Hanukkah, Part 2

April 3, 2025

The Jewish Holiday Season

In John 9, Jesus does a messianic miracle: He gives sight to a blind person, blind from birth.

As He passed by, He saw a man blind from birth. And His disciples asked Him, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he would be born blind?” (John 9:1-2)

“Who sinned, him or his parents?”

There were three pilgrim feasts described in Leviticus 23 when the Jews had to come from all over to Jerusalem to celebrate. The Spring feasts were “Pesach” and “Ha Shavu’ot” (Weeks, Pentecost), and in the Autumn the Feast of Taberhacles, “Ha Sukkot”. However, by Jesus’ day, Hannukah became a fourth festival when a lot of Jews (although it was not mandatory by the Torah), would have come to Jerusalem for Hanukkah.

Instead of walking all the way down from Galilee just to turn around and go back, and then having to come back again several weeks later for Hanukkah, it is possible that Jesus would have hung out in Jerusalem. It was a long journey then by foot.

So this became the Jewish holiday season, that lasts from Autumn into early Winter. We have a lot of holidays together.

The Issue of Blindness

Unlike in the Pagan world where literacy was only for the aristocracy, every Jew had to be able to read the Torah to worship God. So to have been born blind would have been seen as a curse.

And His disciples asked Him, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he would be born blind?” Jesus answered, “It was neither that this man sinned, nor his parents; but it was so that the works of God might be displayed in him. (John 9:2-3)

“Who sinned, this person or his parents?” Jesus said, “Neither one.”

Unrepentant sin can cause illness, as shown in 1 Corinthians and in Psalm 32. But to say that some illness or birth defect has to be the result of some sin is ridiculous. Jesus clearly said it isn’t.

He began to develop the Hanukkah theme here by identifying Himself as the Light of the world, building up to the Hanukkah celebration in John 10. John is the most festal of the four Gospels, presenting Jesus as the Passover Lamb. In John, Jesus reveals Himself as the fulfillment of the holidays the most. Throughout most of John’s Gospel, Jesus is depicted as going to or from Jerusalem, or getting ready to go, or just come back. John is very Jerusalem-centered and diligent to show Jesus as the messianic fulfillment of the holidays. Here Jesus brought up the subject of light as the people were focused on lights that represented the Jews being called as a light to the nations.

“We must work the works of Him who sent Me as long as it is day; night is coming when no one can work. While I am in the world, I am the Light of the world.” (John 9:4-5)

The Jews are called to be “owr goyim”, the light to the nations, the light of the world. He formed the clay of spittle and put it on the eyes of the young boy.

When He had said this, He spat on the ground, and made clay of the spittle, and applied the clay to his eyes, and said to him, “Go, wash in the pool of Siloam” (which is translated, Sent). So he went away and washed, and came back seeing. (John 9:6-7)

And go wash in the Pool of Shiloach. “Shiloach” is the same word we get “apostle”, one who is sent. The Pool of Siloam was a pool at the end of Hezekiah’s tunnel. It drew water from the Kidron and then it went to the Pool of Shiloach through the tunnel. It is still there. You can walk through it. “One who was sent”. Go wash in the Pool of Shiloach.

He answered, “The man who is called Jesus made clay, and anointed my eyes, and said to me, ‘Go to Siloam and wash’; so I went away and washed, and I received sight.” (John 9:11)

The Salvific Message of the Miracles

The healing miracles of Jesus have to be understood this way: They were miracles only the Messiah could do, such as making the blind see and the deaf hear. Once neurological tissue is dead, it doesn’t regenerate. If the optic nerve is dead, that person is not going to see again. Even today it would take an act of God to rejuvenate nerve tissue.

He did miracles for three reasons: The first was obviously the compassion of God. Second, the miracles were emblematic of His messiahship. And third, they are demonstrations of salvation in some way.

The healing miracles in the Gospel of John always demonstrate salvation. In John 5 He told the paralytic, “Pick up your pallet and go your way; sin no more” (John 5:11-14) Now that was a case where sin caused the paralysis. Why did Jesus tell him, “Take your pallet” when he doesn’t need it anymore? Because it’s the piece of wood to which his flesh was confined. What Jesus was saying was, “Pick up your cross, live a crucified life, don’t sin anymore.” In figure, that’s what He was saying midrashically, in figure. The guy didn’t need it any more. We’re all lame until we pick up the cross. We can’t walk in the Spirit until we pick up the cross. Well, we’re all blind until we see Jesus.

But notice Jesus says, “Go wash in the Pool of Shiloach”. Again, baptism. The restoration of sight is always in proportion to obedience to the Lord. The more you do His will, the clearer you’re going to see. You didn’t get it all at once. When somebody is born, they don’t see at once. When somebody’s born again they don’t see at once. But baptism is an eye opener. You begin to understand your salvation when you understand co-burial and co-resurrection.

The Rejection of the Saved by the Unsaved

He continued to develop this theme. The boy must have been bar mitzvah age, because his parents say he’s of age.

His parents answered them and said, “We know that this is our son, and that he was born blind; but how he now sees, we do not know who opened his eyes, we do not know. Ask him; he is of age, he will speak for himself” (John 9:20:21).

Notice that his family rejected him.

Therefore the neighbors, and those who previously saw him as a beggar, were saying, “Is not this the one who used to sit and beg?” Others were saying, “This is he,” still others were saying, “No, but he is like him.” He kept saying, “I am the one” (John 9:8-9).

They said, “Well, we thought it was him, but it can’t be him, it must be somebody who looks like him.” The people who knew him couldn’t recognize him. Some said it was him, and others said no it was not him, it was somebody who only looked like him. And he kept saying, “I am the one”.

That’s the way unsaved people will always react when somebody gets born again. You’re not the same person to them. “That can’t be him. Jacob Prasch? He used to be a cocaine addict. I used to score coke from that guy! He dealt drugs in high school. That’s not him. It just looks like him.” Unsaved people always think that way, that it’s not us. It’s us, but it’s not us. They’ll always be confused about our identity once we come to know Jesus.

But even the family couldn’t handle it. Now remember, this is a Jewish setting. In verse 22, his parents said this because they were afraid of the Jews.

His parents said this because they were afraid of the Jews; for the Jews had already agreed that if anyone confessed Him to be Christ, he was to be put out of the synagogue . For this reason his parents said, “He is of age; ask him” (John 9:22-23).

As I always point out in John, there is a major translation problem with the word “Jew”, “Ioudaios”. It doesn’t mean people who were “Jewish” – they were ALL “Jewish”, Jesus was “Jewish” – it meant the religious establishment in and around Jerusalem and the Judeans, the people they controlled. Even in modern Israel you’ll see a lot more religious Jews and a lot more religious influence in Jerusalem than you will in Haifa or Tel Aviv. It meant the “Judeans”, the religious establishment – the Sanhedrin and the people they controlled.

And so, Jesus opened his eyes and we’re told Jesus found this guy wandering around.

Jesus heard that they had put him out, and finding him, He said, “Do you believe in the Son of Man?”

We had a joke in Israel, but it is no joke: When a “frum” (an Orthodox Jew) gets saved, the family has a funeral for him, but when a Muslim gets saved they also have a funeral for him, only it’s his own funeral.

Well, what does it say? Jesus found him. “Your family might reject you, but Jesus will find you, too.”

The Effects of Willful Blindness

Jesus turned His attention to the Pharisees:

Jesus said to them, “If you were blind, you would have no sin; but since you say, ‘We see,’ your sin remains.

In John 9 Jesus was comparing the willful blindness of the Pharisees to the unwillful blindness of this young guy. We’re all born blind. But from God’s perspective there’s a big difference between blindness and willful blindness. Those who are unwillfully blind will always invoke the mercy of Christ; those who are willfully blind will always invoke thejudgment of Christ.

This sets the stage for Hanukkah because it hearkens back to the time of the Maccabees. Can’t you people see what’s going on? They’re outlawing the reading of the Word of God, they’re outlawing the practice of “brit milah” (ritual circumcision), they’re bringing this Pagan stuff into the church – it’s becoming idolatry. Can’t you see what they’re doing?

Rejecting the True for the False

Then Jesus gave His pastoral discourse, which goes back to Psalm 23. It has Maccabean allusions to it because they were the true shepherds. Most of the clergy went along with the people

“A stranger they simply will not follow, but will flee from him, because they do not know the voice of strangers” (John 10:5).

Characteristic of John’s Gospel is the frequent reference to the Antichrist more than any of the other apostles, even more than Paul. In his Gospel he deals with Antichrist; in his epistle he refers to the Antichrist (1 John), and in the book of Revelation he fully reveals him. In his Gospel he quotes Jesus’ many references to the man of lawlessness: “If another comes in his own name, him you will believe” (John 5:43). “You are going to reject Me, but you will follow the false Christs,” ultimately, the Antichrist. He will make a treaty with them. He will deceive them.

In any event, John is always alluding to things about the Antichrist. Well, this is a general truth, but it becomes an eschatological truth. “Those who are really Mine, they are going to know the difference between Christ and Antichrist.”

“Truly, truly, I say to you, he who does not enter by the door into the fold of the sheep, but climbs up some other way, he is a thief and a robber. But he who enters by the door is a shepherd of the sheep. To him the doorkeeper opens, and the sheep hear his voice, and he calls his own sheep by name and leads them out. When he puts forth all his own, he goes ahead of them, and the sheep follow him because they know his voice” (John 10:1-4).

Somebody will know if something is of Jesus or not. If you believe the Bible, if you have the Holy Spirit, you will know if something hasn’t got it. You’ll know. “My sheep hear My voice.” (John 10:27)

This figure of speech Jesus spoke to them, but they did not understand what those things were which He had been saying to them (John 10:6).

A division occurred again among the Jews because of these words. Many of them were saying, “He has a demon and is insane. Why do you listen to Him?” Others were saying, “These are not the sayings of one demon-possessed. A demon cannot open the eyes of the blind, can he?” (vs. 19).

Again, if you operate in the Spirit of Jesus and if you minister in His character, those who are willfully blind are going to say that about you.

Jesus at Hanukkah

Now look at verse 22.

At that time the Feast of the Dedication took place at Jerusalem;

This was Hanukkah. Now again, “at that time” is specific. All this other stuff that is going on in chapter 9 and 10 is setting the stage for what’s going to come.

it was winter, and Jesus was walking in the temple in the portico of Solomon.

Now the Portico of Solomon today would be approximately located to the east of the Mosque of Aqsa,on the temple mount, on the southeast corner overlooking where the Kidron begins to turn into the Tyropean. And it was from there the apostle James would later be martyred, thrown off from the tower above it.

The Jews then gathered around Him, and were saying to Him, “How long will You keep us in suspense? If You are the Christ, tell us plainly.” Jesus answered them, “I told you, and you do not believe; the works that I do in My Father’s name, these testify of Me.

Now, the term “works” here would have the connotation, “semeion mipla’ot”, “signs and wonders”. “These bear witness to Me.” This goes back to John 5, the five things that bear witness to Jesus.

“But you do not believe because you are not of My sheep. My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me; and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand. My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand. I and the Father are one.” The Jews picked up stones again to stone Him. Jesus answered them, “I showed you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you stoning Me?” (John 10:26-32).

Now remember, we know everything that was in the temple from the Mishna. The only stones that were in Solomon’s portico were, of course, the stones of the disassembled altar.

In the story of Daniel, the prophet predicts what will happen with Antiochus Epiphanes and the Maccabees. Antiochus is a major type of the Antichrist, who slaughtered a pig in the temple before an image of Zeus, the Greek god, to whom he gave his own physical features. This is a major type of the Antichrist. And the altar – the stones of the altar (the “mizbeach”, we call them in Hebrew) – were holy. The Jews couldn’t throw the stones away. But neither could they sacrifice on it anymore because they were defiled by pig’s blood – an un-kosher animal – sacrificied to another god. They didn’t know whether to throw them away – they couldn’t throw them away because they were holy – but they couldn’t use them anymore, they had to build a new altar because they were defiled. So they had the stones stacked up in the temple, waiting for the Messiah to come.

At Hanukkah they believed the Messiah was going to come and tell them what to do with the stones. So the Messiah comes at Hanukkah and what do they do with the stones? They pick up the stones and try to stone the Messiah. It would be hard to believe those weren’t the stones of the altar based on what it says in the Mishna, because there were no other stones in Solomon’s portico. And the Mishna records everything in some detail. So based on the historical record, it would seem probable those were the stones.

The Jews answered Him, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out to be God.” Jesus answered them, “Has it not been written in your Law, ‘I said you are gods’? If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken), do you say of Him, whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’?

The Response of Rejection

We need to understand this idea of “you are gods”. The best way to translate it is small “g”, from “El Elohim”. God is the God of the universe. He made us in His image and likeness and gave us dominion over the creation. So we would be, as it were, a god over the creation, subordinate to the God who is Creator and act as His adjutants. Once that was forfeited through sin, Satan became the god of this world (2 Cor 4:4). But not “God”. You’ve got to understand the context. The god of the world, instead of man, became Satan. In other words, to a giraffe, man is god. We have dominion and power. The relationship to us of a giraffe is like the relationship of us to God. We know He is the Creator. That is what is meant by “you are gods,” not this “little god” stuff taught by Ken Copeland and Paul Crouch.

Now, while we are made in God’s image and likeness, Jesus is NOT made in His image and likeness. Jesus is God who became a man. The fullness of the Father dwells in Him bodily. If you want to know what God is like, look at Jesus.

Under the Law, under the Torah, you could know about God. The Jews could know about God through the Torah. You can know about God in the Old Testament. Under the New Testament, through being born again, you can know God. There’s a big difference between knowing about God and knowing God. If you know Jesus, you know God. You don’t know Him as well as you would like to or as well as you are going to, but you know Him. And even before we get to heaven, we all have a chance to get to know Him better.

But He uses this term, “I am the Son of God”. This hearkens back to John 8 where He uses the term “ego ami” – “I AM the I AM”. It is exactly how Yahweh identified Himself to the Hebrews through Moses in the book of Exodus and they wanted to stone Him for that.

“If I do not do the works of My Father, do not believe Me; but if I do them, though you do not believe Me, believe the works, so that you may know and understand that the Father is in Me, and I in the Father” (John 10:37-38).

Here He is arguing the Hebrew concept of “achtut”, of oneness from the “Sh’ma”, the same term used for marital unity, of marital consummation: becoming one flesh.

Therefore they were seeking again to seize Him, and He eluded their grasp. And He went away again beyond the Jordan to the place where John was first baptizing, and He was staying there. Many came to Him and were saying, “While John performed no sign, yet everything John said about this man was true.” Many believed in Him there (John 10:39-42).

Compare the Theologies

This is the Hebrew feast of signs and wonders. Look at the theology of Jesus compared to the theology of the modern church.

It began with the late John Wimber. He co-wrote a book with Kevin Springer called “Power Evangelism”, and had an influence on others including Nicky Gumbel of Holy Trinity Brompton. The premise was if unsaved people see signs and wonders, they would believe. These are power encounters between the demonic and the divine, and if they see the signs and wonders they’ll believe. Signs and wonders were the key to belief.

Well, without even dealing with the issue that so many of the signs are bogus and so many of the miracles cannot be medically authenticated, is it true? Do signs and wonders cause people to commit their lives to Christ? If were true, then why did Jesus say, “For which of these signs do you stone Me”? (John 10:32) He made a blind person see and their reaction? They wanted to kill Him anyway. If signs and wonders are the key to belief, how do you explain Hanukkah in John 10? Remember, “these signs follow” (Mark 16:20).

The only thing Jesus had to do was put on a show for Herod and He wouldn’t have been crucified. All He had to do was the “Kenny/Benny” stuff: Put on a show. “A wicked and adulterous generation seeks a sign” (Matthew 12:39). When you see people flock to see Kenny and Benny and this stuff, and going to Holy Trinity Brompton or to Kensington Temple, that is a wicked and adulterous generation seeking a sign.

I’m not a Cessasionist. I believe in all the gifts of the Spirit, I believe in miracles. The view that the gifts of the Spirit ended with the Apostles is a doctrinal error. God does miracles now. God does heal people now. There is the real and there is the counterfeit. Just because much of what we see today is bogus that does not mean there isn’t the real. I’ve seen the real. Having said that, I would rather see nothing than see a counterfeit. “These signs follow.” They were never the focus.

I always say Jesus never had a “miracle crusade”. He had miracles, but never a miracle crusade. Jesus never had a “healing crusade”. He had healings, but never a healing crusade. He had repentance crusades.

The Place They Believed

Where did the people believe? Where they saw the show? Where they saw the signs? Where they saw the miracles? No. Although John did no miracle, everything John said about Jesus was true.

Faith cometh by seeing? No, it is not John Wimber, it’s John the Baptist. Faith doesn’t come by seeing, “Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing the Word of God” (Romans 10:17).

The first thing Jesus did when He began His public ministry is He went out to the Jordan to get baptized. Why the Jordan? We need to understand the connotation of the Jordan and what it meant to the Jews. That is where Joshua first entered the land. In other words, when things get that bad for that long, you have got to go back to the beginning.

“While John performed no sign, yet everything John said about this man was true.” Many believed in Him there.

Not where there were miracles, but where the Word was preached. Signs and wonders are not, and have never been, the key to belief.

The Wrong View

The Jews had a wrong view of Hanukkah. In other words, they had a wrong view of “dedication”. Hanukkah was not simply “dedication”; actually, Hannukah was RE-dedication.

Once again, the temple had been defiled. People are not going to believe until the temple’s rededicated. People are not going to believe until the true Gospel is preached. Save the Frank Sinatra records for Hoboken, New Jersey – not for the house of God. That is what it is saying.

John performed no sign. “For which one of these signs do you stone Me?” They had it all wrong. What they wanted – what the Jews wanted – was a Messiah who would come in the character of the Maccabees and get rid of the Romans the way the Maccabees got rid of the Greeks. As long as they thought Jesus was going to be a political Messiah and give them the kingdom then, they were all for Him. As soon as they found out that instead of making a right turn to the Fortress Antonio, He made a left and kicked the money changers out of the temple, the same crowd was yelling, “Crucify Him!” (Luke 23:21).

He wasn’t concerned with the Romans; God could take care of them any time. He was concerned with those who were prostituting the Word of God and profiteering on the blood of the Lamb. The Maccabees weren’t concerned with Antiochus, they were concerned with Menelaus. “Get rid of Menelaus, then God will help us get rid of Antiochus.” It is the same now. Get rid of Nicky Gumbel, then God will help us get rid of Alan Williams and homosexual bishops and whoever.

It’s the collaborator. “No, get the Romans!” No, you don’t understand. Why are the Romans here? “You want Me to do what the Maccabees did? How did Antiochus get that kind of power? It is because your fathers sinned; because your forefathers collaborated; because those that knew what was wrong shut up instead of standing up. Now you want Me to get rid of the Romans the way the Maccabees got rid of the Greeks? How did the Romans get here? The same way. They got here because people shut up when they should have stood up -- because people collaborated.” The Herodians actually collaborated with the Romans. First get rid of Menelaus, first get rid of the Herodians, the Sanhedrin, etc..

It's the Same Today
Well, today it’s the same. Jesus began with a small band because that was what the Maccabees did. They began with a small band. Jesus didn’t testify against the Romans – everybody knew what they were – He testified against those among His own people who should have known better.

You’re telling me that Billy Graham doesn’t know it is wrong to lift up the pope of Rome as a great spiritual leader? You’re telling me a clergyman from Holy Trinity Bromptondoesn’t know it’s wrong to endorse books by a Druid who ordains homosexuals? Crazy. It’s the same, exact thing. They’re getting in the same way.

The stage is being set for the advent of Antichrist. The public reading of the Word of God is going to be outlawed. “It’s hate literature.” They’re saying it in Canada, they’re saying it in Sweden, they’re going to say it here. And so-called clergy will go along with it.

God’s looking for something: He’s looking for Maccabees. He’s looking for what He’s always looked for when things got like this: He’s looking for people who realize the enemy is Menelaus. He’s looking for people who will take a stand. He’s looking for people who will pay a price. He’s looking for people who really want to rededicate His house. That’s who He’s looking for.

It’s not going to come from the top; it’s going to come from the rank and file. It’s not going to come from big groups or big churches; it never did and it never will. It will come from small groups, small fellowships. Expect disappointment, expect hardship, expect betrayal. But Daniel prophesied that in the end they would win and they did. (Dan 11:45). Revelation prophesies that we will win and so we shall.

“For wicked men to triumph, good men must merely remain silent.” It’s not Scripture, but the principle certainly seems to be, and so it is.

They’re looking for signs, for shows. That’s not what’s going to make people believe. If that was the case, Britain would have been saved a long time ago. Revival would have come a long time ago. It just doesn’t work that way. It works this way – from the heart. This is the way it has to be. If it doesn’t go this way, it doesn’t go at all.

Who Will Rise Aginst Menelaus Today?

We are looking for something. We are looking for those who are not afraid to pick up a sword against Menelaus; those who will stand against Evangelicals who go down theEcumenical road; those who will stand against men like Stephen Sizer who stood on a platform with a Muslim and denounced Israel and called it his Christian ministry. He said nothing about the genocidal extermination of Christians throughout the Muslim world or about our brethren in Christ being killed in every Arab country in the world. No, but he will stand with the Muslims on the same platform in a church, in an Anglican cathedral, and denounce Israel. He is my first enemy, not the Muslim. Stephen Sizer is my enemy because he is the enemy of God.

My first enemy is not an Archbishop who will ordain homosexuals. My enemy is Nicky Gumbel, a man who will endorse him and lead born-again Christians into reading his books and applauding him.

Sound radical? The Maccabees were radical. They’re the only ones who are going to win.

The temple is defiled. Do you want to be a Maccabee? I can’t answer that question for you. What I can tell you is you’re going to be rejected. What I can tell you is you’re going to be a target.

“Those who have insight among the people will give understanding to the many; yet they will fall by sword and by flame, by captivity and by plunder for many days” (Daniel 11:33).

Those who have insight among the people will give understanding to the many. Yet they will fall by the sword until they are refined and purified.

“Some of those who have insight will fall, in order to refine, purge and make them pure until the end time; because it is still to come at the appointed time” (Daniel 11:35).

I can’t tell you to join the Maccabees, but I can tell you if you do join the Maccabees, you will have the victory, you will have the blessing. I can tell you if you do join the Maccabees what you should do; I can tell you that. I can tell you all about the Maccabees. I can tell you anything you want to know about the Maccabees probably. But the one thing I can’t tell you is if, or not, you really want to be a Maccabee. That’s a question you have to answer for yourself.

Me? I stand in Modi’in. I throw my lot in with Jehuda, Mathias, Jonathan, Eleazar. I made that decision a long time ago. I don’t enjoy being a Maccabee, but some day – some day – I know that the temple will be rededicated and once more that lamp is going to burn in God’s house.

God bless.

< Older Post

Newer Post >

How AI is transforming defensive capabilities against drones

October 12, 2026

Written by - Rubin Rothler LLB, LLM Examples abound in history of how the responses to innovations in technology that disrupted and transformed the nature of warfare have taken a delayed time to be adapted. Chain mail and armour had to be altered and bolstered to repel arrows from the English Longbow in Medieval Europe, but this didn't occur in time to the dismay of the French at Agincourt. It took the Spanish decades to redesign their cumbersome Galleons that lay prey to the swifter English ships. Napoleonic era field tactics were still being employed during the American Civil War, with mass charges mowed down by the Gatling barrel machine gun. Trench warfare was only later embraced during WWI. With the cheap manufacture of drones and the advances in AI a new chapter has opened in how war is waged in our own time. The conflicts in Ukraine and Iran have demonstrated how asymmetric warfare has become as much an economic calculation as a game of cat and mouse. Drones (and relatively cheaply manufactured ballistic missiles by Iran) are being shot down at great expense. AI which has been extensively deployed for target identification in Gaza is also proving to be a vital tool in hunting incoming drones. But as in the delayed development of military countermeasures historically, drones are ahead of AI in the battlefield. This is reflected in the enormity of Russian military casualties that have fallen victim to Ukrainian drones. AI is able to cut through the 'background noise' of distracting projectiles, birds and other debris to home in efforts to eliminate the actual drone target. The magic formula is speed and precision. Humans can detect and assess a threat, but AI can process radar, cameras and other sensors almost instantly, and with increasing accuracy predict where a drone intends to strike. When swamped with a wave drone attack, AI acts to identify and track the multiple threats. AI can also help decide how to respond. Depending on the system, the response could involve electronic warfare, an interceptor drone, a missile or a gun-based system. Ukraine has installed automated machine gun turrets instructed by AI to protect Kiev. In some cases, humans still make the final decision to engage, while AI handles the calculations and tracking required to make that decision quickly. More broadly, drone warfare is becoming a contest between autonomous systems. The challenge is no longer simply building a better missile or a better drone. It is building a system that can see the threat first, understand it quickly and respond before the drone reaches its target. In that sense, AI is becoming a critical part of air defence. The advantage may increasingly belong to whoever can make the fastest and most accurate decisions—not necessarily whoever manufactures the most expensive weapons. AI's pace of progress is exponential. It is beyond comprehension what capacity could be realized in even the next 2-3 years. The combination of drones, robotics and AI may render the traditional military hardware of tanks, frigates and fighter jets almost functionally obsolete. The development of AI's course of military application will be largely directed by the conflicts where it is deployed. In the pre-AI world of 1987, the black Friday market crash during the Reagan Administration saw a dangerous drop in the Dow, where computer analysis issued sell orders against a background of Reagan's massive budget deficits. Amidst Reagan's budget deficits this created an environment where social security was looted to fund defence spending. A supposed conservative President ran a fiscal policy with simultaneous increases in the Pentagon budget, coupled with tax cuts. The computer generated sell off was beyond the functional control of brokers and market makers, while the Soviets attempted to engineer market irregularities affecting the American economy which had further global ramifications due to massive American trade deficits with Japan under Reagan. The current Securities exchange environment is at best no less complex now. Given the spectre of what transpired in 1987 with computerised over control of stock exchange trading, and a shadow hanging over the bond market we are left to ponder could another such scenario be triggered in the age of AI? And even more illuminous prospect over shadows us now with the question can AI gain a decision-making operational capacity over command-and-control decisions. Certainly, for tactical weapons systems or even a doomsday scenario with Russia, China, India or Pakistan placing nuclear launch control in the hands of AI that could result in an exchange that either the US, Britain, France or Israel would be forced to react to. Without scaremongering it is necessary for strategic planners to prevent the nuclear powers that be from arriving at the precipice of such an abyss.

Interconnected Conflicts: The Risk of a New Thirty Years' War. By Rubin Rothler - LLB, MLB

September 21, 2026

The interlinked nature of third-party involvement in the ongoing conflicts in Iran and Ukraine has increasingly come to the fore in recent weeks. It emerged that China has not only been providing Iran with radar systems, navigation tools, and electronic warfare technology, but also high-resolution satellite imagery and geospatial data to direct its rockets. The same great-power relationships that are shaping the Middle East are affecting the conduct and constraints of the war in Ukraine. It is apparent that a reciprocation in kind is dictating Russia's conduct towards the US in Iran. Intelligence and targeting support mirror similar U.S. assistance to Ukraine. But this picture becomes murkier when considering the backroom accommodations Trump is willing to give Putin. Recently, Trump pressured Zelensky to stop targeting Russian diesel infrastructure, saying the attacks were causing a shortage of the fuel that is "hurting the world." The U.S. national average price for diesel, which is used by trucks, trains, ships, and farm equipment, rose above six dollars a gallon for the first time last Thursday. Such interventions demonstrate how developments on the battlefield in Ukraine can no longer be considered independently of wider economic and geopolitical calculations. China has been using tankers that are already at sea, when that runs out the American blockade will create shortage problems for the Chinese economy, as China no longer gets Venezuelan oil and is reliant on Iran and international spot market prices. The war with Iran is now spreading to Yemen, with the Houthis attempting to replicate the Iranian chokehold model perfected in the Strait of Hormuz. The strategic importance of controlling or threatening critical maritime chokepoints is central to the wider contest. What happens in the Gulf can therefore have consequences for shipping, energy markets, and military calculations far beyond the immediate theatre. So far, the US has declined Saudi requests to slow the Houthi advance. Neither Turkey nor Egypt seems inclined to come to Saudi Arabia's aid. This is despite the signing of a very recent mutual defence pact between Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan. More developments can happen in these conflicts on an average day than can be afforded mention, but they should be increasingly understood as interconnected parts of a wider geopolitical confrontation. Assistance in one theatre triggers reciprocal action in another. Consequently, these cease to be discrete, containable conflicts and are extending into prolonged multinational conflicts. There is a distinct possibility that these may become frozen conflicts over time. A more terrifying eventuality is something more akin to the Thirty Years' War, which was fought in the first half of the 17th century in Europe. It is important to remember that this calamity, which ravaged Europe, began as a localized rebellion that gradually drew in more and more powers. The initial religious nature of the fighting gave way to political struggles. The mechanism by which a localized conflict becomes a multinational struggle offers a historical warning worth considering. The danger today is that a collection of individually distinct conflicts could become sufficiently interconnected that containing any one of them becomes increasingly difficult. Iran, Ukraine, Russia, China, the United States, and the conflict involving the Houthis are already linked by military assistance, intelligence, energy, trade, and strategic competition. The question, therefore, is no longer simply how any one of these conflicts ends. It is whether they can remain separate conflicts at all. (Author is an Israeli American lawyer academically qualified in British and in U.S.A. law, and a graduate of the School of Oriental & African Studies, London. He is a Jewish believer in Jesus and is currently based in Israel).

Prayer Request

By David Passmore • September 12, 2026

Moriel & Jacob Prasch request prayer for our sister in Jesus - Wendy Blomkamp, widow of Brother Fred Blomkamp (now with The Lord), the founder of Moriel South Africa Branch (not to be confused with Moriel's Ebyown Aids Children's Mission in South Africa founded by David Royle). Wendy, (an equestrian rider of all things) is originally from West Yorkshire, England but has lived most of her life in South Africa and is currently in retirement in the USA. Unfortunately, Wendy is diagnosed with inoperable pre terminal cancer with cardio pullmonary complications. The Lord will either intervene supernaturally or call her home. We request prayer for Wendy and her beloved family and wisdom for her physicians. In Christ, All at Moriel

What would happen to Israel if the House is controlled by Democrats, and if the Republicans lose control of the Senate?

By David Passmore • September 7, 2026

The US midterm elections are around the corner and the results could have profound effects on US foreign policy concerning Israel. Much has been said about this vote being a referendum on Trump's unpopular war with Iran. But it can equally be said to be about Trump's other foreign policy engagements that are viewed rather more favourably like the overthrow of Maduro in Venezuela and his replacement with a pro-American regime. With Israel the picture is less clear. It used to be a given that Israel enjoyed bipartisan support on the Hill. You could count on the fingers of one hand the number of politicians opposed to supporting Israel - the occasional fringe Democrat representing a singular Michigan constituency with a high Arab origin demographic, or a rare odd ball Republican preaching strict isolationism. This dynamic has shifted quickly in the last decade. The Democrats have all but abandoned any inclination of a pro-Israel position. Even establishment figures like Chuck Schumer have been pressured to side with the Party's radical left wing. With 60-80% of Democrats now anti-Israel, Israel can no longer rely on Jewish Democrats to oppose anti-Zionism or antisemitism. The most outspoken Democratic member of the Senate advocating a pro-Israel position, Senator John Fetterman of Pennsylvania is being pressured to resign and leave the party even by Pennsylvania's Jewish Governor Shapiro and Soros sponsored Philadelphia Prosecutor Krasner. This is happening concurrently with mass endorsement from 170 leading Hollywood Jewish actors writing a letter of support for Mark Ruffallo - despite his antisemitic comments naming Jewish investors supporting a Hollywood studio mega merger as being associated with apartheid genocide. However most shocking, were the comments by Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel who stood before an audience of Jewish Democrats last weekend telling them they may need to sacrifice the safety, and even the future, of their own people in exchange for saving the rest of humanity. Such rhetoric is contrary to basic human instincts of survival and self-preservation. If any other nation were suggested this course of action, I wonder what their response would be? On the Republican side the foreboding sense of an altering course towards Israel no longer seems so distant. The anti-Israel faction in the Republican party led by Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens and Nick Fuentes are now being supported by Vice President Vance. Jewish kingpins in the Trump Administration such as Witkoff and Kushner have been tied to business dealings in N.Y. with the Muslim Brotherhood controlled Qatari government through its business holdings. Should Republicans lose control of the Senate while Democrats take the House, Israel could find itself having to drastically re-access its relationship with Washington. We wouldn't see an immediate break in ties. American military, intelligence, technological and strategic cooperation with Israel is too integrated into the core of US institutions and corporations that would take a protracted period to dismantle. However, the power of Congress is in no way feeble. Congress controls funding, foreign-assistance legislation, sanctions, arms-related legislation and, perhaps most importantly, the political milieu in which an administration operates. A Democratic House combined with a Senate no longer controlled by Republicans could place enormous pressure on Trump to alter his attitude towards Israel. Practically this could entail demanding further accountability from Israel over military operations in Gaza, and the West Bank Settlers causing civilian casualties and property damage. Military aid could face more conditions or restrictions, but an immediate cutoff is unlikely. Israel has historically depended upon the presumption that regardless of who was President, there would be a robust enough bipartisan coalition in Congress to prevent a major deterioration in the relationship. Now the opposite appears true. Israel is taking the gamble of solely relying on a friendly President like Trump getting elected to maintain cordial relations. With the erosion of even much of Jewish American support for Israel and the hijacking of the Democratic party by a pro Islamist socialist left seen in Mamdani and others, Israel is forced to confront the inescapable reality that the last strong bastion of support for it is the Republican Party's evangelical base. But even younger voters in this key demographic are beginning to question support for Israel. The hostility displayed by the Haredim in Jerusalem and elsewhere against Christians including evangelicals, is to say the least counter-productive to the national interest. To attack the one friend Israel has left with a proven track record of loyalty and is vital to pro-Zionism internationally, is particularly detrimental to the national interest. It is Iran with its Mahdiist interpretations of jihad and sharia as a religious ideology that drives its hatred of Israel and the USA, and The West, to the detriment of the interests of the majority of the Iranian populace who want non hostile co-existence. Such religious fanaticism and ideologically fuelled hatred ought not be given place in Israeli Judaism. It too, will generate adverse consequences for the majority of Israelis, including religious moderates, who desire an ongoing friendship with Evangelical Christians whose theology is not one of anti Semitism, but of proven Philo-Semitism and pro Zionism.

Don't bit ethe hand that feeds you - Irish hypocrisy towards Israel

By David Passmore • August 21, 2026

Don't bite the hand that feeds you - Irish hypocrisy towards Israel Rubin Rothler LLB, LLM Amongst European nations, Ireland in recent years has gained the reputation as being the leading anti-Zionist country. The Irish Republic has never been favourably inclined to Israel. It only established an Embassy in Tel Aviv in 1996. In poll after poll the vast majority of the Irish public have indicated hostility towards Zionism and strong support for Palestinian Statehood. The curious aberration to this is that in British Ruled Northern Ireland support is demarcated along sectarian lines. Catholic Republican areas predictably tend to ardently support the Palestinian cause, while Protestant Unionist communities are overwhelmingly pro-Israel. Perhaps some credence can be given to sentiments of traditional Catholic antisemitism hardwired into the Irish psyche as contributing towards this disposition. It was certainly odd that the Irish government promptly sent a delegation to the Nazi German Ambassador in Dublin to convey condolences after news of Hitler's suicide broke at the end of WW2. But more concretely if you were to ask the average Irish protester on a pro-Palestine march the basis of their empathy for the Palestinian cause, they would point to the ostensible parallels between the Irish experience of fighting for independence from British colonial oppression to the plight of Palestinians living under Israeli occupation. Further remonstrations on a diplomatic level concern the actions of the IDF interreacting with Irish Peace Keepers in Southern Lebanon that have caused the deaths of several Irish Peace Keepers over the decades in friendly fire incidents. Ireland has contributed the most peace keepers to this mission per capita and the government has condemned Israel for these deaths that they view as avoidable. This animosity towards Israel is unbalanced. There are reasons to consider that Ireland and Israel have a shared experience of national liberation. Both countries fought the British in the pursuit of independence. Both countries made great efforts to resurrect their ancient languages for modern wide scale use. Both the Irish and Jews form major diaspora communities in New York. Despite all this Ireland ranks as Israel's second largest export market after the US. The preponderance of Israeli exports to Ireland comprises electronic integrated circuits, micro-assemblies, and tech manufacturing components. American multinational colossal tech corporations like Intel are substantially engrossed in this trade through the chain of supply. Ireland and Israel are hubs for design and manufacture of high-tech hardware components for US corporations. So, due to the nature of the most prosperous and competitive sectors of their respective economies, Israel and Ireland are inextricably bound in bilateral trade ties. Resolutions from the Irish government to impose sanctions on West Bank originating produce is merely perfunctory rhetoric. Such actions amount to a drop in the bucket in terms of impact to overall trade. The stark reliance of Ireland on advanced Israeli aviation equipment recently caused a spectacle when Ireland's new government jet struggled to land in heavy fog due to it being ordered without an advanced Israeli made navigation system. This was directly due to a short-sighted government decision not to buy Israeli military technology. There is a marked disparity between the official position of the Irish government designed for domestic public consumption and the economic policies that it actually pursues towards Israel. The government is acutely aware that the US is massively invested in the Irish economy and they don't want to do anything to jeopardise this. Washington demands that their enterprises in Dublin are intertwined with operations in Israel. The Irish government dare not even prevent US military supply flights refuelling at Shannon Airport on their way to Tel Aviv. The Irish government knows that times change and now the gripping social issue is the anti-immigrant/anti-Islam popular street protests. Soon the anti-Israel protests could become a mere side show only really promoted by Sinn Fein given the pressing ramifications of mass migration. So, in the meantime certain politicians will rile against the occupation, purported genocide and pass paltry sanctions against insignificant produce from the West Bank. All the while making hand over fist in money with the Israelis where it really matters in tech. (Author is an Israeli American lawyer academically qualified in British and in U.S.A. law, and a graduate of the School of Oriental & African Studies, London. He is a Jewish believer in Jesus and is currently based in Israel).

The tide has Changed

By David Passmore • July 31, 2026

The Tide Has Changed Rubin Rothler LLB, LLM The America that Netanyahu touched down on is a changed America. The death of Lindsey Graham represents a changing of the guard. Graham was a staunch Israeli ally who will most probably become an increasingly rare breed in Washington. Sixty percent of Americans now hold a unfavourable view of Israel which politicians are finding difficult to ignore. It was once unthinkable to believe that New York City with such a strong Jewish electoral base and influence on all sectors of economic and cultural life would have a mayor that is so hostile to Israel to such an extent that he is calling for the arrest of its Prime Minister. From all accounts Netanyahu was cordially welcomed at the White House. The official press release stated that the talks were constructive. What is more telling is what was left unsaid particularly concerning the proposed sale of F35's to Israel's new regional adversary -Turkey. Trump is keen to find a swift resolution to the Iran War, while Netanyahu is opposed to a premature departure. When the US and Israel initiated their attacks on Iran over five months ago, Trump and Netanyahu appeared united in the War's goals and purpose. But as the protracted conflict has staggered to topple the Iranian regime fractures have emerged. Much has been said about the imminent political realities both leaders face. The Republicans could take a big hit in the November midterm elections should the war continue and global energy markets be negatively impacted. Netanyahu is anxious to demonstrate a big win to the Israeli public with the upcoming October election. In Israel, the Iran War is not viewed in isolation, but rather as an extension of the response to the colossal disaster of the October 7th massacre. Netanyahu must rehabilitate his reputation as a competent steward of national security having had the greatest loss of civilian life in an attack happening under his watch. Aside from the Iran issue, Trump is being pressured by Erdogan to insist upon Israeli withdrawal from Syrian territory pre-emptively seized by Israel following the toppling of Assad. Trump has also indicated disapproval of the extent of continuing Israeli measures against Hezbollah in southern Lebanon, questioning the proportionality employed. Netanyahu is not in an envious position. Throughout his tenure and political career, he lauded his ability to engage successfully with the American public by zealously advocating Israel's position. Yet under his government Israel's reputation has plummeted in the US. Trump may be the last US President to extend such overwhelming bilateral support to Israel. The days of politicians like Lindsey Graham are fast ending. While John Fetteman and Marco Rubio appear to be remaining more solid, even some of the most warmly inclined leading Republican and Democrat voices like Donald Trump and Rahm Emanuel have nuanced their support for Israel. The tide has shifted and will at best level off if not continuing to shift further. (Author is an Israeli American lawyer academically qualified in British and in U.S.A. law, and a graduate of the School of Oriental & African Studies, London. He is a Jewish believer in Jesus and is currently based in Israel).

The Saudi Nuclear Deal: An attempt to alter the Regional Balance of Power

By David Passmore • July 24, 2026

The Saudi Nuclear Deal: An attempt to alter the Regional Balance of Power Rubin Rothler LLB, LLM The initiative to develop a civilian nuclear program in Saudi Arabia with US assistance isn't new. There were concrete plans discussed towards these ends during the first Trump Administration. The recent announcement to actualize this deal follows the geo-political regional tumult in the wake of the Iran War. Several dimensions of motivation underlie the US decision. An overarching US strategic agenda is to keep the Saudis firmly in the American sphere of influence. Washington knows all too well that the Chinese and Russians are eager to offer their nuclear technical assistance to the Saudis in order to draw them closer to their camp. On a personal note, the nuclear agreement is a significant achievement for Bin Salaman. The Saudis have long had designs to diversify their energy supplies. Having a civilian nuclear program also adds prestige to Saudi Arabia as an emerging market economy. For the US, a monopoly on contracting companies for the requisite construction offers lucrative economic opportunities. Although the Civilian Nuclear deal does not allow the enrichment of Uranium, the Saudis will be in a position to do so if Washington gives the green light. This will act as a counterbalanced threat hanging over the Iranians. After the recent flare up of renewed fighting with Iran due to their lack of adherence to the moratorium of understanding, something had to budge in Trump's estimation. A reconfiguration of the power balance in the Gulf by introducing the potential of Saudi Arabia to be able to acquire nuclear weapons shifts the dynamic and places further pressure on Iran to strictly abstain from nuclear proliferation. Despite Israeli concerns about the agreement, Trump sought to assuage their alarm by making it contingent upon Saudi Arabia normalizing relations with them. Given the inherently unstable nature of an autocratic Saudi regime Israel views a diplomatic relationship with the Saudis as being on precarious footing in the long term. Israel is already forced to contend with the implications of one nuclear armed Muslim state - Pakistan and it will further weaken its own deterrent capability if another similarly capable hostile neighbour were to emerge in the future. The roles of Turkey and Qatar in all this foray are a wild card. Officially Turkey is served under the NATO nuclear umbrella for defence that is subject to US control. However, its civilian nuclear program remains in its infancy. Now with the Saudi deal, Erdogan may be inclined to exert pressure on the US to help accelerate his own nuclear program. Just as Erdogan's efforts to acquire F35 fighter jets from the US greatly disturbed Israeli military planners, a heightened Turkish nuclear ability will intensify this fear. Qatar views itself as pursuing its own independent foreign policy that has managed to remain rather neutral during the current war, thereby escaping the ire of Iran's strikes on US regional assets. Overall, the Qatari government has grown closer to the Turkish vision for the region and so likely isn't particularly amiable to the Saudi agreement. Ultimately the Saudi deal is a gamble. Many will see it as throwing more fuel on the fire which will further imperil the tinder box region and heighten tensions. But Trump finds himself at a continuing impasse with a stubborn regime in Tehran that is leveraging their geographic hold on the straits of Hormuz to inflict damage on the global energy markets. Iranian strikes upon US Arab regional allies have underscored the de facto alliance between Israel and the Arabs against Iran and its Shia proxies. The US hopes to use the Saudi nuclear deal as a means of making this alliance official by having Saudi Arabia joining the Abraham Accords as a pre-condition. (Author is an Israeli American lawyer academically qualified in British and in U.S.A. law, and a graduate of the School of Oriental & African Studies, London. He is a Jewish believer in Jesus and is currently based in Israel).

Circling the Wagons

By David Passmore • July 14, 2026

Circling the wagons Ruben Rothler LLB, LLM Israel is a society riddled with tension and division. It is sociologically, if not politically miraculous that a country drawing Jews from all over the world is able to exist at all. The army affords a degree of integration as a melting pot. But this is only a marginal source of national unity in the overall scheme of things. More so are the myriads of external threats that face this small country. In the former generation the Ashkenazi (Jews of European descent) - Sephardic (Jews of Oriental descent) divide was far more pronounced. The dominant Ashkenazi establishment held the reins of political and economic power which was resented by the Sephardim. However, due to a combination of inter-marriage and political accommodation much of the chasm that separated these distinct groups was forged. Menachem Begin (an Ashkenazi politician) in 1970 successfully ran on the Likud Party ticket with a campaign that brought Sephardic Jews under his conservative political umbrella. Later the immigration of Russian Jews following the end of Communism would add a whole new dimension to the Israeli demographic milieu. The younger generation of these immigrants tended to adapt well to Israeli society and contributed much to the economy. The wider division in Israeli society that crosses ethnic lines concerns that between religious and secular Jews. This can be further bifurcated to the clash between the secular and specifically ultra-orthodox Jews (Haredim) as distinguished from the national religious Jews (Dati Leumi). The Secular and the Religious generally part on what they envisage a Jewish State to entail. Religious Jews desire the State to strictly adhere to the stipulations of Jewish Law (Halacha), while at present Halakhic influence is largely limited to certain areas of Family Law concerning Jewish citizens. Wider considerations of promoting a socially conservative political agenda would also be forefront amongst the religious mindset broadly. Secular Jews view the imposition of such proposed measures as a serious infringement of their civil rights. With regard to the Haredim, the bone of contention looms larger, in that this group is fundamentally opposed to participating in society at large. This is acutely manifested in diminished contribution to the work force and a refusal to be conscripted into the army. The 2023 judicial reform protests posed a significant threat to social civil order. The nation appeared to be bitterly divided into two opposing camps. This split reflected broader divisions concerning visions of how the country should be governed. The judicial reforms would have weakened the Supreme Court's ability to render the Executive branch accountable. However, the Supreme Court was also accused of using its considerable powers to promote a socially liberal agenda. Left wing secular Israelis tended to oppose the proposed reforms while those on the right (which included the majority of Religious Jews) supported the reforms. Every weekend droves of protesters were brought onto the streets causing major disturbances to traffic. The polarising nature of this impasse threatened the future of Israeli democracy. It was the October 7th attack that brought a swift end to this public debate and civil strife. The nation instinctually united in response to this common existential threat. The judicial reforms were shelved for a future point when the urgent security threats subsided. However, as the war dragged on the enduring issue of Haredi refusal to conscript into the army became more pronounced. Mounting casualties combined with ever increasing manpower demands to field troops on the multiple theatres of action on which the IDF is engaged has depleted the ranks, and the army is now in much need of fresh conscripts. Haredi belligerent refusal to participate in the pressing national defence has escalated from being a political debate to a matter of very practical vital importance. Overall we can observe that the challenges to national unity in successive generations since the establishment of Israel has recurrently been ameliorated by the common necessity of defence towards outside threats. Most recently we can see this happening with regard to the global anti Semitism and anti-Zionism that has been raging since the October 7th atrocities. These hostile attitudes have paradoxically acted as a force which promotes nationalism and a sense of national cohesion in Israel that otherwise might not functionally exist. (Author is an Israeli American lawyer academically qualified in British and in U.S.A. law, and a graduate of the School of Oriental & African Studies, London. He is a Jewish believer in Jesus and is currently based in Israel).

A Divided Nation

By David Passmore • July 8, 2026

A Divided Nation Rubin Rothler LLB, LLM The Haredi community has had a complicated, paradoxical relationship with the State since its founding. Rooted in a Talmudic precept that the Jews are forbidden to resettle the land of Israel en masse by force before the coming of the Messiah, the secular democratic State of Israel presents itself as blasphemous by its mere existence. Yet due to practical considerations such as the need to obtain funding for its religious academies the Haredi leadership reached a settlement with the State's founders that exempted Haredi men from being conscripted for military service. This was at a time when the Haredi population in Israel was relatively small. Over the past decades this demographic ballooned until the point that soon the majority of Jewish children in Israel will be born into Haredi families. Such a situation is clearly unsustainable. Recently the Knesset's (Parliament's) Haredi parties have pressured their coalition partners in government to codify Torah Study as part of the Country's Basic Laws. This was purposefully done to elevate the status of their institutions to be on parity with service in the IDF. Israel is yet to promulgate a written Constitution, so legislation classed as a Basic Law holds Constitutional status for all intents and purposes. These moves by the religious parties represent a back door power grab to enshrine in law very significant hurdles to prevent the enlistment of Haredi men. The burden of Israel's defence is comparatively massive for a country its size and it is vastly disproportionately shouldered by the secular population. Until now there have been political initiatives to conscript the Haredim. But given the huge manpower shortages emerging in the wake of near continual conflict on multiple fronts since the events of October 7th this matter has become urgent and not merely a theoretical discussion of what is fair and equitable. It is important to draw a distinction between the Haredim and national religious Jews (Dati Leumi). The Haredim adhere to a lifestyle entirely committed to observance of Jewish Law and Talmudic study. This is embraced to the exclusion of gainful employment and participation in wider society. They are either outrightly opposed to Zionism or consider themselves non-Zionist. Conversely, followers of the national religious movement in Israel although being observant of Jewish law and learning would alongside this pursue secular professions. Furthermore, they are ardently Zionist and disproportionately serve in IDF combat units. This is often done within the framework of a program called Hesder Yeshiva that combines religious learning with military service. Efforts to cater a similar model for accommodating Haredi participation in the IDF have so far failed to make substantial gains. Such measures designed to override Haredi objections to service based upon modesty concerns by strict segregation of the sexes in these specially formed units have failed to appease the Haredi leadership. For them, any form of military service is considered a dereliction of their duty to fully devote themselves to a Torah lifestyle. They argue that their Talmudic learning and prayers are in itself a form of national service and act to protect the Jewish people spiritually from enemy attack. It is as if two parallel societies exist within Israel. And the trajectory of separation between the two is only growing. The Haredim are cloistered away in their Yeshivas, immersed in lives devoted to adhering to the stipulations of Jewish law. While the particulars of actually running the State is left to the Secular. The Haredim desire all the benefits of subsidizing their lifestyle without contributing to society. What we really have going on here at source is two profoundly different and opposing ideological visions of what is important in life and what is the purpose of a Jewish State. At the State's founding these divergent perspectives were more manageable. Ben Gurion only had to contend with one religious party –the National Religious Party. Later in 1970 Begin aligned with the NRP to form a coalition government that also brought Sephardic Jews under the Likud umbrella which had the effect of bringing unity to the country by bridging the Ashkenazi-Sephardi divide. However, over time Israeli politics has seen a proliferation of religious parties, gaining further leverage as king brokers in forming governments due to the proportionate representation voting system which secular Israelis not uncommonly view as political blackmail. (Author is an Israeli American lawyer academically qualified in British and in U.S.A. law, and a graduate of the School of Oriental & African Studies, London. He is a Jewish believer in Jesus and is currently based in Israel).

Why Is It Always Israel? | Zechariah 12 Is Happening Before Our Eyes

By David Passmore • June 29, 2026