The Myth of the Lone-Wolf Terrorist

Yesterday, an Israeli woman was murdered, and an Israeli man severely wounded, in a drive-by shooting outside of Hebron. On Saturday, another terrorist killed a father and son at a carwash. The Israeli media has described these as lone-wolf attacks, since the perpetrators do not appear to be acting on direct orders from any known jihadist group. Nadav Shragai rejects this characterization:

The attackers may decide on their own where to strike and they do it on their own, but they drink from the same poisonous well that makes the killing of Jews kosher, be it because “al-Aqsa Mosque is being desecrated” or just in the name of Islam or the Palestinian cause. The incitement and hatred have no organizational affiliation.

The Palestinian Authority (PA), for its own reasons, may be assisting Israel in capturing dozens of killers but it has not lifted a finger in an effort to stop the worshiping of death and martyrdom. It has not stopped the explicit incitement to kill Jews for being Jews. It has allowed the continuation of terrorist glorification; it continues paying families of terrorists and has been memorializing them upon their death. Perceptually, it has been breeding terrorists and helping them grow, while occasionally helping Israel detain them in extreme cases.

Just last week, the Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center published a study showing that in the Palestinian textbooks issued by the PA, Israel doesn’t even exist. The study noted that the Palestinian prime minister recently took part in a ceremony honoring parents of “martyrs,” [i.e., Palestinians who lost their lives committing acts of terror], who were killed during the past year, and vowed that the PA would not bow to pressure by altering its subject matter, regardless of whether the donor countries will stop the funding spigot.

During the ceremony, there was even a picture shown of a “lone-wolf terrorist.”

Read more at Israel Hayom

More about: Israeli Security, Palestinian Authority, Palestinian terror

An Israeli Buffer Zone in the Gaza Strip Doesn’t Violate International Law

 The IDF announced on Thursday that it is safe for residents to return to some of the towns and villages near the Gaza Strip that have been abandoned since October 7. Yet on the same day, rocket sirens sounded in one of those communities, Kibbutz Mefalsim. To help ensure security in the area, Israel is considering the creation of a buffer zone within the Strip that would be closed to Palestinian civilians and buildings. The U.S. has indicated, however, that it would not look favorably on such a step.

Avraham Shalev explains why it’s necessary:

The creation of a security buffer along the Gaza-Israel border serves the purpose of destroying Hamas’s infrastructure and eliminating the threat to Israel. . . . Some Palestinian structures are practically on the border, and only several hundred yards away from Israeli communities such as Kfar Aza, Kerem Shalom, and Sderot. The Palestinian terrorists that carried out the murderous October 7 attacks crossed into Israel from many of these border-adjacent areas. Hamas officials have already vowed that “we will do this again and again. The al-Aqsa Flood [the October 7th massacre] is just the first time, and there will be a second, a third, a fourth.”

In 2018 and 2019, Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad organized mass marches towards the Israeli border with the goal of breaking into Israel. Billed by Palestinians as “the Great March of Return,” its name reveals its purpose—invasion. Although the marches were supposedly non-violent, they featured largescale attacks on Israeli forces as well as arson and damage to Israeli agriculture and civilian communities. Moreover, the October 7 massacre was made possible by Hamas’s prepositioning military hardware along the border under false cover of civilian activity. The security perimeter is intended to prevent a reprise of these events.

Shalev goes on to dismantle the arguments put forth about why international law prohibits Israel from creating the buffer zone. He notes:

By way of comparison, following the defeat of Nazi Germany, France occupied the Saar [River Valley] directly until 1947 and then indirectly until reintegration with Germany in 1957, and the Allied occupation of Berlin continued until the reunification of Germany in 1990. The Allies maintained their occupation long after the fall of the Nazi regime, due to the threat of Soviet invasion and conquest of West Berlin, and by extension Western Europe.

Read more at Kohelet

More about: Gaza Strip, Gaza War 2023, International Law, Israeli Security