The Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee will hold a discussion tomorrow on the parts of Judea and Samaria agreed to in the Oslo Accords as “Area C”, under full Israeli civil and security authority. The aim of the discussion is for Committee members to initiate a significant move to allow for Israeli sovereignty in those areas.

Talk in the Right in recent days suggests the political echelon is trying to influence Committee Chairman MK Zvi Hauser to avoid holding the debate in question as long as there are talks with the Americans about applying sovereignty and the Trump plan.

This, after discussion on the issue was postponed twice, both due to a burden on the Committee related to the coronavirus and also because Hauser was in isolation for several days.

Hauser has been examining the issue recently and had discussions with professionals who are well-versed in Palestinian Authority land theft that is taking place, and has been presented with maps that accurately show the illegal PA takeover in these areas.

A senior source on the Right told Arutz Sheva that he believes the Committee Chairman will not succumb to political pressure: “Hauser recently sounded very committed to the issue and also held meetings with people who have dealt with the lack of governance in Area C and know it in-depth. The situation on the ground speaks for itself and it’s time for the State of Israel to wake up and start acting, before it discovers that large parts of the territories under its control have been seized by the Palestinians in practice.”

In the discussion, the Regavim movement is expected to raise new findings on the scope of the takeover over the past year, emphasizing changes that have taken place in the field since Trump’s statement on the Deal of the Century following which, the Palestinian Authority began a “construction race” with the aim of establishing facts on the ground, especially in areas where Israeli sovereignty is planned according to Trump’s statement.

Regavim Director Meir Deutsch notes, “Several months ago, we toured Gush Etzion with Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee Chairman Zvi Hauser, who was aware that a real war was taking place in the area. We’re confident that tomorrow’s discussion in the Committee will be significant in deepening the State of Israel’s treatment of this story.”

The first time the Metropolitan Museum of Art tweeted a picture that appeared unmistakably to Jewish followers to be a ritual object used in Jewish prayer with the label “amulet,” a single follower responded with a correction.

“That is not an Amulet it is a Jewish tefillin,” wrote an account from a New York City rug gallery.

The object, which the Met says it acquired in 1962, is listed as part of the museum’s Islamic Art Department as a sixth-century amulet from Egypt. It is dated at A.D. 500–1000.

But a photo of the piece in the collection looks unmistakably like one piece of tefillin, the leather boxes and straps used in prayer by observant Jews. A shin, the Hebrew letter on the portion of tefillin that goes on the head, can be seen in the picture.

That was in November 2019. The second, third, fourth and fifth times the Islamic art collection shared the image, no one responded at all.

But over the weekend the image became the subject of an explosion of interest on Twitter after multiple accounts with many Jewish followers picked up on the item in the museum’s holdings and requested corrections.

One of the first to post it, a Jewish genealogist named Caitlin Hollander, offered a correction and tagged people who might be able to work with the Met to revise the museum’s description.

Other people who shared the image were less constructive in their criticism. And after the account @StopAntiSemites amplified the issue, criticism of the labeling included charges that the museum’s categorization was offensive to Jews.

The museum, which is currently closed because of the coronavirus pandemic, did not respond publicly over the weekend.

But Raphael Magarik, a English professor at the University of Illinois-Chicago whose studies have included the understanding of tefillin by non-Jews, posted a thread Sunday explaining that while the object pictured is likely mislabeled, there are historical arguments for the label.

“There’s no reason not to call tefillin an amulet,” Magarik wrote. “Lexically, the Greek term now commonly used to refer to them (‘phylactery’) originally meant just that, and had a long history of usage in that sense before referring to the specific Jewish items.”

He added that while tefillin have been invoked in anti-Semitic discourse in the past, the Met’s labeling more likely reflects how museums catalog objects.

Jewish visitors to the Temple Mount, once a rare sight, has become commonplace, with the number of Jews visiting the holy site surging by several hundred percent in recent years.

Data on the annual number of Jewish visitors to the Temple Mount shows a consistent upward trend.

But what is less well known is the quiet revolution taking place on the Temple Mount, thanks to the tens of thousands of people who ascend the Mount, and thanks to the work of Matte Irguni HaMikdash, which maintains a productive dialogue with police in the field, as well as with the local commander and even with Israel’s recent Public Security ministers.

The attitude of police on the Temple Mount has become far more friendly towards Jewish visitors, making visits to the holy site far more positive.

This change culminated in a shift in the police department’s policy on the Mount, which now quietly permits, albeit unofficially, Jewish prayer on the Temple Mount.

Just a few years ago, any Jew who was seen quietly praying by himself – even if those around him couldn’t even hear the words – would have been detained by police and barred from the Temple Mount for an extended period.

Today, however, most of the several dozen people barred from the Temple Mount are employees of the Waqf, the Islamic trust which manages the Mount.

Now, when Muslims attempt to harass Jews on the Temple Mount, they are arrested on the spot and barred from the Mount for four to six months, something which did not use to happen. Even the former Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Ekrima Sa’id Sabri, was banned from the Temple Mount for half a year.

In addition, the police have even permitted a model of the Temple to be displayed near the entrance used by Jews ascending the Mount.

To help strengthen the Jewish presence on the Temple Mount, click here to donate to the Matte Irguni HaMikdash.

The organization largely responsible for these changes is the Matte Irguni HaMikdash, an umbrella group which unites the efforts of multiple Temple Mount activist groups.

In recent years, the Matte Irguni HaMikdash has established, in cooperation with police, a steering committee, aimed at coordinating the Matte’s activities with the authorities. The steering committee’s work includes regular meetings between police commanders and members of the Matte and maintaining an open dialogue between the two sides.

Under the auspices of the Matte, and in cooperation with various Temple Mount activist groups, extensive public relations work is carried out, including maintaining a team of Temple Mount tour guides who provide historical and halachic information about the Mount, media outreach, distributing pamphlets, practicing commandments associated with the Temple Mount, along with groups dedicated to organizing group visits by rabbis and during special occasions like Jerusalem Day and Israeli Independence Day.

Now, ahead of Tisha B’Av, the Matte has launched a fundraising campaign to enable it to continue its operations.

“Because of the public relations work and our cooperation with security forces, there are amazing changes underway on the Temple Mount,” said Matte leaders. “We’re moving forward one step at a time, and with each step there are more and more Jews who are coming to visit the Temple Mount.”

“Open your heart for the sake of the Temple Mount, so that we can continue with this holy work, with our various activities; so we can continue to grow and keep this change going; so that Jews can pray on the Temple Mount as they should be able to, wearing phylacteries and prayer shawls; so that we continue to move forward towards the Third Temple. We need your support.”

To help strengthen the Jewish presence on the Temple Mount, click here to donate to the Matte Irguni HaMikdash.

Eighty years ago, the stormy heart of Ze’ev Jabotinsky, Zionist leader, founder of the Revisionist movement and Betar Youth Organization, fell silent.

After decades of his teachings being pushed to the margins of public discourse, today Jabotinsky finally receives a proper place in history. His ideology has slowly but surely seeped into the public consciousness and is appreciated for its merits.

The Jewish and Zionist world is facing a very significant period. Today, both the political right and left now see the inevitable implementation of the process of applying Israeli sovereignty to Jewish communities in all parts of the Land of Israel.

This significant step comes with clear support and recognition from the world’s greatest democratic superpower – the United States of America. Once and for all the uncertainty is being cleared away regarding the future of the Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria and solidifies the main tenets of modern-day Zionism.

Back in the 1930s, Jabotinsky shared his dream of an Arab-Jewish agreement regarding the Land of Israel. His respectful attitude towards the Arabs is expressed in these remarks:

“But perhaps no war is necessary. Perhaps you, the children of Ishmael son of Abraham, our patriarch, will support the claim of the people of Israel… that a homeless nation may be allowed to return and settle in its ancient kingdom.”

Knowing the power of the stubbornness of the Arab nations as well as the genuine desire to fulfill the aspirations of the Jewish people for the establishment of a Jewish state in the Land of Israel, he opened a door to a liberal approach of “compensation” while providing “a well-known measure of independence.”

Now here we are in the year 2020 and countless proposals for bridging the gaps between the Arabs and the Israelis have been discussed, proposed, attempted and force-fed.

Attempts to bring peace and creative solutions for both sides were offered as early as the last century.

There was the Balfour Declaration of 1917, which was met by a complete refusal from the Arab world, who used severe violence and rioting against Jews in the years that followed. The United Nations Partition Plan of November 29, 1947 was also completely rejected by the Arab world, and following the vote, and hostile actions were launched against Jews both in Arab lands and in the Land of Israel.

From the Six Day War of 1967 until today, countless plans and initiatives were launched and failed. Amid international headlines and great fanfare, agreements was tried and tested. They include: the Madrid Conference, the Oslo Accords, the Hebron Protocol, the Wye River Memorandum, the Sharm El Sheikh Memorandum, the Camp David Summit, the Taba Summit, the Arab Peace Initiative, the Road Map for Peace, the French Peace Initiative and the Kerry Initiative. In-between those initiatives, plans such as the Disengagement and the Convergence Plan have been tried, and unfortunately, have simply not worked, resulting in fierce debates, societal rifts, terrorism and military operations.

Our generation was privileged to be born into an independent country, with language, culture, a strong military, robust economy, educational excellence and high-tech expertise. We did not experience what our parents and grandparents did in exile. We did not struggle to hold on to our Jewish heritage or feel the longing to return to our home – the Land of Israel.

America’s Deal of the Century is now under consideration and has been debated from different angles. But eighty years after the passing of Jabotinsky, it is time to stop sitting back.

The principles of the Zionist movement include the unity of the Jewish people, its bond to its historic homeland Eretz Yisrael, and the centrality of the State of Israel and Jerusalem, its capital, in the life of the nation. Zionism calls for Aliyah to Israel from all countries and the effective integration of all immigrants into Israel as a Jewish-Zionist and democratic state. Settling the land is an expression of Zionist fulfillment.

In my opinion, the Deal of the Century, yet another of the innumerable plans for trying to live a normalized life here, may be a rare window of opportunity to unite our ranks. For the first time since Israel’s founding, our borders could be solidified and Jerusalem recognized as our eternal and historic capital, while fulfilling Zionism by implementing our sovereignty in the heartland of our nation, Judea and Samaria.

For a moment, Jabotinsky seems to be somewhat involved in these current proceedings.

“If we sit back,” Jabotinsky wrote, “and look at how others are clamoring and we do not intervene… the nations of the world will not consider us, our neighbors will lift their heads against us, and any piece of goodness that we may have and any future goodness we would have in our world will fall in the hands of others, and only we will be disappointed.”

And us? Our job today, eighty years since his passing, is to act for the fulfillment of Zionist values. It is to settle, build, flourish, educate and sustain the exemplary society which the forefathers of our country and the pioneers of Zionism dreamed.

The writer is the Vice-Chairman of the World Zionist Organization and the chairman of the World Likud.

At the beginning of July, a senior Jordanian official made an unexpected but obvious statement about the conflict from his nation’s standpoint in particular and the wider Arab world in general. “We have been defeated. We have been defeated militarily, as well as politically and diplomatically,” said former Jordanian minister and diplomat Ambassador Ahmad Masa’deh referring to Israel.

While these are unprecedented words, they are simply logical.

Seventy two years ago, in 1948, Jordan, then known as Transjordan, with arguably the strongest army in the region, British trained, invaded what would become the territory of the United Nations-mandated Jewish State, conquering wide swathes of territory and massacring inhabitants of Jewish towns and villages, like in Gush Etzion.

It seized Judea and Samaria and large parts of Jerusalem, expelling and ethnically cleansing these territories of their Jewish populations.

Even after it signed a ceasefire agreement with the newly established State of Israel, it continued to allow deadly Fedayeen attacks from its territory in a war of attrition to try and achieve what the traditional military method could not. However, these began to lessen after the 1956 Suez War, and came to a complete stop after the Jordanian army was routed in the Six Day War.

The 1973 Yom Kippur War was notable for an almost complete absence of a strong Jordanian force. King Hussein had sent some auxiliary forces to help the Syrians on the Golan, but later declassified U.S. documents show that the Jordanian participation was only a token to preserve the king’s status in the Arab world.

That would be the last time Jordanian and Israeli soldiers formerly faced each other on the battlefield, and in 1994 the two nations signed an historic peace agreement that held until today.

What this evolution demonstrates is that Jordan understood, albeit slowly, that the Jewish State was here to stay, its existence was permanent and this reality had to be faced. They had lost any time they tried to defeat it militarily, diplomatically, and even economically, during the infamous Arab League boycott.

In fact, Jordan had become so inured to the permanence of the Jewish State that it has worked together, even before the establishment of formal relations, to rid themselves of mutual enemies as they did in 1970 during Black September when King Hussein forced out the PLO and other sympathetic Palestinians from his territory.

This peace is certainly not the warmest and there have been many ups and downs, and strong disagreements. However, when the Jordanians are displeased with something Israel is doing, like the talk of applying Israeli sovereignty to parts of Judea and Samaria, it suffices with strongly-worded communiques, diplomatic entreaties and possibly the threat of the temporary removal of its ambassador.

While there is some talk of cancelling the peace agreement, these are empty threats and never come from an actual Jordanian decision-maker.

These are the actions of a nation and leadership that knows its war aims have been defeated. It now treats its neighbor like any other. It no longer seeks Israel’s destruction through any means, and a cold peace is certainly preferable to any type of conflict.

This is an excellent paradigm for how to achieve victory over the Palestinians, and end the Israel-Palestinian conflict once and for all.

While the Palestinians have been defeated several times over the years, whether during its attacks on airplanes around the world during the 1970s, routing it from Lebanon, or the campaign of suicide attacks. Israel has demonstrated that it could hold its line on each of these waves of attacks. The Palestinian Liberation Organization has never succeeded in terrorizing the people.

On the flip side, Israel has never delivered a victory blow that would convince it to give up its war aims to end the Jewish State. The fact that Palestinian leaders Mahmoud Abbas regularly talks of eventual victory, never recognizing Israel as the national homeland of the Jewish People, or been pushed to give up a single claim, demonstrates this amply.

It is clear that a negotiated peace has not worked. Palestinian leaders have been offered a state, half of Jerusalem, the entire territory of Judea and Samaria, and other concessions, multiple times throughout their 100-year war against Jewish sovereignty, but never acceded to end the conflict.

It still harbors hope of eventually defeating Israel.

They have never been forced to give up their war in the same way that Jordan was.

To finally end the conflict and to usher in peace, or at least the absence of war and conflict, the Palestinians have to be defeated like the Jordanians were. They have to be forced, through military, diplomatic or economic means, within legal and moral strictures, to understand that the war is over and they have lost.

When we hear Masa’deh’s words coming from a Palestinian leader we will finally know that the conflict is over.

Nave Dromi is an Israeli commentator and director of the Middle East Forum’s Israel Office.