Drastic Increase In Anti-Semitism In The World – Analysis

After Hamas militants attacked southern Israel on October 7 this year and after Israel’s fierce counterattack in the Gaza Strip, where the number of dead Palestinians far exceeded the number of dead Jews in the Hamas attack, anti-Semitism throughout the world experienced a drastic rise. The old evil is back at the big door again. Current trends – the flare-up of the war in the Gaza Strip and the mass suffering of Palestinians – are the driving fuel of anti-Semitism, the rise of which favors the deepening or revival of social conflicts in many communities.

Iran Reinforces Positions in Hama, Deir-ez-Zor and Homs, Withdraws Thousands of Troops From Aleppo

Iran aims to reinforce its forces in its areas of presence in Syria, according to Baladi News.

Informed sources have disclosed that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard militias have withdrawn thousands of Syrian members affiliated with them from the Aleppo governorate. These members were relocated to positions in the governorates of Hama, Deir-ez-Zor, and Homs.

Islam vs. The West: Conflict Unfortunately Seems Inevitable

To many on the so-called “Left”, it sometimes appears as if there is no insurmountable conflict between Islam and the West, or between any differing cultures, just old bits of conflict inherited from an obscure past, which will eventually be overcome by greater material equality.

This thesis, which is in fact Marxist — wherein any conflict is always caused by unequal material situations — also is based more on wishful thinking than on historical evidence. Muslims do not massacre Christians, Jews and Hindus because they are richer, but because they are non-Muslims. At least, that is what many mass murderers have been stating for more than ten centuries…

The “clash of civilizations” seems to be about religion, a topic that many in the West thought had been put to bed ages ago.

The “no-go” Islamic zones in Europe, the attacks on 9/11, London’s 7/7 attacks… the murder of Theo Van Gogh, the massacre at the Bataclan, the constant censorship (blasphemy laws), and more: a brief look at recent history of the immigrants bears witness to what seems a pervasive inability, or lack of desire, to adapt to the values of their new host countries.

That, sadly, may be one of the reasons multiculturalism in the West has been such a failure — a failure of the West. When westerners stopped having children, they started importing people en masse, indiscriminately, as if people were all the same. People are not all the same. Many Muslims, or at least a significant proportion of them, seem to have no intention of integrating, or of discarding the values they brought with them, which they appear to prefer to Western values.

Samuel Huntington’s insight into the clash of civilizations is brilliant and true, but a few details in his thesis might benefit from a bit of updating. Moreover, some of his critics, especially on the “Left”, might wish to rethink a few of their “conclusions”.

According to Huntington, since 1989 the clash between civilizations has been essentially cultural, rather than economic or political. The collapse of the Berlin Wall in 1989 marked the transition from a world dominated by ideological oppositions — between communism and capitalism, imperialism and its counter-movement — to an era of cultural divergence, with the international political scene simultaneously verging on the multipolar and multicultural.

Huntington, in support of his conjecture, explained that the decadence of ideologies has coincided with a revival of aspirations to identity, both in the Muslim world, which has witnessed a revitalization of radical Islam, in Asia, and in Eastern Europe, such as Poland, where revolutions took place in tune with their national and cultural heritage.

Huntington’s thesis of a “clash of civilizations” has been shown to be true. The opposition between Islam and the West is an obvious example; the uninterrupted massacre of Christians by Muslims is another, and the re-awakening of China and Chinese cultural pride is a third. From this point of view, Huntington is right: we live in a world structured by tensions between profoundly divergent cultures.

Huntington, however, may have overlooked that the core of the global economic and cultural world is Western. The globalization of trade has not taken place by using categories and means that are equally derived from different civilizations, as if each culture had contributed its share. Even though China and Egypt were trading before there was a ‘West’, modern globalization is based solely on the categories, modes and means of Western civilization, down to the smallest detail. To take just one example, the new generation of Russian or Chinese international action films is a simple iteration of the Hollywood concept, with an absence of local specificity that can be embarrassing and does not do justice to the three thousand years of the rich and specific Chinese culture. Other Chinese films, however such as those by Zhang Yimou and others, are glories of which China should be immensely proud.

It is not true, therefore, that the world is divided up between different civilizations, as we would speak of equal, or even unequal, partners, like parts of a cake, one with pineapple, the other with strawberry. The common language of this world, which is indeed fragmented for the most part, still seems strictly Western. Perhaps that is one of the reasons Communist China’s President Xi Jinping would openly like to upend it.

This circumstance does not alter the truth of Huntington’s findings, which lie in what the ancient Greeks called the antagonistic, or oppositional, character of the world. The ancient Greek world was defined as much by the conflict between cities as by the commonality of its culture.

To many on the so-called “Left”, it sometimes appears as if there is no insurmountable conflict between Islam and the West, or between any differing cultures, just old bits of conflict inherited from an obscure past, which will eventually be overcome by greater material equality.

This thesis, which is in fact Marxist — wherein any conflict is always caused by unequal material situations — also is based more on wishful thinking than on historical evidence. Muslims do not massacre Christians, Jews and Hindus because they are richer, but because they are non-Muslims. At least, that is what many mass murderers have been stating for more than ten centuries, starting with the Quran:

"But once the Sacred Months have passed, kill the polytheists ˹who violated their treaties˺ wherever you find them, capture them, besiege them, and lie in wait for them on every way. But if they repent, perform prayers, and pay alms-tax, then set them free. Indeed, Allah is All-Forgiving, Most Merciful." – Surat At-Tawbah, 9:5

In his book Histoire de l’Inde, Alain Danielou writes:

"From the time Muslims started arriving [in India], around 632 AD, the history of India becomes a long, monotonous series of murders, massacres, spoliations, and destructions. It is, as usual, in the name of 'a holy war' of their faith, of their sole God, that the barbarians have destroyed civilizations, wiped out entire races."

Perhaps we should finally listen to them? Give them credit for honesty? Read the fiqh, the legal schools of Islam, where all agree on celebrating the future hegemony of Islam. It is hard to argue that Qatar and Saudi Arabia, which are extremely rich, are motivated by envy. The economic, Marxist thesis, which has been discredited by history, is now only being bandied about by the Left. The “clash of civilizations” seems to be about religion, a topic that many in the West thought had been put to bed ages ago.

To return to Huntington’s thesis, the values of Islam and those of the West, unfortunately, do appear irreconcilable. Even if the Arab, Turkish and Persian Muslim worlds have been welcomed into the Western culture, many of those immigrants to the West retain their own Islamic identity, which they apparently do not intend to dim or negotiate, as can be seen from Europe’s many “no-go zones”.

This movement to “return to true Islam” seems, sometimes, an illusion. Without oil and gas, in today’s world Islam is, sadly, often a religion of poverty, misery and defeats. There may be a wish to “return” to the old Islam, but what we are witnessing is the galvanization of an idealized vision of the old Islam, the Islam of the first conquest, the Islam of the Taj Mahal, the Alhambra and the Ottoman Empire.

Even this reinvention of radical Islam, however, seems radically incompatible with the West. The “no-go” Islamic zones in Europe (here, here and here), the attacks on 9/11, London’s 7/7 attacks , Berlin’s Christmas Market terror attack, the violence triggered by the Muhammad cartoons, the slaughter at Charlie Hebdo, the murder of Theo Van Gogh, the massacre at the Bataclan, the constant censorship (blasphemy laws), and more: a brief look at recent history of the immigrants bears witness to what seems a pervasive inability, or lack of desire, to adapt to the values of their new host countries.

That, sadly, may be one of the reasons multiculturalism in the West has been such a failure — a failure of the West. When westerners stopped having children, they started importing people en masse, indiscriminately, as if people were all the same. People are not all the same. Many Muslims, or at least a significant proportion of them, seem to have no intention of integrating, or of discarding the values they brought with them, which they appear to prefer to Western values.

There are 45 million Muslims in Europe. Some have chosen and will choose the West. Others — possibly the vast majority – will, in the event of conflict, remain faithful to Islam at the moment of truth.

Can the Global Spiral of Violence Be Stopped?

The turmoil spreading across the globe makes it difficult to meaningfully respond to individual crises. The resulting expectation of impunity is emboldening aggressors.

In the last months alone, a bloody civil war has broken out in Sudan; Azerbaijan has conquered the Armenian-populated Nagorno-Karabakh; a Serbian militia has tried to destabilize the north of Kosovo; military coups have proliferated in Africa; the Sahel zone is increasingly turning to anarchy; and Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine continues unabated. The latest outbreak of violence, Hamas’s terrorist attack on southern Israel followed by Israeli retaliation on the Gaza strip, could still escalate into a devastating conflagration across the Middle East.

Qatar: Extremism and Terrorism

On October 7, 2023, Hamas launched a surprise attack on Israel killing at least 1,200 people and kidnapping at least 240 men, women, and children. In response, Israel declared war on Hamas and launched a ground invasion of the Gaza Strip. Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh and other Hamas leaders watched the attack unfold from Haniyeh’s office in Doha, Qatar. Qatar joined with Saudi Arabia and Iran in blaming Israel for the October 7 Hamas attack. According to a Qatari government statement, Qatar’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs held Israel “solely responsible for the ongoing escalation due to its ongoing violations of the rights of the Palestinian people, the latest of which was the repeated incursions into Al-Aqsa Mosque under the protection of the Israeli police.” That night, Qatari officials claimed they had begun mediation talks to convince Hamas to release captive women and children for Palestinian security prisoners in Israel. Israel denied negotiations were underway. On October 20, Hamas freed two hostages—an American mother and daughter pair—after Qatari intervention. Hamas said it released the hostages for “humanitarian reasons.” On October 24, Qatari Emir Sheikh Tamim Bin Hamad Al-Thani accused Israel of receiving an “unconditional green light and free license to kill” in Gaza. As of November 14, Hamas had released four hostages—two Americans and two Israelis—because of Qatari mediation. That day, the Qatari government renewed its call on Israel and Hamas to reach an agreement on releasing hostages, but Qatar Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Majed bin Mohammed al-Ansari also blamed the “deteriorating” situation in Gaza for hindering mediation efforts. (Sources: Hamas Telegram Channel, Associated Press, Reuters, Daily Mail, Qatari Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Hill, Reuters, Al Jazeera, Associated Press, NPR, NPR, Agence France-Presse)

Houthis

The Houthis are an Iranian-backed, Shiite Muslim armed religious and political movement in Yemen. The Houthis waged a series of bloody insurgencies against the Yemeni government for over a decade, leading to that regime’s overthrow in 2015.

Lebanese Journalists: Hizbullah Is Dragging Lebanon Into A Devastating War With Israel

Amid the escalating attacks launched at Israel from South Lebanon by Hizbullah and other armed organizations there, both Lebanese and Palestinian, many in Lebanon are increasingly concerned that the country will be dragged into a confrontation with Israel.[1] There is also concern about the growing power of the Palestinian militias in the country, and a possible return of the situation that prevailed there in the 1970s and 1980s, when Palestinian organizations were given free rein and dragged the country into a devastating war.

Kurdish Columnist On Saudi Website: It Is The Iranian Regime That Ignited The Fires Of War; The Solution Is To Topple This Regime

In an article on the Saudi news website Elaph, Kurdish journalist Nizar Jaff accused the Iranian leaders of hypocrisy, saying that they shed crocodile tears over the war in Gaza and deny having any hand in it, when the fact is that they are the force behind Hamas in Gaza, behind Hizbullah in Lebanon and behind the militias in Iraq. Iran, he adds, started the war in Gaza in order to draw attention away from the popular protests within its own borders, while playing on the religious sentiments of the people in the region. These people must understand that the solution to their problems lies in opposing the Iranian regime and overthrowing it, he concluded.