The Trump Light is Green – Go!

by Emanuel Shilo, editor of Besheva weekly , translated by Hillel Fendel.

1. Why oh why, many are asking, did we agree to enter into negotiations with Hamas and consent to give them almost everything they wanted at such an early stage of the deal?

In general, it is hard to avoid the impression that the push to reach a deal right there and then, and the cave-in to the pressure of the media and the "Bring Them Home!" groups, caused our negotiators to wage the negotiations in a rushed and most unprofessional manner. Perhaps we would have done a lot better had we sent to Qatar and Egypt not the senior figures in our security establishment – Gen. Nitzan Alon, Shabak chief Ronen Bar, and Mossad head Dedi Barnea – but seasoned and savvy businessmen or lawyers.

The price is unfathomable. What could have justified the exponential jump from the fairly reasonable price we paid for the release of some of our hostages at the end of 2023 and the outrageous price we are now paying? The gap is huge, in terms of the number – and quality – of terrorists we are releasing for each hostage, the number of ceasefire days that the enemy will use to rearm and rebuild itself, and of course the dangerous precedent of our concession of strategic assets that we won with the blood of our soldiers.

2.  But beyond that: Is it not obvious that when and if one has to deal with a cheat and liar, one must ensure that he leaves sufficient assets in his hands to ensure that the other side carries out its part of the deal? Why did we agree to pay in full even before receiving the promised goods? How could we have allowed the Gazan population to return to northern Gaza, and agreed to withdraw our forces from the Netzarim axis, at such an early stage of the deal? We could have agreed, in the first stages, to call a ceasefire, to release terrorists, and to allow even more humanitarian aid – while retaining the cards that were so important to Hamas, such as the return of the population to northern Gaza and the IDF's withdrawal from Netzarim, until after the all our living hostages were freed.

Another elementary rule is that our enemy is not to receive live terrorists in exchange for dead bodies; only dead terrorists are to be given over in exchange for our corpses. This principle - one of the conclusions of the Shamgar Committee that was established in 2008 after the Gilad Shalit deal to set guidelines for future hostage exchanges - is both just and smart, for it motivates the abductors to preserve the lives of those they have kidnapped. For some inexplicable reason, in exchange for several corpses in the coming days, Israel will release all the women and minors who were arrested in Gaza ever since Oct. 8, 2023, the day after the massacre.

Certainly bringing deceased Jews to proper Jewish burial is a great Torah commandment and value. But it cannot justify the future danger to lives inherent in the release of murderous terrorists. We have in our hands many "valuable" terrorist corpses, such as that of Yichye Sinwar. If the negotiations had been handled correctly, all of our dead hostages could have been attained in exchange for Sinwar's cadaver, with perhaps a few more thrown in for good measure. It's true that ultimate justice requires that his remains be lost forever in the sea, as we did with the ashes of Eichmann and the Americans did with Bin-Laden. However, for the sake of Jewish burials for our dead hostages, we could have compromised on that point. 

Of course, it's not only the negotiators' fault, but also that of our Prime Minister and other government minister who approved the deal. We can be happy at least that from now on, Minister Ron Dermer will replace the failed negotiators and head our negotiating team.

3. Another missed opportunity – so far – was the threat last week by Israel's friend U.S. President Donald Trump that "all hell is going to break out" if Hamas did not release at least the three hostages it promised to free this past Saturday. Given that the "excuse" for the current agreement was pressure by the incoming Trump Administration, there is no reason that Trump's support for a strong Israeli reaction should not be utilized now to extricate ourselves from this terrible deal.

That is, now that this past Saturday noon did not see a full release of all the hostages, we have a green light from Trump to attack Hamas again with abandon. With full American backing, a new Defense Minister who thinks differently than his predecessor, and a new Chief of Staff, this is the time to wage the ultimate offensive that will achieve the war aims of destroying Hamas and freeing the hostages – as well as the new goal of transferring the Gazan population to other countries, in the spirit of the Trump vision.

[Ed. note: We now know that Hamas has agreed to release six living hostages this coming Saturday, in addition to four corpses beforehand and another four afterwards. It is therefore far from certain that the writer would call for an immediate Israeli attack under these circumstances.]

4. The war objective of dismantling the Hamas regime should be done in three stages. First, Israel must take over all of Gaza and establish a military administration that will control, among other things, the distribution of food and humanitarian aid to the populace. When the Gazans are no longer dependent on Hamas for food, and are no longer threatened by Hamas, they are more likely to cooperate with Israel and provide information for the release of the hostages and the capture of the Hamas leaders.

Secondly, any Gazan who wants to leave should be helped to do so. Pres. Trump has laid his prestige on this initiative, and will be of great assistance to this end.

And thirdly, the IDF must wage war on all fronts in Gaza simultaneously. The only agreement that can ever be made with Hamas is its surrender, in which all the hostages, dead or alive, are returned safely. If we allow Hamas to end this war with a victory of any type, the chance that it will return all our hostages is microscopic, for they serve to guarantee that Israel will not continue to attack and destroy Hamas.

If we muster up the strength, courage and resourcefulness to resume the military effort with a new spirit, there is a very good chance that Hamas will reach its moral breaking point very quickly and will agree, from lack of choice, to hand over all the hostages to us as part of its surrender.

Hypocritical Alternatives to the Trump Gaza Plan

by Dr. Ron Breiman, former Chairman of Professors for a Strong Israel, translated by Hillel Fendel.

Those whose hypocrisy is their trade are appalled by President Trump’s proposal to empty Gaza of its Arabs. “Trumpsfer,” they mockingly call it. They view it as impossible to implement, but continue to champion their favorite lie – the “two-state solution” – which is even less implementable.

They conceal the fact that Trump has no intention of forcibly expelling anyone. He rather intends to offer incentives to the Gazans to encourage them to emigrate. The freedom to live anywhere one likes is one of the most basic and important human rights - but the hypocrites who want to prevent this plan are seeking to deny it to the Gazans. 

These two-faced critics repeat over and over their mantra regarding "The Day After" – which is really their codename for their dangerous dream of a Palestinian state in the heart of western Eretz Yisrael. And they wish to pave the way for it by having our IDF soldiers put their lives on the line to destroy Hamas just so that the Fatah-run, terrorist-supporting Palestinian Authority can take its place. And all this comes precisely as they reject outright the Trump initiative for "The Day After," which is geared to encourage the terrorist-supporting, and worse, population of Gaza to begin new lives elsewhere.

What is their problem with the Trump plan? They say it's too coercive and racist, and immorally uproots people from their land. They forget, of course, that they themselves were very much in favor of a similar program to forcibly evict a myriad of Jews from their homes in Gaza and northern Shomron just 20 years ago. Many of them also favor the transfer of another few hundred thousand Jews so as to make room for their beloved two-state solution. They would be well advised to wake up to their hypocrisy and keep quiet.

Those whose hypocrisy is their trade, by comparing modern-day Israel to Nazi-era Germany, are guilty of belittling the Holocaust. The racist, Messianic left-wing camp has no right to even begin speaking against Israel's shining democracy!

Those whose hypocrisy is their trade claim to have compassion for the Arab "refugees" living in squalid refugee camps – when in fact we are talking about the fourth generation of those who left Israel back in 1948. By no means can they still be considered refugees. Instead of being resettled, as is the case with refugees around the world within two generations [according to the official UN definition for refugees who are not Arab Palestinian], they continue to benefit, decade after decade, from the generosity of the anti-Semitic UNRWA organization. The "camps" they live in are generally full-fledged cities, and the IDF would be well advised to stop using the term "refugee camp" (R.C.) altogether.

Those whose hypocrisy is their trade would have us forget that in 1948, there were not only Arab refugees, but also Jewish refugees – those who had been forcibly expelled from Arab countries such as Iraq, Egypt, Yemen, and others, beginning immediately after the establishment of the State of Israel. Some 650,000 of them arrived in Israel destitute and truly homeless, and immediately began a process of rehabilitation and acclimatization. Yet the hypocrites condemn Trump's nonviolent proposal for the Gazans.

What Type of Investigation?

Speaking of those whose hypocrisy is their trade, out of their desire to topple the Netanyahu government at any price, they demand a public commission of inquiry – something that doesn't even appear in the Law of Commissions of Inquiry – to investigate the failures, faults and mishaps that led to the current war. However, they are not coming to the public debate on this matter with clean hands. A genuine investigation must look deeply into the following:

a.     How to ensure that such a catastrophic event as Simchat Torah-October 7^th not ever be repeated – and not how to simply find those who are guilty, and especially Bibi Netanyahu. There are those whose only goal is to ensure that Netanyahu leaves public life, and as ignominiously as possible. The inquiry must therefore be carried out by professional investigators who enjoy the public trust; its members can certainly not be appointed by Judge Yitzchak Amit – who recently and controversially took on the position of Supreme Court President – who does not enjoy such public confidence.

b.    How the concept of giving gifts to the enemy evolved. These include, specifically, handing over parts of our homeland under the Oslo Accords, and giving money to Hamas. In addition, why was arch-terrorist Arafat and his successors granted the role of peace-maker, and why did we feel the need to purchase quiet from Hizbullah and Hamas?

c.     It must also investigate the plethora of new evidence that has been amassed over the years regarding the assassination of Yitzchak Rabin, thus shedding light (or darkness…) on the circumstances of the murder and the motives of the murderer.

Those whose hypocrisy is their trade have not seemed to notice, or care, that there are politicians in Israel who wear suits, and others who wear judicial robes. Most unfortunately, the latter operate most zealously and aggressively to erode the public trust in them – trust that is so very important for a judicial system. They might want to check every once in a while to see if possibly the only ones standing behind them are those who wear similar robes to them.

Best Trip Ever: Netanyahu in Washington

by Avi Greentzeig, former editor of the Kav Itonut chain and Hadrei Hadarim website, translated by Hillel Fendel.

Just over a week ago, when Prime Minister Netanyahu began an important trip to Washington as the first foreign leader to visit newly-reelected President Trump, the media here was rife with warnings: "Trump Demands that Israel Stop the War," "Trump Doesn't Like Netanyahu," and so on.

Over-zealous reporters rushed to tell us that the one-on-one meeting between the two would last "only 15 minutes," and pompous commentators in the TV studios explained that Trump would exact a high price from Israel. First and foremost, they warned us that Trump doesn't like wars and that Israel would not be permitted to continue its campaign to destroy Hamas.

And then came Trump.

In an unforgettable press conference before reporters from all over the world, Trump smashed to smithereens 100% of the prognoses, musings, nonsense and lies that had been heard here in the preceding days. The leader of the world gave Israel more or less every possible thing it could have asked for – and then added a bonus.

Not only did the president not hint in any way or form that he has any intention of restricting Israel, he actually made it clear that as far as he is concerned, Israel can renew the war and finish the job of cleaning out Gaza. He then added the words that shook up the world: “We should go to other countries of interest with humanitarian hearts, and … build various domains that will ultimately be occupied by the 1.8 million Palestinians living in Gaza… The U.S. will take over the Gaza Strip [and] we'll own it…"

This little addendum that he stuck in was one that, had it been uttered five minutes earlier by an Israeli, would have led to a police investigation for possible incitement, ordered by Attorney-General Gali Bahrav Miara. Just ask former MK Michael Ben-Ari.

Even as we debate, justifiably so, exactly what the chances are that Trump's Gaza plan will be actualized, we must remember that its very announcement grants Israel some important gains. For one thing, it means that the U.S. has reversed the extreme anti-Israel policies (in some areas) of the Biden Administration - which leads in turn to a reduction of international pressure upon us. The Biden term's point of departure was that even given that Israel had no other choice after Oct.7^th, it is still a war criminal country. From this followed the halt of U.S. armaments to Israel, as well as strong American pressure to increase "humanitarian aid" to Hamas/Gaza. This led to the bizarre scene of the installation of a pier in Gaza, under American auspices, for the benefit of "innocent" Gazans.

Trump has changed the American perspective. As of now, the Gazans – whether because they are "unlucky," as Trump said, or because they are a bloodthirsty, murderous gang – must be moved aside and sent away. From now on, every discussion starts with that point of departure. If the Saudis or the Qataris, or even Hamas itself, want to soften the decree, it will be up to them to make an acceptable offer.

And then also came Iran. I've seen that there are many in Israel's nationalist camp who were disappointed that Trump did not declare outright war on Iran, or something close to it. But the truth is that when Trump said he would rather negotiate with Iran than go to war with it, he gave Israel even more than it needs regarding the Iranian nuclear threat. To elaborate:

Israeli thinking is that when we hear about "diplomatic understandings" or a deal with Iran, what immediately comes to mind is the Obama era. But with Trump, it's different: When he presents a diplomatic option, he is not referring to a temporary freeze or dubious understandings – but rather something that will put a total and absolute end to Iran's nuclear aspirations.

For one thing, Trump has already signed an order directing his Secretaries of State and Defense to do everything necessary to drive Iran’s oil exports to zero. In addition, he said clearly: “If we made the deal, Israel wouldn’t bomb them." Basically, Trump is simply telling the Iranians to destroy their own nuclear reactors, so that Israel doesn't have to. Sounds like a good deal to me.

Now that Netanyahu has returned from Washington, he can get back into the Israeli routine of petty coalition fights and wasted courtroom time about years-old articles on the Walla website. It is therefore worth remembering, briefly, the gap between what the media here originally expected and the reality - which includes "small" achievements in America such as the imposition of sanctions on The Hague, the launch of an official campaign against anti-Semitism on campuses, and another weapons package for Israel worth a billion dollars.

It seems that we can sum up very simply: This was one of the most successful, if not the most successful, trips to Washington, D.C. of an Israel prime minister. Its welcome results will accompany us for many years ahead.

Thank you, Mr. Prime Minister.

Trump's Golden Deal

by Dr. Meir Seidler, Senior Lecturer in the Jewish Heritage Department of Ariel University in the Shomron, translated by Hillel Fendel.

This past Tuesday evening, I set myself down in front of the TV and internet screens, and prepared myself for a long night.

The last time I remember doing something like that was when I was a boy and my parents gave me special permission to stay up to watch the legendary late-night championship fight between Muhammed Ali and Joe Frazier. And here it was, over 50 years later, and it was happening again.

This time, too, I watched and listened up to the end, jumping from one channel to another internet site and back again. I started with my favorite station, Reshet Bet, the news and talk station of the Israeli Public Broadcasting Corporation. It has a large selection of broadcasters who enjoy frustrating and angering me and my fellow nationalists. And since, like most Israelis, I like to get angry, I listen to Reshet Bet a lot. This particular time Reshet Bet was producing a special Trump-Netanyahu summit broadcast.

The atmosphere its broadcasters emitted was one of depression, something between extreme sourness and heavy mourning. The main topic discussed for many minutes at the beginning was Netanyahu's "betrayal" of Biden. That is, Trump had said that, in contrast with Biden, he himself supported Israel absolutely and without reservations – and Netanyahu did not come out in Biden's defense! Yes, I'm serious: The Reshet Bet journalists felt that the most important thing to talk about at this time was why Netanyahu didn't have a good word for Biden. In any event, the real news – the Trump-Netanyahu meeting and subsequent press conference – soon pushed even the critical topic of Netanyahu and Biden to the back burners, and the real show began.

And what do you know? Trump took the whole world by surprise. The plan that he came up with was something that we really hadn't thought of. He explained, perhaps three times, that the reason he wanted the U.S. to essentially border Israel is that the world can't go on making the same mistakes again and again, when all they lead to is more war and more suffering. When you think about it, what he said was totally logical. War, ceasefire, rebuilding, rearming, war, ceasefire, rebuilding, rearming, and so on, over and over. What business that wants to remain competitive would ever adopt a business model like that, one that has failed time after time?

Countries from all over the world have invested large fortunes of money in what has been called, in accordance with the best Orwellian tradition, the "peace process." These monies ended up supporting not housing and reparations, but only one thing: Arab aggression that has become increasingly more brutal and has brought upon us never-ending rounds of war. One round barely ends before the next one appears on the horizon. Just in the last 15 years we have seen Operations Cast Lead, Pillar of Cloud, and Protective Edge, then the fighting accompanying the 2021 Israeli-Arab revolt, Operation Summer Rains, and more.

And now comes along Donald Trump with a vision that no one thought of; he himself could not have imagined it up until possibly a year ago. His creative plan is to turn the Gaza Strip not into the 51^st state of the United States, but something close: a beautiful shoreline front of American-built and American-owned hotels, where "anyone who wants to" can live, presumably after having been vetted for terrorist backgrounds and the like.

And here must be said something that has not yet been said outright, but appears to me to be quite obvious: The Trump Gaza Plan will include the establishment of an American military base offshore of the Mediterranean Sea (or perhaps on the beach). This explains why Trump is pushing this plan so enthusiastically. It's not because he has become a Messianic evangelical who wishes to help Israel even more than Israel itself asked for. He's still the same businessman he always was – but now he is more creative and has the resources of a superpower in his pocket. This is a golden opportunity for the United States to improve its strategic status in our region. It's the kind of thing that happens once in a century – and it happened precisely when Trump was elected President with his Make American Great Again program atop the agenda. How wondrous are G-d's ways!

The U.S. military base will benefit from a friendly neighborhood, and of course will leave plenty of space for a tourism paradise on the beach. All this will supply the "thousands of jobs" that Trump promised – and there is no doubt that he will give priority to Israeli workers over Arabs, who are liable to turn hostile at any given moment.

This is also what stands behind the weakest link in Trump's plan: the transfer of all or most of the residents of Gaza to other countries. But even this part of the plan can become realistic. Given the tremendous interest that the U.S. has in implementing this tremendous strategic upgrade, and also the no-less tremendous aid that American provides Egypt, it is very likely that a solution will be found for the transfer. This is true especially when the countries of the region wake up to the tremendous economic potential for everyone when the dollars start pouring in. Egyptian and other workers will be glad to receive American salaries in order to build the grandiose American project that will take shape here. This is a dream that with G-d's help can and will come true!

We can only hope that in the framework of this unexpected plan – and of course given the most recent developments sparked by Hamas' threats and Trump's bellicose response – all the hostages will be freed before it's too late. Hopefully, the leaders of Hamas will be made to realize that they have no hope of remaining alive if they do not release the hostages. We can only pray that this works out, under the guiding hand of the Leader of History in Whose hands are placed the hearts of kings (see Proverbs 21,1). May it be soon!

What Will Be the Netanyahu Legacy?

abridged from an article by Besheva Editor Emmanuel Shilo, translated by Hillel Fendel.

Israel's Prime Minister can either extricate himself from the second stage of the hostage-ceasefire deal that brings defeat upon Israel – or he can be remembered in infamy as he who sought to teach the world how to defeat terrorism but ended up teaching the terrorists how to defeat Israel.

Clarification: As the English version of this article is being prepared, the world is in a tizzy following President Trump's announcement that he wants to deport most of the Gazan population, with the United States taking over, owning, and rebuilding the Gaza Strip. This article deals with Netanyahu's stark choice between defeating the terrorists and caving in to them – a choice that could become moot if Trump has his way.

1.       Israel is paying a very heavy, multi-faceted price for its agreement to release thousands of terrorists in exchange for some of our tortured captives from Hamas captivity. The first issue, not at all to be sneezed at, is that it strikes a blow at justice and morality. When cruel murderers are sent free to joyous victory celebrations instead of being executed, or at least spending the rest of their lives in jail – the injustice cries out to the heavens. It is evident in the renewed suffering of the victims' families, the celebrations in our face of the terrorists' return, the emasculation of our justice system's activities to convict them, and in the apparent wasted energies of our soldiers who endangered themselves or even lost their lives in capturing them.

2.       But even graver is the danger that the Israeli populace faces with the freeing of these bloodthirsty animals from their cages and their return to the hunt. It has been said before and must be emphasized again: The Shabak has shown that some 80% of the terrorists freed in the 2011 Shalit deal returned to their terrorist ways – and have murdered nearly a dozen Israelis since then. This doesn't include the massacre of 1,200 Israelis initiated and led by Yichye Sinwar and other terrorists released with him in the Shalit deal. Israel thus saved one soldier at the price of ten other Jewish lives, including the three kidnapped youths in Gush Etzion in June 2014, and others.

Oct. 7^th, of course, also led to the abduction of 250 Israelis, which led in turn to the current release of thousands more terrorists. Thus, the mistakes of the Shalit deal are being catastrophically felt today – and who knows when the mistakes of the current deal will be similarly felt?

In 2008, a special secret committee, headed by the late Chief Justice Meir Shamgar, sought to set clear guidelines and limitations on the release of terrorist prisoners. However, its conclusions remained secret and were not implemented, and we thus ended up paying exorbitant prices for our hostages not only in 2011 but again in 2025. The simple principle of not encouraging future abductions by refusing to give in to the abductors' demands, as manifest in the Talmudic law that "captives are not redeemed for more than they are worth," is simply overlooked time and again – with tragic results.

3. But the price is even heavier than that. While some say that additional terrorists on the streets make little difference given that those who wish to cry out Allahu Akbar and kill Jews are not in short supply – they are not taking into account that these specific terrorists who are being freed have gained many skills in organizing attacks that they would not otherwise have easily acquired. They are thus a qualitative reinforcement. The example of Sinwar proves that among them are military leaders whose potential danger to Israel is inestimably greater than that of regular terrorists recruited off the street.

And even furthermore: Our deterrence capabilities suffer greatly, of course, whenever terrorists are released in this manner. Today, any terrorist who wishes to murder Jews – for the sake of Allah and heavenly delights, or for a life-long salary, or for fame and glory, or for all of the above – knows that even if he is sentenced to many life sentences, he will one day be freed in some kind of deal. This loss of deterrence is itself something that encourages and increases terrorist attacks against Israelis.

Those who clamor to Bring Them Home! at absolutely any price, and those in the media who promote their cause – do they not realize the future dangers they are pushing us and themselves into? Do they not realize that every other possible alternative must be exhausted before we take this perilous path? Our compassionate Jewish hearts go out to our tortured brethren in Gaza, but whatever happened to our intelligent Jewish brains that are usually able to learn from the past and calculate several steps ahead?

4. As if all the above isn't bad enough, we are now paying an even higher price, if that can be imagined: If the next stage of this agreement goes through, we will actually stop a war forced upon us before our war objectives have been fully achieved.

We are actually teaching our enemies that if they want to defeat us, all they have to do, Heaven forbid, is to capture a few soldiers or civilians, hold them in torturous conditions, reveal nothing about their fate, wage a psychological war against us, and just wait for public campaigns to force us into giving in to their demands. What's to stop them from demanding that we withdraw from the security zone in Lebanon, or from other areas that they desire, or from all of Judea and Samaria, or from Jerusalem? They could even demand that we give up our nuclear capabilities. Once this precedent has been set, who's to say how far it can be taken?

5. Throughout the first 15 months of this war, Prime Minister Netanyahu showed impressive strength in standing up to the pressure of the Biden Administration. Yet he caved in to the Trump Administration even before it took office. This failure shakes our confidence in him as one who, despite his share of the responsibility for the Oct. 7^th travesty, is able to lead us to full victory.

Minister Betzalel Smotrich and his Religious Zionism party remained in the government and did not overthrow it, simply to ensure that the war would be resumed after the current first phase of the deal, for the sake of defeating and dismantling Hamas. [Again, this was written before Trump's announcement on Tuesday regarding his plans for Gaza, as explained above. – HF] But given all the pressures that will be so heavily exerted to continue the deal so as to achieve the release of the remaining hostages, alive or dead, the chances are small that the war can be resumed.

Netanyahu can either be remembered as one who learned from his errors and led us to brilliant victory, or as one who, after having sought in his youth to teach the world how to defeat terrorism, ended up in his old age teaching the terrorists how to defeat the State of Israel. In the coming days, he will have to make this choice.

Charge of the Hour: Transfer the Gaza Population

by Haggai Lober,  founder of Aspaklaria Theater Company and father of St.-Sgt. Yehonatan who fell in Gaza in Dec. '23, translated by Hillel Fendel.

Let's not lose the momentum! The three reasons not to take the ethical road and expel the Arabs of Gaza are no longer relevant.

The issue of expelling a war-hungry Arab populace from our country – which Ben-Gurion and his generals did as a matter of course during the War of Independence – has become in recent decades a dirty word. It has become forbidden and immoral to even think about, let alone say out loud.

But in light of the horrors seen and still being seen by our own eyes, we have no choice but to reexamine this and other old positions.

There were three principal reasons that stood as an iron wall against any thought of resolving some of our problems by expelling murderous and hostile Arabs. These hold in many circles even now, when it is clear to all that had Gaza not been full of Arabs 16 months ago, Israel would have enjoyed security and growth, and would certainly not have had to undergo the horrors of Oct. 7^th.

The three are: alleged rights, morality, and the U.S. position.

Rights: It is claimed around the world, with very little to back it up, that "the Arabs in Israel have the right to unite as a Palestinian nation," that "they were here before us and they therefore have national rights to the land," and that "there is a national Palestinian history and legacy." For years the world has been discussing the question of which of the two "peoples" – Jews and Palestinians – have more substantial rights to this land. [This of course ignores the Balfour Declaration, which specifically mentioned only the "civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine;" no national or political rights were accorded them. -HF]

By the time of the Oslo Accords, in the early 1990's, the world had already made up its mind: There is a Palestinian entity and it has the right to be sovereign over a large part of the "contested" territory, if not the entire State of Israel (as in the widespread "Free Palestine" chants). Israel stands in the face of a "conventional wisdom" that determines that it must cede large pieces of its territory, despite the great dangers, in favor of a recently-invented Palestinian people.

However: Even assuming that this people has certain rights (which the pro-Israel side has still not quite signed on to), the murderous path by which this collective has chosen to actualize them over the years must establish clearly for all that the Palestinians have lost any claim to rights in this land.

After all, rights are acquired and can be lost. A murderer and other criminals lose their natural rights to freedom; they are placed in prison until they die, even if they maintain that their victims did them wrong.

Yes, a collective can become a nation on its own recognizance. However, the enlightened world can also, and is even obligated to, dismantle this entity - if it turns out that murder and evil are the basis of its nationhood. As the Mishna teaches: "Gathering wicked people together is bad for them and bad for the world; dispersing them is good for them and good for the world" (Sanhedrin 8,5).

The second element that negates a political Palestinian presence in the land is morality, or the lack thereof. Do Arabs who commit crimes of terrorism deserve to remain here? It is precisely those who insisted on seeing the Arabs of the Land of Israel as a national collective who relate to its terrorist organizations as individual and isolated instances. They refuse to attribute any nationalistic motives to these terrorist groups. Have they forgotten that these acts are not just neighborhood crimes or gang fights, but rather full-fledged acts of war that must be responded to as such?

The widespread lie that "aside from some bad terrorists, the Arab populace in general wants only peace and a comfortable life" – was totally shattered on Oct. 7^th. "Regular" citizens joined gleefully in the atrocities, and our soldiers later found guns and other weapons in cribs throughout Gaza (and in Judea and Samaria). They also found that the walls in every children's room feature the pictures of child-killers and other terrorists, as a basic part of the educational curriculum over there.

Nationalistic terrorism is war. And because of the important role played by the local Gaza population in encouraging and enabling the terrorists to kill Jews, this supportive populace may not be considered "uninvolved," but must rather be dealt with forcefully and severely.

In fact, the "ethical" argument must actually be reversed, as follows: "It is not ethical towards us, nor towards the world, not to deal with this murderous and ideological hornets' nest, and to let this abominable collective continue to exist while we deal only with the murderers themselves. This is simply not moral!"

In the case of Gaza, there is no doubt: A mass evacuation of the population to Arab countries will dismantle the collective murderous demon that the Palestinian people, and its supporters around the world, have become.

And finally, the third reason for not deporting or expelling the Arabs of Gaza: "We can't buck the United States, which wants a two-state solution and nothing else. We can't afford to disagree."

Even if this argument is worthy of consideration, and even if one might want to check from a historical standpoint whether it was the U.S. that led us into surrender, or perhaps it was we who got the Americans to force us to supply the terrorists with "humanitarian aid" – either way, it appears that the point is now moot. It's President Trump himself who is leading the charge to empty Gaza of Arabs!

In the light of the collapse of the third argument against transfer, we would be wise to "collapse" the other two as well, and go full-steam ahead towards the only solution that will enable our children to grow up in peace and security in their land: the dissolution of the Hamas-Gaza populace. This plan has the best chances for success – and could even win President Trump a Nobel Peace Prize.

One thing is certain: The Nation of Israel, including international Jewry, will receive the great prize of all: the prize of life. This means the ability of Jewish parents like me to see their children grow up alongside them without fear of death by war, or murder, rape and kidnappings by our bloodthirsty enemies.

It has to be done now – right now. We can't lose the momentum.

Needed: New, Younger IDF Leadership

by Emanuel Shilo, Editor of Besheva Weekly, translated by Hillel Fendel.

The resignation of Lt.-Gen. Hertzi HaLevi as IDF Chief of Staff was sad but necessary, and must lead to a major change in the very conception of how the IDF is to fight our enemies.

HaLevi's resignation was regrettable because he is a good man, with admirable values, who dedicated his life to Israel's security. Even in the current multi-front war he exhibited great tactical abilities, brought us great achievements, and was party to some very impressive successes.

It was necessary, however – not only because HaLevi led the list of those who were responsible for the worst calamity ever experienced by the State of Israel, but also, and more critically, because he failed to achieve the war objectives in Gaza.

Despite the clear blame that he has now accepted upon himself for Oct. 7^th, he was given another chance, as well as nearly unlimited resources to fight the war against Hamas and win it decisively. His strategy, however, did not lead to the achievement of either of the two main objectives set by the government: destroying Hamas, and freeing the hostages.

Yes, after 15 months of warfare under Lt.-Gen. HaLevi the IDF struck a strong blow at Hamas' military capabilities, liquidated its leaders, dismantled its divisions and brigades, killed tens of thousands of terrorists, and destroyed a tremendous amount of arms, fortifications, and tunnels. But the bottom line is that the failed strategy led by HaLevi enabled Hamas to survive and even recover and partially rebuild itself.

Two main factors enabled Hamas to continue to rule in Gaza. The first was the humanitarian aid to Gaza that was forced upon us by the Biden Administration. Unforgivably, however, we did not prevent Hamas from taking corrupt control of its distribution, thus enabling the terrorists to retain a form of governmental authority as well as great financial resources. The second factor was the lack of an alternative to Hamas. With no one to compete with, even a weakened Hamas was able to remain in power.

These two factors should have been neutralized, via the formation of an Israeli military administration – as governed the Galilee for many years after 1948, and as still governs Judea and Samaria – which would administer/govern the Gaza population, distribute supplies, and prevent the area from falling under Hamas rule. But the Netanyahu government's orders to the IDF to prepare for this was met by foot-dragging by Gen. HaLevy, backed by former Defense Minister Yoav Galant. Despite the uncompromising fighting spirit of the troops and officers in the field, the top security brass did not believe in its ability to overthrow Hamas, opposed a full conquest of the Gaza Strip, and aspired to end the war and secure the hostages' freedom via a humiliating and disastrous deal of surrender.

Another strategic error of HaLevy that cost us many soldiers and wasted much time was his method of repeated incursions. Under this system, we conquered cities and areas in Gaza, destroyed buildings and tunnels, and killed or banished terrorists, and then quickly withdrew – thus allowing the terrorists to regroup and re-arm themselves, causing us to go in yet again and lose soldiers as we conquered them again, etc., etc.

Though this approach had some initial successes, such as in the Shifa Hospital terrorist complex, it quickly proved to be a failure in general – and yet HaLevy's General Staff refused to recognize its mistake. The root of the problem appears to be that the army under Gen. HaLevy is unable to consider actually conquering and controlling Gaza, even for a limited time. If we ever want to renew the fighting and achieve full victory, it can happen only after we stop fearing this idea.

On the political front, the religious-Zionist public can be pleased with the manner in which its two Knesset parties operated during the current hostage-deal crisis. Ben-Gvir's Jewish Strength party resigned from the government, but announced that it would not bring it down and would even leave the door open to return if the warfare is renewed. Smotrich's Religious-Zionism party voted against releasing thousands of terrorists and temporarily ending the war in return for some of the hostages – but took upon itself the complex task of fighting from within to try to ensure that after the first, six-week stage of the deal, the war to destroy Hamas will be renewed.

These two approaches complement each other. If both parties had quit the government, Netanyahu would have had to find partners from the left-center, who would have dictated intolerable terms. And if neither had left the government, Netanyahu would have understood that all is fine and he can go on caving to American pressure. This way, Ben-Gvir wields a stick over the Prime Minister while Smotrich offers him a carrot. Perhaps this integrated approach will produce the desired results.

Prospects Don't Look Good

In truth, of course, at present the prospects for a renewal of the war against murderous and fortified Hamas following the first stage of this deal do not look promising. It will not be easy to overcome the protests of the well-funded Kaplanists who will insist that not even one hostage corpse be left behind. And in general, it will be hard for the nation, and particularly the troops, to resume fighting after so many months of warfare and so many fallen soldiers, and seek to regain what we just recently gave away.

What is needed to overcome these challenges are three things: Strong will on the part of Netanyahu, support from the Trump Administration, and total enlistment, determination and commitment on the part of the right-wing public. We must be willing to take to the streets en-masse and demand that the catastrophe of Oct. 7th finally receive its proper response: the total annihilation of Hamas. We must not allow ourselves to be distracted by other considerations, such as a need to prove that we too want the hostages home or the demand that hareidim enlist in droves. We must be focused on the immediate goals, with confidence that the hostages can be freed by winning the war and that the hareidi/IDF problem will be solved in time. For now, we must concentrate on winning the war and nothing else.

The coming weeks will be very fateful, and will hopefully bring about a revolutionary change in the way the top IDF brass thinks and plans the coming battles. There must be a total switch, with new, younger leadership that strives for victory, not for containment. We pray that we will be able to rise to the greatness of the occasion and pass the tests that stand before us.

Made-in-Jerusalem Decisions, with Help From Washington

by Yisrael Ganz, Head of the Binyamin Regional Council and Chairman of the Yesha Council, translated by Hillel Fendel.

The Trump Era presents great opportunities, but the right decisions have to be made in Jerusalem.

I am writing these words soon after participating in the inauguration of the old-new President of the United States, Donald Trump. One thing must be made clear: The principle address for our demands regarding Israel's requirements is not here in Washington, but in Jerusalem. The Government of Israel is the sovereign leader of the State of Israel, and it is the body responsible for advancing all processes connected with its land and its future.

I was privileged to take part in this important ceremony, in which the new leader of the superpower of the U.S. was crowned, as the representative of all residents of Binyamin and all those of Judea and Samaria (Yesha). The invitation to the United States' most prestigious ceremony reflects the appreciation that senior Trump Administration officials have for Judea and Samaria in particular, and for Israel in general.

It also obligates us to make sure to seize this important opportunity. We must do everything possible to translate their admiration and appreciation into extraordinary achievements that will change and enhance the future of our settlement enterprise and the State of Israel.

It is incumbent upon us to be as relevant as we possibly can so that we can achieve great things under the new circumstances. However, we are not naïve. It is clear that President Trump always has America's best interests in mind, and there is no guarantee that these will always jibe with ours. Our relations with the U.S. will undoubtedly include challenges in important areas. But at the same time, no one can dispute that before us stands a unique opportunity.

Time for Sovereignty in Yesha

Every generation has its historic prospects and challenges. The previous Yesha leaders merited to build communities and to hold fast to the Land. It is now upon our shoulders not only to develop the areas with long-range visions of growth, but also to tie it tightly to the State of Israel with ropes that do not fray. At present, the sovereignty in Yesha belongs to the IDF Civil Administration, and we are a type of foster child of the State. The way to historic justice and to the flowering of Yesha as an integral and important part of Israel is by applying full Israeli sovereignty over the entire homeland region of Judea and Samaria.

We address this demand, first and foremost, to the Government of Israel and its leader, Binyamin Netanyahu. As the man who holds the responsibility for Israel's future and its security, the decision to do so is in his hands.

After having spoken to many senior officials in Washington, I can say with certainty that if our Prime Minister places this matter at the top of his priorities in his meeting with President Trump, the chances are good that within a relatively short time, we will be able to take a great step towards this goal.

Within the Administration, as well as the House of Representatives and the Senate, we saw that there is great potential support for this initiative. As usual, the way to actualize this is by making the right decisions back home in the Jewish State.

Many influential members of Congress see us, the Israelis, as the torch-bearers of the Biblical legacy, and believe that the Holy Land is Divinely ours. Others simply understand who are the good guys in the Middle East, and recognize that we in Yesha and Israel represent the frontlines in the free world's battle against the axis of evil.

Over the past years of contact with several Congressional members, we constantly reminded them of the need to retract the unfair sanctions that the Biden Administration placed upon individuals and organizations in Yesha. These precious friends of ours fulfilled their promises, and within a half-hour of Mr. Trump's taking office, he signed an Executive Order voiding the sanctions. He thus sent an important message regarding the future of Judea and Samaria.

Unlike other mayors and municipal leaders in Israel and around the world, my decisions cannot be made only on the local level. Rather, they are international affairs, and are judged not only by my residents, but also by leaders of world superpowers. When I and my colleagues here try to pave roads, regulate communities, build industrial zones, construct schools, and try to receive our fair share of national budgeting – along come international players with their opinions and guidelines. They happen to know full well what goes on here, and are familiar with even the smallest details. When we see how important steps for the future of our residents were blocked by the Biden team, together with left-wing pro-Palestinian elements, we understand how critical our work is. If we don't show up in these arenas, no one else will do the work in our stead.

And in fact, for very many years, plans for the future of our Biblical homeland in Yesha were made over our heads. The decisions were made behind closed doors, and we weren't there. No more. Today, we are there, and they're talking with us.

Still, however, "our eyes are peeled to Zion," as we sing in HaTikvah, and we know that it is our leaders who have to make the right and bold decisions. Now is the time for us to proudly, with historic justice, regain our sovereignty over Binyamin, Judea and Samaria.

Don't Reward Hamas!

by Nadav Rath, Strategic Business and Personal Decisions Consultant , translated by Hillel Fendel.

Some in Israel's nationalist camp are falling into the same trap that Hamas successfully set for Israel's left-wing sector over the past year. We must be careful not to identify with the victory messages of Hamas, but rather continue to broadcast strength and might.

Over the past year, every time Hamas sent us a video [not shown in Israel, thankfully] of poor hostages forced to parrot words fed them by the terrorists demanding that Israel's government agree to a deal for their release, we of the right-wing camp all wondered: Could it possibly be that those clamoring for a deal no matter what, don't realize that their messages totally jibe with those of Hamas?

Both Hamas and the hostage-families/supporters screamed out together: "At any price!" "Now!" "The government of Israel are murderers!" They also rammed down our throats that the IDF offensives are killing or maiming the hostages. Many of us understood from the beginning that they were seeking to manipulate us with psychological warfare, and we didn't fall for their tricks. Official Israel did not agree to disseminate the videos. But many others didn't seem to notice.

After a few months, it became extra clear that this was a well-planned strategy of the enemy, with the goal of sowing chaos and discord within the Israeli public. Once this happened, we were able to continue with the war with extra energies, knowing that the enemy was strong and determined to deceive us – and that we must not fall into their propaganda trap. War always demands strength and determination, and certainly not lowliness and solidarity with the enemy's goals.

But this morning, I was very sad to find that many of us have apparently begun to suffer from a type of temporary blindness. Maybe it was the publication of the names of the arch-terrorists and murderers who are about to be released, or maybe it was the celebrations in Gaza that so confused us. All I know is that even some of my good friends began to share Hamas propaganda – videos of happy terrorists roaming the streets of Gaza, waving their hands in the joy of victory.

What is the purpose of spreading these scenes on our phones? We all knew and internalized that the purpose of the videos of the hostages were designed to harm us and our unity, our strength, our faith, our determination. Has anything changed now? In what way is the dissemination of videos of what Hamas considers victory (despite the ruins and the stench of death all around them) a good idea? These scenes were released by Hamas for precisely one purpose: to harm us and our morale, to strike at us psychologically and spiritually, to seek to ensure that we will not want to renew the war in six weeks' time. What they want is for us to fight amongst ourselves again as to who was at fault, and to leave them in "peace."

We are going through difficult days as it is, without the need to disseminate Hamas propaganda amongst ourselves. Yes, we must object to this terrible ceasefire and wholesale terrorist release, and the noble protests by some families of hostages and of fallen soldiers were of inestimable importance; it is inconceivable that such a decision would go unprotested. Now, however, we must resolve that our role is to continue to strengthen our nation in the justness of its path and struggle – and not to weaken ourselves, lower our spirits, or act as if all our efforts until now were in vain.

I have made a simple decision: I won't share any Hamas propaganda such as photos of their celebrations. I will rather focus on the tremendous destruction we have rained down on the Hamas terrorist infrastructure in Gaza, including the flattening of much of Gaza, the killing of tens of thousands of Hamas supporters, and the elimination of most of Hamas's leaders. I will continue to work to bolster our national spirit and ensure that we renew the war. Yes, we made a tactical blunder by agreeing to this deal – but we will not let it affect the entire war, of which we are still in the midst. "Let us be strong," we read in Samuel II, "for the sake of our nation and the cities of our G-d."

The Hostage Deal is Very Bad – But Could Become the Lever for Victory

by Moshe Gutman, Fellow at the Misgav Institute for National Security, translated by Hillel Fendel.

In October 1973, during the Yom Kippur War, IDF Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. David (Dado) Elazar made a difficult decision: He ordered an end to the thankless and grinding efforts to try to save the all-but-doomed fortified positions along the Suez Canal. Instead, the positions were surrendered, and the IDF was then then able to focus on stabilizing an effective line of defense and preparing a counter-attack that would totally reverse the situation.

This painful decision later turned out to be a critical stage in Israel's ultimate victory. In an impressive display of military insight, Dado knew that he had to lose that particular battle in order to win the overall campaign.

The current deal that saw the release of three women from Hamas captivity on Sunday is done. There's no turning back, as of now. The agreement calls for the release of another 30 hostages – most of them alive, apparently – in exchange for six weeks of a ceasefire and the freeing of nearly 2,000 imprisoned terrorists, including over 700 who murdered dozens of Israelis. This terrible deal for Israel is a dangerous concession to Hamas, which will encourage and motivate our enemies, and weaken our deterrence power.

But under the circumstances, given that those responsible for the negotiations led us into a dead end from which there has long been no turning back, it is no longer relevant to discuss how terrible it is. The only question we must concentrate on is how we can turn this failure into an opportunity.

Perhaps this deal provides us with the chance to correct some of the military campaign's failures thus far. It's been some weeks now that our military efforts in Gaza have not been producing significant results, yet have been costing us increasing number of soldiers' lives. This reveals that the army's approach continues to be based on a problematic military "conception." What the Chief of Staff terms "the incursions system" – conquering and cleansing an area, then retreating, with predictable consequences – is actually an expression of indecision and the absence of a victory plan, and it is not in line with the war goals defined by the government. Instead of a head-on strategy that will defeat Hamas, the IDF is settling for a "one-step-forward, two-steps-backwards" approach that merely lengthens the combat, wears down our forces, and plays in to the hands of Hamas. For Hamas loves the idea of a war of attrition, celebrates the death of every individual soldier, and is interested in the scorched earth it leaves behind less than last year's snow. All of this, Israel still has not internalized.

On the other hand, if we employ the principles of judo – where each side uses the momentum employed by the other in order to overcome him – we can turn the current lemon into lemonade. Instead of using this deal simply to bring about a ceasefire, it can cease something else: Israel's treading in place. Chapter Two of this war must mark the beginning of a new era in the campaign for a quick and uncompromising dash towards victory. It has to be swift, determined, and lethal.

With this understanding, we might also be able to explain the puzzling support of President Trump for the deal. After all, Trump is an undying critic of weakness and concessions in negotiations, and yet he has taken credit for the terms of the deal as designed by his bitter rival, outgoing president Joe Biden. Why? 

The answer can perhaps be found in Trump's Art of the Deal philosophy. He holds that if you have reached an impasse in negotiations, the best way out is to get up from the table, walk out, and start again. That's the "reset" approach, as anyone who has ever had a problem with a computer knows.

In the case at hand, Trump, who has always admired strength and quick achievements, is apparently losing patience with Israel's water-treading approach in Gaza. Acting as if you're doing something but actually getting nowhere is for weaklings, he holds, and he now wants to stop the whole story and turn over a new page.

From his standpoint, if Israel is not able to win a quick victory under the current circumstances, he would like to see a reset – a ceasefire that would allow a reorganization, a return to a strategy of firmness, and an operative plan that is decisive. This is how we can best explain and understand the gap between his statements and the more belligerent positions taken by his top officials.

The key to turning bitter into sweet in this conflict lies in the conditions and guarantees regarding Chapter Two of the Gaza war. Just as Dado did not abandon the outposts in 1973 without a clear plan for victory, so too today: This terrible deal that has been forced upon us must be fenced with clear and irreversible obligations to renew the war until victory is achieved. Mechanisms must be put in place to ensure that the truce is only temporary and that the main Israeli achievements are preserved; if they are not, the ceasefire will truly be our defeat.

The main question, therefore, is whether the current leadership has the courage and the vision to turn the failure of Oct. 7^th into an opportunity. Will it know how to use the ceasefire forced upon it to reorganize correctly, with a new strategy for a decisive victory? Or will it succumb to the temptation to allow it to become permanent? Without firm determination in this area, even Trump's support will be of little use, and the bad deal will remain that, marking a historic surrender that will haunt us for generations.

The members of our government – and especially Finance Minister Smotrich, who has said that he will resign if the war is not resumed, and who therefore plays a kingpin role – bear a heavy responsibility. They must ensure that there are mechanisms in place to assure that the war is renewed, and that this terrible deal actually becomes the basis for a tremendous reversal that will take us from darkness to light.

Turning Words into Action

by Ze'ev Kam, Public "Kan" Radio Commentator and BeSheva Contributor, translated by Hillel Fendel.

Between Declaring Support for Yesha – and Eternalizing it in Israel's Code of Law

This past July, we were witness to an unusual occurrence in the Israeli Knesset: No fewer than 68 MKs united around one cause and voted as one in favor of a declaration opposing a Palestinian state. And this does not mean that "only" 68 MKs feel that way; many of the other 52 are quite opposed to a Palestinian state, but for political reasons had to absent themselves for the vote.

Prime Minister Netanyahu has cited this vote since then many times, in announcements that he distributed to the media and also in his speeches. "The Knesset united as one with a great majority," he declared, "against the attempt to dictate to us the establishment of a Palestinian state" – something that would endanger the very existence of the Jewish state.

Behind the scenes, what's fascinating about this is that the vote has absolutely no legal or practical ramifications. The declaration against a PLO state is not an official decision by the State of Israel, and has only symbolic significance. Still, however, it will not be long before Netanyahu and many others in the coalition government, as well as those from the opposition who voted for the declaration, will be tested as to how seriously they meant what they voted for.

Many of are mistakenly inclined believe that if one day, the State of Israel decides to cede parts of Judea and Samaria (Yesha) and give them to an Arab entity, unilaterally or by mutual agreement, the government will be obligated to hold a popular referendum to ascertain if this is the will of the people. After all, it is Israeli law that a referendum must be held in the event that the government wishes to cede territory.

But those many of us are mistaken. This is because the existing law does not pertain at all to Judea and Samaria, but only to areas that are under total Israeli sovereignty. Judea and Samaria – as opposed to Jerusalem and the Golan Heights – are still under IDF administrative control, and have not yet been upgraded to full Israeli status. It's true that in the past, the assumption was that any agreement having to do with Yesha would involve an exchange of territory, meaning that actual parts of Israel would be given up in exchange for the areas of the Yesha settlement blocs, and that this would then obligate a referendum.

But there is yet another caveat. As PM Netanyahu explained in 2013 when the Cabinet approved the draft bill, "Any agreement, if it is achieved in negotiations, will be brought as a referendum. It is important that every citizen directly vote on fateful decisions like these." That is, unilateral withdrawals, such as occurred in 2005 from Gush Katif, need not be brought for a referendum.

Who can guarantee that we won't see a future intiatiative to withdraw unilaterally from some part or other of Yesha? In such a case, no referendum will be needed! Not to mention areas that are already under some sort of Palestinian Authority control; ceding them, despite the tremendous security and other ramifications that will result, will require no popular vote!

Precisely for that reason, the three co-chairmen of the Land of Israel lobby in the Knesset – MKs Yuli Edelstein, Simcha Rotman, and Limor Sohn Har-Melekh – have decided to advance a bill requiring a referendum in the events listed above. And in order to speed the process along, they decided not to take the regular, long, winding legislative route of a "private bill" sponsored by individual MKs. Rather, they arranged for the the Knesset Law Committee to sponsor it. As such, the Ministerial Committee for Legislation will not have to review the bill and determine whether the Government supports it or not, and it can be submitted to the Knesset immediately for its first reading.

For it is clear that a bill of this nature will attract unwanted international pressures, just as the bill to outlaw UNRWA – a full participant in the atrocities of Oct. 7^th – recently did. Although the UNRWA bill passed and is about to be implemented in full, who's to say that the Yesha referendum bill will have the same success? Speed is therefore of the essence.

In one of the preparatory Law Committee sessions for this bill, one of the supportive MKs, Yulia Malinovsky (Yisrael Beiteinu), said with a sting, "I just hope that the coalition will vote for this bill, given the people involved. I also hope that the Prime Minister won't block it, but if he does, he should at least do so in his voice and not via some emissary." A short time after this session, a senior member of the coalition announced that certain hareidi party leaders were demanding that the topic be discussed at the next coalition meeting. This was not the first time that hareidi representatives take the old Diaspora approach of, "What will the goyim say?"

But the three Land of Israel heads – Edelstein, Rotman, and Sohn Har-Melekh – say that they're going ahead with the bill until someone actively tries to stop them. It's actually a form of a dare, to see the Prime Minister, or the leader of any coalition party, would be brazen enough to say that "now is not the time for this bill." This was actually the very real fear when the above-mentioned declaration against a PLO state was voted on. Up to the very last hours before the vote, everyone involved was anxious about some foreign intervention that might suddenly happen in the form of a phone call from abroad, or that someone from the Prime Minister's office, or the Prime Minister himself, would abruptly appear saying that because of Biden, or a feared arms embargo, or the UN Security Council, or whatever, the vote has to be pushed off.

Of course, in the end, the declaration passed by a large majority, including even several opposition MKs.

The idea now is to turn that very declaration into practical law, with real teeth – something that will truly make history.