gen. Paul Selva, the head of U.S. Transportation Command, to become the next vice chairman, said the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity ahead of the announcement.

If confirmed, Dunford, who oversaw U.S. forces in Afghanistan from February 2013 until last August and commanded Marines during the 2003 invasion of Iraq, would become the second Marine to serve in the nation’s top military post. Gen. Pete Pace held the position from 2005 to 2007.

Dunford has been commandant of the Marine Corps since October.

Dunford and Selva would replace Army Gen. Martin Dempsey and Adm. Sandy Winnefeld, the current chairman and vice chairman. Their nominations come as the military has slowed its withdrawal from Afghanistan, widened its campaign against Islamic State militants in Iraq and Syria, and grappled with budget uncertainty with little signs of long-term relief.

While Dunford’s nomination was widely expected, Selva’s nomination is perhaps more significant: no Air Force general has held either of the top two slots on the Joint Chiefs since Gen. Richard Myers stepped down as chairman in 2005. As well, 44’s nomination of Selva – a cargo and aerial tanker pilot – is unusual for a service that has historically recommended only fighter and bomber pilots for its highest billets.

Selva was former Secretary of State HRC's senior military adviser from 2008 to 2011 when he was the assistant to the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Pentagon insiders have long said Selva would be a likely candidate for the chairman’s job if she is elected president

Little Satan Reset

As Little Satan's Joyeuex Anniversarie approacheth, might be like totally time to do a Reset with Great Satan's ally...

Because American public opinion is solidly pro-Israel, the next president—Democrat or Republican—will be able to move quickly to repair much of the damage caused by the current administration. What kinds of initiatives should 2016 candidates who are friends of Israel consider making part of their foreign policy platforms?

The first thing the next president, Democrat or Republican, might consider doing is downgrading the peace process as the central feature of the U.S.-Israel relationship. On Inauguration Day 2017, the peace process will be more than 25 years old—with very little progress to show and in some cases, such as Gaza, with a situation much worse than before.   

The pursuit of Palestinian statehood over the past quarter-century has damaged U.S. credibility. It has committed our country to a diplomatic proceeding whose expectations have always been set too high, and in which corrupt and violent figures are promoted as peace partners while an ally is set up to play the role of scapegoat.
.
It doesn’t have to be like this. The next president can acknowledge the benefits of a Palestinian state that is truly and permanently at peace with Israel, yet recognize that such a state is unlikely to emerge soon, given Hamas’s control of Gaza and the corruption, sclerosis, and terror-friendliness of the Palestinian Authority (PA). There will be a time, the next president could say, to discuss statehood. Until then, our emphasis should be on encouraging Palestinian reform. A good place to start would be insisting that the PA stop paying benefits to terrorists and their families, and conditioning further American aid on the cessation of such payments.

Having freed him or herself from this diplomatic rut, the next president can move to rebuild the alliance on a foundation that serves American interests and strengthens Israel’s security and legitimacy. The broad goal should be a reduction of the kind of ambiguities about Israel’s borders and territory that have created opportunities for mischief-makers around the world to manufacture diplomatic crises.

The next president could recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and move the U.S. embassy to West Jerusalem, to which there is no Arab claim. This would in no way curtail Israel’s options in future negotiations with the Palestinians or prejudge any legitimate diplomatic outcomes. It would merely recognize the fact that, since its founding in 1948, Jerusalem has been its capital, just as it will always be Israel’s capital.

There are two more things the next president could do to help clarify and legitimize Israel’s borders. The first is to revive and codify the understandings that were reached in the 2004 Bush-Sharon letter, which was endorsed by overwhelming bipartisan majorities of the House and Senate in June of that year. The letter drew an important distinction between major settlement blocks that will remain part of Israel in any peace deal, and farther-flung and much less populous settlements that may not. Since the major settlement blocks, especially those around Jerusalem, will never be part of Palestine, the letter said the United States would cease contesting construction within them.

44 discarded this understanding upon taking office and instigated crisis after crisis over “settlement construction” inside these blocks. The crises were contrived and needless. The next president should recognize the legitimacy of these communities and tell the EU that the United States will vigorously block any effort to punish Israel for construction in them.

The second thing the next president could do to help clarify Israel’s borders is to recognize the Golan Heights as Israeli territory. The Golan was captured by Israel in the 1967 Six Day War, after it had been used repeatedly during previous decades as a launching pad for attacks on the Jewish state.   

Today, because of the ongoing war in Syria, the Heights—which sit above Israel’s major source of fresh water and much of its farmland—are more vital to Israel’s security than ever. It’s time to end this territory’s purgatory and discard the fantasy that the Golan will one day be handed back to Syria.

It doesn’t have to be like this. The next president can acknowledge the benefits of a Palestinian state that is truly and permanently at peace with Israel, yet recognize that such a state is unlikely to emerge soon, given Hamas’s control of Gaza and the corruption, sclerosis, and terror-friendliness of the Palestinian Authority (PA).   

There will be a time, the next president could say, to discuss statehood. Until then, our emphasis should be on encouraging Palestinian reform. A good place to start would be insisting that the PA stop paying benefits to terrorists and their families, and conditioning further American aid on the cessation of such payments.

There are two more things the next president could do to help clarify and legitimize Israel’s borders.

The next president could recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and move the U.S. embassy to West Jerusalem, to which there is no Arab claim. This would in no way curtail Israel’s options in future negotiations with the Palestinians or prejudge any legitimate diplomatic outcomes. It would merely recognize the fact that, since its founding in 1948, Jerusalem has been its capital, just as it will always be Israel’s capital.

The second thing the next president could do to help clarify Israel’s borders is to recognize the Golan Heights as Israeli territory. The Golan was captured by Israel in the 1967 Six Day War, after it had been used repeatedly during previous decades as a launching pad for attacks on the Jewish state.   

Today, because of the ongoing war in Syria, the Heights—which sit above Israel’s major source of fresh water and much of its farmland—are more vital to Israel’s security than ever. It’s time to end this territory’s purgatory and discard the fantasy that the Golan will one day be handed back to Syria.

The next president could also address the ongoing scandal that is the U.N.’s abusive treatment of Israel. He or she can pledge to veto anti-Israel Security Council resolutions and to vigorously oppose anti-Israel General Assembly resolutions. This is less a kindness to Israel than it is a straightforward expression of American moral clarity and global leadership.   

The next president can also withdraw from the odious U.N. Human Rights Council, a club of dictators and terrorists that does little more than make slanderous accusations against Israel (while ignoring egregious human rights violations elsewhere in the world). The 43rd administration abandoned the council; the 44th administration rejoined it, with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton pledging to reform it from within. This reform never happened.

The next president can also begin the long-overdue process of reforming the U.N. Relief and Works Agency, which spends $2 billion a year prolonging the conflict by preventing the normalization of Palestinian “refugees” from 1948 (almost all of whom are in fact descendants of the original 1948 refugees). Instead of being treated like all other war refugees and resettled so they may start new lives, these descendants, today numbering more than five million, are warehoused in poor conditions and nurtured on the fantasy of their eventual “return” to a place almost none of them have lived.

The past six years have been difficult ones for Israel and her many American supporters. But there is no reason why 44's era cannot end up being viewed as a clarifying prelude to a fresh start, under the next president, based on new thinking about U.S. policy towards Israel.