1) At the INSS, Yohanan Tzoreff explains why ‘Fatah Central Committee Decisions Accelerate the Decline of PA Legitimacy’.
“A series of decisions on appointments and candidacies taken recently at the Fatah Central Committee caused an uproar in the Palestinian arena. Their implementation would be interpreted as an attempted takeover of the PLO and the Palestinian Authority (PA) power centers by the “Abu Mazen camp” in Fatah, perpetuation of the intra-Palestinian divide, delay of the elections to PA institutions to an unknown date, and increased dependence on Israel. In effect, reflecting a lack of interest in public legitimacy, these decisions open a new front by the PA vis-à-vis the public, alongside the existing fronts with respect to Hamas, those disillusioned with Fatah, and other organizations.”
2) CAMERA’s David Litman looks at the backdrop to Amnesty International’s recent anti-Israel report.
“Amnesty International’s recent scandalous report accusing Israel of “apartheid,” as well as a similar report from Human Rights Watch a year ago, are unsurprisingly overflowing with falsehoods and bigotry. Many outstanding analysts have already thoroughly debunked each of these reports.
What also must be addressed, however, is the surrounding context of this slander. Why are they being released now? What purpose are they supposed to serve?”
3) At the JISS, Daniel Rakov analyses ‘the Russia-Iran-Israel Triangle’.
“As Tehran invests efforts to improve relations with Russia, Israel will have to maintain a dialogue with Moscow to safeguard its military and diplomatic freedom of action in Syria, despite the current growing tensions between Russia and the West.”
4) UK Lawyers for Israel will hold a webinar with Irwin Cotler on “The IHRA Definition – Origins, Nature, and Impact” on February 23rd.
“The IHRA working definition of antisemitism has been adopted by 33 States, and a wide range of other entities, including regional and local governments in countries around the world.
However, the definition is under sustained attack. Criticisms include contentions that the definition is being given a legal status and significance it should not have, that Jewish victims of discrimination are being treated better than other victims, and that it thwarts criticism of Israel, is adverse to the Palestinians and endangers freedom of expression. There has even been some dispute as to what text was actually adopted by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) in 2016. This webinar with one of the world’s leading experts on antisemitism will clarify the issues.”