By Ryan Augustine

The pro-Zionist and anti-Zionist movements have become bellwethers in the current geopolitics. In fact, there are more U.N. resolutions regarding Israel and Palestine than there are for any other country or conflict. It is a strange thing, too, that such a small piece of land has become such a focal point when there are many more pressing issues and conflicts in the world today. Most people not within the ruling class likewise hold strong opinions on the subject, and I think that these opinions are more guided by emotion than by clear thinking. Pro-Zionism seems to be emotionally regulated by the collective guilt people feel over the holocaust (TM), Jewish persecution in general, and protestant religious beliefs. The Anti-Zionist movement is much murkier and seems to be an amalgamation of Islamic beliefs, Marxism, egalitarianism, anti-colonialism, some Christian beliefs, anti-Jewishness, and a whole host of other things. Thus, for the common man, the anti-Zionist movement is the more incoherent of the two and the argument who’s end goals are less thought out. Therefore, the purpose of this piece will be to delve into the logical outcomes of Anti-Zionism to help shed light on the issue.

Firstly, it is important to understand that there are differences within Anti-Zionism of what anti-Zionism means and what its goals should be. Without going into the weeds too much and to understand these differences, let us first give Zionism a definition. This article hereby defines Zionism as the right of self determination for the Jewish people to have a country within the rough geography of modern-day Israel.

Back to the question at hand, this article will therefore tackle these differences within the anti-Zionist movement on a one-by-one basis. Note these will be framed in generalities and is by no means an exhaustive list. I do not have time or am qualified to write a book on the subject. Nor will I discuss the feasibility of achieving the positions, for that would be an entirely different article, this piece is focused on logical outcomes.

The first difference is that the U.S., the West in general, should divorce itself from the Israeli state, stop funding it, and let it be what it will be. This is the most moderate and reasonable of the anti-Zionist positions. There are both pros and cons to pursuing such a policy. First, the pros: our governments would save money to the tune of tens of billions of dollars per year; we would be less vulnerable to espionage and subversion; less likely to be entrapped in foreign military conflicts; we could perhaps go after the dual citizen issue; our politicians would not prostrate themselves before the wall; the West would start to have closure over the holocaust; and we could start to build better relations with the Arab countries. The Cons are: Israel and Jews supporting Israel would become hostile to Christians and the West; Israel would seek to cement alliances with Russia and China. The Arab world, which had previously aligned itself with the Soviets against Israel and the West would not come around to the West soon and would be more likely to join back with Russia and China, as they would thenl move into the middle east as the U.S. withdrew from it. They would be more inclined to do so, as China and Russia would put pressure on them, and China could offer them a burgeoning oil market greater than the oil market offered by Western countries. The West, whose people still find oppression and war crimes abhorrent, have previously reigned in Israeli hostility. The Russians and Chinese would not; thus, it is probable that such a dramatic shift in power would be the cause of new and greater conflicts as the West seeks to prevent Communist Middle East hegemony, and Israel, Russia, and China awould be emboldened to seek it at the expense of what Arab allies the West could pull together. If this position is to be successful, it must be executed very precisely to avoid the more dire ramifications.

The second position is the so called two-state solution whereby Israel returns to its pre-1967 borders and the Palestinians are granted their own state. The pros are that this position would grant both the Palestinians and the Israeli’s what they want: Israel still retains a country and the Palestinians would no longer be oppressed by the Israelis. The cons are as follows: hundreds of thousands of Israelis would be evicted from their homes; Palestine would still be an oppressive Islamo-Marxist state; religious tensions would mount, especially over the dome of the rock and wailing wall, as there would be two governing bodies over each. Israel would feel very insecure and seek any pretext for retaking its land; thus, it is more than likely the U.S. would be drawn into another middle eastern conflict. Furthermore, this position would entrench the status quo and the dialectic between the Israelis and Palestinians will be used as a dialectic.

The third position is that Israel, as a nation state, should cease to exist. The Pros are that there would be no more Israeli-Palestinian conflict and no more money going to Israel. The Palestinians would have their own country, and relations with the Arab world would likely improve. The cons are as follows: whether you believe it or not, Israel was founded illegally. After some point in time, a country which is founded illegally becomes legitimized. This time period would vary depending on who the people who created the country are and where and from whom they have carved it out. In the case of the colonization of America, a few months were sufficient. In Western countries being colonized by Africans, 10,000 years would not suffice (1). In the case of Israel, you have Jews who have been born under the Israeli flag for four generations, so whether or not Israel was illegally settled has become a moot point. There would be a massive Jewish refugee problem whereby six million jews would seek resettlement in Western countries; thus, all western nations would be Judaized by a very significant factor. Zionist supporters and Jewish refugees, instead of focusing their efforts and money on Israel, would now spend those resources on changing to their liking the countries they inhabit and we would see an acceleration of the social and moral decay we are witnessing now. Furthermore, the destruction of Israel would advance the International Communist position of anti-colonialism, and the West could be wrongfooted into atoning for all of its alleged sins against the non-western world, as the concept of an ethnic nation state as a legitimate form of government would lose a lot of its legitimacy. The U.S. and the West would also lose face for supporting Israel for so long, just to destroy her. Many Jews and Christians, especially Protestants, would lose their faith, as they view Israel fulfilling prophecy, and the ecumenical New Age movement would be strengthened handsomely. Islam would likewise be strengthened, and it would be seen in the Islamic world as a great victory; thus, with the breakdown of the concept of the nation-state and a resurgent Islam, the West ccould expect to see more Muslim immigrants and greater Islamic belligerence.

I’m going to cut this article short, but I hope I have covered enough material to present a good analysis. If you, the reader, feel that I missed something important, please let me know. One last thing, since these positions have a lot of drawbacks, I will present one that has better outcomes which I have not heard talked about, which is neither an anti-Zionist nor pro-Zionist idea. This would be the one-state solution; whereby, Israel subsumes all the Palestinian lands, yet grants citizenship. Palestinians who wouldn’t want citizenship would be kicked out. Israel would complain that this would undermine the Idea of having a Jewish state, but I say that the Jews push multiculturalism onto us, so what’s good for the goose is good for the Gander. If Israel really wants to, they can rewrite their constitution to make it more Jewish. I hear they are good with that legal type of stuff. God bless.

1. Ruling Steward – Tolkien Gateway

By Timothy Fitzpatrick

Judaism’s ‘holy’ shrine, the Western or Wailing Wall in Jerusalem has nothing to do with God or His Holy Church. God ordained Jerusalem’s destruction by Roman General Titus in 70 AD, seemingly fulfilling Jesus Christ’s prophecy of Jerusalem’s imminent destruction where not one stone would be left upon another. The Temple was utterly destroyed and one million Jews perished in the siege. Centuries later, when the Jews attempted to rebuild the Temple under Julian the Apostate, large fireballs came up from the Earth and burned them to death. Glowing crosses appears on the onlookers. The Temple reconstruction was completely abandoned and they never tried again.

And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? Verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.

—Matthew 24:22

Furthermore, Christ said He left Jerusalem desolate, so this supposed Wailing Wall is nothing but a mockery of God and his decree to destroy Jerusalem and the Levitical system.

O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets,and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!

Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.

—Matthew 23:27-28

So, why the devotion to this ridiculous wall (it is doubtful that the Western Wall is a remnant of the original Temple) where Orthodox Jews can be seen rocking back and forth in front of it as a way of simulating sex with the Shekinah? We can only conclude that it is a rite of passage for this Satanic world, much like wearing the Kabbalah red string or being a Freemason. Demonstrate your loyalty to the Synagogue of Satan by touching this wall.

Without further adieu: (list will be updated as more photos are discovered)

Russian President Vladimir Putin (see article Putin prays for Moshaich at Western Wall)

JERUSALEM, -: Russian President Vladimir Putin speaks to Rabbi Shmuel Rabinovitz, during a brief visit to the Western Wall, Judaism holiest site in Jerusalem’s Old City, 27 April 2005. Putin is expected to hold talks with Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and President Katsav on Thursday before heading to the West Bank city of Ramallah for a meeting on Friday with Palestinian leader Mahmud Abbas. AFP PHOTO SEBASTIAN SCHEINER +++ISRAEL OUT+++ (Photo credit should read SEBASTIAN SCHEINER/AFP via Getty Images)

Vice President of the People’s Republic of China Wang Qishan

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi

Soviet Premier Mikhail Gorbachev

Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev

Russian Chief Rabbi Berel Lazar and President Vladimir Putin

Moscow Mayor Sergey Sobyanin

Poland President Andrzej Duda

Tomb of KGB/Mossad operative Robert Maxwell, father to Jeffrey Epstein madame Ghislaine Maxwell

French President Emmanuel Macron

U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo

U.S. presidential candidate Mitt Romney 

U.S. First Lady Melania Trump

U.S. First Lady Laura Bush

U.S. First Lady Hillary Clinton

U.S. First Lady Jill Biden

U.S. Vice President Mike Pence

Ukraine President Petro Poroshenko

Prince William

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban

Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro

U.S. President Donald Trump

Ivanka Trump

U.S. President Barak Obama

Musician Enrique Iglesias

The Scorpions

U.S. President George W. Bush

U.S. President George H.W. Bush

U.S. President Bill Clinton

The Dalai Lama

Czech Republic President Vaclav Klaus

Czech Republic President Vaclav Klaus places his hand on the Western Wall, Judaism’s holiest site, during his visit to the Old City of Jerusalem September 15, 2005. REUTERS/Stefano Rellandini SHP/mk

Russian-Jewish oligarch Roman Abramovich

Chelsea football club owner Roman Abramovich (Front L) visits the Western Wall, Judaism’s holiest prayer site, in Jerusalem’s Old City February 7, 2006. REUTERS/Ronen Zvulun

Poland President Lech Kaczynski

Peru President Alejandro Toledo

French President Nicolas Sarkozy

Slovakia Prime Minister Robert Fico

Slovakia’s Prime Minister Robert Fico visits the Western Wall, Judaism’s holiest prayer site, in the Old City of Jerusalem March 20, 2007. REUTERS/Oleg Popov (JERUSALEM)

Japan Prime Minister Junichiro Koizum

British Prime Minister David Cameron

Poland Prime Minister Donald Tusk

Bulgaria President Georgi Parvanov

Bulgarian Premier Boyko Borisov

Czech Republic Prime Minister Mirek Topolanek

Prince Laurent of Belgium

Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley

Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon

Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper

New York Governor Andrew Cuomo

Pope Francis 

Pope Benedict XVI

Pope John Paul II

Crown Prince of Iran, Reza Pahlavi

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson

New York Mayor Bill de Blasio

Barcelona FC President Sandro Rosell

U.S. Abassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley

President of Chile Sebastian Pinera

Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili

Georgian Prime MInister Bidzina Ivanishvili

Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis

Tommy Robinson, Alt Right gatekeeper

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky

Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby

Ukraine President Victor Yushchenko

President of El Salvador Nayib Bukele

British cabinet minister Sajid Javid

Controlled opposition Jack Posobiec

Actor Will Smith

Liberian President George Weah

Nigerian President Goodluck Jonathan

U.S. Ambassador to Israel Thomas Nides

Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer

President of Guatemala Alejandro Giammettei

President of Honduras Juan Hernandez Alvarado

U.S. Energy Secretary Rick Perry

Miami Mayor Francis Suarez

Ecuador President Daniel Noboa

President of Argentina Javier Milei

New York Mayor Eric Adams

Estonian foreign minister Margus Tsakhkna

By Timothy Fitzpatrick
March 30, 2023 Anno Domini

Two of the biggest questions I have about that manufactured disinformation operator Adam Green of Know More News is how he got in and out of Israel unscathed and why a high-profile 9/11 truther bothered to go to Green’s home and do several interviews with him.

At the time, 2018 and prior, Green didn’t have a large following. He is educated in business administration, worked as a grunt at ViaSat, and has very limited historical or theological knowledge, much less conspiracy research knowledge (his bait is your basic Leftist anti-Zionism). So why would the supposed king of 9/11 research Christopher Bollyn (aka Kinky Balloon, according to the late Michael Collins Piper) bother with a crummy little Youtuber like Adam Green? He’s appeared on CNN^[1], been interviewed by Haaretz^[2], and attended many lectures at Kremlin-backed conferences around the world talking about the Anglo-Israeli orchestration of the 9/11 attacks. Why on Earth would Bollyn care about some wannabe Youtube star like Green? Green is not unique or special. He just interviews random people (but how random was Bollyn?) and reads on video what others have researched or written, which is appealing to younger people who don’t like reading and would rather watch.

The only reasonable conclusion one could come to is that Bollyn is “giving a rub” to Green. No, I am not talking about Bollyn’s sexual proclivities, although those can’t be ruled out. What I am talking about is the figurative passing of the torch. Once again, we turn to the deceptive world of professional wrestling to understand real world deception:

*rub

“Helping a less popular wrestler get over by associating them with a more prominent or popular wrestler.”^[3]

“Get over” means to be accepted by the crowd and potentially become popular. Green is the less popular disinfo artist being associated with a much more prominent one in Bollyn. Apparently, the rub Alex Jones gave to Green didn’t work very well, which is why Green left the Infowars fold? So if Bollyn and Green are the wrestlers, who is the promoter? Indications point to the East, as I suggested in Christopher Bollyn gatekeeping 9/11 truth on behalf of Moscow? If you haven’t read this article yet, please do so before reading on here.

Could it be that Bollyn, who not only lived in Israel working in the Marxist Kibbutz system but also married an Eastern European-derived Israeli woman (Bosmat Merimsky) who worked in the Israeli defense services, provided Green the connection with which he could pass in and out of Israel with relative ease? Green was publicly anti-Zionist at the time he went to Israel (and just happened to bump into fellow anti-Zionist and Kremlin shill Jake Morphonios-on Russian TV/ a contributor to pro-Kremlin Iranian site).^[4] You would think the Israeli authorities, who monitor this stuff like hawks, would have roughed up the gangly hipster, at least a little bit. But as far as we can tell from the videos Green posted, nothing at all happened to him or Morphonios. It’s possible Green’s “former” employer Viasat could’ve provided help with Green’s access to Israel, as ViaSat is sponsored by the Israeli government^[5], but for that to be possible, it seems Green would have to have been more than just a grunt working in an IT depot. But who knows. Bottom line, it’s highly suspicious that a publicly anti-Zionist figure is traversing Zion with ease.

Bollyn seems to be more connected then he lets on. Add to the list of the Communist connections outlined in my first article on Bollyn (linked above), I came across more in Communist Venezuela. I happen to have spent some time in that country and know with certainty that it is a Communist country^[6], despite Kremlin narratives to contrary (you will find much of the alt media championing Venezuela as an anti-globalist freedom fighter, which is typical Commie rhetoric).

In February 2006, Bollyn claims that the late American Free Press publisher Willis Carto assigned him to cover a story in the “Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela” (Simon Bolivar was a freemason, Soviet-styled “liberator”, much like Che Guevara) and petition dictator Hugo Chavez for support for the AFP. Brewing in the background at this time, Michael Collins Piper at American Free Press grew suspicious of Bollyn and seemed to see him as some kind of Israeli operative that was sent to the newspaper as a plant. Piper suspects that Bollyn was trailing him all the way in Mexico, long before they officially met. Long story short, Bollyn was fired by AFP—along with Kremlin asset Raphael M. Johnson (currently writes for such shill sites as Russia Insider)—and then retaliated by accusing AFP of being a Zionist operation (via the Mark Lane angle) and used stunts (staging his own arrest by police) to try and hijack AFP’s audience for his own gain—a series of events that tend to confirm Piper’s suspicions that indeed Bollyn was an Israeli operator. It seems Bollyn was there to prevent AFP and/or Piper from unearthing too much truth, or just to cause dissension and infighting. Bollyn then began feuds with others in the patriot movement, including the late Victor Thorn.^[7] The demoralizing thing about the feud between Bollyn, Piper, Hufschmid, Daryl Bradford Smith, and WingTV was that they all seemed to have Leftist, pro-Kremlin leanings and espoused mainly generic anti-Zionist viewpoints (see The Kremlin directs the anti-Zionist movement on behalf of Israel).

Can anyone see the parallels with Adam Green, first attaching himself to Infowars, leaving it, then accusing it of being a Zionist operation? Infowars is no doubt a Kremlin-Israeli sponsored outfit, but the parallel remains.

“At the time, I was in Europe covering the Ernst Zundel trial in Mannheim and had made excellent contacts with Lebanese and Syrian leaders at the Axis of Peace conference in Brussels,” Bollyn says. This was in late 2005, before his Venezuela excursion.^[8]

The Axis For Peace conference has all the hallmarks of a KGB operation. Of course, we know the “peace movement” is a Soviet front to ultimately promote Western disarmament for greater ease of Communist victory over the world. The Conference, which listed Bollyn as a panelist^[9], was sponsored by Russia Today, Al Jazeera, Tele Sur (Venezuela state media) and others (while in Venezuela myself, I remember watching a documentary on Tele Sur called Painful Deceptions, which I learned years later was the work of Bollyn associate Eric Hufschmidt. It was another typical Soviet-styled 9/11 bait documentary—blaming the West for 9/11 and some Zionist elements thrown in to make it seem legitimate. Evidently, the Bollyn did get through to the Venezuelan government, at least in as far as getting his buddy Hufschmid’s documentary televised). Most of the other panelists and presenters at the conference were of Marxist, U.N., and/or Islamic persuasions, much like sister conferences like the Duginist New Horizons conference of Iran that our resident Vatican II shill E. Michael Jones is known for attending.

The conference’s final declaration stated,

“We salute the mediation of Russia who stands by the application of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, and the presumption of innocence in international relations. We call upon the UN General Assembly to support Russia’s efforts in favor of the re-establishment of a multilateral dialogue; to support its strong stance against financing terrorism, double standards in international politics and the interference in the internal affairs of sovereign states.”^[10]

It might as well have called for Dugin’s multi-polar world order cry with Putin as the peacemaker.

The most notable figure at Axis for Peace was former aide to the Soviet Ministry of Defense General Leonid Ivashov, who was involved in the writing of Aleksandr Dugin’s 1997 Eurasianist propaganda piece Foundations of Geopolitics.^[11] Also in attendance was KGB operative Yasser Arafat’s advisor Ahmad Tibi. Interestingly, Lyndon LaRouche’s wife Helga Zepp-LaRouche was there, too. You would think at some point in all of Bollyn’s conferencing around the world that he would have crossed paths with Dugin himself.

Back to Bollyn’s Venezuela trip, he used it as a chance to shill for the Latino-Soviet regime, defending the overweight hillbilly Chavez (locals told me how sounded like a hillbilly anytime he spoke), condemning the U.S. for unjustly vilifying the Bolivarian government, and glorifying life in the socialist hellhole.^[12]

“Hundreds of thousands of poor Americans in five Northeastern states have been on the receiving end of Venezuela ‘s generosity. This winter alone, hundreds of thousands of low-income Americans from Pennsylvania and New York to Maine and Vermont have received more than 25 million gallons of subsidized heating oil for their homes.” Bollyn wrote.^[13]

In the first in his series about Venezuela, Bollyn penned the letter from Margarita Island,^[14] which is a tourist destination in Venezuela. You have to wonder if Bollyn was ever shown the shanties and absolute squalor that dominates Venezuela. Or maybe he was but chose to ignore it for the good of the Mother Russia.

Notes:

1. CNN, Paula Zahn Now, Jan. 23, 2007 – https://www.bitchute.com/video/wrPmKPCtXSH5/ ↑
2. Cohen, Nussbaum Debra, 9/11 Truther’s Controversial Speech at Hipster Brooklyn Bastion Draws Protesters, Police, Sept. 9, 2016, Haaretz – https://www.haaretz.com/world-news/americas/2016-09-09/ty-article/9-11-truthers-controversial-speech-at-hipster-bastion-draws-protesters-nypd/0000017f-e7fe-df2c-a1ff-ffffeebb0000 ↑
3. Glossary of professional wrestling terms – Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossary_of_professional_wrestling_terms ↑
4. Adam Green and Jake Morphonios In Jerusalem, Will they Enter Gaza?, Grassroots United911—Youtube – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHyypOxjajM ↑
5. De Selding, Peter B., Viasat & Israel, rebuffed by ITU in October, renew case for in-service-deadline extension for Viasat-3 EMEA, Space Intel Report, March 15, 2022 – https://www.spaceintelreport.com/viasat-israel-rebuffed-by-itu-in-october-renew-case-for-in-service-deadline-extension-for-viasat-3-emea/ ↑
6. Fitzpatrick, Timothy, Venezuela is a Commie hellhole, Fitzpatrick Informer, July 11, 2019 – https://fitzinfo.net/2019/07/11/venezuela-is-a-commie-hell-hole/ ↑
7. Wing TV, Christopher Bollyn Arrest: Man or Mouse?, WING TV, June 2008 – https://web.archive.org/web/20100430195828/http://www.wingtv.net/thorn2006/bollyn.html ↑
8. Bollyn, Christopher, Christopher Bollyn Responds to Michael Piper’s Lies About Willis Carto’s “Chavez Project”, 29 November 2006, Huge Questions – http://www.hugequestions.com/Eric/TFC/Bollyn/BollynResponseToPiperNov2006.html ↑
9. Panelists, Axis For Peace 2005 – https://web.archive.org/web/20120419015908/http://www.axisforpeace.net/rubrique41.html ↑
10. Final Declaration, Axis For Peace 2005 – https://web.archive.org/web/20120622104516/http://www.axisforpeace.net/article681.html ↑
11. Leonid Ivashov, Wikipedia – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonid_Ivashov ↑
12. Bollyn, Christopher, Chavez influence growing, American Free Press, Jan. 7, 2006 – https://www.americanfreepress.net/html/chavez_influence_growing.html ↑
13. Bollyn, Christopher, Letter from Venezuela, American Free Press, Feb. 17, 2006 – https://www.facts-are-facts.com/news/letter-from-venezuela ↑
14. ibid ↑

In practice, a small number of Israeli diamond dealers, licensed importers of Russian merchandise, continued to import rough diamonds from Alrosa, which is owned by the Russian government, at least until mid-March. Since that time they have been encountering obstacles, mainly banks that are balking at transferring payments to Russia. There is no impediment in law that would stop them from continuing to trade with the Russians, incidentally (indirectly) injecting money into Russia’s war.

The diamond industry is not an outlier. In effect, Israel has not imposed any sanctions on President Vladimir Putin, the businesses supporting his government, or oligarchs close to him. But when it comes to diamonds, Israel’s neutrality is likely to be of unique significance, potentially affecting the efficacy of the U.S. sanctions. A loophole in the U.S. law could turn Israel, or the Israeli traders, into a channel for bypassing the sanctions, and for bringing diamonds originating in Russia to the United States, legally.

Owned by the Kremlin

Alrosa is considered a monopoly in diamond exports from Russia, and is the world’s largest supplier of rough diamonds. According to U.S. Treasury figures, when it imposed the first sanctions against Alrosa in February (some further sanctions were imposed this weekend) , the company was responsible for about 90 percent of diamond exports from Russia and about 28 percent of the world’s rough diamond market.

Alrosa itself, incidentally, claims on its website that it controls 99 percent of the exports of Russian rough diamonds. Its main competitor is the global De Beers syndicate, which controls about 23 percent of the global market.

• Ukrainians fleeing ‘hell’ in Mariupol find a city free of Russian occupation, but in denial
• A brutal general now heads Putin’s Ukraine war. Who is Alexander Dvornikov?
• While Putin commits war crimes, Israel is still walking on eggshells
• Ukraine war exposes how Russian oligarchs’ dirty money has polluted the Jewish world
• Sharansky: Bennett is afraid of ‘criminal’ Putin, Israel should arm Ukraine

As is the norm for companies exporting key goods from Russia, Alrosa is effectively controlled by the Kremlin. About a third of its shares are held by the Russian Federal Government. Another third is owned by the Sakha-Yakutia Republic (part of the Russian Federation), an area in the Russian Far East that is remote, frozen, and rich in diamonds. The rest of the shares are held by employees and private shareholders and are traded on the Russian stock exchange.

The strong man in Alrosa since 2017 is CEO Sergei Sergeyevich Ivanov, who was appointed the head of the national mining company at the age of 37. Ivanov is the son of Serge Borisovich Ivanov, who is considered one of Putin’s close confidants. Ivanov Sr. is Putin’s special adviser on environment and transportation and sits on the Russian Security Council. He formerly served as Russia’s defense minister, deputy prime minister and chief of staff in the president’s bureau. The two Ivanovs, father and son, have appeared on the U.S. list of sanctions as of late February, along with Alrosa.

Alrosa’s sales totaled about $4.2 billion last year, the company stated. Of that $4 billion stemmed from selling rough diamonds, and the rest comes from polished diamonds. It netted about $1 billion in 2021.

As in the case of De Beers, Alrosa itself does not sell on the retail market or on the global diamond exchanges, but through a limited list of several dozen regular customers, “sightholders,” as they’re called in the diamond industry, a name actually coined by De Beers, but which is also used among diamantaires for Alrosa’s franchisers. These sightholders are guaranteed a regular annual supply of rough diamonds worth tens of millions of dollars, and sometimes even more. They may polish the stones and sell them, or sell rough diamonds. Sometimes a diamond will pass via several intermediaries before reaching the end of the value chain: a piece of jewelry.

Five Israeli sightholders

On the eve of the imposition of the first sanctions against Alrosa, the company’s website named 51 “special customers” and “members of the Alrosa Alliance,” in other words the company’s sightholders for 2022 to 2024. The list was removed after the sanctions were imposed, but it can easily be reconstructed, and it named five Israeli sightholders: A. Dalumi Diamonds, owned by diamond dealers Meir Dalumi and Rafi Yerushalmi; Sahar Atid, owned by diamond dealer Yair Sahar, who served as the president of the Israel Diamond Exchange from 2011 to 2013; Leo Schachter Diamonds, one of the largest Israeli companies, owned by businessman Elliot Tannenbaum; and Niru Diamonds, owned by Ranjeet Barmecha, an Indian diamond dealer who settled in Israel a few decades ago, and is considered a prominent player on the diamond exchange. Closing out the list is Y. Dvash Diamonds, owned by diamond dealer Yoram Dvash, who was president of the exchange until late 2020 and was given Alrosa sightholder status during his stint as president, when visiting Russia on business. He even met with Alrosa CEO Ivanov.

According to the Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics, diamonds imports from Russia to Israel totaled $413 million in 2021, accounting for about 60 percent of Russian imports to Israel. Most of this amount is apparently divided among the five abovementioned sightholders. Ergo, exports to Israel represent about 10 percent of Alrosa’s global activity.

That sounds like a lot, considering the size of the Israeli economy and of the country itself. In effect this figure actually attests to the continuing decline of the Ramat Gan Diamond Exchange, once a world center of trade in rough and polished diamonds, which has been slowly but surely losing status to India, which has become a diamond polishing hub. Another rising player is the United Arab Emirates, Israel’s new ally, which offers diamond dealers a lenient tax policy and a permissive banking system when it comes to enforcing the rules against money laundering, an issue that is still considered an advantage in the diamond industry.

The most important destination for the export of Russian diamonds to Europe is Antwerp, Belgium, where the diamond industry is flourishing, and where Jews – some of whom are Israeli citizens – play an important role. Some companies operate both in Antwerp and Ramat Gan, such as Taché Diamonds, another Alrosa sightholder, which also has representatives in the Israel Diamond Exchange in Ramat Gan.

In recent weeks the foreign media has publicized reports of a lobby activated by diamond dealers from Antwerp to prevent the inclusion of the import of rough diamonds on the list of EU sanctions. So far, their efforts seem to have worked. The EU – as opposed to the United States and Great Britain – has yet to place Alrosa or Russian diamonds on the list of sanctions. That is the backdrop for Zelenskyy’s speech to the Belgian parliament.

One person battling to scale down Israel’s trade with Russia following the invasion of Ukraine is attorney and human rights activist Eitay Mack. apparently with little chance of success. Writing to the Economy Ministry’s supervisor of diamonds in late March, Mack urged that licenses given to Israeli diamond dealers who trade with Russia be revoked.

Israeli law does in fact grant the supervisor of diamonds the power to grant and revoke licenses, subject to Israel’s foreign policy. But as long as the policy is that Israel is not joining the sanctions against the Kremlin, the supervisor, Ophir Gore, has no legal means to prevent trade with Russia. In his reply to Mack, Gore recited the hollow declaration by Foreign Minister Yair Lapid that “Israel will not become a bypass route for the sanctions imposed on Russia,” without any explanation of why it shouldn’t do so, as long as Israel itself is not adopting sanctions.

According to a source familiar with diamond data, from the start of the war to mid-March, Russian rough diamonds continued to enter Israel without hindrance. But about three weeks after the start of the fighting the U.S. sanctions list was expanded, and since then banks, and transport and insurance companies that deal with the diamond industry, have been making things difficult for Alrosa sightholders, which has led in effect to a cessation of imports. This may be only temporary.

Israeli banks turn touchy

If the international sanctions regime persists over the long term, Alrosa could become a significant source of oxygen for Moscow. The Israeli diamond industry has the potential to contribute its part, because the loophole in the U.S. law allows bringing diamonds originating in the Alrosa mines into the U.S. jewelry market, as long as they pass through Israel en route.

The U.S. imposed sanctions against Alrosa and against the import of Russian diamonds in general, and although it is considered the most important market for ornamental diamonds (as opposed to industrial diamonds, such as those used in discs for cutting concrete or in dental equipment). The loophole involves polishing the gems in a third country. U.S. tax law defines that third player as the country of origin, as long as the stone underwent “a significant transformation.” So a Russian stone polished in Israel can be shipped to the U.S. as an Israeli product.

Although some of the Israeli sightholders whisper to colleagues that it would be “convenient for them” to stop dealing with Russian merchandise until things blow over, they could theoretically find a way to bypass the obstacles raised by the banks. Note that the Israeli banking system is not subject to the American or European sanctions regime against the Russians. It subjects itself to rules that are more stringent that the law demands, probably in the aftermath of the moneylaundering affairs involving banks Hapoalim, Leumi and Discount, which cost the banks’ shareholders fines amounting to billions of shekels.

A leading diamond dealer active on the Israeli-Russian axis says the Israeli banks won’t touch payment to Russia now, even if it’s legal, “even if I transfer to someone in Dubai and he transfers it to the Russians. That’s their risk management policy.”

How is Alrosa reacting to the cessation of trade? Aren’t they threatening to cancel the sightholders’ franchise?

“I can attest that meanwhile the Russians understand what’s happening. Nor are they disconnected. Alrosa has an office here in the diamond exchange, the people who work there are young, educated, they understand the Western world and the sightholders’ problem. If you ask me, they themselves don’t identify much with their crazy president’s war. Take into account that Israel is only a small part of Alrosa’s business, and as far as I hear, trade in India and Dubai is continuing as usual, so that they aren’t getting stuck with all the merchandise. Meanwhile there’s no pressure on the sightholders to continue to buy.”

Another industry source thinks that in fact, even assuming the Israeli diamond dealers find ways to resolve the matter of payments, delivery and insurance, the Israeli sightholders will likely move their activity to India: “In any case polishing in India is cheaper than in Israel, and there’s a flow of Russian merchandise, without any problem or restriction. Someone like Elliot Tannenbaum has no problem receiving the goods in India, and sending them from there to the United States. As long as there are Western sanctions, there’s no reason for them to pass via Israel.” Tannenbaum’s Attorney Amir Altshuler, it should be noted, claims his client stopped his dealings with Alrosa or any other Russian company completely after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Others are dubious that Israeli trade with the Russians in general has halted, or significantly diminished, because of payment difficulties. “Don’t believe a diamond dealer who tells you that a bank restriction stopped him,” one source said. “Diamond dealers, certainly anyone who has become a sightholder, are no suckers. They find a way to pay. If not from Israel, then from an account in Dubai, if not today, then with a guarantee to pay when the sanctions are lifted. The fact is that I don’t see any lack of Russian merchandise in the market.”

Blood diamonds and barefaced lies

The diamond industry never did have a gorgeous image, partly because of the so-called “blood diamonds” mined in countries suffering from hunger, bloody conflicts and corruption, such as Angola during the long civil war in the late 20th century.

One method to thwart trade in “blood diamonds” is the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme, named after Kimberley, South Africa and formulated in 2003. It formulated standards for the diamond trade that were ultimately adopted by United Nations institutions and most of the major countries involved in the diamond trade. It basically involves a process of registering and documenting the history of rough diamonds.

Every rough diamond exported or imported in the member countries is supposed to have a document attesting to its origin (where mined), its history, weight and qualities. The document certifies that the stone was purchased from a legitimate mine, with a legal license. It’s supposed to stop the diamond industry from financing bloodthirsty militias, child labor, and other ills. Along with the certificate there is registration in the Kimberley international system, which is designed to prevent the development of a forged documents industry.

“One of Kimberley’s shortcomings is that it defines conflict diamonds only as those that finance a non-governmental military organization. That’s a definition that was designed to catch rebel organizations rather than governments. Therefore, no matter what the Russian army does, there’s no way of declaring the Alrosa diamonds conflict diamonds or blood diamonds,” explains Edahn Golan, a veteran diamond industry analyst. “The second problem is that decisions in Kimberley are made unanimously by representatives of the member countries – in other words, Russia has a right to veto the decisions. Therefore the Kimberley Process can’t harm Alrosa in any way.”

The Kimberley Process could help simply by identifying diamonds as Russian. In recent weeks several major jewelry makers, including Tiffany, Pandora and Cartier, have vowed to stop buying diamonds mined in Russia, in light of the war crimes being committed by the Russian army in Ukraine.

Presumably, the fashion chains can enforce the declarations by examining the Kimberley certificates of the diamonds they purchase, but customarily, from the moment the diamond is polished, it is exported without its certificate – in other words, jewelry manufacturers don’t examine the Kimberley certificates prior to acquisition. So how can the jewelry companies know where the diamonds were mined?

A diamond dealer who owns several mines in Africa claims that the fashion chains are satisfied with a declaration from the traders who sell them the merchandise: “Make no mistake. These declarations by the chains are nothing more than public relations. No jewelry company has any idea where the diamonds were mined. I can take a Russian diamond and say it’s from Botswana. The only thing they have is my word for it.”

“Tiffany, as opposed to the other chains that issued declarations, is also a direct customer of Alrosa [through one of Tiffany’s subsidiaries] and is included on the official customer list,” notes Nurit Rothman, a veteran diamond dealer and a former director of the Diamond Producers Association. “When you read Tiffany’s announcement, you see that they aren’t ending the trade, they’re postponing it. It’s cautious wording, designed to prevent them from getting into trouble with a major supplier. I assume that within a few weeks they’ll resume buying diamonds from Alrosa. They have no interest in losing the contract.”

As opposed to fears in the diamond industry, the U.S. and British moves against Alrosa did not substantially jack up diamond prices. Actually since the war began, prices of polished diamonds have slightly dipped.

Golan suspects the explanation lies more in COVID-19 and less in Ukraine, partly because weddings were being postponed as the pandemic began. “Later, there was an overall increase in personal consumption, which was also reflected in the demand for diamonds. Recently this trend has changed, and at the moment it seems that the jewelry chains have accumulated inventories, while there has been some decline in demand,” he says. It is also possible, though difficult to calculate, that loopholes in the sanctions regime are affecting the business as well.

In late 1982, Israeli intelligence sources reported to EIR that then-Defense Minister Ariel Sharon made a secret trip to Greek Cyprus to meet with two ranking officials of the Soviet GRU, the military intelligence service. The subject of those secret discussions was an Israeli-Soviet quid pro quo to drive the United States out of the Middle East. In exchange for Israeli complicity in a series of anti-American covert diplomatic and low-intensity military operations, the Soviet Union would “guarantee” Israeli control over an expanded piece of eastern Mediterranean turf, fulfilling the “Greater Israel” designs of the faction associated with Sharon; and would gradually allow for the emigration of a large number of Russian and Eastern European Jews to colonize the West Bank of the Jordan River, thus de facto consolidating Israelis 1967 land grab.

This “Greater Israel” scheme prefigures a parallel emergence of a “Greater Syria,” constituting the second satrap of the future Soviet domination of the eastern Mediterranean. The dismantling of Lebanon and the virtual extermination of the Palestinian population in successive genocidal campaigns by the Israeli Defense Force, the Syrian Army, the Syrian-backed Abu Musa radical Palestinian front, and the Amal Shi’ites of Lebanon—also agents of the Alawite Brotherhood ruling Syria—demonstrated on the field of battle the potential for Hobbesian coexistence between “Greater” Syria and “Greater” Israel.

While no published sources have corroborated the particulars of the reported Sharon-GRU session and the strategic deal consolidated there, subsequent events have clearly demonstrated that Israel is no longer America’s “leading ally” in the Middle East, despite continuing howls to this effect from U.S. State Department, Eastern Establishment, and Zionist Lobby voices.

Three factors, representing a dramatic change in the direction and control over Israeli politico-military policy, provide the backdrop to the emerging Tel Aviv-Moscow-Damascus pact:

1. The demographic shift within the Israeli population. Over 50 per cent of the Israeli population is now Sephardic, Middle Eastern-born. The shift from a Western European, Judeo-Christian cultural matrix to an Oriental Semitic cultural matrix has been identified by recent Israeli writers as a repudiation of Western values and a re-emergence of a Jewish “kabbalistic” brand of fundamentalism. This shift has been aggravated by the fact that over one-third of the Israeli citizenry, predominantly Ashkenazi pre- and postwar European émigrés, have left Israel and returned to the United States of Western Europe, thus drawing out of Israel some of the leading scientific and technological strata of the population. A radical, fundamentalist peasant caste has thus emerged in recent years as a prominent political force, providing the social base for Ariel Sharon’s drive for power under the slogan “Arik, Arik, King of Israel.”

This “Oriental” shift has been augmented by the emergence of a Russian-Jewish dominated New Right movement in Israel, heavily penetrated by the KGB. This New Right movement is in a prominent position within the Jewish Underground, or, Temple Mount movement [Chabad], which has revived a Khomeiniite brand of Judaism preaching the rebuilding of the Third Temple of Solomon. The other predominant grouping within the Temple Mount conspiracy is a powerful and wealthy community of Syrian-born Jews from the Turkish border region of Aleppo, who reportedly maintain deep but quiet ties to the Alawite Assad leadership of Syria, also Aleppo-based.

2. The collapse of the Israeli economy. Whereas, Israel’s inflation rate was 20 per cent in 1975, it is now an astounding 180 per cent, with interest rates on certain categories of loans over 210 per cent. While exports of citrus and other real economic products have collapsed and overall exports stagnated, official Israeli arms exports have increased sixteenfold over the last decade. Official exports of arms and diamonds in 1983 accounted for 60-70 per cent of Israel’s total exports. The unrecorded smuggling of drugs, diamonds, and weapons has massively increased, placing Israel in a leading position within the overall worldwide “unofficial economy”—i.e., the arms-for-drugs black market.

Within this arms-for-dope bazaar, Israel has entered into documented barter dealings with Khomeini’s Iran, providing spare parts for U.S. equipment originally sold to Iran during the reign of the late Shah, in clear and brazen violating of U.S. law. Through Lebanese channels centered around the Chouf Mountains-based Chamoun clan, the Sharon faction additionally entered into co-operative business ventures, including massive West Bank land scams, with Bulgarian foreign trade bank Litex. The latter arrangement was consummated in an October 1982 meeting at the Chamoun family Chouf mountain retreat at approximately the same time that Sharon was cavorting with the GRU on Cyprus.

The singular focus on building Israel’s arms industry was expressed in clear anti-American terms in the 1981 Meridor Memorandum, drafted by Ya-acov Meridor, a member of the former Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin’s cabinet. The memorandum was ostensibly part of the U.S.-Israeli letters of understanding: “We shall say to the Americans: ‘Don’t compete with us in Taiwan…South Africa…or the Caribbean, or in other areas where we can sell weapons directly…. Let us do it. Sell the ammunition using a proxy, Israel will be your proxy.'”

From its current status as the world’s seventh-largest arms exporter, Israel’s defense sector has mapped out an ambitious program to place Israel in the number three spot over the next several years. At the heart of this drive has been an extensive lobbying effort into the Reagan administration and the U.S. Congress, to force the release of previously classified stealth and other technologies to Israel for the production of the Lavie jet, a joint Israel-Republic of South Africa production venture. This would give Israel the additional delivery system capabilities, as well, for the rapid development of an independent intermediate-range nuclear capability.

On repeated occasions, this particular Israel-South Africa connection has been caught funneling state-of-the-art U.S. computer technologies to the Soviet Union. [Operation Talpiot].

3. The Lebanon invasion of 1982 and its aftermath. In June 1982, Ariel Sharon launched the Israeli Defense Force invasion of Lebanon on the pretext of assaulting Palestinian terrorist bases behind the attempted assassination of the Israeli ambassador in London, Shlomo Argov. The action marked a decisive breach in U.S.-Israeli relations that accelerated Sharon’s openings in Moscow and Damascus. Sharon launched the operation on the basis of personal assurances from the Secretary of State, Alexander Haig, that the United States would fully support the Israeli invasion. When the United States—already at that moment caught in the ringer of the Malvinas War—harshly rebuked the Israeli move and President Reagan took the unprecedented step of firing Hail, Sharon wrote off the United States as an “unreliable ally,” and took his business to Moscow and Damascus, where more “practical” minds supposedly prevailed.

When every effort from inside Israel to dislodge the butcher Sharon from power failed, a deep cultural pessimism took hold in the country that merely accelerated the radical fundamentalist drive to impose a Sharon dictatorship.

Beginning in 1984, a more open phase of diplomatic dealings with Moscow began, through the personal “shuttle diplomacy” of Edgar Bronfman and Armand Hammer. Both men made a series of trips to Moscow during the Andropov and Chernenko periods, to negotiate a broad-based Moscow-Tel Aviv re-approchment involving Jewish emigration and anticipated official recognition of Israel by the Soviet Union. According to Canadian sources, this was paralleled by an increasingly public role of the Bronfman family, particularly Charles Bronfman, as the semi-official channel between the Canadian and East German governments. Privately, Canadian intelligence sources have told EIR that this Bronfman-East Germany channel is directly into Gen. Marcus (“Misha”) Wolf, the number two man in the East German Ministry of State Security (MfS). The son of a German-Jewish Communist Party official who fled to Russia during the Hitler period, Wolf has been identified as the single most powerful figure in the MfS and a close personal associate and protégé of Marshal Nikolai Ogarkov.

The Sharon Plan to destroy Lebanon, and divide the spoils between Syria and Israel, slaughter the Palestinian population there, transfer the dirty-money operations previously based in Beirut into the Israeli banking system, and convert the West Bank into a Russian émigré-populated real estate boondoggle, was, in fact, a corollary to the Kissinger Doctrine elaborated by the former Secretary of State at a July 23-24, 1982 secret meeting at the Bohemian Grove in California. In that address, Kissinger called for the United States to strategically withdraw from 75 per cent of its global commitments and assume a more modest role within a concordat of Western nations modeled on the Holy Roman Empire of the post Treaty of Vienna period.

Convinced by the Reagan administration’s failure to fully support the invasion of Lebanon, that the United States must be punished by humiliating setbacks within the eastern Mediterranean, the Sharon group in Israel provided consistent aid and comfort to the Shi’ite terrorist offensive against the United States, beginning with the February 1983 bombing of the U.S. embassy in Beirut that wiped out the entire U.S. CIA station for Lebanon.

The Tel Aviv-Damascus Hobbesian deal with Moscow’s blessing was consummated during April-June 1985 through the following sequence of events that culminated in the TWA 847 hijacking.

• In early April 1985, Israeli forces entered Southern Lebanon and rounded up over 700 Shi-ites, trucking them across the Israeli border into a detention camp. The mass hostage-taking was aimed by the Sharon group, now strongly allied with Defense Minister Yitzhak Rabin, at forcing Amal leader Nabih Berri to reach a security pact with Israel assuring the permanent elimination of Palestinians from southern Lebanon. On April 5, the Reagan administration denounced the Israeli move as a violation of the Geneva Convention and demanded the unconditional release of the “hostages”.
• On May 14, a top Israeli intelligence official met with the head of Amal intelligence, a known Syrian intelligence asset, in southern Lebanon, soliciting a negotiating package that would lead to the relase of the Shi’ite hostages inside Israel. The terms proposed by the Israeli official reportedly called for an Amal action against the United States that would provide Israel with an “excuse” for releasing the 700 Lebanese Shi’ites.
• On May 17, the Mossad leaked a story in the Washington Post blaming the CIA for a March 8 car bombing in Beirut that killed 80 Shi’ites. Despite the fact that the Lebanese secret unit that carried out the car bomb attack was acting under direct Mossad orders, Israel’s “proxy” status for U.S. actions inside Lebanon, in effect since the humiliating American withdrawal from Lebanese territory in 1984, served as blackmail leverage against the Reagan administration’s revealing the facts of the case. The Washington Post story was widely circulated in the Shi’ite press inside Lebanon, building a revenge climate against “CIA terrorists”.
• On May 20, a second secret meeting in southern Lebanon between the Mossad official and other ranking members of the Amal military command took place. Allegedly, this meeting spelled out a detailed arrangement between the Amal and the Israelis, involving policing responsibilities for the border zone with Israel, the release of the Shi’ites, and the staging of the TWA hijacking. The secret accord was ratified first by the head of Syrian intelligence in Lebanon before the plan went operational in early June with the Athens hijacking.

The conclusion: The TWA hostage incident marked the consolidation of a process begun with the 1982 Lebanon invasion, which fundamentally realigned the eastern Mediterranean into a Damascus-Tel Aviv-Moscow controlled zone, in which, barring a dramatic shift in policy from Washington, the United States is no longer a prominent player.

Count Bennigsen and the ‘Islamic Card’

When terror by Islamic fundamentalist groups, against innocent citizens from the United States and other countries, escalates with new hijackings and murders, one would hardly expect to hear the old argument of the 1970s voiced in Washington, that Islamic fundamentalism should be welcomed as a counterthrust to communism in Central Asia.

But professor Alexandre Bennigsen, late of the University of Chicago and now based at the Sorbonne in Paris, is still in action. He makes the rounds on Capitol Hill. He gets a forum in the U.S. Information Agency’s Problems of Communism to vent his enthusiastic hope for the spread of Islamic revolt (“Mullahs, Mujahidin, and Soviet Muslims,” Problems of Communism, Nov.-Dec. 1984). This scheme, that the spread of Islamic fundamentalism in West Asia would inspire turmoil in Soviet Central Asia and trepidation in the Kremlin, was the stuff of Bennigsen’s frequent congressional testimony and academic dissertations, which fueled the doomed “arc of crisis” policy under the Carter administration. The continuing popularity of Bennigsen, the author of The Islamic Threat to the Soviet Union, demonstrates the dangerous persistence in Washington—among professed conservatives as well as around the State Department—of fascination with the “crumbling of the Soviet Empire,” even as the Russians count their gains in areas near and far from their borders.

In the 1970s, Carter’s national security chief Zbigniew Brzezinski proclaimed that Islamic fundamentalism would be a bulwark against Communist insurgencies [Brzezinski’s controlled opposition narrative that helps Soviet aims] along an “arc of crisis,” stretching from the southern borders of the Soviet Union, through the Near East and into North Africa. In Iran, the keystone of the arc, the Carter administration abetted the overthrow of the Shah by the mullarchy of the insane Ayatollah Khomeini. The Islamic revolution, the hope was voiced, would ultimately sweep into Soviet Central Asia, whose inhabitants would rise against their Russian overlords simultaneously with the peoples of Eastern Europe. The USSR would crack open like a walnut.

The results in the late 1970s, when this view was policy, were somewhat different. The Soviet Union achieved such a striking increase of power in the region, that Brzezinski subsequently suggested, in a June 1983 speech at Harvard University, that the United States might as well abandon the Middle East, along with Western Europe, and search for allies in the Pacific Basin.

The so-called Rejection Front of radical Arab states under Soviet tutelage, was consolidated out of the rage engendered by the Camp David pact. In this alignment, Libya and Syria were joined by Iran—after the Khomeini revolution brought down the Shah. Khomeini sits astride the Persian Gulf oil routes, scarcely veiling his threats to call in Satan Number 2 (the USSR), if Satan Number 1 crosses him; and the Soviets have invested heavily in both infrastructure and political assets in Iran. Syria is armed to the teeth with Soviet weapons. What is left of Lebanon teeters on the bring of becoming an “Islamic state” under the domination of Soviet-armed Syria, with added benefit of Khomeini’s “moral guidance” for the one million Shi’ite Lebanese. Saudi Arabia is being told by Moscow that the time has come for a Soviet-Saudi diplomatic thaw, under the threat of a Khomeini-proclaimed “holy war” to be triggered by terrorist assaults on the Islamic holy places in Saudi Arabia. Between 100,000 and 200,000 Soviet troops are in Afghanistan. Soviet-backed ethnic and religious insurgencies threaten to break Pakistan into pieces.

The national security of the United States and of the targeted nations of the Middle East, North Africa, and the Indian Ocean littoral demands, that the widely shared fantasies of the Jesuit-trained Brzezinski [he’s not a Catholic] and ideologues like Bennigsen be put aside, and the truth admitted: Moscow has mastered the “Muslim card”, and turned the arc of crisis into a Soviet arc of opportunity.

The Soviets have their own program for “Islamic culture” and, through East Germany, an alliance with Hitler’s old Nazi networks in the Middle East to spread terrorism. In an August 1980 article, the Moscow Institute of Orientology director, Academician Yevgenii Primakov, gloated that policy-makers in the West had no grasp of religious factors in the Middle East, since they mistakenly viewed Islamic uprisings as a short-lived “explosion of fanaticism”, while underestimating the “anti-imperialist direction of the growing movement for Islamic solidarity”—that is, the Soviet ability to turn it to advantage.

Geidar Aliyev and the Tashkent nexus

The master of the Soviets’ “Islamic card” is Geidar Ali-Reza ogly Aliyev, the career KGB officer of Shi’ite Muslim origin, promoted in 1982 to be First Deputy Prime Minister of the Soviet Union and a full member of the Politburo. Before coming to Moscow at that time, Aliyev operated for 15 years out of Soviet Azerbaijan, first as its KGB chief and then as First Secretary of the Communist Party of Azerbaijan.

He was located in Baku, the Caspian Sea oil town that is the capital of Soviet Azerbaijan. It is second only to Tashkent, Soviet Uzbekistan, as a military command centre for the USSR’s southern flank—what now comes under High Command South, commanded by General of the Army Yuri Maksimov, a member of the Politburo of the Uzbekistan Communist Party since 1981. In both the Transcaucasus and Central Asia, the two foci of the Soviet Muslim population, the local party machine and the Islamic establishment are integrated under the political-military command.

In wartime, their special capabilities come into play. For instance, before the December 1970 Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, thousands of Soviet Izbek and Tajik cadre were infiltrated across the border into the areas of Afghanistan where the population is Uzbek and Tajik, to carry out spetsnaz sabotage activities in advance of the invasion. More recently, Iranian sources have observed the transit of persons from Iran’s northeastern province of Turkmenistan, on Iran’s border with Afghanistan, into the Soviet Union; after military training in the USSR, they slip back into Iran.

Soviet and COMINTERN officials, from the early 1920s on, conceived of Tashkent as a jumping-off point for power throughout south Asia, just as certain Slavophile-linked geopoliticians—like the Buryat Mongol mystic, arms merchant and court intriguer Badmayev—had counseled the late nineteenth century Tsars to seize the Himalayas, thence to take British India. Leon Trotsky, in August 1919, declared that “the road to Paris and London lies via the towns of Afghanistan, the Punjab, and Bengal”. In May 1919, the newspaper Zhyzn natsionalnostei (Life of the Nationalities), published by the Central Bureau of the Communist Organizations of the Peoples of the East, editorialized, “Without active assistance from the outside by the fresh untapped forces of Russia’s Muslims, it (the revolution in Asia) can once again fall into a lethargic sleep of spineless inertness and apathy. Let Britain, which has always been afraid of the spectre of a Cossack lance on the peaks of the Himalayas, now see this historical lance in the hands of Russia’s Muslim-proletarian coming to the aid of his brothers in Persia, India, and Afghanistan”.

Such extreme—or rather, frank—statements are today termed by oh-so-scholarly Soviet specialists, evidence of “leftist, adventuristic tendencies.” The Tashkent-based Communist University for Toilers of the East was repeatedly purged. But the views of the “Islamo-Marxists” forged Soviet policy and capabilities in the region. By the late 1920s, the COMINTERN’s Third World operations were reshaped to emphasize the building of individual communist parties, but the role of the Azerbaijani Communist Party, with its heritage from the Islamo-Marxist Nariman Narimanov, stayed strong. The party’s approach, later perfected by Aliyev, was to exploit indigenous belief structures, but to tame them away from disruptive excesses and tool them into a means for the outward expansion of influence. Azerbaijan supplied organizers and administrators to Soviet Central Asia proper, making Baku a point from which Soviet influence radiated into the Islamic world. The Turkish, Iranian, Iraqi communist parties were organized from Baku; the Communist Party of Indian, from Tashkent.

The Soviet state and cultural establishment, meanwhile, built up the image of Tashkent as a developing-sector boomtown and crossroads of Asia, by staging major events there. The late Uzbek party chief, Sharaf Rashidov, hosted many events like the 1983 Seventh Conference of the Afro-Asian Writers Association. In 1966, Soviet Prime Minister Aleksei Kosygin propelled Tashkent into world headlines when he invited the prime ministers of India and Pakistan to come there for reconciliation talks after the Indo-Pakistan war of 1965. Not long after that, the Soviets readied another diplomatic coup for Tashkent, but did not succeed in bringing it off. The late Egyptian President Anwar Sadat revealed that the Soviets had invited him to come negotiate with Israel after the 1967 war, and asked, “I wonder what would be the position of the Soviet Union if the accord we signed at Camp David had been signed at Tashkent?”

The Islamic establishment

Alongside the overt and covert activities of the state, the four Spiritual Boards of the Soviet Muslim establishment, revived during World War II on the base of a hierarchy first set up by Catherine the Great in the eighteenth century, have developed diplomatic prowess paralleling that of the Russian Orthodox Church/Moscow Patirarchate.

The organization of Soviet Islam today proceeds from the 1943 concordat signed after discussions between Stalin and the Mufti of Ufa, Abdurrahman Rasulayev, which revived the Central Muslim Spiritual Board that first functioned in the eighteenth century. There are four boards, or Spiritual Administrations, each headed by a Mufti or Sheikh, which cover: 1. Central Asia and Kazakhstan (Tashkent); 2. Transcaucasus (Baku, Azerbaijan(; 3. European USSR and Siberia (Ufa, Bashkir ASSR); and 4, North Caucasus (Makhachkla, Daghestan ASSR).

The Muslim boards were encouraged to expand in the 1960s, when the Soviets upgraded the social sciences and all manner of cultivation of what they call “cultural factors”.

In 1968, the Tashkent board began to publish the quarterly Muslims of the Soviet East in English, French, Persian, Arabic, and Uzbek, to propagandize to Mideast readers what a great life their Muslim brothers in the Soviet Union enjoy. The same year, Soviet Muslims first went abroad, and a Soviet, and a Soviet mullah on the annual Hajj to Mecca became an established custom. These travels allow propaganda interchange with Muslim leaders from all over the world.

Soviet mullahs are trained at one of two schools in Central Asia. Primary is the Bukhara madrasah, to which Soviet Muslims come from all over the USSR. Bukhara has a “work-study” program so that the budding of mullahs can teach at nearby mosques while getting their degrees. The best students go on to the Imam al-Bukhari Islamic Institute of Tashkent, or take further training in Damascus or Cairo.

The propaganda thrust from Tashkent, Baku, Ufa, and the Caucasus is by no means limited to showcasing the material advantages of Soviet Muslims. Muslims of the Soviet East participates in some very precisely targeted operations, such as the Jerusalem Temple Mount scenario for sparking religious war by a Jewish and Christian fundamentalist threat to the holy shrines of Islam in Jerusalem. On April 16, 1982, mullahs throughout the USSR preached on the threat to these Islamic holy places, arising from “brigands’ attempts to undermine the scared mosque which is being allegedly perpetrated with a view to finding Solomon’s temple.”

The fraud of Bennigsen

Before Zbigniew Brzezinski ever heard about Soviet Muslims, Alexandre Bennigsen was the authority on them. He shaped the field of Soviet Central Asia studies, training dozens of specialists at the Sorbonne and at Chicago. One Central Asia specialist, who has followed the spread of Bennigsen’s gospel on the potential for Soviet Muslim revolt, observes: “Bennigsen has had an absolutely horrendous effect on American strategic estimates (in that area of the world). I can’t tell you how many times he has traveled to Washington to testify before Senate committees and meet with people.”

The Muslim population of upwards of 44 million, living within the USSR, makes it the first largest Islamic country in the world. Contrary to Bennigsen’s myths, the interesting question is not whether at some point in 40 or 50 years those Muslims will threaten Russian rule. An overriding strategic question will be answered, in this decade, long before Muslims demography transforms the Soviet Union: Will Moscow destroy U.S. power worldwide and preside over its ultimate empire? As for Soviet Muslims, will they or won’t they serve Soviet imperial aims during this crisis?

Bennigsen systematically blacks out this strategic reality. At a March 1983 conference on Soviet Central Asia, the professor expounded his fixed theme in typical fashion: “The question of ‘identity’ among Soviet Muslims is of critical importance. Without trying to be overly dramatic, the ultimate cohesion of the USSR could be at stake.”

Bennigsen does acknowledge that Soviet Muslims have served as a foreign policy asset, stating that Soviet Islam’s goal of appearing as part of world Islam desirous of contacts abroad—for the sake of “its own survival and protection—conveniently parallels Moscow’s desire to appear to the Third World Muslim nations as ‘one of them’.” But in a 1983 book co-authored with his daughter, Marie Broxup, Bennigsen asserted that Soviet Muslims had become drastically less effective in foreign operations since the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. “The period of co-operation between the Soviet Islamic establishment and Moscow…seems to have come to an end with the invasion of Afghanistan.” After EIR exposed this as a systematic cover-up of the deployments by the Soviet Muslim Boards, Bennigsen attempted to clean up his record. “Without doubt,” he said in the recent Problems of Communism article, “the official Soviet Islamic establishment is once again entrusted with an important high-level diplomatic mission. Moscow’s aim in sponsoring the official Islamic establishment is both transparent and highly successful…. The message they bring to their co-religionists abroad may not be very different from official Soviet propaganda…but it is accepted with a certain sympathy because it is presented by authentic Islamic scholars…. Thanks to the activity of these representatives, Moscow managed to neutralize to a certain degree the disastrous propaganda image of the Afghan genocide.”

Bennigsen admits all that but refuses to abandon his main line: “One might well ask how long the Soviets can play the sophisticated but dangerous game of supporting Islam abroad, while trying to destroy it at home.” The answer may be: As long as anybody in the United States is foolish enough to follow the advice of Bennigsen, who hails the “Islamic Revolution” of the fanatics in Iran, even as they commit more atrocities.

Related:

New York—Moscow—Tel Aviv Triangle

Soviet Islam

How Israel and Russia forged unlikely partnership in Syria

World Jewish Congress confirmed New York-Moscow-Tel Aviv triangle in 1978

By Esther Kay | moshiach.ru
October 18, 2021 Anno Domini
Translated from the Russian

“Red-skinned friend of Israel” (original headline)

“We want to talk about co-operation between the Cherokee people and the people of Israel, and living in Alabama, we strive for a united and indivisible Jerusalem.”

The Indians of North America gathered in Atlanta (or, as they say, in the District of the Red Wind) to argue on the topic – “Do we not belong to the tribes of Israel, which the exile scattered throughout the world? We feel that we are very similar to the Jews in our destiny – we were expelled, destroyed, and we were reborn again and returned to our homeland. ”

Ms. King represented the Federation of Small Jewish Communities in North America at the Alabama Indian Rally. The Cherokee tribe was introduced by Mr. Smith. Ms. Dadon, Israel’s consul in Atlanta, also wanted to visit, but she limited herself to a letter of welcome.

Historically, there were indeed Jews among the first European settlers. For example, the present Montgomery began with a Jew named Abraham-Mordechai. In principle, it is easier to prove that the Indians themselves do not understand why they have sympathy specifically for Israel: after all, they could, on the contrary, support the concept of the Palestinian myth of an oppressed people, etc. However, the Indians of Alabama emphasize that it was the Jewish people who were oppressed and it was they who were deprived of their homeland for centuries, but never lost touch with it.

Israel is a friend of the Redskins … perhaps in the sense that the lessons of history were, in fact, similar. In the United States, before 1967, the Indians could not even receive a full school education at all, and, according to them, they did not want to see them in the state: the motto was “either let them die or assimilate” … Indeed, such situations for Jews are almost an everyday reality in any country where the hand of Providence has thrown them.

Even now, the Indians do not really fit into the life of the United States and Canada as ordinary citizens, their soul requires something different.

They are unlikely to be satisfied with the ceremonial Zionism of today’s Israel, and the role of a Christian missionary “for the sake of the Jews” will not suit them. They need to be taught the 7 Laws of Noah and show them the depth of the Hasidic approach to the Torah. The Cherokee Indians have shown an interest in Israel, but that does not mean that friendship will go beyond the surface of a political agenda. No one doubts the existence of the Jewish people and their contribution to world culture. And the Cherokee may well study some aspects of Jewry that appeal to all nations and do everything in their power to lead to the uncovering of Moshiach, which will give the world a real unification.

For more, see:

Alabama Cherokee tribe establishes ties with Israel, recognizes ‘undivided’ Jerusalem

Kabbalah and the Cherokees

Cherokee Moon

By Compromat.group
June 11, 2021
Translated from the Russian

Russian deputy and part-time citizen of Israel (or, more precisely, an Israeli citizen and part-time Russian deputy) Ilya Mitelman not only did not declare an apartment in the elite area of Tel Aviv for $1.8 million but also used foreign ones prohibited for Russian parliamentarians to buy as financial instruments, namely opening a foreign account for obtaining a loan in the Israeli Mizrahi-Tefahot Bank for 2,200,000 shekels with a monthly payment of 17,300 shekels, that is, almost 400,000 rubles.

To the deputy of the Chelyabinsk City Duma, Ilya Mitelman, who was going to become a deputy of the State Duma, but was kicked out of the primaries, we devoted a separate large investigation. In this article, we described in detail how this parliamentarian hid his Israeli citizenship, Israeli business interests with an Israeli mother-in-law, an undeclared Israeli apartment in downtown Tel Aviv for $1.8 million, an Israeli mortgage, and an undeclared foreign bank account.

But we deliberately kept some information. Well, since Mr. Mitelman tried to sue us using dishonest methods (which, however, did not help him—the trial in case No. 2-2850 / 2021 – M-1614/2021, which was considered in the Kalininsky District Court of Chelyabinsk, he lost) decided to publish also classified information about the family account of the Mitelman couple in the Israeli Mizrahi-Tefahot Bank (registration number 520000052). We emphasize that for dishonest methods of litigation, we will continue to spread information about the identity of this deputy.

As Ilya Mitelman asked Israeli bankers for a shekel

So, on September 17, 2018, Ilya Mitelman, together with his wife Melanie Mitelman (nee Alberta Izmailova, then Melanie Korman), opened an account number 4310-28-298 in Mizrahi-Tefahot Bank for obtaining a mortgage loan. The mortgage was issued according to act 1023/2019/3 at the Mizrahi branch of bank No. 252 in the city of Ramat Gan. Now this mortgage case is kept in the central office of the bank, located in Tel Aviv at 123 Hashmonaim Street. The main borrower is Melanie, the guarantor is Ilya Mitelman.

They chose a not sickly apartment—132.5 sq. m and in one of the most expensive areas of Tel Aviv—Tel Aviv-Jaffa, on Michael Neeman Street, at 14. The cost of such housing is about $1.8 million. MP Mitelman decided to take out almost half of this amount on credit.

The Mizrahi-Tefahot Bank mortgage loan taken by the Mizrahi-Tefahot Bank totaled NIS 2,200,000 (about $700,000). The monthly payment on this loan is 17,300 shekels ($ 5,300, or about 400,000 rubles). That is, for a mortgage, Deputy Mitelman monthly unfastens 10 average Russian salaries in Israel.

To date, the amount of debt has decreased to 1,871,500 shekels ($576,000).

Interestingly, a loan in Israel is not taken as in Russia—in a single package, but is divided into several parts. The documents in our possession indicate that the Mitelmans took:

• 748,000 shekels for 10 years at a constant interest rate (4.07% per year). Payments are due until October 2028. To date, the loan balance is 605,900 shekels.
• 617,000 shekels for 15 years at prime interest (1.4% per year). Payments end in October 2033.
• 648,000 shekels for 15 years at variable interest (2.36% per year). The deadline is until October 2033.

Twice violator of anti-corruption laws

And everything would be fine—as they say, any whim for your money—but Ilya Semyonovich, equipping a nest for his family in Israel, twice violated the anti-corruption legislation of Russia. Firstly, he did not declare an Israeli apartment, although he was obliged to do so, and then began to get out, referring to some “technical bugs” on the official website of the City Duma of Chelyabinsk.

However, not everything is in order in the revised declaration either: instead of an apartment with an area of ​​132.5 squared metres, Deputy Mitelman pointed out a certain “condominium” of an incomprehensible area. What, again a “technical error”!

And secondly, Ilya Mitelman violated the ban on the use of foreign financial instruments, which include credit lines of foreign banks. Recall that in accordance with clause 1.1 of Art. 2 of Federal Law No. 79-FZ of May 7, 2013, signed by President Vladimir Putin, deputies holding positions in the representative bodies of city districts are prohibited from opening and having accounts (deposits), keeping cash and valuables in foreign banks located outside the territory Of the Russian Federation, own and (or) use foreign financial instruments.

Ilya Semyonovich will clearly not be able to explain the use of credit funds by Israeli bankers by a “technical error.” This means that with the proper work of the supervisory authorities (primarily the regional prosecutor’s office, headed by the new regional prosecutor Karen Gabrielyan, who replaced the corrupt official Vitaly Lopin), Ilya Mitelman must leave the City Duma of Chelyabinsk.

This article is an official appeal to the power structures and supervisory authorities, in particular – to the new prosecutor of the Chelyabinsk region.

By MJCC
May 9, 2021 Anno Domini
Translated from the Russian

FEOR President and Chief Rabbi of Russia Berel Lazar took part in the Victory Day Parade (commemorates Soviet defeat of the Nazis) May 9, 2021.

President of the Federation of Jewish Communities of Russia, Rabbi Alexander Boroda, Chief Rabbi of Russia Berl Lazar, together with other heads of traditional confessions of Russia, took part in the Victory Day Parade.

Rabbi Alexander Boroda noted the grandeur of the Victory Parade. The FEOR President stressed that the solemn demonstration of troops, military equipment, first of all, confirms confidence in a peaceful life in the future. It indicates not so much about military power, but about the possibility of resisting any threat and aggression.

“Victory Day is an undeniably great holiday! For every person on earth, this Victory meant the triumph of good. Victory Day saved the Jewish people from the complete destruction planned by Hitler, and we will forever remain grateful to the warrior-liberator of the Red Army.

“It was the courage and strength of the Red Army soldiers who were able to stop this terrifying death machine, which seemed to be omnipotent and invincible. The Great Patriotic War is not only a war for freedom, for defending one’s territory, for the life and salvation of one’s loved ones, but it is also an ideological war, it is a spiritual opposition to misanthropy, opposition to the criminal and immoral principles of fascism and nationalism. Therefore, the significance of Victory Day is inexorable for all mankind, for all countries! And if extremist sentiments reappear, chauvinist ideas are heard in the international space, then the true history of the Victory is updated with even greater force,” commented Rabbi Boroda.

Yours faithfully
Press Service of the Federation of Jewish Communities of Russia

By Avigdor Eskin
From Breakthrough into Eurasianism
November 13, 2020 Anno Domini
Translated from the Russian

Excerpt:

The conditions for Israel’s survival are the replacement of the liberal diktat with a Eurasian ideocracy with an authentic Jewish filling.

The departure from the political scene of liberal democracy following fascism and communism for many now seems inevitable. Even the renowned ideologue of Americanism, Samuel Huntington, expects substantial resistance to American hegemony. I believe that the mission to be the vanguard of such resistance rests with Israel and Russia.

It is difficult to imagine a more important and noble task in our day. Let’s take Solzhenitsyn’s “Letter to the Leaders” and rewrite it by analyzing the collapse of liberal democracy, not liberalism that has already vanished. You will see how powerful such a Eurasian manifesto will be. It should be put on the table for the rulers of Russia and Israel at the same time.

The messianic passionarity emanating from Zion should capture the majority of Russian Jews and “shake” the liberal foundations of Jewish life in the United States. At the same time, the factor of culturally isolated Jewish traditionalists living in America will inevitably affect. These people will turn to Israel in a moment of trial, even at the cost of a conflict with their country of residence. The continental imperial orientation of Russia, instead of assimilation, will offer Russian Jews an orientation toward Israel.

The ideology of Eurasianism will allow representatives of all traditions to assert themselves without humiliating compromises, inviting them to realize themselves within the territories historically occupied by them.

This concept fully integrates the messianism of the Zionist movement as an antipode to the assimilation of the “great confusion” (“Erev Rav”). The authentic Jewish idea of ​​”light to the nations” is not in wandering for the sake of gaining influence in a foreign land, but in connection with the piece of the continent, given by the Creator—the Land of Israel. It is reflected in the words of the Jewish prophets, in the laws of the Talmud and in the writings of the saints of Israel of all times. Moving around the planet according to the Atlanticist model is a punishment, but not an ideal. Since the era of exile has ended, there is no more room for even a discussion on this issue.

Zionocentrism automatically solves all the painful problems of the Russian-Jewish symbiosis. For constructive interaction, it is also necessary to develop a new joint geopolitical strategy based on soil tendencies among both peoples.

This is a hitherto unknown innovation. It would not have come true today if it were not for the ground under the feet of each of the sides. There is also a common Wahhabis of the same type in Chechnya and Hamas in the Middle East. And most importantly, the “new world order” destroying any originality ….

The will of the Israelis in the elections is a challenge for Putin’s Russia not to miss the chance to knock Israel out of the chains of the liberal-democratic international. If the Kremlin intends to become an international player again, then it has been given a chance not to lag behind Washington, enforcing a “peace process”, but guided by its own interests, relying on the forces of resistance to mondialism in Israel. And we should start with an active dialogue with a million Russian-speaking Israelis, most of whom, in accordance with existing legislation, are citizens of Russia.

The new wave from Israel will immediately have an impact on the Jews in Russia. After Gusinsky leaves, there will be no more active and influential opponents of the new strategy. In turn, the Bush administration’s dislike of Israel can play a positive role here.

All facts and undercurrents lead us to the idea of ​​the inevitability of the proposed turn. We are hindered only by numbness – a consequence of cowardice – the habit of “going with the flow” and being burdened with a feeling of hopelessness in the face of the etheric giant. Time to show will and become the creator of history, and not its passive subject.

Time is working against us as long as we are in hesitation and indecision. But now we have a great task ahead of us. And who knows – perhaps for the sake of this great hour the Creator of the universe brought Russians and Jews together from the beginning of the century, so that together we would write a new page in the history of the victory of the human race over the serpent pursuing it? ..

2000 year

By Avigdor Eskin
Date Unknown
Translated from the Russian

Shortly after leaving the post of Chief of the General Staff of Israel in 1983, Refael Eitan gave an interview to Israeli radio and spoke about his musical tastes. “Most of all I love listening to the marches of the Red Army ensemble,” the hero of all Israel’s wars shared with the audience. – I tried to instill in our army the fighting spirit of the Russians. It always helped in battle. ”

After leaving the service, Eitan created the movement for the revival of Zionism, Tsomet, which managed to win eight seats in the Knesset in the 1991 elections. The retired general was a staunch opponent of any concessions to the Arabs, advocated the refusal of American aid and fought against the introduction of the mondialist culture into Israeli society. In this regard, the origin of Eitan is interesting. His parents, the Orlovs, are Russian people who came to the Holy Land at the beginning of the century. Neither they themselves nor their son ever converted to Judaism and considered themselves Russian. This did not stop Eitan from feeling like an Israeli, fighting for the revival of Zionism and rising to the highest post in the Israel Defense Forces.

Russian-Jewish symbiosis permeates the entire history of the Zionist movement and the State of Israel. The Zionist movement, created at the end of the 19th century, was initially led by liberal nationalists from Germany. This category includes Herzel, Wolfson and Nordau. They were carriers of the European spirit, cut off from their Jewish roots. Their arrival in the Zionist movement was a reaction to the Dreyfus trial and other manifestations of anti-Semitism in Europe at the time. “Since Europe doesn’t want us, we need to create our own state,” they thought so.

Since the beginning of the twentieth century, the Zionist movement has increasingly smelled of the Russian spirit. The overwhelming majority of immigrants to the then Palestine were Jews of the Russian Empire, who quickly took leading positions in the management of the Zionist organization.

It should be noted that already at the beginning of the XIX century. a movement began among the Jews for the return to the Land of Israel and the revival of their state there.

All the forerunners of Zionism were religious ascetics with a messianic bias. They advocated a conciliar existence within the framework of the idea of ​​translating into life the words of the prophets about deliverance at the end of days. The pioneers were the students of the legendary Vilna Gaon. They were followed by groups of Russian Hasidim, starting with Rabbi Menachem Mendel of Vitebsk. By the end of the 19th century, even before the formation of the Zionist movement, large religious centers existed in the land of Israel in Jerusalem, Hebron and Safed. Dozens of agricultural communes became the forerunners of the kibbutzim. The foundations of future cities were laid – Petah Tikva, Rishon LeTsiyon, Rehovot. All this was done by the natives of the Russian Empire.

In the early 1920s, the Russian factor became dominant in the Zionist movement, which was divided into a secular majority and a religious minority. The latter based their worldview solely on traditional Jewish sources and showed no interest in the great revolutionary achievements of the early twentieth century. Their comrades-in-arms, estranged from ritualism, were clearly divided into red and white.

The socialist wing of the Zionist movement was headed by the future first prime minister of Israel, David Ben-Gurion. He welcomed the ideas of the Bolsheviks and the October Revolution. Later, Ben-Gurion and his followers took a neutral position in relation to the USSR, which eventually grew into rejection of the Stalinist regime. (Among the Zionist socialists, the HaShomer Ha-Tsair-Mapai movement, which opposed Ben-Gurion within the socialist wing of the movement, continued to defend the pro-Soviet line until 1956.)

Belykh was headed by an outstanding writer and orator from Odessa, Vladimir Evgenievich Zhabotinsky. An opponent of Bolshevism and a nationalist, he enjoyed fantastic popularity among the Jews of Eastern Europe, but lost to the calculating and power-hungry Ben-Gurion in the struggle for supremacy in the Zionist movement. In the 30s. in the most British-occupied Palestine, Jabotinsky’s comrade-in-arms Aba Ahimeir, an intellectual and adorer of Russian culture, had great authority. He led the toughest and most radical wing of the white Jewish passionaries, advocating the expulsion of the British from the Holy Land, but they managed to drown out his voice, laying slander against him. Akhimeir was acquitted in court on charges of complicity in the murder of the prominent socialist Arlozorov, but his fighting spirit did not return. Since the end of the 30s, he limited himself to publicistic activities and weekly meetings of lovers of Russian culture.

By the end of the 30s, the Zionist movement was predominantly focused on the red and white passionaries of the Russian orientation, but even then the influence of Chaim Weizmann, who relied entirely on the British, was noticeable. From year to year he will incline his colleagues to obedient policy in relation to the interests of the sea power. Weizmann was in the minority, but his influence was reinforced by connections with the British elite and with the big businessmen of the empire.

The thirties were marked by Britain’s anti-Jewish policies, which restricted Jewish immigrants to Palestine to a minimum. Hundreds of thousands, or even more, could then find refuge in the land of Israel and avoid extermination in the gas chambers, if it were not for the White Book issued by the British. Contrary to the Balfour Declaration of 1917 and the 1922 League of Nations decision, the British decided to prevent the creation of an independent Jewish state. Imperial interests persuaded them to side with the Arabs, who declared war on the Jewish movement to return their ancestors to their homeland.

In the mid-1930s, the “white Zionists” created two paramilitary groups to resist the Arab pogroms and drive out the British occupiers. The ideologist of ETZEL Vladimir Zhabotinsky was declared a criminal by the British and until his death in 1940 could not enter Palestine, to the delight of his socialist opponents. From the depths of Etzel emerged the fighting movement of Lekhi, in the ranks of which the “whites” represented by Israel Eldad and his group coexisted with the “reds” represented by Nathan Elin-Mor and the future Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir. In the early years, the legendary Abraham Stern was at the head of LYOKHI – religious and white at the same time, who wrote poetry in Russian until the end of his days. He was captured and killed by the British in 1940. His followers fought against the British occupation uncompromisingly and did not lay down their arms even during the Second World War.

The victory of the USSR over Germany strengthened the position of the “Reds” in the Zionist movement. The supplies of weapons by the countries of the communist bloc were carried out not only to the main combat detachments of the Jewish settlers (Haganah Ben-Gurion and PALMAKH), ​​but also to the militant LEKHI, who did not shy away from reprisals against the invaders by partisan methods. It so happened that Israel was created despite the efforts of the British and without support from the United States (America imposed an embargo on arms supplies to Palestine), but with the active participation of the USSR.

However, the honeymoon between the Zionists and the countries of the communist bloc did not last long. Beginning in 1948, Stalin introduced a policy of official anti-Semitism and destroyed all centers of Jewish culture. It is planned to deport all Jews to Birobidzhan immediately after the completion of the “doctors’ case”. Emigration to Israel is not allowed. A consequence of this policy of suppression of Jews in the USSR is a cooling in relations with Israel, which did not remain indifferent to the ongoing terror in the USSR at the declarative and diplomatic level. It was then that Ben-Gurion decides not to rely on relations with the communist countries anymore, but to seek allies in the West. America has long maintained a hostile neutrality towards Israel.

The main ally from the 1950s to the 1967 Six Day War was Gaullist France, which was firmly opposed to the United States. It was France that helped Israel become one of the first nuclear powers in the world.

After Nasser’s victory in Egypt, Moscow is totally focusing on relations with the Arabs. Diplomatic relations with Israel continue, but nothing more. Nasser is awarded a gold star in Moscow. The USSR embarks on a policy of “fraternal aid” that resulted in tens of billions thrown out and culminated in the expulsion of Soviet advisers from Egypt in 1973 (pragmatic Arabs are guided only by whoever pays the most – in this the United States has no competitors).

The active involvement of the United States in Middle East affairs began after the Six Day War, when the USSR broke off diplomatic relations with Israel and increased support for Arab regimes and Palestinian terrorists. In response, Israel began to strengthen its strategic partnership with the United States, which continues to this day. An additional factor that influenced the rapprochement between Jerusalem and Washington was the campaign for the freedom of Soviet Jews to leave for Israel. The Kremlin responded to the awakening of the traditionalist and national spirit among Soviet Jews with persecution, which made them hostages of the United States and the policy of detente between the two superpowers in the early 70s.

All attempts by Israel to restore dialogue and diplomatic relations with Moscow ended in failure. The confrontation between the USSR and the United States has become the dominant factor in the Middle East plexus of contradictions. Israel has become the most reliable partner of the United States, ahead of all other Washington partners in terms of the “pro-American” vote in the UN. Following this course, Israel laid an ideological time bomb under its Zionist foundations, but not of its own free will – the logic of geopolitics and the ill-conceived strategy of the USSR in the Middle East pushed it to this.

But since the late 1980s, tension between Moscow and Jerusalem has developed into mutually supportive relations. However, Israel remains in the US sphere of influence, and Russia does not even claim a serious role in the Middle East. Thus, relations between Israel and Russia continue to be dual in nature.

Understanding and sympathy for Israel has sharply increased against the background of the events in Chechnya, but the cooling of relations between Russia and the United States may lead to a worsening of the climate between Moscow and Jerusalem. The similarity of interests in many areas does not change the dominant factor of Israel’s strategic alliance with America, which is in many ways detrimental to the Jewish state in its struggle for survival.

In Russia they know and appreciate the fact that the Israelis were the first to provide effective assistance to Vojislav Karadzic in Yugoslavia, ahead of even the Russians. Serbian television continued to broadcast during the most stringent sanctions period via Israel’s Amos satellite. Natural Jewish solidarity with the Serbs is evident at all stages of the conflict in the Balkans. Even several volunteers from Israel, immigrants from the USSR, fought on the side of the Serbs.

It is also important to note the fact that even official Jerusalem refused to condemn Russia for military actions against Chechen bandits, contrary to the position of the United States and all other Western countries. (In this regard, the disappointment of many Israelis with the pro-Palestinian position of the Russian Foreign Ministry is understandable.)

It should be noted that for more than ten years the Jews in Russia have enjoyed full rights and the trace of state anti-Semitism is gone. Interestingly, recent events in the Middle East, which have awakened an unprecedented wave of anti-Semism in the West – the most powerful since the Second World War, have not led to a single anti-Jewish uprising in Russia. The similarities between Basayev’s and Khattab’s militants and the rebellious Palestinian apostles of the sword of Mohammed are all too obvious.

An attempt to predict the future of relations between Russia and Israel largely depends on the understanding of the American factor. More than twenty percent of Israel’s five million Jews were born in the USSR, and many of them have the warmest feelings for Russia. Americanization of Israel abhorrent to them in essence. The number of immigrants from the United States in Israel does not even reach the hundred thousandth level. Moreover, most of the arrivals are religious traditionalists seeking refuge in the Holy Land from the spiritual enslavement of “Erev Ravu – Great confusion”.

The well-known New York-born Rabbi Meir Kahane focused on completely ending Israel’s dependence on the United States and rejecting American culture, in which he saw the main enemy destroying the nation from within.

American penetration into Israel was carried out gradually. To understand the Israeli mentality in the past, it is worth considering the significance of the refusal to issue entry visas to the Beatles in 1964. The country was dominated by the passionate spirit of the Red and White Zionists. Half of the population was made up of traditionalists from Arab countries. American culture and the American way of life were completely alien to Israel until the early seventies.

The strategic partnership with the United States was not limited to military and political cooperation. American culture began to be brought into the land of Zionism and traditionalism. Instead of Russian and French, English with an American accent became the second language. Americans are good at turning their economic aid into a method of spiritual enslavement. Gradually, the Israelis began to think in American terms. It can be said that almost the entire ruling elite of the country, together with the press, the judiciary and the university elite, have turned into American liberals. Hence the strange policy of concessions to the Arabs, which has been going on for many years. The main argument of the Israeli land sellers was and remains the threat of a break with America in case of intransigence.

For the last ten years, Israeli liberals have been preaching the idea of ​​”post-Zionism” – an adapted version of the new world order and the “end of ideology” – made in the USA. Liberals bury the devotion of the first settlers along with the past. Defeatism is being introduced under the slogan “there is no military solution to the conflict.” Israel’s military successes, which amazed the whole world, are declared to be the lot of the past, and the world in its American interpretation is a window to the future. This has already led to a weakening of Israel from within, which can be compared with the entropy of Russian society in the 90s. Americanization versus Zionism. This is the essence of the struggle for the future of the Jewish state.

However, the process of subordinating the national will to American interests has recently met with an ever more decisive rebuff. Jewish residents of Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip, facing forcible deportation if the “peace process” under the auspices of Washington continues, are increasingly voicing their rights. This peculiar Jewish Cossacks consists mainly of traditionalists who despise the American way of life and thought. For them, the “new world order” is not just a streamlined slogan, but a direct threat to the continuation of life in their homes and villages. Today they are supported by most of the people.

Over the past ten years, a yawning chasm has formed in Israel between the liberal American elite and the people themselves. All candidates from major parties promise their fellow citizens before the elections a tough and independent policy in the spirit of traditional Zionism. Likud nominee Netanyahu promised to refuse handouts from Washington. But a couple of months pass after the election, and a boa constrictor in the form of the need to continue the “process” forces to follow the lead of the United States. In fact, Israel’s leaders fear American economic sanctions and mistakenly believe that the people would rather tolerate humiliation and abandonment of the Zionist ideals of settling the country than agree to lower their standard of living. Eternal choice – spirit or matter, national identity or humanitarian aid.

We can safely talk about the abyss and misunderstanding between the authorities and the people, relying on the facts of recent years. Yitzhak Rabin’s revolutionary steps towards the Americanization of the region through concessions to Arafat’s gangs led to a deadly assassination attempt on Rabin and the defeat of his colleague Shimon Peres in the 1996 elections. The Likud leader Netanyahu, who continued the line of his predecessors, was forced to go to early elections after an agreement in Wye Plantation on further concessions. The right-wing factions deprived him of the majority in the Knesset and once again proved the “impassability” of the policy of concessions to globalism. A similar fate has already befell Ehud Barak, who defeated Netanyahu. He is likely to face defeat in the upcoming elections.

These dramatic collisions prove the fragility of the positions of supporters of Washington’s line in Israel. The unwillingness to endure the ongoing process of the country’s disintegration has not yet reached a revolutionary point, but the conflict between the people and the top is evident. This is due in no small part to the structure of Israeli society. More than a million immigrants from the USSR are in their majority opposed to the peace process under the auspices of Washington. Half of the country’s Jewish population is made up of immigrants from Eastern countries, predominantly traditionalist-minded. A quarter of the Jewish population are strict traditionalists who oppose mondialism at a very internal level.

They are opposed by a minority of secular liberal-minded Israelis. But it is precisely this minority that constitutes the ruling elite. Thus, government policy is being adjusted by the elite, which does not reflect the wishes of the overwhelming majority. An electoral victory for the right never meant a fundamental change in politics. The Washington-controlled press and bureaucratic elite have always pushed political leaders in the right direction.

Change in Israel is approaching. Popular fatigue from the daily Palestinian terror will inevitably spill out – against the entire ruling elite, if they do not realize the need to change course. The rise to power of the anti-Israel Bush administration will inevitably spur and accelerate the process of distance from America. Already today, some experts are talking about the possibility of a strategic rapprochement between Israel and Russia.

On December 21, 2000, in Moscow, Russian President Vladimir Putin took part in the celebration of the Jewish holiday of liberation from the dominion of the Roman Empire (which is also the embodiment of modern mondialism in Judaism) during the existence of the Second Temple. The President himself lit the menorah in the Jewish center and in his speech noted the closeness of the Hanukkah ideas to the Russians. Putin was well aware of the significance of his action. The non-coincidental choice of Hanukkah to visit the Jewish community looked like a wish to those present to win again in the struggle against the destructive tendencies of modern mondialism.

The topic of the prospects for relations between Russia and Israel in the light of Bush Jr.’s coming to power in the United States was discussed at a meeting between the leading Israeli opposition politician Benjamin Netanyahu and the Russian President immediately after the festive evening in the Jewish center. Interesting was Putin’s reaction to Netanyahu’s speech, in which the former prime minister assessed the Islamist terror and drew a parallel between Chechen militants and Palestinian bandits. The President of Russia said in response that he would like to add a lot to the words of the guest, but the position does not allow. By this he said more than he could express in direct speech.

The growing signs of climate change between Moscow and Jerusalem and the beginning of a real dialogue between Russian sovereigns and passionary Zionists have not yet brought about changes in the geopolitical orientations of both countries. The Israeli government continues the policy of a “new Middle East” in the framework of the American concept of a “New World Order”. Submission to the will of Washington and the abandonment of Zionism in favor of globalism run like a red thread through all of Israel’s recent decisions. Of course, while the top of the Jewish state is looking for salvation in the help of the country of “Erev Rav – Great Confusion”, it is difficult to imagine a quick rapprochement with Putin’s increasingly consciously Eurasian Russia.

But there is another aspect of the problem that will be decisive. Russia has not yet made a strong-willed decision to regain its superpower status. There is reason to believe that President Putin intends to embark on this difficult path of gaining world greatness, and this will result in a different foreign policy doctrine. Then the time will come to reconsider the role of Russia in the Middle East. This hour is approaching.

The day is also approaching when the discrepancy between the anti-Zionist and pro-American policies of the Israeli elite and the aspirations of the people will develop into an open conflict between the government as a whole and the people. In Israel, this is unlikely to turn into bloody riots, but the “velvet coup” is not far off there. The leaders will not be able to continue for long the line of transferring the management of the country to the “international community” and international capital. In the forefront will be immigrants from the USSR, who will not lose much, from a purely economic point of view, in the event of US sanctions against Israel. This is where the moment will come, which can be used to establish strong ties between the emerging power of Russia and the highly developed Israel – a nuclear power, which is now one of the five strongest.

A superficial look at what is happening will not stop at the many signs of the possibility of such a development of events, but the logic of Russia’s ascent to greatness will dictate the acquisition of traditionalist allies as opposed to mondialism. The strengthening of Zionist and religious foundations in Israel could change the attitude towards the Jewish state of many skeptics and enemies, like India and Iran, for example. Israel’s military potential is attractive to any major geopolitical alliance. All of these factors can allow the Jewish state to quickly find new friends after its break with Washington.

You can describe in detail, in the most rosy colors, the onset of a new era for Israel and world Jewry in its majority. However, all this is premature. There should be a signal from Russia that the rules of the game are changing. Natives of the USSR in Israel and other countries should feel that Russia will be placing bets on them in the near future. This should have concrete expressions already now, such as, for example, the initiative of the Russian Foreign Ministry on a duty-free procedure for the return of Russian citizenship to everyone who left the USSR and expresses readiness from now on to be loyal citizens of the Russian state. It is difficult to overestimate the significance of such a step.

While the top officials confer and hesitate, the ideologists and developers of the neo-Eurasian project (for example, A.G. Dugin) could immediately begin building a conceptual geopolitical scheme for Israel’s participation in the strategy of changing the world balance in favor of Land and creating a new atmosphere that rejects the commitment dead-end liberal mondialist attachments of the past (both in Russia and in Israel).

All fateful achievements in history began with the initiative of the intellectual elites – and only then it becomes the property of the masses and peoples.

It seems that events are developing so quickly that we run the risk of being unprepared in the face of essentially new schemes of the world order. Therefore, it is necessary to start working immediately in the field of re-evaluating the Russian-Jewish symbiosis. This will include a fundamental change in the status of Jewish oligarchs within Russia. The new configuration will allow them to solidify with Israel, thus indirectly protecting Russian interests. In this case, an orientation toward the United States, as was the case with Gusinsky, will not only meet with resistance from Russian power structures, but will automatically be viewed by Israel as undermining its own interests. Russian-speaking Jews around the world, locked in an alliance between Russia and Israel, will become an ideal conductor of friendship between our two countries and peoples.

This will completely resolve what remains of the Jewish question in Russia, and this factor is seen as important in view of the noticeable participation of Russian Jews in media affairs, in culture and in political structures. The envisaged changes will leave no room for them to remain committed to Atlanticist values ​​when Russia and Israel jointly find themselves in the world vanguard of the traditionalist and patriotic idea.

The influential Jewish community in the United States will also face difficult choices. Among these people, undoubtedly, there will be many adherents of American mondialism, contrary to their own national interests. But even here we can confidently talk about the most important intellectual and financial potential for promoting the Eurasian project. Recall that back in the 40s, the greatest achievements of the USSR in lobbying and even in intelligence in the United States were associated with Jews. Today, Zionist and religious Jewish circles in America are increasingly uncomfortable with the position of the Washington administration on resolving the conflict in the Middle East. A cry from Israel will be effective for many of them.

So, having listed the main vectors of the development of Russian-Jewish relations in the light of rapid changes, we will look forward to the identification of a new trend on a global scale, when the universal idea of ​​the Great Russians will find an ally in the person of the ascetics of the centuries-old idea of ​​saving Israel and through Israel. One can envy those who will give this a real impetus. Their names will be inscribed in the history of mankind in golden letters.