Welcome to White Rose Magazine.

The West at War: Is it Fighting?

“The future belongs to those who show up.”
—Mark Steyn, GB News, June 14, 2022

It seems to be a recurring theme of free societies in the modern age that they are often the last ones to realize they are at war.

In 1933, America, England, France, and the other nations which had won the First War wanted no part of another one. People naturally felt that millions had already died; why more? But the Führer, who had suffered the same battles and festered in the same trenches, shared none of their revulsion for war. He believed that only more battles were the answer. With every violation of the Versailles Treaty, act of re-armament, and blood-curdling rally, the former Allies never even mustered serious diplomatic protest. If there was a problem, it was at the other end of an ocean, a channel, or a border. The louder Hitlerian intentions were shouted, they thought, the less seriously they should be taken. Yet “Peace for our time” meant exactly what it said: “our” time and “our” values. Hitler, however, lived in his own time and had his own values. And by 1939, it was too late. Appeasement and disapproving statements made no difference. The West was at war.

Decency perceived as weakness

Since 1945, the West has arguably become the victim of its own decency. As it was for Neville Chamberlain in 1938, peace (correctly) is still a Western value. The West is a cooperative, not an adversarial, civilization, whose wealth and success are built upon the peaceful, voluntary exchange of required or desired goods. Today, however, many if not most of the societies the West has welcomed into the United Nations General Assembly ascribe to the adversarial system, in which wealth and power are obtained through violence and theft. Diplomacy and tolerance, to them, are virtues of the already defeated.

Not long before his attempt to steal a fifth of the world’s oil industry for himself, Saddam Hussein chided American ambassador April Glaspie that “Yours is a society which cannot accept 10,000 dead in one battle.” The West’s concern for life and belief in the value of the individual, he believed, was its Achilles’ heel. In the short term, of course, Saddam’s heartless boast ended up as famous last words: his invasion of Kuwait, met with rare Western decisiveness, was a military catastrophe which his regime barely survived.

Yet, a generation later, those humane values have been perverted against themselves. While no American should ever scoff at any person’s death—let alone 10,000—moral clarity has been replaced by mere moral ideals. Western humility has, through decades of KGB propaganda and academic misinformation, become the basis of moral malaise. For the West to believe in itself as a good place, and a source of good for the rest of the world, is derided as primitive, “Eurocentric” bigotry. And decent people, appalled at the idea of being unkind to other societies, force themselves to agree. But the very moral idea of a bully—like Saddam—being villainous is itself a Western one. Western civilization is based upon the Ten Commandments, not on which warlord has plundered the most from whom. Now, under the spell of this self-loathing, the bullies’ victims are taught to see fighting back as the true sin. Retrospectively, the Nazis would be the victims and the British the crazed killers.

Threatened from all sides

The 1930s have, in part, returned; and while the menaces are many more, just as then, little is being done to combat them. And what complicates any plan of response is that so much of what seeks to conquer the West comes from within.

Mass immigration from cultures in which every prejudice the Second World War was fought to destroy are part of everyday life makes liberal societies’ values of equal justice and rule of law foreign in their own lands. Leftist sympathizers with the enemy span the breadth of “educated” society, who, in the quest for absolute power, use as human shields, battering rams, and cannon fodder all the “oppressed” peoples about whom they claim to care. And retrograde reactionaries (out of deluded spite, never above sympathy with the enemy themselves) retreat into conspiratorial, isolationist schizophrenia and are resolved, at best, only to fight small portions of the coming war. 

Western civilization is based upon the Ten Commandments, not on which warlord has plundered the most from whom.

These delusions corrupt so much of Euro-American civilization that Winston Churchill might well today be hanged as an “infidel,” “racist,” “traitor,” or all three for demanding “victory at all costs.”

The far enemy

The West—comprised of America, Europe, its former imperial dominions, and Israel—is also beset from outside. The main driver is weakness. The effects of prolonged socialism, ruinous economic policies, Marxist cultural rot, a politicized and useless educational system, the despondency which comes from far-off success, and mirror-image reactions to these failures, among much more, signal a society’s decline. Smelling blood, the predators converge toward what they see as a crippled civilization—in fact, one crippled by its own hand.

Abroad, a new evil “axis” has emerged comprising Russia, China, and the worldwide agents of jihad, led by Iran. This alliance, as unlikely and awkward as its counterpart nearly a century ago, is born of international isolation and a common cause to destroy its once-dominant rivals.

The “old” enemy, Russia, seeks to restore a bygone empire of terror. The “new” one, China, aspires to a new empire stretching across the Pacific and even beyond. And the enemy which seems “newest”—but is actually the oldest—now represented by the Muslim Brotherhood, Iran, and their regional proxies, per the Qur’an’s command, dreams of a world ruled by Islam.

All three entities desire as much of the globe as they can snatch, but the majority of their influence is maintained “softly”: through bribery, strategic debt bondage, disinformation, financing of home-grown anti-Western movements, purchasing Western institutions’ support, and more. Still, these united enemies have many differences: Islam’s contempt for communist atheism, China’s genocidal fears of Uyghur separatism, Russia’s hatred for its rebellious Muslim population, and long-standing Sino-Russian mutual loathing, to name a few. So many are their differences and areas of distrust that one could ask if these powers comprise one front or two. Foreign policy experts can legitimately debate this question, because each actor has its own distinct interests, which can conceivably clash. Still, the fundamental fact is that the old-style, centralized, imperial aspirations of Russia and China are (for now) compatible with the subversive aims of global, borderless Islam.

The 1930s have, in part, returned; and while there are many more dangers, just as then, little is being done to combat them.

It is also possible that, in their arrogance, the Chinese and Russians believe they can control their Muslim allies, and even defeat them once the West is finally vanquished. As the world saw during the Soviets’ disastrous invasion of Afghanistan, they are mistaken. Jihad—where the delights of the next world repay the sacrifices of this one—is very often stronger than regular armies. The worldwide caliphate, regardless of sect or which government directs it, if not confronted, will win in the end.

The far enemy comes near

Coming forth from abroad, migration by the many millions from societies which often condemn the West’s values threatens social cohesion, especially in Europe. First encouraged to support the unsustainable socialist welfare state, these “guest workers”—frequently the biggest welfare recipients themselves—never left.

Some assimilate, but many do not, and sometimes insulate themselves into “no-go zones,” where ruling civil and criminal laws do not apply. Though the West’s unique idea of citizenship is completely non-racial and meritocratic, objective, non-racial concern over this demographic shift is denounced as unacceptable.

That gangs of Muslim men, for example, groomed, trafficked, and raped countless underage girls in northern British cities for years does not matter: both the police and media have refused to see that this type of “multi-culturalism” was impossible. So, too, when visible acts of jihad occur (the rapes technically counting as jihad behind closed doors), the suspects’ motives remain “unclear.”

This new electorate has also arguably pushed Western governments toward more anti-Western policies, such as anti-Zionism. And, in the face of this assault, European populations, for so many decades neutered by the self-centered “present-tense” psychology of socialism, are neither having children nor showing significant interest in maintaining their morally superior values. As commentator Mark Steyn said of the Scottish fertility rate (1.31 children per woman in 2021), “The future belongs to those who show up, and the Scots aren’t showing up.”

The near enemy

At home, the most privileged among us are indoctrinated to loath their own civilization based upon exaggerated remembrances of its genuine past shortcomings. They are taught to adopt a soulless narcissism which whittles morality itself down to little more than the chance to be the protest heroes society largely no longer needs.

Indeed, they are not without support. Copious funding from Islamic dictatorships and communist syndicates helped such ingrates usurp much of American higher education in the space of one semester, while terrified yet sympathetic administrators hid and lied for them. Openly supporting designated terrorist organizations and throwing tantrums that Israelis were not dying in exponentially larger numbers than their murderers, the ingrates were mostly let loose to encamp and riot. Even though it contravenes (already childish) university speech codes, such “hate” is evidently only hateful if it is against people useful to the West’s adversaries. Similarly, astounding moral atrocities—Arab slavery in Africa, the imprisonment of political dissidents in China, Islamic child marriage, human trafficking on the U.S. southern border, and the mass rape of innocents in Israel—elicit no pity on their part, because their perpetrators, like themselves, are enemies of the West.

Further, on the established governmental level, leftist politicians bow not only before the near enemies—the overgrown children whose miseducation they enabled—but also the far enemies. In 2010, the Obama administration sold a Russian state-owned company approximately 20% of America’s uranium reserves. In 2015, it signed a Munich-style pact with Iran allowing it to produce nuclear warheads. Later that year, Angela Merkel opened Germany’s borders to unvetted, unrestricted migration. In 2021, the Biden administration withdrew from Afghanistan while leaving the Taliban priceless American weapons. In 2022, it waived Trump-era sanctions against Iran. In 2023, it sought to renew a deal which would allow China to steal more sensitive American technology. And, in 2024, it threatened to withhold shipment of vital bombs to Israel if it dared strike harder against Hamas.

As their appeasement of Iran and Hamas demonstrates, the politicians, too, seem to delude themselves that the Islamic powers can be harnessed or controlled with money and treaties. In reality, of course, just like the Chinese and Russians, they will be eaten, too—if, maybe, last. The same can be said of the Biden administration’s cowardly eagerness to cooperate with the Chinese-dominated World Health Organization and world government-advocating World Economic Forum, a body which welcomed Iran’s vile foreign minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian—killed in the same helicopter accident as President Ibrahim Raisi—as an honored speaker.

Also at home, America’s most discredited political movement is being cleaned of its 1930s dust. Once buried by the realities of Soviet proxy aggression and then largely irrelevant in the years after 9/11, Lindberghian isolationism has rocketed again to popularity among “populist” pseudo-conversatives like Tucker Carlson.

Like their predecessors, they insist that the West’s overseas enemies should be left to themselves. Even worse, they share the same naïveté which defines their more guileless leftist counterparts. They, too, believe that Russia, China, and Iran hold up peace as superior to war, and only go to war in response to undue provocation. In addition to his bizarre and misinformed praise for Russia, Carlson himself has even swallowed the Chomskyite communist lie that the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not just unnecessary but “evil.” The chief irony is that the only people who have ever been isolationists are Americans—never Nazis, Japanese imperialists, Muslims, or international Marxists. For them, as classicist Paul Cartledge described the ancient Greeks, “Peace was an interruption of war, rather than vice versa.” It was through the policy of peace through strength that Soviet communism collapsed, yet isolationists would prefer to dismantle Western military might and the deterrence which provably keeps peace.

The last great wave of American isolationism was immolated in the burning remains of the U.S. Pacific Fleet. Now resurgent, it must be feared that another Pearl Harbor, or many, will be what immolates this new one. For we know the only “enemies” they are ready to fight are AIPAC and the “extinction” of white people. And if the West’s lack of borders genuinely horrifies them as much as advertised, then they can rest assured that withdrawing from the world’s problems will make no difference. Those problems are already here.

Why is failure an option?

On November 7, 2023, the cenotaph in the center of the northern English city of Rochdale was sprayed with the words “Free Palestine.” Rochdale was among the several towns in which Muslim rape gangs trafficked their child concubines unimpeded for years. That a hallowed monument dedicated to the courage of “the men of Rochdale who gave their lives in the Great War” should be daubed with a phrase symbolizing the very opposite is cruelly fitting. Perhaps no image can more perfectly illustrate a war against a once-great, now surrendering, West. Those who intend to show up are indeed seizing the future from those who do not.

A police officer stands bewildered before the Rochdale cenotaph, daubed with the slogan “Free Palestine”—November 7, 2023. (X)

With few (if any) Churchills this side of the horizon, is there hope? For now, Chamberlainian appeasement is all the world can expect in the face of the most concerted and complex example of civilizational war in history. If the will to fight is not there, then, like France in 1940, the West itself will fall.

If, however, there are still those left who grasp what they are likely to lose—that the West is humanity’s greatest, most righteous achievement—then perhaps our society’s finest hour is yet to come. If we honor our cenotaphs, then we will have the self-respect and confidence never to break when the storm comes. If we are willing to truly understand our enemy and are resolved to deny them our humiliation, then there is hope. Fighting back at all is what terrifies bullies the most. Fighting back is what will bring us to the “broad, sunlit uplands” Western civilization is due.

Islamism, Marxism + The West

The bridge to the utopia that they imagine is the destruction of every principle, ideal, and institution that has defined the West since its greatest societies threw off the shackles of monarchy, serfdom, and religious dogma centuries ago. Moral confusion of the kind that is so prevalent on university campuses today is key to the destruction of those things and took hold when too many institutions of higher learning “diversified curricula,” which is to say, replaced classical, pro-Western, and objective academia with content that is meant to promote an anti-Western and even Marxist-Leninist and Islamist worldviews. 

The only thing that one needs to understand about Marxism is that it is not so much a philosophy as it is a religion.

Joseph McCarthy, for all his paranoia and political opportunism, was right. The Reds are among us. For them, college students and the young in general are weapons to be used against us and a way of life that allows for progress even when that progress is phased or gradual. This brings us to the reason why Israel and the Jewish people are so heavily targeted by those who leverage calls for increased diversity, equity, and inclusion for far-left ideological and political gain. It is seldom acknowledged that Marx’s earlier writings were more anti-Jewish than anti-capitalist. For Marx, capitalism, as it existed during the Industrial Revolution, was a Jewish invention and he approached “the Jewish question” and capital in the way many Christians  approach  the story of Eve and the apple, which is to say that Marx taught that the Jewish lending and merchant class brought the original sin of capitalism into being. 

That Marx was himself Jewish by descent, attached to, but estranged from “bourgeois Jewry” and terrible with money is the subject of another conversation (a conversation in which we might address Marx’s self-loathing and poor familial relationships).  But the only thing that one needs to understand about Marxism is that it is not so much a philosophy as it is a religion. And like all religions of its kind, it is resistant to deconstruction, criticism, and rationalism. And because Marxism is all of those things, it became the perfect vector for a new strain of anti-Semitism, one that pretends concern for all nations and peoples while surreptitiously promoting the hatred of just one nation and people. 

Wherever Marx’s materialist theory gained traction, anti-Semitism, in addition to a hatred of the modern, capitalist West, blossomed. And it was in that milieu of reactionary hatred that Maxine Rodinson, the famous French Arabist (and Marxist) convinced his audience that the State of Israel is colonial in nature if not literally a colony of some empire. After all, how can the people who did the most to bring about the modern capitalist society not also be guilty of the crimes that spring from it? 

Never mind that colonialism is first and foremost the relocation of a group of people to a land to which they have no cultural attachment. That the left has forgotten that Jews originated in Judea and that every group that arrived in the Roman colony of Palestine during and after the first century should only be regarded as colonial transplants is Orwellian (think of the line from 1984: “war is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength”). The blame for such amnesia can be pinned on Marx, Rodinson, and every other intellectual who chained their thinking to Marx’s. But the Marxist objection to Israel’s existence has less to do with principle and more to do with her Western and capitalist character. 

Wherever Marx’s materialist theory gained traction, anti-Semitism, in addition to a hatred of the modern, capitalist West, blossomed.

Not long after Israel’s founding, the Middle East became one of the most important fronts of the Cold War. Arab states that gravitated toward or even collaborated with the Nazis during the Second World War were more apt to partner with the Soviets while Arab states that practiced some form of neutrality during the war would come to face the West after the war. Mind you, none of these states supported the right of the Jewish people to pursue self-determination in their homeland when that right was first claimed, but, nearly a century on, persistent acrimony between Israel and Syria can be attributed to Syria’s closeness with the Soviet Union and now the Russian Federation and viewed, in part, as a function of the anti-Semitism shared by the two nations. But, of the two, it was always the Soviets and Russians who did the most to perpetuate that hatred and who saw their war with Jews and Zionism as one dimension of their war with the capitalist West, which brings us to the Russian project to inculcate Leninist-Marxism in leftist Western youth while framing Israel an imperialist aggressor and anyone who is party to a conflict with Israel as belonging to a proletariat victim class. 

That the left has forgotten that Jews originated in Judea and that every group that arrived in the Roman colony of Palestine during and after the first century should only be regarded as colonial transplants is Orwellian.

Where the West once viewed all conflicts, the Cold War included, as material and fought them by the numbers, the Russians took a primarily psychological approach to the Cold War and spread Soviet doctrinal beliefs to and throughout Western academia using a missionary approach. It did so while manufacturing facts that its missionaries would claim are preexisting and immutable. Chief among those “facts” is the existence of an ancient Palestinian people and a land that has been Palestine for as long as it has been called Eretz Yisrsel and that would still be Palestine if not for Zionist usurpation.

The Marxist-Leninist and Islamist goal of destroying the Jewish state is a steppingstone to a larger goal of destroying the West and replacing it with a utopia that Marxists-Leninists are naïve enough to believe is incorporable with the Islamist vision for humanity, which is anything but human. 

That missionary work, the acceptance of this lie coupled with a normalization of Marxist-Leninist sociopolitical violence, laid the groundwork for the Western academic response to the October 7 Massacre with its denials of the barbaric nature of the attack, its conspiracy theory that the attack was allowed by Israel and that Israel is to blame for the rape, murder, and kidnapping of her own people. In that response, there is something akin to Holocaust denial, which hinges upon the hateful belief that Jews exaggerate, manufacture, and/or misrepresent Jewish suffering for collective and individual gain. And in the same way that Holocaust deniers once tried to gain entry to the academic mainstream, Marxist-Leninist deniers of the necessity of defeating Hamas in Gaza once and for all are attempting to mainstream themselves now, but with far more success. That success is due largely to the work of a Marxist-Leninist and Islamist  organization called Students for Justice in Palestine, or SJP, which has been allowed to operate on American campuses for over two decades now. Appallingly, SJP organized a “Day of Resistance” within a week of October 7 while publicly endorsing the crimes against humanity that Hamas undertook on that day. SJP even went so far as to share images and video of attacks on Israeli civilians while celebrating them. 

But understanding the evil of SJP and the movement it fits into is just as important as understanding the broader purpose of both. As the saying goes, what begins with the Jews never ends with the Jews and in this case, the Marxist-Leninist and Islamist goal of destroying the Jewish state is a steppingstone to a larger goal of destroying the West and replacing it with a utopia that Marxists-Leninists are naïve enough to believe is incorporable with the Islamist vision for humanity, which is anything but human. But that is what anti-Semitism and the fundamentalist ideologies that beget it do. They expel reason from all discourse before replacing all discourse with a demand that we in the West exchange our values and principles for what Marxist-Leninists and Islamists call justice, but that is really just a pathway to total power and control.

Caliphate: A Warning from History

Elliot Toman

Mohammedan Expansion

Patriarchal Expansion

Umayyed Expansion

Ottoman Empire

Ottoman Empire

Islamic Governed Nation

The New Axis of Evil

In many ways, Russia, China, and Iran are enemies with conflicting political, economic, and military goals. But, sometimes, the orbits of these three highly undemocratic and repressive regimes converge and produce either intentional or unintentional cooperation. Actually, it’s better to call it “collusion.”

Before you can outline how this is all playing out now, it’s important to define the key goals of each of these three nations’ foreign policies. Luckily, they all just need one word each. For Russia, it’s “chaos.” For China, it’s “dependence.” For Iran, it’s “destruction.”

Unfortunately for Israel, these three regimes and their policies have been colluding against the Jewish state more often over the last 10 years. In many ways, that collusion has become more problematic since October 7. The good news is that if Israel does finish off Hamas, much of the support system for this three-way Russian-Chinese-Iranian collusion will fall apart fast.

For Russia, it’s “chaos.” For China, it’s “dependence.” For Iran, it’s “destruction.”

Russia’s chaos tactics

Let’s start with Russia and its chaos techniques. 

Today’s Russia is run by a former KGB operative in Vladimir Putin, who began a series of chaos-creating policies throughout the world after the U.S. and other Western powers imposed economic sanctions for his first major breach of Ukrainian sovereignty in 2014.

After that move, I warned that Putin was now acting like a wounded animal and that there was nothing he wouldn’t do to push back on the West and any semblance of world security and order. Nine months after I issued that warning, Russia had done just that. But, in particular interest to Israel, it had brought a massive military force into Syria to protect the Assad regime, and has thus complicated Israel’s efforts to thwart Hezbollah in Syria and Lebanon ever since.

To be clear, Putin hasn’t been sacrificing Russian military power in Syria out of any affinity for Bashar al-Assad. Officially, he’s justified the move to the Russian people as a strike against the Syrian rebels and their many connections to Islamist terrorist groups. Islamist terrorism is still a very sore spot in Russia because of the Chechen terror attacks years ago—a spot which has not stopped Putin from allying with Ramzan Kadyirov, Chechnya’s own dictator, in killing civilians in Ukraine.

But Putin is really doing it to help bolster Iran’s influence in the region and the resulting chaos ensuing from it. A Middle East that is more influenced by Israel and a moderate-moving Saudi Arabia is the opposite of chaos, and Russia is all about chaos. Since the Ukraine war exploded in early 2022, Russia became more aligned with Iran because of Tehran’s willingness to supply Moscow with killer drones and other weapons much more specifically suited to the war with Kyiv than Russia’s existing weapons cache.

Now Russia has thus become more willing to tow Iran’s rhetoric about Israeli actions in the Hamas war. Barely more than three weeks after October 7, Putin gave a live TV address that mimicked the absurd falsehoods about the war that we’ve become used to hearing from ignorant college encampment protesters, saying: “There is no justification for the terrible events taking place in Gaza now, where hundreds of thousands of innocent people are being killed indiscriminately, without having anywhere to flee or hide from the bombing.”

“Hundreds of thousands?” “Indiscriminately?” Really, Vladimir? Chaos, meet destruction. Destruction, meet chaos.

But as bad and transparent as Putin’s falsehoods against Israel are, never forget that, as a former KGB leader, he is well-versed in much more sophisticated forms of Russian misinformation, those that can truly damage Israel. For everyone who continues to brush off Putin as just a greedy thug, or Russia as just a “big gas station with nukes,” take note of this blast from the past of sophisticated Russian propaganda and chaos rhetoric: 

Russian disinformation tactics have hurt Jews probably more than anything else on earth, starting with the blood libels and Protocols of the Elders of Zion during the time of the tsars, to the KGB’s enforcement of the USSR’s official anti-Semitic policies, to Putin’s modern embodiment of KGB “psy-op” tactics in our own time.

We’ve all experienced these tactics from Moscow many times in the last several decades whether we realize it or not. In fact, one of the then-KGB’s most elaborate and ambitious disinformation campaigns sheds some light on just how good Russia has always been at inducing chaos and playing on Jewish vulnerabilities at the same time. 

Russian disinformation tactics have hurt Jews probably more than anything else on earth.

For me that moment came when I was just 16-years-old and closely observed, along with much of the rest of world Jewry, the John “Ivan the Terrible” Demjanjuk trial in Israel. 

From the beginning, something seemed “off” to me about the whole process. I didn’t like that the trial was moved from the courthouse to a large theater. I bristled at the trial being used as an excuse to drag Holocaust survivors through their painful past once more. Also, it wasn’t a trial debating whether crimes had or had not been committed like the famous trial of Adolf Eichmann a quarter-century earlier. Instead, it was solely about determining if Demjanjuk was indeed the infamous Treblinka death camp guard known as “Ivan the Terrible.” I never found any of the identification testimony to be very convincing, and there was a big reason why.

He was the wrong guy.

As his fervently right-wing Zionist Israeli attorney Yoram Sheftel painstakingly explained in his book Defending Ivan the Terrible, Demjanjuk may or may not have been a Nazi sympathizer or even a low-level member of the German forces, but he was definitely not Ivan the Terrible, and, by the time the trial started, even the Israeli judiciary knew it.

But Demjanjuk was a patsy in the KGB’s desire to use the case of the still missing and unpunished Ivan to cool the growing ties between Israel, Ukraine, and world Jewry in their combined efforts to win freedom for Soviet Jews and undermine the USSR’s entire totalitarian regime. Fingering a retired Ukrainian American autoworker living outside Cleveland seemed to be worth it to the KGB in the Soviet Empire’s final years.

Luckily, the USSR collapsed anyway. Putin’s Russia endures, and it still uses these kinds of tactics with no worries whatsoever about the long-term costs.

China chimes in

China likes to bolster its power internationally by increasing the number of nations who economically depend on the Beijing regime for everything from infrastructure to foreign imports.

The infrastructure part of that equation is known as the “Belt and Road Initiative,” which, at best, makes many smaller nations rely on Chinese expertise and, at worst, makes them slaves to Chinese financing for that expensive (and collapsing) infrastructure forevermore.

Israel is getting an added bitter taste of this right now as the Chinese-operated ports in Haifa seem to be benefiting from their safer distance from Gaza while Israeli-operated ports in the city of Ashdod have suffered some disruptions.

This dichotomy is the latest in the long-running controversy over the Haifa ports, which created tensions inside Israel and between Israel and the Trump administration in 2019. Israel had been trying to balance its desire for more Chinese investments with security concerns and worries over how that could anger the U.S. The war in Gaza has only made all of those problems even worse.

But that doesn’t mean everything is going according to plan for Beijing. While its economic influence in the Middle East is growing, especially when it comes to financial deals with Saudi Arabia, its political influence compared to the U.S. and Russia is minimal.

Most analysts correctly point out that China believes the best way to increase that influence is to undermine American political power in the region. Since 2021, Beijing has been trying to do that by taking a page from the Russian handbook and promoting disinformation campaigns that portray the U.S. as supporting racist policies that harm fairness and justice. Now, this narrative has now been added to China’s rhetoric against Israel’s conduct in the Gaza war. It all mirrors the Chinese response to Trump administration and congressional objections to Beijing’s dissolution of Hong Kong’s remaining autonomy in 2019. China retorted with a series of public comments about how life in America is exceedingly racist.

It appears Beijing sees using the Gaza war as an excuse to bash Israel aligns with its foreign policy goals overall.

That tactic should ring lots of alarm bells for everyone who knows, sadly, how popular claims that Israel is racist are throughout the world already. The only solace is that slur is so heavily repeated and contributed to by so many entities that perhaps China piling on this late in the game won’t make much of an influential difference.

Nevertheless, it appears Beijing sees using the Gaza war as an excuse to bash Israel aligns with its foreign policy goals overall. 

Iran’s destruction tactics

While Russia and Iran are both major agents of chaos in the Middle East, it’s important to note that while chaos is Russia’s direct goal, chaos is just an indirect result of Iran’s policies. 

The Iranian regime really only produces one thing: terrorism. That manifests itself mostly in its support for and control of its main foreign terror proxy armies: Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthis (there are many others, but those are the Big Three). It also supports terror attacks all over the world with varying frequency.

The Iranian regime really only produces one thing: terrorism.

It would be a mistake to think that Iran actually thinks of these terror armies as just chaos agents, because the real goal is for them to create as much death as possible, including the deaths of their own people. Iran sees itself not only fighting the West, but more primarily leading the war against Sunni Islam in a 1,400-year-old civil war for dominance of the faith. That means the deaths of Americans, Israelis, and Sunni Muslims all over the world are all fine by the mullahs in Tehran. 

Note that none of its terror armies are manned by Iranians, and only Hezbollah includes Shiite leaders with close personal ties to Iran. That’s the perfect recipe for a Tehran regime that feels comfortable sending these mostly non-Shiite fighters to their deaths as they attack other non-Shiite or non-Iranian fighters and civilians they may or may not care about slightly less. 

Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Iran has enjoyed the added financial benefits of Russia’s procurement of Tehran’s killer drones. Now, since October 7, Iran has also enjoyed the rhetorical bashing of Israel coming from Moscow and Beijing alike.

How does this end?

The key question is how far Russia and China will go to back up Iran if and when Hamas does collapse and Tehran comes under inevitable added pressure from its other proxies to protect them better from a similar fate. Tehran suffers from a tremendous and justifiable fear that a collapse of Hamas will start a process that could lead to the destruction of the mullahs’ regime within one-to-two years. That’s what happens to tyrannical rulers who are suddenly exposed to their own people and allies as weak. 

It’s that panic over the possible domino effect a Hamas collapse would create that’s igniting the Biden administration’s efforts to do anything to preserve at least some remnant of the terrorist army. Too many supposed experts on the American political scene are falling for the head fake that President Joe Biden’s increasing attacks and false statements against Israel are the result of the Democrats’ worries about carrying the heavily Muslim-populated swing state of Michigan. In reality, the large number of pro-Iranian agents and sympathizers inside the White House and the State Department mean these moves to please Tehran. That desperation has led to some very obvious and flailing errors lately, including multiple incidents of U.S. leaders falsely claiming Israel had accepted ceasefire terms to which it had not actually agreed—or, in some cases, hadn’t even seen.

If Hamas does collapse, Russia’s chaos policy would likely push it towards not intervening in a meaningful way, as the power vacuum in Tehran would likely produce enough chaos of its own for some time. China would also likely stand back and work on starting over with any possible new regime in Iran that could be under greater Saudi influence just as Beijing and Riyadh continue to solidify ties. 

But, as long as Hamas survives, this recent trend of Russia, China, and Iran ganging up on Israel will continue, which is another reason why Israel needs to finish Hamas off.

The End is Near

When Yeshurun kicked
Ishmael cried out
Then Yitzchak laughed
Removing all doubt

A plague of ancient darkness
That storm has come around
Light dims and refracts
Silence, the loudest sound

Sparks of destruction
Reveal the familiar enemy
Igniting our soul
Curing our identity

The path is guided,
As The End draws near
United or divided
Through joy or through tear

Our compass in alignment
The Red Heifer beckons
The prophet preaches
While God reckons

Always darkest before the dawn
Before The Light breaches the night
It’s our partner in battle
Our holy weapon in this fight

Progressive Terrorism

We have terrorism masquerading as free speech; anti-Semitism is now a credential for the human rights community. New York’s governor has hopes of reinstituting the anti-mask law. It was repealed on account of the pandemic. It’s now once again necessary—this time to unmask violent anti-Semites who benefit from the anonymity of crowds and the darkness of night.

This content is for Annual Subscriber and Monthly Subscriber members only.
Login Join Now

A Conversation with Ayaan Hirsi Ali

For political Islam and any other kinds of destructive ideas to be an actual threat to the west, the West has to be in a place of decline and demoralization.

This content is for Annual Subscriber and Monthly Subscriber members only.
Login Join Now

Hamas, Communism + The End of America

The hijacking—nay, the occupation—of campuses by Hamas sympathizers has less to do with a conflict 5,000 miles away and more to do with dethroning America.

This content is for Annual Subscriber and Monthly Subscriber members only.
Login Join Now

Empathy for Hamas, Not its Victims, on Turtle Island

Despite being rooted in empathy, this coddling fantasy is the height of racism. It denies Arabs and Muslims—who, these days, serve as stand-ins for blacks or native Latin Americans—of their agency and keeps it in the hands of Eurocentric Westerners.

This content is for Annual Subscriber and Monthly Subscriber members only.
Login Join Now

Islamist Propaganda Colonizes the West

The layered approach to conquest taken by Islamism was made possible by Joseph Goebbels and his Ministry of Propaganda and Public Enlightenment, which made a religion of Nazism in the same way that Islamism disguises its political agenda as a religious one.

This content is for Annual Subscriber and Monthly Subscriber members only.
Login Join Now
Subscribe to Our Newsletter
Please correct the marked field(s) below.