Dear Family & Friends,

A letter to the editor in the JPost said we need to send maps around the world for the public diplomacy we are NOT getting from the alleged Foreign Ministry workers who are supposed to be in charge of our Israeli “Hasbara”.

So – Here is my favorite: the Secret Joint Chiefs of Staff Map from June 29, 1967. Read the story to know why. Another favorite you received this week was a photo of Mark Langfan’s geo-political topographical Map of Israel.

We need more maps, people. Please send those you feel worthy of mighty distribution.

We had a beautiful, sunny day today! Finally. A small water emergency here. A Spigot popped off of my Solar Panels (“Kolteem” in Hebrew)…requiring a run-around the house turning off all the incoming pipes of water until the wonderful crew of Solar Panel experts popped in after a job in the neighborhood. B”H (Baruch HaShem), with my extra long ladder & the 3 of them, they fixed it in 15 minutes! The Israeli working crews/experts in their fields are great! I’ve hardly ever been disappointed by any of them. Come to Israel for great care of your homes, cars, etc.!!!

Have a sweet night under the silvery, waning moon…A swell day preparing for Shabbat.

All the very best, Gail/Geula/Savta/Savta Raba x 2/Mom

1.The formerly Secret Joint Chiefs of Staff Map from June 29, 1967

2.US-Israel strategic partnership inspired by Col. Meinertzhagen

4.Ted Cruz – A fresh approach to American foreign policy and US-Israel relations by Caroline Glick

1.The formerly Secret Joint Chiefs of Staff Map from June 29, 1967

B”sd

GAIL WINSTON gail@winstonglobal.org Gaza War Diary Sat. Nite. Dec. 6, 2014 Day 151

Dear Family & Friends,

Here’s a supplemental edition of my ongoing Gaza War Diary, now Day 151.

I promised to send this map from the Jt. Chiefs of Staff, June 29, 1967, ordered by then President Lyndon B. Johnson of General Earle G. Wheeler, then Chairman of the U.S. Military’s Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Israel beat 3 major Arab armies in the 6 Days War of June 1967, regained & liberated Judea, Samaria, the Golan Heights, all the Sinai Desert, Gaza & all of our Eternal Capital – Jerusalem. President Johnson wanted to know what was the minimal land Israel needed to keep so that America would not have to come to her rescue in any future [inevitable & repeated] Arab army attack [by any combination of Arab countries’ forces & weapons] & so Israel would remain a ‘strategic asset’ to the United States.

In 1967 the US Joint Chiefs were unequivocal. See their irrevocable analysis below.

How many parcels of land, originally designated as Eretz Yisrael by HaShem, G-d Almighty, have we given away, trying to appease the irremediable Arab Muslims for the sake of Peace?

How long must we endure this dangerous farce?

How many more precious lives of our valiant soldiers, our babies, our children, our women, our holy Rabbis must we sacrifice to the bloody knives, cars, cleavers, guns of our Muslim Arab co-inhabitants…before we are allowed to live our peaceful lives in our G-d given Land?

We are, were & always will THE JEWISH STATE! No one is allowed to give that away or take that away. If we need another law to testify that we really believe that, so be it. Let this new election be an historic affirmation of our faith in our

SOVEREIGNTY OF THIS LAND FROM THE RIVER TO THE SEA!

All the very best, Gail/Geula/Savta/Savta Raba/Mom

Featuring the formerly Secret Joint Chiefs of Staff Map from June 29, 1967

From: Winston MidEast Analysis & Commentary <gwin…@interaccess.com>old Email
Subject: BARAK QUOTES U.S. JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF ON BORDERS: RE-RUN

WINSTON MIDEAST ANALYSIS & COMMENTARY May 4, 1999
Email: gwin…@interaccess.com [old email]

BARAK QUOTES U.S. JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF ON BORDERS
by Gail Winston, journalist Chicago/Jerusalem
Director M.E.I.R., Mid East Information Resource

former President – Chicago Chapter of Women-in-Green

On January 26, 1996, I published the following analysis of a May 20, 1993 interview with then Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Ehud Barak. Now that Barak is the Labor Party’s candidate for Prime Minister, his prior truthful, heart-felt beliefs are key to his character, his ability to govern, his intelligence, his capability for negotiating with enemies – Arafat’s PLO, & with supposed friends, the United States Administration.

Note the following points:

Item #1. Barak’s professional, military, strategic opinion as to what borders would be defensible for Israel’s security & to ensure that Israel would remain a strategic asset were exactly what the US Joint Chiefs of Staff delineated when asked by President Johnson. See enclosed map which was Top Secret until March 1983.

This is NOT what is proposed in the Labor Party’s platform which now calls for a Palestinian State. The May 1993 interview:

Ehud Barak as Israel’s Foreign Minister under Shimon Peres is [was] negotiating the surrender of the Golan Heights. But on 5/20/93 when Lt. General Ehud Barak was Israel’s Chief of Staff, he addressed an American Jewish Press conference. Asked by me to express his professional military, strategic opinion as to what borders would be defensible for Israel’s security & to remain a US strategic asset, Gen. Barak quoted the 6/29/67 US Joint Chiefs of Staff under Gen. Earle Wheeler memorandum, which was top secret until 1983.

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL reported 3/9/83: “President Johnson asked ‘what minimum territory Israel should retain for effective defense against conventional Arab attack & terrorist raids?’ The Joint Chiefs said: ‘returning Israel to pre-1967 boundaries would drastically increase its vulnerability. Israel would be threatened by West Bank artillery & tactical SAMs – a sword constantly over its head & the need to maintain readiness with prohibitive mobilization costs. For stable future Arab-Israeli agreements, Israel must feel it can wait out a crisis rather than strike pre-emptively. Israel should retain… the Gaza Strip, mountains & plateaus of the West Bank, the tip of the Sinai, Sharm el Sheikh, the Golan Heights east of Quneitra, & all of Jerusalem.”

Four were negotiated away. The last two are presently on the table. Directly
contravening the US Joint Chiefs, Rabin & Peres agreed to abandon the only deterrent/defensive positions which till now have guaranteed peace. They said they’ll give the entire Golan Heights to Syria & most of the West Bank to the PLO. Jews who come under Arab sovereignty & police force can stay if they want. The Arabs say all Jews must go.

The top secret deep analysis by US Army, Navy, Air Force & Intelligence agencies assessed Israel’s vulnerability according to US interests. In 1996 US considerations are still future economic relations with Arab countries including oil, banking, sales of military goods & services. The US attacked Saddam Hussein over the only issue for which America would fight Arabs – namely Saudi oil. Israel has no oil. Moreover, the US Administration, then under Johnson did not want to be in the position of having to rescue Israel. The Wheeler recommendation was considered the best military option in order to protect Israel.

Item #2. The editorial CHICAGO TRIBUNE of May 4, 1999 said: “Barak sees
Israel as the region’s strongest nation, militarily & economically, & thus powerful enough to make peace.” However, when he was a General, Barak said May 1993 that: “Israel’s qualitative edge has disappeared as the West arms the Arabs with top-of- the-line planes, tanks & missiles – the same models Israel receives in much smaller numbers. Israel can’t afford to maintain present defense levels & has cut its defense budget from 15% of the GDP to 9%; in dollars from $7.2 billion to $5.8 billion & going down.”

Gen. Barak described “national, ethnic & Islamic Fundamentalism as the tribal motive driving the Arab countries’ arms race. They are achieving nuclear capability; receiving & developing unconventional weapons; and virtually all are dictatorships.” [remember he said this in 1993! –GW]

He continued, “Short run, with Iraq defeated & ‘de facto’ peace with Jordan, only Syria can make war. [While Israel sits on the Golan facing Damascus, Assad does not attack.] Long run, non-conventional weapons development will be resumed in Iraq as soon as the UN inspection teams leave. Iraq, Iran & Syria will have chemical, biological & nuclear weapons in 1-5 years. They have the whole spectrum of technological know-how in their minds.” [Gail Sez: As of May 1993. Such catastrophic weapons of mass destruction are probably operative now.]

Gen. Barak emphasized that, “Israel needs to maintain its armed strength.
The combination of (our) conventional capability, Arab perception of (our)
non-conventional capability & US aid gives Israel stability the way a three legged table is always stable.” Are the intentions of the Arab countries honorably peaceful? No! The Arabs declare openly their goals are to return to Jaffa, Haifa, Lod & especially Jerusalem, as the capital of ONLY the State of Palestine. They are arming prodigiously. Total Arab arms ratio in all categories runs against Israel from 10:1 in men, 5:1 in tanks, 3:1 in planes, 3:1 missiles, at minimum.” [as if 1993]

Gen. Barak stressed that, “Israel needs to maintain its armed strength. The
combination of (our) conventional capability, Arab perception of (our) non-conventional capability & US aid gives Israel stability the way a three legged table is always stable.”

Some say territory is not important in this age of missiles. However, in the
WASHINGTON TIMES Oct. 1988, 100 retired US Generals & Admirals urged Israel NOT to withdraw from Judea & Samaria. The headline was “RETAIN THE ISRAEL ASSET”: “The Samarian & Judean high ridges cannot be effectively demilitarized or adequately inspected. If Israel loses its extensive early warning line, it would have no warning of attack. Now [1993] the Arab armies are at least four times their size in 1967. Even with missiles & supersonic aircraft causing great devastation, they cannot occupy. Only infantry & armor can overrun a country. Those are vulnerable to natural barriers. To remain strong Israel must retain the Jordan River as its eastern border. Pressing Israel to withdraw from this line will neither bring peace nor serve America’s interests.”

The ‘root cause’ of Arab attacks against Israel isn’t Arab frustration or poverty, but hatred of the non-Moslem ‘infidel’. Peace talks with unilateral territorial concessions foster the impression that Israel is weak. Perceived weakness invites Arab attack. The American military knows these territories are minimal for Israel’s security & would keep Israel strong enough to be the primary US strategic ally against violent Islamic Fundamentalism in the region. Why don’t Israel’s leaders?”

This was the 1993 interview. Barak was candid & truthful. But, now he is a politician. Barak is engaging in a deceitful campaign which also tells the Israeli public he has no convictions. Can he be trusted? He has gone against everything he believed as a General. Can he be trusted with Israel’s security?

###

Please contact: Gail Winston at winston@winstonglobal.org.

The conviction-driven British clairvoyant was convinced that the Jewish state was destined for a rosy commercial & military future due to boundless Jewish tenacity – as evidenced by the survival of Judaism in defiance of historical adversity – & Jewish brainpower, inspired by values that generated monotheism & Western democracies. Moreover, in 1920, Meinertzhagen wrote that “the Zionist entity shall provide its Arab citizens with enhanced economy & security.” In 1949, he referred to the newly-born Jewish State as “one of the world wonders, & the only positive outcome of the Second World War.”

Noting in 1937 that “a secure Jewish State would bolster the regional position of Britain,” while “a splintered Land of Israel would weaken, & possibly, eliminate, the Jewish State,” Meinertzhagen delineated the security lines of the Jewish state [before the intensified unpredictability, instability & threat generated by the Arab Tsunami]: from the Lake of Galilee to the Jordan River, the Dead Sea & the Gulf of Aqaba in the east; from the Gulf of Aqaba to

Rafiah (Southern Gaza) in the south; the Mediterranean in the west; & the Litani River (Southern Lebanon) in the north. Meinertzhagen’s map was similar to the map of Israel’s minimal security requirements, submitted on June 29, 1967 to President Johnson by General Earl Wheeler, the US Chairman of the Joint Chiefs-of-Staff.

Against the backdrop of the 2014 controversy over the Jewish State Law, it is instructive to read that, Col. Meinertzhagen indicated in 1932: “it is clear that [for the sake of Britain] the Land of Israel will become a Jewish State no less than England is English.”

Yoram Ettinger, Jerusalem, “Second Thought: a US-Israel initiative”

Get my e-book, “Jewish Holidays Guide for the Perplexed”: http://amzn.to/1mwxchc For feedback & speaking engagements in the US, Canada & Israel: yoramtex@netvision.net.il

Dry Bones blog updates for winston@winstonglobal.org

3.Dry Bones by Ya’acov Kirschen: “Holocaust Remembrance Day”

There are two annual days of Holocaust remembrance.

1. International Holocaust Remembrance Day, is an international memorial day on 27 January commemorating the victims of the Holocaust, the genocidal murder of an estimated 6 million Jews, 2 million Roma, 250,000 mentally and physically disabled people, and 9,000 homosexual men by the Nazi regime and its collaborators. The date was chosen to mark the liberation, on January 27 1945, of Auschwitz-Birkenau, the largest Nazi death camp.

2. The Jewish holiday of Yom HaShoah ( Holocaust Martyrs’ and Heroes’ Remembrance Day) is a national day of commemoration in Israel, on which the six million Jews murdered in the Holocaust and the Jewish resistance to the Nazis are memorialized. Yom HaShoah 2016 begins in the evening of Wednesday, May 4 and ends in the evening of Thursday, May 5.The original proposal was to hold Yom HaShoah on the 14th of the Hebrew month of Nisan, the date of the Warsaw ghetto uprising (April 19, 1943), but this was problematic because the 14th of Nisan is the day immediately before Passover. The date was therefore moved to the 27th of Nisan, which is eight days before Yom Ha’atzma’ut,(Israeli Independence Day)

Educational resources for both observances are available at Holocaust Information

-Dry Bones- Israel’s Political Comic Strip Since 1973

Dry Bones by Ya’acov Kirschen: “Holocaust Remembrance Day”

4.Ted Cruz – A fresh approach to American foreign policy and US-Israel relations by Caroline Glick Friday, October 23rd, 2015

Photo: Amos Ben Gershom GPO

US Senator Ted Cruz, the conservative Republican firebrand from Texas, is running for president. Up until a few weeks ago, his candidacy was met with indifference as the media and political operatives all dismissed its viability. But that is beginning to change. The voices arguing that Cruz, the favorite of Tea Party fiscal conservatives and Evangelical Christians may have what it takes to win the Republican nomination have multiplied.

Since arriving in Washington four years ago, Cruz has arguably been Israel’s most avid defender in the Senate. During Operation Protective Edge in July 2014, Cruz used his authority as a member of the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee to force the Obama administration to end the Federal Aviation Commission’s ban on US flights to Ben-Gurion Airport. Cruz announced at the time that he would put a hold on all State Department appointments until the administration justified the flight ban.

Rather than defend its position, the administration restored flights to Israel after 36 hours.

Last summer Cruz led the national opposition to US President Barack Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran. He brought thousands of activists to the Capitol to participate in a rally he organized calling for Congress to vote down the deal. Rather than use the rally as a means to promote himself, Cruz invited Republican front-runner real estate developer Donald Trump to join him at the rally. Trump’s participation ensured that the event received wide coverage from the national media.

I interviewed Cruz by telephone from the campaign trail earlier this week about his views on the purpose of American foreign policy, US-Israel relations, the Iran nuclear deal and the Palestinian conflict with Israel.

The transcript of our conversation follows.

Sen. Cruz, you have managed to anger the two foreign policy wings of your party – the neoconservatives and the isolationists – with your foreign policy positions. How would you describe the rationale behind your foreign policy positions?

Cruz: I believe American foreign policy should be driven by the vital national security interests of our nation. The most central failing of the Obama-Clinton foreign policy is it fails to look to America’s national security interests. And as a result, we have undermined our friendships and alliances across the globe, and we have allowed our enemies to grow stronger in the face of weakness and appeasement.

How does the US alliance with Israel align with that view? A lot of Americans argue that by supporting Israel the US has diminished its capacity to form alliances with the Arab world.

Nobody who understands the reality of foreign policy believes that. That is the view of the Obama administration and the far Left. I think America’s alliance with Israel is overwhelmingly in our national security interest. Israel shares the same democratic values. It has been a tremendously important ally to America in a very troubled region of the world. The military assistance that America provides Israel yields enormous national security benefits to America.

There are some politicians who characterize the United States military aid to Israel as somehow a form of assistance rather than a mutually beneficial military alliance.

I think that stems from a misunderstanding of the fundamental dynamics.

[This week Obama instructed federal agencies to begin suspending economic sanctions on Iran, in conformance with the nuclear deal he concluded with the regime last summer. Cruz argues that the Republicans in Congress have the constitutional authority to prevent Obama from suspending sanctions. He expresses deep frustration with the Republican congressional leadership’s refusal to do so.]

Over a month ago I wrote a detailed letter to [Senate] Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and [House] Speaker John Boehner laying out a specific course of attack to stop this catastrophic Iranian nuclear deal. The first step, I believe, is that the majority leader and the speaker of the House should jointly conclude that Obama has not submitted the entire deal to Congress as required by the Congressional Review Act, which explicitly defines the deal to include any and all side agreements.

The side agreements with the IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency] governing the incredibly weak inspection of the regime were not handed over to Congress.

So under the terms of federal law, the deal has not yet been given to Congress, which means the clock for the congressional review has not started. The reason that is important is because under the terms of the Congressional Review Act, it is illegal for the administration to lift the Iran sanctions until the expiration of the congressional review clock. If the clock has not started, then the sanctions cannot be lifted consistent with law.

Now unfortunately we know what the next step will be to that. After six-and-a-half years we have seen that with President Obama we have a president who has repeatedly ignored and defied federal law.

So we can anticipate that he would do the same here and say that it does not concern him; he intends to lift sanctions anyway.

At that point, what I recommended is that congressional leadership make abundantly clear to each of the banks that is in possession of the frozen billions of dollars that whether or not Obama chooses to disregard or ignore federal law does not exonerate those banks from the obligation to follow binding federal statutes.

And if those banks, contrary to federal law, release billions of dollars to Ayatollah Khamenei, then those banks will face potentially billions of dollars in civil liabilities and even possibly criminal prosecution.

But senator, they didn’t do any of those things.

Caroline, you’re exactly right that congressional leadership refused to do any of this. Likewise, we just had a battle over the continuing resolution [which funds the government without an approved budget]. I urged Congress to fund the entire federal government but deny any federal funds to implement this catastrophic deal. Again Republican leadership refused to do that. So long as Republican leadership is unwilling to use the constitutional authority given to Congress, the Obama administration will move forward with this catastrophic deal.

I will continue to fight on every front to stop this deal. I believe it is the single greatest national security threat facing America – the threat of a nuclear Iran.

And I also agree with Prime Minister [Benjamin] Netanyahu that a nuclear Iran is an existential threat to the nation of Israel. The challenge right now is Republican congressional leadership has been unwilling to use the constitutional authority we have to stop this deal.

If that does not change, then Congress will acquiesce and this deal will go forward for the next 15 months.

This means nothing is more important to stopping a nuclear Iran than the next presidential election in America.

And indeed I believe this issue is becoming the single most important issue in the presidential election. I have pledged that if I am elected president, to rip to shreds this Iranian nuclear deal on my very first day in office and to make abundantly clear that under no circumstances will the nation of Iran, led by a theocratic ayatollah who chants Death to America, be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons.

On the other hand, if Hillary Clinton is elected president, we know to a virtual metaphysical certainty that Iran will acquire nuclear weapons. And if Iran acquires nuclear weapons, the odds are unacceptable that it will use those weapons, either against Israel or against America.

Over the past 15 years, through its sponsorship of Hamas and Islamic Jihad and occasional support for Fatah, Iran has become a key factor in the Palestinian war against Israel. The nuclear deal, which guarantees Iran will receive hundreds of billions of dollars in the coming years, ensures that Tehran will massively increase its funding for Palestinian terrorism. What we’re now experiencing in Israel may in part be a consequence of the nuclear pact.

How would you characterize the Obama administration’s stewardship of US relations with the Palestinians?

This past this week I publicly called for John Kerry’s resignation as secretary of state. This is the second time I’ve done so. A number of months ago I called for Kerry’s resignation when he wrongfully suggested that Israel could become an apartheid state, which is slander. It is one often repeated by the terrorists, and it should not be coming out of the mouth of a United States secretary of state.

This past week John Kerry and the State Department accused the nation of Israel of terrorism. That is a blatant lie. There is a qualitative difference between antics of Palestinian terrorists murdering innocent women and children in response to the relentless incitement from Hamas, from the PA.

There’s a qualitative difference between that and the IDF defending the safety and security of the nation of Israel.

And John Kerry’s suggestion that they are morally equivalent is wrong, harmful and deeply offensive.

If you are elected president in 2016, what would your relationship be with the PA?

I believe that nobody wants to see peace more than the Israeli people. The barrier to peace is not the government of Israel. The barrier to peace is Palestinians who refuse to renounce terrorism and refuse to even acknowledge Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state.

As it regards to US policy, I think for far too long, American presidents have attempted to dictate the terms of a peace settlement. In my view, America has no appropriate role dictating the terms of a peace settlement.

If Israel chooses to negotiate and reach a settlement with the Palestinian Authority, that is Israel’s right as a sovereign state, and America can help provide a fair forum for negotiations.

But it is not the role of the American government to attempt to lecture the Israeli people or dictate terms of peace.

No one has a greater incentive to seek peace than the people of Israel, who have lived with the daily threat of rocket attacks or knifings or terrorist bombs.

Do you think a Palestinian state west of the Jordan River is a US interest?

I think that is a question to be decided by the nation of Israel and the Palestinian people.

You don’t think it’s a question for America?

I do not believe the United States should try to dictate the terms of peace. We have seen now for two decades American presidents trying to dictate the terms of peace. And it hasn’t worked.

The Palestinians have turned down every reasonable offer of peace. And I believe America should stand unshakably alongside the nation of Israel. If I am elected president, that is exactly what we will do.

Right now the PA is spending around $150 million a year to pay salaries to convicted terrorists sitting in Israeli prisons. The US gives the PA about $550m. annually. Do you think the US should reconsider its commitment to funding the PA?

Of course we should. The PA has formed a unity government with Hamas. The idea that American taxpayer dollars are going to a government that is in unity with terrorists makes no sense whatsoever. The idea that American taxpayer dollars are going to the PA, which routinely engages in incitement, which celebrates the terrorists who murder women and children, makes no sense whatsoever. We should not be funding people who want to kill us. We should not be funding terrorists.

This goes back to what I mentioned before about the central failing of the Obama-Clinton foreign policy – that it fails to focus on the vital national security interests of America. Funding terrorists is directly contrary to our national security interests and we should not be doing so.

The prevailing wisdom is that building in Israeli communities beyond the 1949 armistice lines causes Palestinian terrorism. Do you accept that?

That is yet one more area in which the Obama-Clinton-Kerry foreign policy is deeply misguided. The question of settlements is a question for Israel as a sovereign nation to decide. I don’t believe an American president should be dictating to the nation of Israel where Israelis can choose to live. And the fact that Israelis choose to live in Judea and Samaria is not justification for terrorism or murder. And it is yet another example of the Obama administration’s repeated false moral equivalency to suggest that it is.

That isn’t just Obama’s position. In the road map peace plan, the Bush administration also called for Israel to revoke Jewish property rights beyond the armistice lines, saying that doing so promotes peace. Do you think that makes sense?

I do not. As I said, my views are markedly different from the Obama administration but also from the Bush administration.

I do not believe the American government should be dictating terms of peace or settlement policy to the nation of Israel. Israel is a sovereign nation.

Israel is our ally. We should stand with Israel. We should not presume to dictate matters of internal governance for the nation of Israel. If I am elected president, we will not do so.

Under the Obama administration, American power in the region has been massively diminished. The power vacuum that followed is now being filled by Russia, Iran, Turkey, Islamic State and others. How would you reassert American leadership, if you become the next president?

I believe one of the most, if not the most important issue in the 2016 presidential elections will be restoring American leadership in the world. That consists of number one, standing by our friends and allies. And number two, standing up to our enemies. In both regards, the Obama-Clinton foreign policy has been deeply misguided. We have proven over and over again to be an unreliable friend to our allies under President Obama. Indeed, as I travel abroad and meet with heads of states, foreign ministers and defense ministers of allies across the world, the message is consistently the same, which is: “Where is America? We cannot do this without America leading in the world.”

And you are right, the consequence of America’s withdrawal from leadership is that it has created a vacuum, and into that vacuum have stepped bad actors like Russia and China and Iran and even ISIS [Islamic State]. That will change on January 20, 2017. As I mentioned, on the first day in office, I will abrogate this catastrophic Iranian nuclear deal. Also on the first day of office, I will begin the process of moving the American embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, the once and eternal capital of Israel.

Originally published in The Jerusalem Post.

THE TOWER MAGAZINE: Briefing Book: ‘Surrender in Vienna: Iran Nuclear Deal’

Iran

5.Yair Lapid: Iran Deal Will Fund Next Terror War against Israel

by TheTower.org Staff | 01.26.16 5:15 pm

Israeli opposition politician and Yesh Atid party chairman Yair Lapid said that the nuclear deal with Iran will fund the next war that the Islamic Republic’s proxies will wage against Israel, The Jerusalem Post reported Tuesday.

“Secretary of State [John] Kerry said himself last week that some of the sanctions relief will go to funding terrorism,” Lapid told reporters. “For us, this is not theoretical. This money will translate itself to rockets aimed at our children. The next conflict in the North or South of Israel is just a matter of time.”

Lapid said there were currently around 1,000 people digging terrorist tunnels in the Gaza Strip, some of them under the border and into Israel.

“The provocations, the breaches of international law, the preparations – are already happening every day by Hamas in the south and Hezbollah in the north, both with Iranian backing,” Lapid said. “When the next round of fighting breaks out, the analysis and the reporting shouldn’t start with the first Israeli strike, but with what’s happening on the ground right now.”

Phillip Smyth, an adjunct fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, wrote last year that Hezbollah’s increased activity on the Golan Heights was part of Iran’s strategy to militarily “encircle” Israel.

While the Jan. 18 attack represents another saga in the long-running war between Israel and Hezbollah, it also underlines a strategic power shift between Iran and the Assad regime. Hezbollah’s success in opening a new front in the Golan has been a major accomplishment. With greater access to the Golan — or at least sections of it — Hezbollah has a new, non-Lebanese zone it can utilize to target Israel. This may have been Hezbollah’s primary goal all along. Long before Syria’s brutal civil war, it was Hafez and Bashar al-Assad who used Lebanon, and often Hezbollah, as a front to exact their military goals against Israel. Now the tables have turned, and it is Hezbollah and its masters in Tehran who can choose areas of Syria to use against Israel.

For Iran and its Hezbollah proxy, this success is a step in a process to militarily encircle the Israelis. Tehran is currently re-solidifying its relationship with Hamas in Gaza, addressing a push for a southern front against Jerusalem. If needed, the Golan’s near-anarchic conditions also provide Hezbollah with plausible deniability (in the odd case it wishes to deny it had a role in attacking the Jewish state). Geographically, the domination of the Golan potentially creates a Hezbollah-dominated zone stretching from the Mediterranean to the Jordanian border.

Shortly before the nuclear deal was announced last summer, Hamas and Hezbollah officials met with leaders from Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps in a bid to further strengthen ties. Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif met with Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah in August, telling him that the nuclear agreement presented them with a “historic opportunity” to confront Israel.

In September, Iran’s Defense Minister Hossein Dehghanaffirmed that his country was committed to arming Hamas and Hezbollah. It was reported later that month that Iran boosted its funding of both terror groups in anticipation of the windfall it would receive through sanctions relief.

[Photo: Yonatan Sindel / Flash90 ]

Yair Lapid: Iran Deal Will Fund Next Terror War against Israel

6.THE SHAMRAK REPORT: FROM STEVEN SHAMRAK at: shamrakreport@gmail.com