Christmas is Coming

April 3, 2025
Introduction

The word for “Christmas” in Hebrew is “Hag Ha molad” – literally “The Festival of the Birth”.

It says in Romans 14:4 not to judge anyone for what religious festivals they celebrate, and along similar lines, it says in Colossians 2:16-18 not to let anyone judge you; it is a matter of culture and context that is strictly between you and the Lord. I could care less whether someone celebrates Christmas; it doesn't matter to me. What I do care about is the theology of Christmas, or the Nativity. When He was born, who knows? That He was born, we all know.

My family, being Israeli, celebrates Hanukah. It is Hanukah now. In John 10 Jesus celebrated Hanukah – the Feast of Dedication. This is very important in understanding the advent of Antichrist among other things through Antiochus Epiphanes and the Maccabees. We have a Hanukah party to which we invite unsaved Jewish people, which my family is doing this week while I am in America. Again, at our house we don't have Christmas, we have the Nativity. We go to our church, and we go to the carol service; that's all. We may do things for missions and for needy families, but nothing more than that. Christmas is strictly a church thing for us; we have Hanukah as our celebration.

Christmas and the Last Days

What does Christmas, the Nativity, have to do with the Last Days? This may surprise you, but the answer is everything.
You may have heard me say before that we will never understand the Second Coming of Christ until we understand His First Coming. What happened in His First Coming is replayed, recapitulated, in His Second Coming. When Jesus was born, the Roman emperor was Caesar Augustus – formerly Octavius. He was the first Roman emperor to be deified in his lifetime. Thus there was a Roman emperor presiding over the Roman Empire and being worshiped as a god when Jesus arrived the first time. This emperor took a census, ascribing numbers to people – not actually putting numbers on them, but ascribing one to every person in the known world. There were actually two censuses taken by Augustus, both for this purpose: that he might gain financial control of the world. When Jesus comes back, the same thing will happen: we will have a resurrected Roman Empire headed by someone who is virtually deified. This demi-god will number people's heads in order to economically control the world. What happened at Jesus' First Coming will happen again at His Second. Christmas is not just a past event; it is a future event, a prophetic event.

The book of Joel, the book of Revelation, and the Olivet Discourse tell us about signs in the sky and the cosmos heralding the return of Christ. Of course, as we know, there were signs in the sky and the cosmos heralding the birth of Christ. The Jews were in their own land, but under the thumb of this Roman emperor. How did he get there? By seduction – the Roman general, Pompeii, seduced the Jews and entered the Holy of Holies in the Temple. Whenever you see somebody other than the High Priest on the Day of Atonement entering the Holy of Holies, it is a picture in some way of the Antichrist. What happened with Pompeii in Rome will happen again. These events that we see happening in Europe and in the Middle East are setting the stage.
Jochanan ha Matbiel – John the Baptist – came in the spirit and power of Elijah. He was born just before Jesus and appeared just before Him. The prophet Malachi predicted that in some way, Elijah will come again; Jesus confirmed this.

There were many false prophets in Israel when Jesus came the first time, and many will be here when He comes back. The general backslidden state of the faith that should have believed in Him then is no different in many ways from the backslidden state of the faith that should believe in Him now.

Jesus' First Coming teaches about His Second. Christmas is neither here nor there; the Nativity, however, is very important. If we do not understand how He came the first time, we will not understand His return. There are differences, of course, but one is a picture of the other.

I have spent a lot of my time for the past 20 years as an evangelist to the Jews thinking about one question: How could it be, with 2,000 years of history preparing for the Messiah to come, being in a covenant relationship with God and having the Scripture, that so few Jews were ready for Jesus to come the first time? Paul tells us that the devil blinded their eyes. (Rom. 11:25) There were 2,000 years of preparation for Jesus to come, Israel had a covenantal relationship with God, and they had the Scriptures. Yet in spite of all this, only a remnant was ready for Him to come. The same thing will be true when He comes back, only it will not only be Israel, but also the so-called church.

What kinds of Christians are going to be ready for Jesus to come again in the Last Days? If you want to know the answer to this, look at the kinds of Jews who were ready for Him to come the first time. If you want to know what kinds of Christians are not going to be ready for Him to come back, take a good look at the kinds of Jews that were not ready for Him to come the first time. His First Coming teaches about His Second; we will never understand His Second Coming until we understand His First. Obviously He will not come as a baby the second time, being born of an earthly mother. There are differences between the two comings, but essentially one prefigures the other.

Those Who Were Not Ready

Before we look at what kinds of Jews were ready for Jesus to come the first time, let's look at Jews who were not ready. When we see what kinds of Jews were not ready, we will know what kinds of Christians will not be ready. A is to B as B is to C.

Turn with me, please, to Matthew's Nativity narrative in Matthew 2:1:

"Now after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the king, behold, wise men from the East came to Jerusalem, saying, 'Where is He who has been born King of the Jews? For we have seen His star in the East and have come to worship Him.' When Herod the king heard this, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him. And when he had gathered all the chief priests and scribes of the people together, he inquired of them where the Christ was to be born. So they said to him, 'In Bethlehem of Judea, for thus it is written by the prophet: "But you, Bethlehem, in the land of Judah, are not the least among the rulers of Judah; for out of you shall come a Ruler Who will shepherd My people Israel."'

What we see here is that some of the people who were ready for Jesus to come the first time were people whom you would not have expected to be ready. These Magi, or wise men, were from Persia. They were the chaplains of the ancient Medes and Persians. Somehow in ancient Persia there was a religion that has been changed over the centuries, called Zoroastrianism. It was monotheistic; they believed that there was one God and that man was responsible for his own sin. They believed there was a battle between the sons of light and the sons of darkness; they held similar beliefs, in other words, to those of the Essenes and the Christians.

During the Babylonian Captivity, when Persia overtook Babylon in fulfillment of Daniel's prophecies, some of the Persian kings came to believe in the Jewish God, having already been predisposed to monotheism. There was a lingering Jewish influence in that place. We read about Esther, for example, and Darius the Mede, as well as the prophecy of King Cyrus by Isaiah the prophet over 200 years before Cyrus' birth. We read in Ezra and Nehemiah what happened there. All the way through the Hasmonean period to the time of Jesus, the Persians favored the Jews. In fact, until the Shaw of Iran fell, the Persians – Iran – favored Israel. I have no doubt in my mind that the Prince of Persia, the principality against which Daniel prayed and fasted for three weeks (Dan. 10:13; 20), is still there today in the form of Shia Islam, that Islamic fundamentalism in Iran. People in modern Christian circles like to call demons like this one “territorial spirits”, which is not a good translation or interpretation. The Greek word is “arche”, the Hebrew word “shedim”; a better translation for these words is “principalities”, meaning demonic powers over nations. We have many crazy people today doing “binding and loosing”, among other nonsense, but there is no doubt about the fact that there are principalities over nations. The book of Daniel reveals that, and in Gerasenes the demons going into the swine begged Jesus not to send them out of the region. (Lk. 8:31-33) There are territorial spirits, if you want to use that term, although it is not a particularly good interpretation. They do exist. In Belfast, you see murals of ancient Celtic war gods on the walls, both in the neighborhoods where Protestants are recruited and in those where Catholics are recruited.

You see, those wise men understood how to interpret the signs of the time. Sadly, there are born-again Christians who cannot see the significance of contemporary events in the Middle East. They are blind to it, as if the book of Zechariah was not in the Bible. They cannot see what is happening in the EEC – they don't understand the globalization of the world economy, the destruction of the environment, or any of these other signs, as wise men do.

So the Magi came to see the Messiah, non-Jews, people you would not have expected, because they saw the Star in the East. Here we see that they come to Jerusalem, where Herod heard them and was troubled – and all Jerusalem with him. This was the city where David said that the Messiah would come. This was where the Temple was; the focus of their identity and their Messianic hope, yet almost nobody who lived there wanted Him to come.

You will find many churches with the same attitude; drive up the road, look at the churches you pass, and ask yourself how many of them really want Jesus to come back. All Jerusalem was troubled; oh, they had the rituals, the liturgies, the festivities and the holidays, but when it looked like He was showing up, they were all troubled. Especially troubled were the national and religious leaders. Think about this.

It gets even more frightening, however – these guys knew the Scriptures. Herod wanted to know where the Messiah would be born, and they told him what Micah 5:2 said, that He would be born in Bethlehem. They had head knowledge of the Scriptures, but not heart knowledge. When He showed up, it was the last thing in the world that they either expected or wanted. Do you think it will be any different when He returns?

The Trap of Satan: Backsliding

Almost every lie of Satan perpetrated in the church today is designed with one purpose: to get God's people to hope in this life and this world. By definition, that is what backsliding is. Kingdom-Now theology, Dominionism, Triumphalism, Calvinistic Reconstructionism – what are they all trying to do? Set up the kingdom now; trust in this life. Faith-prosperity, the money preachers – teaching the sin of covetousness and calling it faith, the worship of Mammon and calling it the worship of God – what is it about? Trusting in this life.

Gerald Coates and Rick Joyner say that the Rapture is a lie of the devil, a fantasy and a myth. They mock it, comparing it to Star Trek's "Beam me up, Scotty". What is their purpose? It is to cause the church to forget about the Rapture and trust in this life. What do you think the ecumenical movement is about? Building the brotherhood of man – once again, trust in this life. All Jerusalem was troubled when He came the first time, and Jerusalem will be troubled again when He returns – and I don't just mean Jerusalem, Israel.

Their national and religious leaders, who knew the Scriptures, did not want Him to come. For 2,000 years God had been preparing them for His coming; the whole reason for their very existence as a nation and a people was His coming. Yet very few wanted Him to; and it will be no different when He returns.

Those Who Were Ready

But what kind of Jews were ready for Him to come? Let's look: turn with me please to the gospel of Luke chapter one.
In Luke 1:46-55 we have the Magnificat, which if you read it in Greek would be a literary replay of the song of Deborah, found in Judges 5 from the Septuagint. The angel Gabriel – whose name means “mighty one of God” – came and told Mary that she was the greatest woman who ever lived. "Blessed are you among women - God Almighty is going to be physically incarnated inside of you." Her name was not Mary, but Miriam, the same as Moses' sister. The Hebrew root of “Miriam” is “bitterness”. She did not have blonde hair or blue eyes, but rather dark, Semitic features. She has also never been to Medjugorje, Guadalupe, Fatima, or Lourdes. Her name is Miriam, and she was probably no more than mid-teens in age when Gabriel gave her this momentous announcement.

What does the greatest woman who ever lived say in response to being told that that is who she is? Verse 46 and 47:
"'My soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior.'"

The greatest woman who ever lived called God her Savior, stating that she needed to be saved from her sins. If the greatest woman who ever lived needs a Savior, where does that put me? None is righteous, no not one. (Rom. 3:10) All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. (Rom. 3:23) The word “Theotokos”, “Mother of God”, is not in the Greek New Testament. She is told that she would be the mother of the Messiah, who would save His people from their sin, and she responds by saying "I rejoice in God my Savior". God Almighty is going to be incarnated inside of her, and all she can say is that she needs to be saved!

If the greatest woman who ever lived states that she needs a Savior, I believe her. I do not believe that she would lie, and even if she did, God certainly would not put that lie in His Word. So, whom should I believe? Mary herself or the lie of the Immaculate Conception which claims that she was conceived without sin? What has happened is that you have the pseudo-Christianization of Minerva, Diana of Ephesus, etc., and the application of these to Mary in fulfillment of the prophecies of Ezekiel and Jeremiah. The Madonna with the baby was originally derived from Tammuz-worship, which Ezekiel contended with. Jeremiah warned of the worship of the Queen of Heaven.

Miriam said she needed a Savior. God would become a Man, take my sin and put it on His Son, the Messiah, and take His righteousness and put it on me. Why should God become a man to take my place?

When I was a young Christian I used the cliché "Jesus is my personal Savior". However, I did not really understand all of what that meant. I thought it meant that He was my personal Savior because I personally accepted Him; but that is only half of what it means. What “personal Savior” means in its totality is that if I was the only person who ever sinned, He would have had to be born of Miriam and gone to that cross and risen from the dead just for me. For me alone; why should God die for me, a cocaine addict? Why should God become a man and die for me? Why should He rise from the dead to give me eternal life? Maybe for Miriam we can understand it more; yet she stated her need of a Savior.

The religious people did not think they needed a Savior; they had rituals and celebrations. The devil gets more people into hell with religion than he does with all the dope, all the immorality and gambling and alcohol abuse put together. Arguably, the two most influential people on human civilization have both been Jews: Karl Marx and Jesus Christ. There is a great difference between them; they are, in fact, on opposite ends of the spectrum except on one point: religion is the biggest fraud ever perpetrated on humanity. The Gospel is not religion, it is relationship!

“I need a Savior”; that is what Mary said. She was a teenage girl who was not concerned with Brittany Spears' videos on MTV or with her own personal vanity. Her response was to state her need of a Savior. That is the kind of Jew who was ready for Him to come the first time.

I really like Miriam; I love Miriam, and esteem her. I think Miriam is sensational, is fabulous, is terrific, and I cannot wait to meet her. But I want nothing to do with the blonde bimbo that Mary has become due to the so-called Church.

Zecharias & Elizabeth

Miriam has some family: in Luke 1:5 & 6 we read about them:

"There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the division of Abijah. His wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elizabeth. And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless."

Now, remember that the Sanhedrin, the clergy, were corrupt – it was a racket. It was Hinn, Copeland, and Hagin; that is what it was like when Jesus came the first time. Yet despite the popular corruption and hypocrisy of the clergy, there were individuals within it who were righteous.

I know individual pastors in the Assemblies of God who are heartbroken over what has happened to that denomination. In England, I know Anglican vicars who are heartbroken over what has happened to the Church of England. I know Baptists who are heartbroken. As bad as it is, and as bad as it is going to get, there will be people like Zacharias who are righteous, devout, and godly. No matter how corrupt the system and its clergy become, they will not go along with it. There may not be many of them, but they will be there. That is the kind of Jew who was ready for Jesus to come the first time, and that is the kind of Christian who will be ready for Him to come again.

Simeon

Let's look still further: in Luke chapter 2:24 we read that Mary brought a pair of turtledoves as her sacrifice; she brought a poor person's offering. There is a liar from America named John Avanzini who came to England and said that Jesus' family was rich, not poor. One of our people asked him publicly at the meeting why, if that was the case, Mary brought a poor person's offering; his response was to have the ushers usher her out. She asked the wrong question.

Luke 2:25:
"And behold, there was a man in Jerusalem whose name was Simeon, and this man was just and devout, waiting for the Consolation of Israel, and the Holy Spirit was upon him."

The Sanhedrin did not want Jesus to come; all Jerusalem was troubled, but Simeon was longing for Jesus to come. In fact, it was his only reason for staying alive – verse 26:

"And it had been revealed to him by the Holy Spirit that he would not see death before he had seen the Lord's Christ."
Under the old Covenant, the Holy Spirit was only for certain people at certain times – high priests, kings, prophets, and certain other individuals. Only they had the Holy Spirit in some sense; not until after Pentecost was He for all who believed. The gifts of the Spirit then operated only in a primordial sense in and through those who had them. Verse 27:

"So he came by the Spirit into the temple. And when the parents brought in the Child Jesus, to do for Him according to the custom of the law"

(They got me when I was a baby, but they sure wouldn't get me now. This, of course, means circumcision. When my son was circumcised at eight days old, I had to hold him and say the Hebrew prayers when the rabbi came in. The rabbi took a cotton ball, dipped it in some wine, and squeezed it into the baby's mouth. I asked what the wine was for, and was told it was to deaden the pain. I said, “If that kid could see that knife, he'd ask for some Jack Daniels.”) But to return to the point, verse 28:

"he took Him up in his arms and blessed God and said, 'Lord, You are letting Your servant depart in peace, according to Your Word; for my eyes have seen Your salvation which You have prepared before the face of all peoples, a light to bring revelation to the Gentiles, and the glory of Your people Israel."

This man, Simeon, was filled with the Holy Spirit and had been promised that he would not die until he had seen the Messiah. He was old, his hair and teeth and eyesight were going, he couldn't get a date, but he knew he would not die until Jesus had come. He had what we call in New Testament terms the gift of faith.

The New Testament does tell us that we all have a measure of faith. We're saved by grace through faith, (Eph. 2:8) without faith it is impossible to please God, (Heb. 11:6) and anything not done in faith is sin (Rom. 14:23), Scripture tells us. Separate from this, however, is the gift of faith, which not all of us have. It is the capacity to trust God absolutely for things that are not specifically written in Scripture, which the Holy Spirit has revealed to you. Most people with this gift are intercessors. Hebrew and Greek both make a distinction between prayer and intercession. People who have this gift can truly intercede in prayer, believing and knowing – not wishfully thinking, or trusting in the futility of their own minds – but holding on to a promise they know by faith that God has truly given them. Although he probably would have denied it himself, I would say that George M?ller in England had that gift of faith; he took in many, many street kids and would need astronomical sums of money by the next day, then pray and miraculously receive it in time.

Just think of this old man, longing for the Consolation of Israel, filled with the Holy Spirit. He only wanted Jesus to come – that was all he cared about, and it was the only reason he had to get out of his bed in the morning.

Anna

Not only was there a little old man, there was also a little old lady. In verse 36 of Luke 2 it says this:

"Now there was one, Anna, a prophetess, the daughter of Phanuel, of the tribe of Asher."

(Forget British Israelism and Armstrongism; these people kept their tribal identities into the second and even third centuries.)
"She was of a great age, and had lived with a husband seven years from her virginity; and this woman was a widow of about eighty-four years, who did not depart from the temple, but served God with fastings and prayers night and day. And coming in at that instant she gave thanks to the Lord, and spoke of Him to all those who looked for redemption in Jerusalem."

For years and years and years all this little old lady did was pray, fast, and serve God in His house. Then she just couldn't stop telling people about Jesus – all those who were looking for the redemption of Israel. The world finds young women attractive; God is different. Read the book of Proverbs – God finds older women attractive, in the spiritual sense. Here was this little old lady, whose whole life was spent in prayer and service to God, and finally in telling people about Jesus. That was the kind of Jew who was ready for Jesus to come the first time; and that is exactly the kind of Christian who will be ready for Him to return.

Faithful Shepherds: Then and Now

But then, back in Luke 2: 8, there were some shepherds:

"Now there were in the same country shepherds living out in the fields, keeping watch over their flock by night. And behold, an angel of the Lord stood before them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were greatly afraid. Then the angel said to them, 'Do not be afraid, for behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy which shall be to all people. For there is born to you this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord.'"

Followed of course in verse 14 in the Latin Vulgate by, "Gloria in Excelsis Deo” – “Glory to God in the highest”.

The Hebrew word for “shepherd” and “pastor” is the same word; the same applies in Greek. These are shepherds who watch their flock – not hirelings. There is a great spiritual darkness coming at the end of the age; you have heard me point it out a number of times:

  • "Watchman, watchman, how far is the night?" (Is. 21:11)
  • "Is He coming in the second watch of the night or the third?" (Mk. 13:35)
  • "He is coming like a thief in the night." (1 Th. 5:2)
  • "Work while you have the light, for night will come when no man can work." (Jn. 9:4)


But there will be those faithful shepherds who watch over their flock no matter how dark it gets.

I once did a conference with Chuck Missler at which I saw an English-born pastor from Zimbabwe, where terrible things are happening. He was in England for a few days and when asked how he was he replied by expressing his thanks for the prayers said on his behalf. He told us how bad things were in Zimbabwe and that most of the white people as well as the educated blacks had left or were leaving. I asked if I would be seeing him around and he replied that I would not because he was returning to Zimbabwe the next day. "My sheep are there," he said. Here is a white man who gives his whole life to take care of black people who are dying of AIDS; they are his sheep. I know a good Christian doctor who could make a good living in America who is down there with him. They aren't leaving; why? It's a dark place and it's getting darker, but they are shepherds. That is the kind of Jew who was ready for Jesus to come the first time, and that is the kind of Christian who will be ready for Him to return.

In Summary

Who is not going to be ready? "Herod mourned, and all Jerusalem with him." The Sanhedrin were troubled. The theologians were pulling their hair out. They won't be ready – people like that rarely are. But the individual clergy like Zacharias and his dear wife, or Joseph the foster father of Jesus – a man who was just, or a teenage girl who said, "I need a Savior", or the shepherds who watched their flocks, or a little old lady whose whole life was spent in prayer and serving God and telling others about Jesus, or an old man who longed for Him to come and was filled with the Spirit of God – they are a different story. They were the kinds of Jews, who were ready for Him to come the first time, and I promise you, they will be the kinds of Christians who are ready for Him to come the second time.

My prayer for all of you, for your families, for myself and for my family, when I look at these Jews who were ready for His first coming, is that by the grace of the God of Israel we will be among the faithful who will be ready the second time. My dear brethren in Jesus, make no mistake about it: Christmas is coming.

My favorite Christmas carol is Hark the Herald Angels Sing for this reason: the music was composed by Felix Mendelssohn, a Jew, and the words were written by Charles Wesley, a Gentile Christian. It is one of the greatest Jew-Gentile collaborations I know of. Would you join me in singing it?

Hark, the herald angels sing,
Glory to the newborn King!
Peace on earth, and mercy mild,
God and sinners reconciled!
Joyful all ye nations, rise,
Join the triumph of the skies,
With th'angelic hosts proclaim,
Christ is born in Bethlehem!
Hark, the herald angels sing,
Glory to the newborn King!.

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