The Trump Peace Plan: Promise, Pause, or Illusion

by Marc Weisman October 14, 2025, 10:04 PM

The Mirage of Acceptance

On Oct. 7, 2023, the world witnessed evil in its purest form. Hamas terrorists stormed into Israel from Gaza, murdering more than 1,200 people — men, women, children, and the elderly — in acts of barbarity. Families were burned alive, women raped, and children mutilated before being executed. Hundreds were dragged into captivity. It was the deadliest day for Jews since the Holocaust. (RELATED: Two Years Later, ‘Much of the World No Longer Remembers Oct. 7’)

Hamas’s acceptance is not an embrace of peace; it’s a maneuver for survival.

Nearly two years later, a fragile calm is emerging. Hamas has, in its habitual fashion, accepted Phase I of the Trump Peace Plan — not from conviction but from calculation. A flat rejection would invite annihilation, so it has done what it always does: stall, obfuscate, and concede just enough to survive. This limited “acceptance” is likely a tactical pause meant to appease Washington and buy time, not a step toward reconciliation. (RELATED: Oct. 7: A Dark Anniversary)

Hamas’s acceptance is not an embrace of peace; it’s a maneuver for survival. The group has not agreed to disarm, end its holy war, or recognize Israel as a Jewish state. Its leaders speak not of reconciliation but of “strategic patience,” a euphemism for regrouping. The only logical conclusion from this is that they have not changed their stripes.

Global Relief v. Global Delusion

The Trump Plan’s 20 points are clear, even if logistics are still unfolding. The world, weary of war and desperate for stability, now risks confusing a ceasefire with surrender and the paperwork of peace with actual peace. Nations just weeks ago paralyzed by moral equivocation — Britain, France, Spain, Canada, Australia, and others — now rally behind the plan’s humanitarian first phase, which promises the return of hostages and international oversight in Gaza.

But Phase I was the easy part — symbolic, humanitarian, photogenic. The real test lies ahead. Phases II and III require Hamas to permanently disarm, dismantle its military wing, and forfeit any role in Gaza’s governance. Arab partners must rebuild Gaza while ensuring that the same terrorists who destroyed it cannot bleed back into power under new names or flags. (RELATED: So Let’s Say Israel Agrees to Full Withdrawal and All Hamas’s Demands)

If the international community mistakes this pause for progress — or allows Hamas to spin its survival as “resistance rewarded” — the entire framework will collapse.

The Narrative War

Hamas’s most potent weapon has never been its rockets — it is its narrative: a toxic blend of victimhood, martyrdom, and moral inversion.

Hamas’s most potent weapon has never been its rockets — it is its narrative: a toxic blend of victimhood, martyrdom, and moral inversion. For decades, Hamas has convinced millions, especially within Western academia and media, that its genocidal campaign is “resistance.” Now, in the aftermath of military defeat, it seeks to weaponize that same narrative to claim that Israel was “forced to negotiate” and that “resistance brought results.” (RELATED: Post-Identity Antisemitism: The New Obsession With Israel)

If this lie takes root, it will embolden radicals from Europe to the United States, convincing them that violence works. Jihadists in the West will be newly inspired, and every antisemitic attack in Paris, London, Toronto, Sydney, or New York — every chant on a Western campus, every Israeli and American flag burned at home and abroad will trace its moral lineage to this illusion of Hamas’s “victory.” It is therefore imperative that the end result of the Trump Peace Plan must include an indisputable decimation of Hamas in the Middle East.

The Gaza Trap

Under the Trump Plan, an Arab-led coalition — Egypt, Jordan, the UAE, and Saudi Arabia — will oversee Gaza’s security and reconstruction. In theory, it is sound. In practice, it could be perilous.

If Hamas or Islamic Jihad fighters provoke violence from Gaza’s ruins, Israel’s ability to respond will be constrained. Any Israeli strike that injures Arab peacekeepers could spark a diplomatic crisis — or worse. To prevent that, the U.S. and its allies must ensure that any Arab presence operates under ironclad terms: full coordination with Israel, zero tolerance for Hamas infiltration, and authority to dismantle terror networks without political interference. Anything less would turn Gaza into a powder keg wrapped in a peace ribbon.

The Hard Part — and the Only Path Forward

The Trump Peace Plan is built on realism: peace through strength, coexistence through accountability. Israel’s acceptance was strategic, not naïve. It understands that only Hamas’s defeat could create the foundation for genuine reconstruction.

Phase I — hostage return and humanitarian relief — is a moral success, but the world must not mistake compassion for closure. The next stages — demilitarization, deradicalization, and reconstruction — will determine whether this is truly peace or merely a pause.

The Palestinian people deserve dignity and self-rule, but that cannot coexist with an ideology rooted in Jew-hatred and jihad. The Arab states stepping into Gaza now bear a historic responsibility: to ensure that Hamas never rules, recruits, or re-arms again.

The United States and Israel must guarantee that outcome — not through speeches or sanctions, but through unwavering enforcement. Phase I ended the fighting; only Hamas’s unconditional surrender — whatever euphemism it chooses — can end the war.

READ MORE from Marc Weisman:

drmarcw 2025-11-23T17:11:41+00:00 November 23rd, 2025|

Dr. Marc Weisman is a physician and writer.

New York’s warning to America

(Nov. 21, 2025 / JNS)

It is no political accident that New York City elected a mayor who openly embraces anti-Western and antisemitic positions. It is the predictable result of a long cultural drift in which mainstream liberals ceded their universities, newsrooms, schools and corporate bureaucracies to activists who disdain the very civilization that made their prosperity possible. A society that forgets its blessings becomes easy prey for those determined to dismantle them.

New York City once welcomed dreamers from around the world, blending cultures through genuine inclusion without sacrificing the American experiment. That mosaic helped make America great—distinct pieces keeping their heritage yet fitting into a unified whole. But as love for that whole—America itself—has faded under the modern left’s identity-politics framework, the mosaic has begun to break apart; its pieces no longer blend, growing more insular and distant rather than uniting in a common purpose.

In recent years, the city’s social fabric has unraveled. Police have been sidelined, campuses have erupted in pro-Hamas demonstrations, and political leaders routinely signal that enforcing the law is optional.

The shift is unmistakable: Columbia University’s encampments left Jewish students afraid to walk their own campus; a CUNY Law School commencement speaker used her platform to denounce the New York City Police Department and praise anti-Israel activism; and the Manhattan district attorney declined to prosecute major crime categories while aggressively pursuing an unprecedented case against Donald Trump, which was widely criticized as politically driven. These moments are not isolated; they define the city’s new public ethos.

As those foundations erode, Manhattan has embraced the oldest political illusion in the book: that socialism can give everyone everything.

In any city, a mayor-elect’s openly antisemitic rhetoric would be alarming, but in New York—home to the largest Jewish community outside Israel—it should have been politically disqualifying.

This transformation did not begin in New York; it simply surfaced there first. Over decades, universities, public schools, major media outlets and corporate bureaucracies drifted away from the foundational principles that once unified the country. As researchers at Heterodox Academy have shown, campuses became ideological monocultures that punished dissent. Critical Race Theory replaced traditional civics, casting the West not as a defender of liberty but as an engine of oppression.

These ideas migrated from the campus into mainstream institutions, where activism replaced inquiry and merit was recast as privilege. What began as campus theatrics and media slogans became the Trojan code that rewrote these institutions from within. The result is a generation fluent in America’s flaws yet unfamiliar with the principles that safeguard their freedom: individual rights, free speech, due process and constitutional norms.

A 2024 Harvard CAPS/Harris Poll illustrates the consequence: 51% of Americans aged 18 to 24 viewed the Hamas-led terrorist attacks in southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, as “justified.” This is the predictable outcome of a cultural apparatus that teaches what to condemn but never what to cherish.

As these internal fractures widened, foreign adversaries—from Islamist propagandists to Chinese and Russian influence networks—flooded American social media with disinformation engineered to deepen every divide. America created the cracks; its enemies merely widened them.

As intersectionality rose, Kimberlé Crenshaw’s theory that identity labels such as race, ethnicity, gender identity and sexuality each add another layer of oppression became the left’s new moral compass. Virtue was assigned to the “oppressed,” guilt to the West cast as the ultimate oppressor, and equality gave way to “equity,” a doctrine demanding unequal treatment to impose equal outcomes.

Through this lens, ideologies openly hostile to the West—from radical environmental extremism to Islamism—were recast as authentic resistance. Even Europe’s near-civil conflict, born of clashing cultures, is dismissed by American liberals who insist the West is the true villain, even when the alternative is violent, intolerant, misogynistic, antisemitic Islamists. In this inversion, persecutors become victims, and haters become heroes.

Back in America, radicals did not storm liberal strongholds. Liberals opened the gates.

Universities became echo chambers because scholars stopped defending inquiry.
Prosecutors reframed crime as a product of society because liberals insisted offenders were too mistreated to be blamed. Journalists abandoned impartiality because audiences rewarded activism. And Democratic leaders shrank from confronting extremists—fearing social-media mobs, primary challengers and ostracism from the very forces and voting blocs they had empowered.

Believing that they could manage the storm, liberals tolerated its growth. But the radicalism they indulged soon consumed the institutions they abandoned.

A culture that trains its young to resent the values that safeguard their freedom eventually pays a price. The rule of law, merit, free expression and even the presumption of innocence have been recast as instruments of oppression, particularly when applied to anyone right-of-center. Once those foundations erode, the society built upon them falters. In this environment, the new mayor’s blend of socialism, Islamism and antisemitism became not a disqualifier but a badge of ideological purity within a worldview that casts Israel as a colonial offender despite millennia of Jewish presence in the land, and the West as an oppressor.

The question is not only how New York elected this mayor, but whether America can rebuild the common ground it has allowed to erode. Conservatives cannot repair what liberals permitted to decay; they do not control the universities, the media, the schools or the cultural machinery shaping the next generation. They did not construct the ideological framework governing the left and cannot dismantle it.

Only liberals can reclaim their movement from the radicals they enabled. And only liberals and conservatives working together can rebuild a shared cultural center strong enough to withstand ideological extremism. Whether Americans choose to reassert those principles will determine if this moment becomes a turning point or a point of no return.

For the sake of Gen Z and those who follow, restoring that shared center is essential.

Like ancient Troy, America’s gates were not breached; they were opened from within.

It is through that open gate that the mayor’s rise must be understood. His victory is a warning not only for New York but for the entire country. Foreign adversaries may exploit our divisions, but the deeper danger is internal: the nation’s universities, media and cultural elites abandoned their identity and mission, creating the very vulnerabilities our enemies now weaponize. A nation that teaches its heirs to resent their inheritance will eventually watch them give it away.

The responsibility to repair this lies with liberals and Democrats willing to confront the extremism they once indulged. Should moderate liberals regain their footing, they will find natural allies in conservatives who still believe in the West’s core principles—giving America one final chance to right the ship.

drmarcw 2025-11-23T17:02:18+00:00 November 23rd, 2025|

Israel: The canary in the West’s coal mine

Keeping up with the destruction of America

August 28, 2025

As Hamas nears defeat, the world seems determined to stop Israel — yet the stakes go far beyond Gaza. The West is ignoring the warning signs: Israel’s survival is a test for the survival of Western civilization.

Even President Donald Trump — by far Israel’s strongest ally since October 7, more than any other leader in the world — now finds that as Hamas nears defeat, the global drumbeat for a ceasefire, which is nothing less than a demand for Israel’s surrender, has become deafening. What was once framed as “humanitarian concern” has morphed into political pressure aimed not at Hamas, the aggressor, but at Israel, the victim. The closer Israel comes to eliminating a genocidal terror organization, the louder the world insists that it must stop. This is not a call for peace; it is a call for capitulation.

History underscores the danger. In every war since Israel’s founding, international pressure has forced Israel to halt before destroying the Islamist threat. This threat has only grown, metastasizing beyond the Middle East and into the West.

Yet let us assume, against the weight of history, that Israel is allowed total victory over Hamas. What then?

The West clings to the illusion that peace will follow Hamas’s destruction, as if Palestinian society secretly longs for coexistence. This is dangerously naïve. Hamas is not a fringe movement; it reflects a culture steeped in Jew-hatred — taught in schools; preached in mosques; and broadcast daily across Gaza, Judea, and Samaria. Polls show that over 85% of West Bank Palestinians prefer Hamas to the Palestinian Authority. And the P.A. is no moderate alternative: It preaches the same antisemitism, only in a suit rather than fatigues, seeking Israel’s destruction in stages rather than all at once.

Every ceasefire, withdrawal, and “confidence-building measure” has failed. You cannot build peace on hatred. You cannot entrust governance to a population that glorifies murder.

So let us examine the four most likely options for the ‘day after.’

Ceasefire = Surrender in Disguise

A premature truce before Hamas’s destruction would hand Iran and Hezb’allah a propaganda victory, proving yet again that terrorism outlasts Israeli resolve and that the West will bail jihadists at the brink of defeat.

Palestinian Authority Control = Poison Renewed

Handing Gaza to the P.A. is no solution. For decades, the P.A. has indoctrinated children with Jew-hatred and funded murder through its “pay for slay” program. Gaza under the P.A. would be Gaza poisoned anew.

Forced Emigration & Annexation = Decisive but Explosive

International law permits relocating a hostile population posing an existential threat. Annexation with resettlement would eliminate the terror base permanently — but at the cost of massive international backlash and diplomatic isolation.

Voluntary Emigration & Arab-Led Reconstruction = The Least Bad Option

Roughly 44% of Gazans say they would leave if given the chance. With U.S. and Gulf support, Arab states aligned through the Abraham Accords could oversee the reconstruction of a demilitarized Gaza, under strict Israeli oversight banning jihadist propaganda. Over time, if stability holds, new leadership untainted by Hamas or Iran could emerge.

Israel stands at a crossroads, where global pressure threatens to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory…again.

Few in the West grasp this truth: Their future depends on Israel’s victory. Israel is not fighting only for itself; it is the canary in the coal mine, and the mine is the West. Decades of reckless immigration have seeded Europe with millions who carry Islamist sympathies. The consequences are visible in Marseille, Brussels, and Berlin, where gangs challenge authority and Western order itself. Integration has largely failed; too many do not wish to join their host culture, but to replace it with illiberal traditions. Only a decisive Israeli triumph over Hamas and its allies can show that militant ideologies are not inevitable — that they can be crushed before spreading farther west.

Many Western leaders appear willing to exchange Israel’s security for the illusion of peace. Israel, however, must chart its own course — resolute and uncompromising — if it is to avoid yet another catastrophic concession. Anything short of decisive victory will amount to only a pause before renewed conflict, while also mirroring the broader cultural erosion already visible in cities across Europe and on the streets and campuses of America.

In this struggle, Israel stands as the first line of defense against that decline. For that reason, it must be allowed not only to fight this war, but to bring it to a clear and enduring

drmarcw 2025-08-29T22:12:41+00:00 August 29th, 2025|

Israel’s Moment of Decision on Hamas

The fundamental dilemma persists: How can Israel finish the war without Hamas executing the remaining hostages?

by Marc Weisman

THE AMERICAN SPECTATOR

Published March 23, 2025, 7:45 PM

Surprise Attack and Israel’s Dilemma

On October 7, 2023, Hamas launched a brutal surprise attack on Israel, killing over 1,200 through rape, torture, kidnappings, and child executions shocking the world with its barbarity. This assault immediately presented Israel with an impossible moral dilemma of having to choose between eradicating Hamas to secure its future or negotiating for the return of hostages, thereby allowing Hamas to survive. Israel must decimate Hamas and cleanse Gaza for whatever post-war structure emerges, or prioritize hostage recovery at the cost of national security.

Victory will not only deliver peace and security to Israel but also deal a crushing blow to Islamism — benefiting the entire world.

Hostages as Currency

Hamas has strategically leveraged hostage-taking, fully aware of Israel’s deep commitment to individual lives — even at a national cost. The 2011 Gilad Shalit exchange, which freed over a thousand Palestinian prisoners for a single Israeli soldier, was initially hailed as a great success. However, it set a dangerous precedent, emboldening Hamas to repeat the strategy. In a tragic irony, one of those freed in 2011 was Yahya Sinwar — the Hamas leader who orchestrated the October 7 massacre.

Purgatory, Israel Style

Seventeen months into this war, Israel stands at a crossroads. After significant battlefield successes against Hamas and the broader Iranian axis, Israel now possesses the military capability, moral justification, and unparalleled American support needed to decisively eliminate Hamas, significantly weaken Iran — likely with American assistance — and reshape the Middle East.

Yet, the fundamental dilemma persists: How can Israel finish the war without Hamas executing the remaining hostages? Initially, on October 8, 2023, most Israelis agreed that coexisting with an entity sworn to their destruction was no longer an option. However, by July 2024, public sentiment had shifted. A Research poll revealed that 72 percent of Israelis prioritized a hostage deal over eliminating Hamas. Ceasefires aimed at rescuing hostages have repeatedly allowed Hamas to regroup, rearm, and amplify anti-Israel propaganda — especially on American college campuses.

Israel Is Hard on Itself. The World Is Harder

Adding to Israel’s internal struggle over war priorities are external pressures, including a deeply entrenched anti-Israel legacy media bias. Less than 24 hours after the October 7 attacks, mainstream outlets began their usual moral equivalence — or outright blame — against Israel.

For example, the BBC faced accusations of violating editorial guidelines 1,553 times in its coverage of the war, associating Israel with genocide 14 times more than Hamas. CBS went as far as to instruct journalists not to refer to Jerusalem as an Israeli city, effectively erasing Israel’s capital from the map.

The Biden Administration’s Undermining of Israel

After a brief show of solidarity, the Biden administration began hampering Israel’s war effort — delaying critical arms shipments and publicly condemning civilian casualties, despite Israel’s restraint against Hamas’s human-shield tactics.

During an October 2024 campaign event at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, an activist accused Israel of genocide. Instead of outright rejecting the claim, Vice President Kamala Harris responded, “Listen, what he’s talking about, it’s real.” Though her campaign later tried to walk it back, the damage was done. When the American president and vice president accuse Israel of war crimes in an existential war it did not start, it emboldens global antisemitism and weakens Israel’s position.

The United Nations’ Systemic Bias

The UN’s anti-Israel bias is well-documented and spans decades. In 2024 alone, the General Assembly adopted 17 resolutions against Israel — compared to just six for the rest of the world combined. Even after Hamas’s October 7 atrocities, the UN refused to pass a resolution explicitly condemning the terrorist attacks.

The UN Human Rights Council, since its establishment in 2006, has adopted over 100 resolutions condemning Israel — more than those against Iran, Syria, and North Korea combined. Meanwhile, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) has been complicit in Hamas’s operations, with its facilities being used to store weapons and launch attacks against Israel. The UN’s enabling of Hamas is undeniable.

The Antidote: Donald Trump and This Republican Congress

The shameful Biden-Harris era — marked by moral equivalence and thinly veiled anti-Israel bias, fueled by the far-left influence of “The Squad” — is over. President Trump and his administration have consistently upheld Israel’s right to self-defense. His robust military support has already delivered $8 billion in weapons to Israel, providing the Jewish state with the means to decisively defeat its enemies.

Trump offers Israel a rare and crucial opportunity: the political cover to win this war, unimpeded by leftist anti-Israel forces, the legacy media, the UN, and the International Criminal Court. For the first time, Israel has the chance to fight for its survival without global interference.

Israel is closer than ever to achieving lasting peace — if it can reconcile the profound dilemma of prioritizing hostages or defeating its enemies. The two objectives may not be mutually exclusive; winning the war could provide the hostages their best chance for survival.

The 2011 hostage deal led directly to the October 7 massacre. The lesson should be clear: Israel must resume the war, withhold Gaza aid, and fight with the same resolve the U.S. demonstrated against ISIS in 2017.

Victory will not only deliver peace and security to Israel but also deal a crushing blow to Islamism — benefiting the entire world.

Marc Weisman

Dr. Weisman is a quadruple board-certified physician and author. He has authored books in his Geriatric Medicine specialty, and politics including radical Islam. He has written scores of articles for popular online websites and magazines. Dr. Weisman completed a medical terrorism training course with the Israeli Defense Forces. He practices and resides in Michigan.

Israel’s Moment of Decision on Hamas

drmarcw 2025-09-04T00:35:20+00:00 March 23rd, 2025|

EU and Ukraine: Stop Blaming Trump, Look in the Mirror

March 8, 2025

EU and Ukraine: Stop Blaming Trump, Look in the Mirror

By Marc Weisman

It is deeply ironic for European leaders to criticize Donald Trump for allegedly undermining President Volodymyr Zelensky as he seeks to create space for negotiations — especially given their own failure to prevent Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in the first place. Ukraine’s pursuit of NATO membership, despite Russia’s explicit warnings, combined with the inability of President Joe Biden and European leaders to deter Vladimir Putin’s aggression, directly contributed to the war. By ignoring Putin’s repeated signals that NATO expansion posed a “threat” to Russia’s security, Ukraine took a gamble — one that ultimately failed, as the West proved too weak to deter him. Instead of condemning Trump for recognizing this reality and pushing for a negotiated peace, his efforts should be welcomed.

Trump’s Position: Acknowledging Reality

Despite claims to the contrary, President Trump has openly recognized Russia as the aggressor in the ongoing conflict with Ukraine. In a recent interview, he stated, “Russia attacked,” clearly acknowledging Moscow’s role in initiating hostilities. Unlike European leaders and many on the left in America, Trump also understands the sobering reality that achieving peace requires bringing both sides to the negotiating table — almost certainly involving Ukraine ceding some eastern territories. Although no one wants Putin to benefit from launching a brutal invasion against his neighbor and former Soviet satellite, the blame rests squarely on the Biden administration and the European Union’s failure to prevent the war during the eight months of Russian military buildup on Ukraine’s border. European leaders, so quick to criticize Trump for supposedly cozying up to Putin, should have considered the consequences of their collective weakness when they failed to act before the full-scale invasion began.

Expensive Stalemate

Despite the E.U. spending approximately $130 billion and the U.S. around $200 billion in military and financial aid, the war remains largely stagnant. As of February 2025, Russia controls roughly 20% of Ukraine’s territory, primarily in the south and east. Over the past month, Russian forces have gained an additional 130 square miles (about 336 square kilometers), advancing into areas like Pokrovsk. but at a staggering cost — over 420,000 Russian casualties in 2024 alone.

There is little reason to believe that in one year, or even three, Ukraine will reclaim its lost land through military action. So what is the rationale for indefinitely funding this war? The toll on human lives has been catastrophic, and the risk of escalation into a wider conflict — potentially between nuclear powers — only adds urgency to the need for diplomacy. This is the core premise of Trump’s position: pushing for negotiations now rather than prolonging a war that continues to drain resources and lives with no clear path to victory.

Pre-War Deterrence: A Missed Opportunity

Prior to the invasion, several deterrence strategies existed but were rejected by the West:

Provision of Military Equipment — Supplying Ukraine with advanced military assets, such as MiG fighter jets from Finland and Poland — aircraft that Ukrainian pilots were already trained to fly — could have enhanced its defensive capabilities and signaled a stronger commitment from Western allies.
Economic Sanctions — Implementing comprehensive pre-emptive sanctions targeting key sectors of the Russian economy, particularly energy exports, might have exerted enough economic pressure to deter an invasion. However, Western nations delayed decisive action, weakening the sanctions’ potential impact.
International Diplomatic Isolation — A unified, global diplomatic effort to isolate Russia could have increased the political and economic costs of an invasion, potentially influencing Putin’s calculations. Instead, Western leaders engaged in half-measures, emboldening Russian aggression. Biden even went so far as to state that small Russian incursion into Ukraine may not require a U.S. response.
The E.U. Failed to Boycott Russian Energy — Reports indicate that the European Union has spent more on Russian oil and gas than on financial aid to Ukraine. According to the Center for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA), in the third year of the war, the E.U. paid approximately $23 billion for Russian fossil fuels, surpassing the $20 billion allocated for Ukraine’s financial support in 2024.

Big Talk, Little Action

European leaders now express strong rhetorical support for Ukraine, but their past inaction contributed to the crisis. Their continued failure to offer a realistic path toward peace beyond funding the war only prolongs the suffering.

French president Emmanuel Macron has insisted that Europe was “right to help Ukraine and sanction Russia three years ago and must continue doing so.” Yet these weak sanctions did little to stop the war or weaken Russia’s resolve.
Italian prime minister Giorgia Meloni has warned of a “divided West” following Trump’s meeting with Zelensky, urging negotiations to prevent further discord among Western allies. However, this unity should have been prioritized before the war began.
British prime minister Keir Starmer has emphasized Europe’s responsibility for its own defense, proposing a U.K.-French ceasefire plan to the U.S. while pledging additional funds for Ukrainian air defense. However, without a comprehensive diplomatic strategy, such actions remain piecemeal efforts.

Conclusion: A Preventable War, a Necessary Peace

The war in Ukraine is a stark reminder of the failures of weak Western deterrence and the complexities of international diplomacy. Although alternative strategies could have prevented this conflict, the current priority must be securing a just and lasting peace — one that, realistically, will require Ukraine to cede some territory, a painful but unavoidable price that Ukraine will pay for its and the greater West’s missteps along the way.

As the saying goes, “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.” Had European leaders and the Biden administration acted decisively before the invasion, this war might never have begun. Now, as the conflict drags on with mounting casualties and economic costs, a new approach is urgently needed.

Donald Trump remains the only leader advocating for a pragmatic resolution — one that acknowledges the realities on the ground and prioritizes stopping the bloodshed over prolonging an unwinnable war. While European leaders continue their posturing, Ukraine continues to suffer. Without decisive leadership, this war will persist, draining resources, lives, and global stability. The time for serious negotiations is now.

drmarcw 2025-03-13T01:14:24+00:00 March 13th, 2025|

The Day After. Three is a Charm

JNS

The Day After. Three is a Charm

Marc Weisman

1.27.2025

Marc Weisman

Dr. Marc Weisman is a physician and writer.

Introduction: The Core Problem and Premise

The only lasting solution for peace between Israel and its Arab neighbors is to permanently remove Israel and the Jewish people from the Palestinian dilemma. If Israel remains a landlord, policeman, or caretaker for the Palestinians, remnants of Hamas, Iran’s leadership, and Islamist groups will continue to spread hatred and obstruct peace. The two-state solution is not viable because Palestinians have repeatedly shown their goal is for Palestine to replace Israel. This was evident in 2007 when they elected Hamas, a group explicitly committed to destroying Jews and Israel. The October 7th massacre further underscores this point, with polls showing overwhelming Palestinian support for the attack. This ongoing allegiance to Hamas makes Palestinians unfit to have a state of their own. A solution is urgently needed — and one has been clear, though largely overlooked, for decades: the “three-state solution.” While often dismissed, it represents a practical and achievable path to lasting peace.

Introducing the Three-State Solution

The “three-state solution” involves Jordan reassuming control over the West Bank, Egypt reclaiming Gaza, and Israel relinquishing claims to most of these territories. While significant barriers exist, closer examination reveals they can be addressed.

Three Essential Components of the Three-State Solution

Israel withdraws from Gaza and the West Bank.
Jordan and Egypt are relatively poor nations and, therefore, subject to economic incentives.
These nations cannot immediately assimilate Palestinians but should lead a coalition of willing Arab nations to administer the territories post-conflict. Palestinians’ indoctrination to hate Jews and glorify violence makes them a toxic influence, which is why no nation incorporates them. Their hostility is deeply ingrained and taught in homes, schools, mosques, and daily life. Assimilating them into other Arab nations poses risks, given the fragility of the “Arab street” and Iran’s constant efforts to destabilize Sunni nations.

The Flawed Alternatives

The One-State Solution: Replacing Israel with a Palestinian state is a nonstarter.

The Two-State Solution: Establishing a Palestinian state alongside Israel while its leadership and people remain committed to Israel’s destruction is equally unviable.

Expel the Gazans: Wherever they go, they will create a “state in exile” and perpetuate the myth that they are the indigenous people who must win back “their” land. This also doesn’t solve the West Bank problem, adding to the “state in exile” dilemma.

Historical and Geopolitical Context

A Palestinian state has never existed and is unnecessary. The concept of a distinct Palestinian identity was politically constructed by Yasser Arafat in 1967 to oppose Israel. Palestinians are Arabs from neighboring regions.

Before 1967, the West Bank and Gaza were under Jordanian and Egyptian control, respectively. The three-state solution would return these territories to their former administrators. Geography further complicates the viability of a Palestinian state, as Gaza and the West Bank are separated by 57 miles of Israeli territory.

The Role of Arab Nations

Arab states have historically refused to integrate Palestinians, partly due to their radicalization by Hamas and the Palestinian Authority, which makes them a destabilizing force. Additionally, Arab nations have used Palestinian refugees as a political tool against Israel, hoping attrition will eventually defeat the Jewish nation.

The largely successful war against Hamas, Iran, and its proxies, and the fall of President Assad in Syria presents a valuable opportunity for peace heretofore seemingly impossible. The Sunni nations, along with the proven strength of Israel, now possess the ability to push out Iran and design a new way forward. For the three-state solution to succeed, however, peaceful Arab nations must share the responsibility of the initial administration to counterbalance Iranian and Islamist influence. Ultimately, Jordan and Egypt would assume control of the territories with safeguards in place to prevent unrest in their nations.

Incentivizing Egypt and Jordan

Financial incentives for Jordan and Egypt are critical. Wealthy Gulf states, the European Union, and the United States can provide substantial economic aid in exchange for them to govern these lands. For context, Egypt’s GDP per capita is $17,000, Jordan’s is $13,000, whereas Saudi Arabia’s is $72,000. Imagine the transformative impact of substantial economic incentives for Jordan and Egypt for administering Gaza and the West Bank while respecting their need for strict separation of Gazans from their own territories during the transition period. Eventually, economic success and distance from the poison of Hamas will quell the Palestinian hatred and bloodlust allowing for more assimilation into Jordan and Egypt proper.

Rebuilding Gaza and the West Bank

The international community can support this plan by investing in infrastructure, education, and economic opportunities for Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank. Once Hamas is dismantled and Israel is removed from the Palestinian equation, progress can begin.

Israel’s Sacrifice and the Path to Peace

Under this plan, Israel faces a significant sacrifice. The West Bank, historically known as Judea and Samaria, is central to Jewish history and the heart of King David’s kingdom. Relinquishing this land is a painful decision, but it is a necessary compromise for lasting peace.

Conclusion: Seizing the Opportunity for Peace

The three-state solution offers a pragmatic path to peace. By removing the Palestinian dilemma from Israel’s responsibilities, it disempowers Iran, reduces Islamist threats, and resolves a conflict that has fueled decades of unrest. This solution provides economic opportunities for the disenfranchised Palestinians. It creates a pathway for Jordan and Egypt to assume leadership roles and benefit economically and politically from their bold action and their role in finally solving the world’s most vexing longstanding conflict. The West also stands to benefit significantly as Iran and Islamists lose their most potent recruiting tool: the Israeli—Palestinian conflict—the gift that never stops giving.

drmarcw 2025-08-30T16:47:15+00:00 January 29th, 2025|

The Trump anti-jihad ripple effect

JNS

While the progressive left often dismisses religion broadly, it has displayed an inexplicable tolerance for radical Islam.

Anti-Israel demonstrators march along the Royal Mile in Edinburgh, Scotland, on Dec. 2, 2023. Credit: Pretzelles via Wikimedia Commons.

Marc Weisman

Dr. Marc Weisman is a physician and writer.

(Jan. 7, 2025 / JNS)

There is a direct relationship between radical Islamic successes and the recruitment of jihadists, domestically and abroad. When radical Islam suffers losses in the courts, in the realm of public opinion and on the battlefields of the Middle East, their membership suffers. This is key to their defeat. Therefore, the left’s acquiescence to Islamists in the name of “tolerance” is directly proportional to Islamist gains. Herein lies the solution to this quagmire, and President-elect Donald Trump and the Republican Party seem to understand this well.

Under Trump and the GOP, the United States has adopted a decisive strategy to combat antisemitism and radical Islam. Congressional initiatives spearheaded by figures like Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) and Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), combined with Trump’s unwavering condemnation of Hamas and Iranian-backed proxies, demonstrate moral clarity and a steadfast stance against Islamism. It marks a sharp departure from the policies of the previous administration. The contrast between the Biden-Harris administration’s strategies of appeasement and Trump’s firm resistance to kinetic and cultural jihad—the gradual infiltration of radical Islamic ideologies into Western societies—is stark.

While the progressive left often dismisses religion broadly, it has displayed an inexplicable tolerance for radical Islam, emboldening jihadist elements in the United States and the West. This has contributed to the erosion of Western cultural norms and values as educational institutions and mainstream media increasingly abandon the belief in American exceptionalism and primacy of Judeo-Christian principles.

At its core, Western civilization is rooted in the enduring principles of Judeo-Christian values. Yet this foundation has been deeply shaken by a “slow jihad” that has flourished under the guise of tolerance. Many Democrats and much of our media dismiss legitimate critiques of radical Islam as Islamophobia, bigotry and racism, stifling meaningful discourse and leaving Western culture vulnerable to gradual subversion.

Tragically, the first day of 2025 brought with it a horrific example of radical Islamic terror. A U.S. Army veteran unabashedly displaying an ISIS flag from a rental truck easily defeated improvised barriers and rammed into the teeming French Quarter in New Orleans, killing 14 people. The actions of the alleged attacker, Shamsud-Din Jabbar, are the most recent example of domestic recruitment by jihadists, in this case, ISIS. This appears to be yet one more heartbreaking example of homegrown jihad that may never have occurred if U.S. leadership crushed rather than coddled radical Islam.

Trump promises to continue the GOP’s unrepentant approach to combating jihad and antisemitism. This need for such leadership, already evident during his first term, was reinforced during the widely televised congressional hearings on antisemitism at Ivy League schools in December 2023. They exposed the alarming inability or unwillingness of university leaders to acknowledge or condemn blatant antisemitism on their campuses. The public reaction to these revelations has been one of shock and awakening, highlighting the urgent need for action to counter radical Islamic ideology among youth and faculty.

Trump’s legacy includes expanding protections against antisemitism in federally funded educational institutions and redefining antisemitism to include certain forms of anti-Israel sentiment. His first administration implemented travel restrictions targeting countries identified as breeding grounds for Islamist extremism. While these measures faced criticism, they were positioned as essential to protecting national security and countering jihadist infiltration.

Tackling antisemitism and radical Islam abroad

Europe is grappling with significant challenges as antisemitism rises and radical Islamist ideologies gain traction. In countries like France, Germany and the United Kingdom, Jewish communities increasingly face violent attacks and growing hostility. The impact of radical Islam extends far beyond antisemitism. Muslim communities in major Western European cities struggle with assimilation and too often advocate for the adoption of Islamic laws and cultural practices that conflict with the values of their host societies. This dynamic has contributed to expanding “no-go zones” where local law enforcement faces significant challenges in maintaining control. These zones further isolate young Muslims, perpetuating a vicious cycle of alienation and radicalization. High-profile incidents like the Paris riots, the Brussels bombings and the London Bridge attack highlight the need for action.

Israel is the West’s first line of defense against radical Islam, so Trump’s unequivocal support for Israel further demonstrates his commitment to preserving Western culture. Key achievements in his support of Israel include relocating the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, recognizing the Golan Heights as Israeli territory, and brokering the Abraham Accords, which normalized relations between Israel and several Arab nations. Trump is messaging his intent to enthusiastically continue supporting Israel in its defensive, justified, and, so far, very successful war against Iran and its proxies. These actions not only strengthen U.S.-Israel ties but also showcase a path towards regional stability through decisive leadership.

A transatlantic partnership, led by America and rooted in firm opposition to radical Islam and antisemitism, will reverse the gains made by extreme Islamists in the United States and abroad. It will also deny a quarter to young, impressionable Muslims who will no longer be emboldened by the West’s apparent capitulation to jihadists’ efforts. Trump’s policies emphasize rejecting jihadist ideologies while fostering integration and inclusion for Muslim communities willing to embrace democratic values. In recognition of this, many in the American Muslim community supported Trump for president. This balanced approach serves as an antidote to the progressive left’s tolerance of Islamist extremism, which has allowed these ideologies to gain a foothold. By prioritizing firm opposition to radical Islamism in all its forms alongside support for genuine inclusion, a united front can safeguard democratic principles while buying the West time to address the root causes of Islamic extremism.

The Trump anti-jihad effect offers a beacon of hope for a Western civilization under siege by radical Islam and antisemitism. Trump’s policies, grounded in moral clarity and decisive action, aim to dismantle these movements’ ideological and cultural threats. By resisting the progressive left’s pro-Islamist sentiment in America and countering unfettered immigration from radicalized regions of the world, Trump’s approach provides a blueprint for safeguarding the Judeo-Christian values that underpin Western society.

drmarcw 2025-01-28T03:48:08+00:00 January 28th, 2025|

Power to perception, an Israeli victory defeats antisemitism

JNS

As Israel’s fate unfolds, so does the trajectory of antisemitism; thus, the solution to the current state of global antisemitism lies largely with Israel.

Rescued Air France passengers wave to the waiting crowd while leaving the belly of the Hercules plane at Ben-Gurion International Airport. Credit: Moshe Milner, July 4, 1976, from National Photo Collection of Israel, Photography Department, Government Press Office via Wikimedia Commons.

Marc Weisman

Dr. Marc Weisman is a physician and writer.

(Oct. 8, 2024 / JNS)

Antisemitism is the world’s oldest continuous bigotry. While the reasons for it are multifactorial, conflicts involving Israel are accompanied by a rise in antisemitism. Oct. 7 was a massive intelligence and strategic failure. Israel’s enemies were elated to witness what appeared to be a kink in the armor of the storied Israel. This perceived weakness sparked a crazed exacerbation of Jew-hatred and blood lust in their mistaken belief that they could finally bring about Israel’s demise. Israel and the Jewish people are indelibly linked and as such, antisemitism is directly coupled to global perceptions regarding the State of Israel. Both Jews and non-Jews understand this.

The Jewish Diaspora’s connection to the Land of Israel spans thousands of years. It is cemented by religious traditions and scripture that place Israel, particularly Jerusalem, at the epicenter of Jewish identity. This nexus between Israel and Diaspora Jews is amplified during conflicts involving Israel, where global media and political criticisms of Israel often spill over into antisemitic stereotypes and attacks on Jewish communities. In a world of 195 nations—158 of which are majority Christian and 51 are majority Muslim—there is only one Jewish state. For all these reasons, the Jewish people and the State of Israel are deeply intertwined by an enduring bond. As Israel’s fate unfolds, so does the trajectory of antisemitism; thus, the solution to the current state of rabid global antisemitism lies largely with Israel herself.

Since Oct. 7, the Anti-Defamation League has counted a 388% increase in antisemitic events in the United States, with similar trends in most Western European nations. This trend is being observed across numerous platforms, including college campuses, social media, public-forum protests, and perhaps the most worrisome of all, violent attacks. The FBI reports a sharp rise in anti-Jewish physical attacks in the United States and Europe, where scores of assaults have affected synagogues and Jews individually. Unfortunately, too many on the left in America, including university professors, infotech leaders and mainstream journalists, have thrown their weight behind this anti-Israel rhetoric. We’ve witnessed university presidents, journalists and even Democratic congresspeople supporting the pro-Hamas, anti-Israel narrative.

Ironically, the very thing most responsible for fueling antisemitism is also its antidote: the annoying habit Jews and the Jewish state have in punching well beyond their weight. The successes and achievements of Jews and Israel are well known, and so far beyond their tiny numbers, it is sometimes hard to fathom. Mark Twain stated of the Jews, “He has made a marvelous fight in this world, in all the ages, and had done it with his hands tied behind him. He could be vain of himself and be excused for it.” John Adams put it this way; “I will insist the Hebrews have [contributed] more to civilize men than any other nation.” Sadly, the veneration great men and women have for the Jews is equaled by the envy of weak-minded people. It is this envy that drives antisemitism.

An interviewer asked the economist and social philosopher Thomas Sowell, what can Jews do to mitigate the 2,000-year-old scourge of antisemitism? His answer came brilliantly as a single word: Fail. While that is undoubtedly true, failure is typically not in the Jewish DNA, so the next best solution is precisely the opposite: succeed spectacularly.

Success begets respect, and respect is a winning formula. When spiteful antisemites control the narrative as they have this past year, antisemitism rises. Alternatively, when the esteem for Israel rises, antisemitism falls. There is historical precedent supporting this theory. In 1967, when in just six days Israel soundly defeated four invading Arab armies in a stunning victory, American support for the Jewish state grew. Another example is the July 1976 raid on Entebbe, an amazingly successful Israeli military mission that rescued the crew and passengers of a plane hijacked by Palestinian and German terrorists. That event was followed by increased support for Israel and diminished antisemitism.

It is fundamental human nature to rally around the winner. The useful idiot, terrorist sympathizers at home and abroad who are spewing the anti-Jewish cacophony but are not vested in Jew-hatred, are vulnerable to realignment. A definitive Israeli victory will shift their allegiance toward the Jews and Israel or at least relax their support for the terrorists. Bullies pick on the weak, not the strong. Herein lies a critical component of the solution to the antisemitism that was fueled by mistaken optimism that Israel and the Jews are weak and defenseless. They proved, once again, to be lions unmatched anywhere on earth by their numbers. Israel’s success in defeating their enemies will bring global respect, maybe not love, but respect, and with that respect will come a diminution of Jew-hatred.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has finally shed his obeisance to the perpetual demands by U.S. President Joe Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris, and the Democrats for ceasefires and “proportional” responses. This released Israel to do what it does best: Succeed. Netanyahu has finally unbridled Israel’s awesome capabilities, and once again, the tiny nation of Israel has proven to the world its astonishing military reach and technological capabilities. They have methodically and systematically routed both Hamas and Hezbollah. These wars are not yet over, but the tide has indeed turned in Israel’s favor these last few weeks. The Israel Defense Forces has demolished all 12 Hamas brigades and assassinated nearly all of Hamas’s leadership. They executed a James Bond-like pager/walkie-talkie magic-bombing feat against thousands of Hezbollah terrorists in a single moment that stunned the world. They killed every high-level Hezbollah leader in 10 days, including their leader, Hassan Nasrallah.

A decisive victory by Israel against Iran and its proxies would create a rare opportunity for reshaping the Middle East. Not only would Israel guarantee its own security but would also deliver an era of reduced global antisemitic tension. The Abraham Accords would expand, likely to soon include Saudi Arabia, which would pave the way for true Arab-Israeli peace, at least with the Sunni nations. Finally, when the Islamists and their witless antisemitic followers in the West have their dreams crushed under the weight of a definitive Israeli victory and they crawl back into their holes, all the West will benefit.

drmarcw 2025-01-28T03:48:33+00:00 January 28th, 2025|

Yearly Archives: 2025

Israel’s Moment of Decision on Hamas

Surprise Attack and Israel’s Dilemma

Hostages as Currency

Purgatory, Israel Style

Israel Is Hard on Itself. The World Is Harder

The Biden Administration’s Undermining of Israel

The United Nations’ Systemic Bias

The Antidote: Donald Trump and This Republican Congress

Marc Weisman

EU and Ukraine: Stop Blaming Trump, Look in the Mirror

While the progressive left often dismisses religion broadly, it has displayed an inexplicable tolerance for radical Islam.

As Israel’s fate unfolds, so does the trajectory of antisemitism; thus, the solution to the current state of global antisemitism lies largely with Israel.