+972 Magazine's Stories of the Week

Directly In Your Inbox

Analysis News
Visit our Hebrew site, "Local Call" , in partnership with Just Vision.

Mubarak, a dictator for hire as next Israeli president

Yesterday was a historic day for the Egyptian people, as they turned the final page of the “court case of the century.” Ousted Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak was sentenced to life in prison, marking a precedent in the Middle East. Some Egyptians were hoping that Mubarak would receive a death sentence for his role in the murder of protesters; others believed he was too old to be put to death.

But in Israel, the country that sent its former president, Moshe Katsav, to prison for rape, there seemed to be some sadness. Some believe that the Egyptians are ungrateful to Mubarak and what he has done for Egypt in his 30 years of service. Israel, for its part, has been faithful to Mubarak through all his years as president. From the beginning of the revolution, Israel took an active stand in defending Mubarak and lobbying the West to curb its criticism of him. Israeli leaders saw Mubarak as a vital part of the Middle East and wished, regardless of how the Egyptian people felt about him, he would stay. After all, democracy isn’t for everyone.

Given the developments in Egypt, Israel should consider Hosni Mubarak, the dictator for hire, to be its next president. Current Israeli President Shimon Peres will soon finish his term. Mubarak is available and looking for a nation that could use his experience as a dictator and oppressor. Mubarak is also an Arab – this will help Israel’s image internationally as a multi-ethnic state.

In a radio interview, Israeli Knesset member and former defense minister Benjamin Ben Eliezer expressed deep sadness over the life sentence handed to Hosni Mubarak, describing him as the “king of the Middle East.”

The verdict brought me deep sorrow, because I admire that man … he is an irreplaceable leader … the last of his kind… It hurts. I know him, his house, his family. It’s someone who’s close to you, someone you know, and suddenly you see this giant who was once the king of the Middle East — actually, the undisputed leader of the Middle East — sitting in a cave like some injured animal, helpless but still keeping his dignity intact… He was the main reason for the stability of the Middle East, and there was none other like him. He held the Middle East together.

Given the above quotation, it would be a shame to let someone with Mubarak’s qualifications disappear from political life. Mubarak’s resume includes extensive expertise that would be useful for Israel. He promoted corruption and supported the privatization of the Egyptian public sector by selling it dirt cheap to his friends. He opposed so-called “social justice” and eliminated social programs. Most importantly, he knew the importance of security. He created underground prisons for those who disagreed with him and used torture and murder to silence his opposition. When it came to the Palestinians, Mubarak was known for his unwavering support of Israel and his dislike of the Palestinian people. Mubarak is also known for his iron fist, and he has extensive knowledge in rigging elections and controlling the legislative and judiciary branches of the government for his own interest.

Considering all of Mubarak’s qualifications, it seems appropriate for Israel to include Mubarak in the next prisoner exchange agreement with Egypt. After his release as a hero in Israel, he could easily win right-wing support in the Knesset, and serve with pride as the next Israeli president.

Mubarak’s term as president could help Israel move to the far right, allowing it to implement practical steps toward becoming a true dictatorship. For example, Mubarak has a long history of ignoring international law, and he has never believed in slogans about human rights and freedom. He could help Israel rid itself completely from any international commitment to human rights. Mubarak is also likely to crack down against the Palestinians and annex the West Bank and Gaza. Most importantly, he is likely to reform the prison system in Israel to include new forms of torture that proved themselves in Egypt.

As Israel transforms to become a natural part of the Middle East, the experience of a seasoned dictator is essential. Mubarak will accelerate the movement away from democracy and would be a perfect partner with anti-democratic forces in Israel. In Egypt Mubarak was the legislator, the judge, and the president. So, since the dictator for hire is available, please join me in campaigning for  Mubarak as the next president of Israel.

Before you go...

A lot of work goes into creating articles like the one you just read. And while we don’t do this for the money, even our model of non-profit, independent journalism has bills to pay.

+972 Magazine is owned by our bloggers and journalists, who are driven by passion and dedication to the causes we cover. But we still need to pay for editing, photography, translation, web design and servers, legal services, and more.

As an independent journalism outlet we aren’t beholden to any outside interests. In order to safeguard that independence voice, we are proud to count you, our readers, as our most important supporters. If each of our readers becomes a supporter of our work, +972 Magazine will remain a strong, independent, and sustainable force helping drive the discourse on Israel/Palestine in the right direction.

Support independent journalism in Israel/Palestine Donate to +972 Magazine today
View article: AAA
Share article
Print article
  • LEAVE A COMMENT

    * Required

    COMMENTS

    1. In the second part of his leaked memoirs, published in serial form in the Egyptian daily newspaper Rose al-Youssef, former Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak reveals the special relationship he had with former Israeli Minister of National Infrastructure Binyamin Ben-Eliezer who he paid a monthly salary of $25,000 from the presidency budget. Only Chief of Presidential Staff Zakaria Azmi, Mubarak adds, knew about this. According to Mubarak, there was nothing wrong with maintaining a close relationship with Ben-Eliezer, since many Arab heads of state used to hire Israeli and Jewish political advisors. (al-Arabiya, Mar 14 2012)
      .
      Former president of Egypt Hosni Mubarak paid MK Binyamin Ben-Eliezer a monthly salary of $25,000, according to Mubarak’s leaked memoirs, which have been serialized in the Egyptian daily Rose al-Youssef, Al-Arabiya reported today. The alleged payments took place at an unspecified point during Mubarak’s long term in office. Ben-Eliezer, who has served in various cabinet posts, is known to have had a close relationship with Mubarak but vigorously denied the assertions. Ben-Eliezer said on wednesday: “Nobody paid me a cent, ever. It’s the first time I’ve heard this nonsense. It’s a joke and someone’s crazy imagination.” Ben-Eliezer said he would call the ailing former president, whom he called a “friend,” to get to the bottom of the story.
      (Times of Israel, Mar 14 2012)

      Reply to Comment
    2. Rafael

      “DICATOTOR” is a troll. He’s been appropriating other user’s names to post nonsensical messages and divulge his hasbaraa links.

      Reply to Comment
    3. jjj

      I think the Palestinians need him a lot more, instead of the other “peaceful” leaders such as Hania.

      And Rafael, are you a Palestinian troll?

      Reply to Comment
    4. Rodrigo

      So far Israeli leaders have been proven completely correct in their pessimistic view of the processes in play in Egypt. Every single liberal commentator (including some on 972mag) have egg on their faces. Everyone who went to Tahrir square and thought that the people there represented Egypt have been shown to be fools of the highest caliber. Arab Spring. Hah!
      .

      Mubarak was an Egyptian patriot, consistently working to benefit the people of Egypt. Soon Egyptians will look at the situation and imagine how nice it would be to go back to a time when life was stable and secure under Mubarak. Without a steady hand to guide Egypt the country looks set for internal instability and economic collapse.

      Reply to Comment
    5. Let’s assume that soon Israel will be entirely surrounded by Muslim Brotherhood ruled states, all ultimately controlled by the Sauds. This would not seem like the sort of neighbourhood Israel would prefer to live in, on the face of it. But either (a) Israel has made a secret deal with the Sauds, which is the only probable answer; (b) Israel plans a war against all the Arab states which is unlikely because it needs them to fight Iran for it; or (b) Israel has absolutely no say in the matter because like every other country it is at the mercy of shape-shifting lizards from the fifth dimension who just don’t give a damn about anybody except themselves (the Icke theory).

      Reply to Comment
    6. XYZ

      Aziz,
      Obviously Mubarak is vile scum. What did he do, after all? Give his country 30 years of peace. Peace with Israel. Disgusting. No doubt you miss the glory days of Nasser, and even Sadat and King Farouk when they, in their righteousl wrath, turned their guns on Israel for you Palestinians. Four major wars they got you and they were defeated in every one, with thousands killed and huge amounts of money wasted. Gave you all “pride”. Mubarak gave peace and must be punished for it.
      (I might add that your claim that Mubarak was a “friend” of Israel -giving “unwavering support” is nonsense– his state-controlled media was filled every day with antisemitic hate messages and his propgandists invented delustionary plots like the one to sent “Zionist sharks” to attack bathers at the Sinai beaches in order to embarrass Egypt. Mubarak also turned a blind eye to the weapons smuggling to HAMAS in the Gaza Strip which enabled them to take control of the Strip by force…yes, some “friend” of Israel…)

      Reply to Comment
    7. XYZ –

      Mubarak impoverished his country while enriching a small elite. He terrorized people with his secret service and his emergency law, having people arbitrarily arrested and tortured on trumped up charges or no charges at all – anything to keep dissidents terrorized and silent.

      He was extremely close to Israel’s ruling elite, because he benefited personally from that connection. He kept peace because he had nothing to gain by going to war; the Camp David Accords have benefited both Egypt and Israel, but they were not signed by Mubarak and Mubarak had nothing to do with the negotiations.

      Mubarak used anti Semitism as a means of allowing ordinary people to blow off some steam while diverting their attention from the corruption of his government.

      People have the right to choose their government. If you have the right to democracy, then so do the Egyptians. You don’t get to decide what’s right for them.

      Also, Aziz is not Egyptian, so your phrase ‘Four major wars they got you’ should not be directed at him. He is Palestinian.

      Reply to Comment
    8. XYZ

      I directed my remarks at Aziz precisely because he is a Palestinian. He was criticizing Mubarak because of his “unwavering support for Israel” which is nonsense. I know he kept the peace for his own reasons, but the Egyptian people benefitted by not having to fight yet another failed war. No doubt many Palestinians want Egyptians to fight and die for them yet again, but I don’t know how the Egyptians feel about that.
      Please don’t give me the Progressive line that Mubarak was bad because he was a dictator. To this day Progressives excoriate George W Bush for ridding Iraq of Saddam Hussein. Was Saddam a “democratic”. Of course not, his dictatorship was far, far more repressive and bloodier than Mubaraks, but he fired Scud missiles at Israel, so the Progressives and Palestinians and others overlook what he did to his own people. In never saw demonstrations by Progressives, Palestinians or their allies against Saddam’s atrocities. All they cared about was his anti-Israel and anti-American rhetoric and actions.
      It has been reported here that the HADASH party is supporting Assad. Why? Because he opposes the Progressives worst enemies…Zionism and American Globalist Capitalism. That is all that matters. Democracy is irrelevant.

      Reply to Comment
    9. XYZ, Unless you are willing to live under a dictatorship, then your opinion about Mubarak’s leadership has no logical or ethical basis. Mubarak was not a dictator according to what you call the progressive line. He was a dictator because he was an unelected head of state with sweeping powers.

      Reply to Comment
    10. Danny

      “Four major wars they got you and they were defeated in every one”
      .
      If my memory serves me, the war of 1973 was not exactly a great Israeli victory. If not for Nixon’s material support (the so-called, “air train”), Israel would not have won that war. And 2,700 dead and many more wounded were a major blow to the IDF. Israel rightly came to her senses when she gave back the Sinai to the last millimeter in exchange the peace that Golda spurned just a decade earlier.

      Reply to Comment
    11. XYZ

      The fact that Mubarak was a dictator is completely irrelevant to the Arab world outside Egypt, just like was the case with Saddam Hussein. Mubarak was the Egyptians’ problem, that’s all. Mubarak is old news now. I am puzzled as to why Aziz didn’t write about something more timely, like an article about how Israel would like a dictator like Assad.
      In fact, I don’t recall the last time Aziz mentioned the slaughter in Syria. (I do recall a few mentions of it here at 972, but no general concern about the matter….after all, he IS anti-Zionist and anti-American Globalist Capitalism.

      Reply to Comment
    12. Danny

      “the Egyptian people benefitted by not having to fight yet another failed war”
      .
      How many failed wars have the Israeli people had to fight since 1973 (the two Lebanon debacles easily come to mind)? Maybe Aziz is right, and we need Mubarak after all?

      Reply to Comment
    13. XYZ

      The Egyptian and Syrian armies were both completely defeated. The IDF could have marched into Damascus and Cairo. The Soviets gave masssive resupply to the Syrian and Egyptian armies. Yes, casualties were high in the IDF, but much higher in the enemy forces. If you want to say that Israel suffered a “defeat” because of the higher than expected casualties, then the Germans “defeated” the Soviets in World War II because the Soviets suffered higher casualties than the Germans in most engagments, which is unusual for a victorious army.
      It is a MYTH that Sadat offered peace before the Yom Kippur War. He suggested Israel carry out a unilateral withdrawal, which was rejected because the lesson Israel learned from the 1957 unilateral withdrawal from the Sinai which brought another war in its wake ten years later was that before any major concessions, the Arab side should committ itself to a peace agreement, which Nasser refused to do. Sadat never intended to make a peace treaty with Israel before 1973 because he would have been considered a traitor for breaking the 3 Noes of Khartoum and disrputing the united Arab front against Israel.

      Reply to Comment
    14. XYZ

      Oh, I see. The Egyptian people, under a “people’s President” would go back on a war footing, spend 10 times as much on armaments and increase the tension on the border. Yes, everyone would feel good if that happened.

      Reply to Comment
    15. Danny

      “The Egyptian and Syrian armies were both completely defeated. The IDF could have marched into Damascus and Cairo”
      .
      Really? And what would they have done there – built new settlements? Israel was in no condition to march anywhere at the end of that war. It won, but by skin-of-the-teeth margin. Without America’s massive support, it wouldn’t have had even that slim margin. Dayan was quoted saying that it’s time to consider the “Samson option” (and we all know what that means). Israel got a licking the likes of which it had never experienced. The IDF was in shambles, and so was the government. And only a few years later, Israel gave up the Sinai to the last inch. Victorious nations don’t that, do they? Israel was defeated because it couldn’t afford another such “victory”. Egypt won because it got the Sinai back by force.

      Reply to Comment
    16. Actually, the 1973 war didn’t benefit anyone except the USA. It provided the pretext for the fourfold increase in oil prices, which obviously increased the value of the global petrodollar market fourfold. You may recall that the US had gone off the gold standard two years earlier. Since then, any oil producer who has even suggested selling oil for anything other than dollars has been described as a ‘dictator’ and subjected to spectacular annihilation, along with his country itself. The oil price hike also vastly increased the debts of the poorer countries of the world, which was handy for the US-controlled banks. Altogether, a triumph for Henry Kissinger’s shuttle ‘diplomacy’.

      Reply to Comment
    17. Danny

      The 1973 war clearly benefited Egypt. It got the Sinai back, made peace with Israel and started getting massive financial and military support from the U.S. Today, the Egyptian army is considered at par with Israel’s, which is a big problem for Israel if the Muslim Brotherhood wins the presidential election (which they probably will). If not for the corrupt Mubarak and his cronies, Egypt would be a prosperous country with a strong economy. Ironically, it is Mubarak’s corruption that made the Muslim Brotherhood a popular alternative and eventually brought them to power. What goes around, comes around.

      Reply to Comment
    18. sh

      But.. but.. but… Mr. Abu Sarah,…… Hosni Mubarak’s not Jewish!

      Reply to Comment
    19. XYZ

      Danny:
      “Israel won the war (by the skin of its teeth)”but also , “Egypt got the Sinai back by force”, but at the same time the cease fire was at kilometer 101 on the West Bank of the Canal on the road to Cairo but on the other hand, Egypt only got the Sinai back after they signed the peace agreement with Begin, even though they drove Israel out of the Sinai “by force” with Israel on the West Bank (Egyptian side) of the canal but Egypt won the war, but they were had to make peace with Israel to get the Sinai back but their forces were completely surrounded on their toe-hold on the east bank but Israel crossed the canal, but Egypt won the war but Israel won (by the skin of its teeth). Thank you, Danny, I know understand.

      Reply to Comment
    20. Danny

      Yes yes – the fabled kilometer 101… And good old Arik Sharon encircled the Egyptian army and was about to deliver the crushing blow. Why didn’t he? Maybe he didn’t want to. Maybe he had some good common sense, and figured that sometimes it’s better to retreat now than to over-extend yourself and later to retreat in defeat like Israel did in Lebanon and Gaza. Or maybe Israel had had enough dead young soldiers when the tally reached 2,700?

      Reply to Comment
    21. sh

      And if it was the stunning victory you describe, XYZ, what did they need the Agranat Commission for?
      http://www.knesset.gov.il/lexicon/eng/agranat_eng.htm
      .
      Sorry, I have to say it, but it’s disgusting to make claims like yours when anyone who was here knows how it really was and how many people’s lives were ruined by it besides the families of the many who died. Believe Danny.

      Reply to Comment
    22. XYZ

      You people are so blinded by your hyperpoliticization, you fail to even attempt to understand what I wrote. I never claimed the Yom Kippur War was a good thing for Israel, at least in the way the Sinai War of 1956 or the Six Day War are viwed. But, due to the hyperpoliticization of this site and many of the commetators, anything I say will automatically be disparaged. In this hyperpoliticized world Arabs are good, Israelis are bad. Thus, the Yom Kippur War was a “victory” for the Arabs, (being the good guys) and it was a “defeat” for Israel (being the bad guys).
      The Yom Kippur War was a great military victory for the IDF, far more than the Six-Day War, which turned out the way it did because the Egyptian commander, after having the Egyptian forces fight well at the beginning, decided to order a general retreat which turned into a rout. That did not happen in 1973 which made the IDF turn-about, after its initial set-backs all the more remarkable.
      This does not mean the war was not a trauma for Israel. Of course it was, because everyone thought Israel was a “superman” before the war and invincible. When the Arabs showed this was not the case, they and you interpret it as a “gigantic” moral victory, which it wasn’t.
      To get the Sinai back, Sadat had to sign a peace agreement with Israel for which he was condemned as a traitor and he was assassinated, just as Mubarak is viewed by Aziz and all these other “patriots” as a traitor to the Arab/Palestinian cause as well. He did not “drive” the IDF out of the Sinai. I visited the Sinai UNDER IDF control AFTER the Yom Kippur War which Danny said “drove Israel out of the Sinai by force”. Nonsense, but typical of the kind of propaganda we see here at 972.

      Reply to Comment
    23. Danny

      “To get the Sinai back, Sadat had to sign a peace agreement with Israel for which he was condemned as a traitor”
      .
      Sadat was a smart man who in 1971/72 sent overtures to then PM Golda (a breath-takingly stupid woman), who rebuked him by saying: “Not an inch of territory will be returned!” By the way, XYZ – there are firsthand accounts of members of the Knesset at that time who corroborate Golda’s rejectionist stance (one of them is Yossi Sarid, who is regarded as an honest man who doesn’t make up stories). Rebuked by Golda, Sadat had no choice but to go to war to return Egypt’s territory. Sadat was murdered by Muslim fanatics for making peace and opening Egypt to the west, and the U.S. in particular. Kind of like Rabin was killed for almost the same reason, only this time by Jewish fanatics, of which Israel has plenty.

      Reply to Comment
    24. sh

      “When the Arabs showed this was not the case, they and you interpret it as a “gigantic” moral victory, which it wasn’t.”
      No-one here called it a gigantic moral victory. There were many too many dead bodies for that. But there would have been no particular reason to return Sinai if the victory had been as great as you claim.
      .
      “I visited the Sinai UNDER IDF control AFTER the Yom Kippur War ”
      And you should consider the possibility that you might be talking to someone who visited Sinai during the Yom Kippur War.

      Reply to Comment
    25. max

      Al-Ahram also thinks that Egypt won the ’73 war (Nasr October), but I couldn’t find a military publication agreeing with it…
      Several analysts wrote over the years before the war that a peace treaty will only be possible when Egypt will feel victorious – they may have been right.
      Was the peace treaty an Egyptian win? I hope it was for both sides – it certainly allowed Israel to rebound economically.
      Ironically, if the peace treaty will be annulled, it is true that the Egyptians will keep their gain and claim a win; Potentially, also, Egypt’s claim of victory may erase the fear of war. And yet, strategically – as Begin probably understood – it was the best outcome for Israel, despite the risk.
      .
      I also couldn’t find a serious publication that sets the Egyptian army on par with Israel’s, though the very importance of such rankings was proven irrelevant by the surprise in ’73
      .
      “If not for the corrupt Mubarak and his cronies, Egypt would be a prosperous country with a strong economy” – one can only smile and hope that such baseless assertion will become true

      Reply to Comment
    26. Haim

      Democracy, indeed, isn’t for everyone. We Jews can’t exist without freedom. You, however, can only go from bad to worse. Let’s wait, say, a year – then we’ll talk about how great Egypt is managing without Mubarak.

      Reply to Comment
    27. Haim,
      Your comment is racist and it is the the other side of the anti semites arguments. Anti Semites use the Jewish race in a negative term. You on the other hand claim that Jews are more evolved that other humans. Which is the essence of racism The comment also shows a fair amount of ignorance. Jewish histry starting at biblical times show that humans are the same, seeking freedome and making mistakes and falling under dicatators that they choose. I would suggest you read the book of judges (in the bible). It seems to suggest that the Jewish people rejected freedome and wanted a king to rule them. So, I think Jews and Arabs are not that different. EVERYONE wants Freedome. Everyone has obstacles to overcome and everyone makes mistakes. Democracy takes time. Americans owned slaves while believing they were under democracy. I would say a good amount of the current MKs are anti freedom and I don’t see much being done about it.

      Reply to Comment
    28. XYZ

      Last time I checked, the Golan Heights is still controlled by Israel even though Syria also won a “titanic victory” in the Yom Kippur War.

      Reply to Comment
    29. Greg

      Good grief are we still arguing over who won the 1973 war?
      .
      This is farcical. Progress becomes impossible with this endless bickering of stubborn and prideful idiots.
      .
      And for the record, being knowledgable and smart does not preclude a person from being an idiot.

      Reply to Comment
    30. XYZ

      Greg-
      You don’t seem to get the point. All this proves why a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians, and the wider Arab world, for that matter is not possible. If the Arabs and their Leftist/Progressive backers, both Jewish and non-Jewish, can not accept REALITY, then there is no basis for any sort of accomodation. I said the Arabs were defeated in 1973 militarily. Since I am a “right-winger” and my statement both offended Arab “pride” and seemed to make Israel look “good” somehow, it must be denounced, whether there is a factual basis or not for the denunciation. One could possibly say, “yes, the Arabs were defeated militarily, but this has no bearing on whether or not the Palestinians have an independent state or not”. Since Arab-Palestinian pride is more important, than no wonder the Left-Progressives and the Arab “street” seem to be pretty strongly opposed to a compromise peace with Israel. That would offend Arab and Progressive sensitivies and their sense of justice. Israel simply has to accept the shopping list of grievances that is presented to them or no deal. There is no room for negotiation because negotiations mean giving up cherished myths and dreams. You see here how Mubarak is denounced for being a traitor to the Palestinian cause (this is what really upsets non-Egyptians, not his being a “dictator” or “undemocratic”) because he gave his people 30 years of peace after his 3 predecessors gave them 4 failed wars with Israel plus another failed war in Yemen (Nasser). What is important is to feel good, not to really improve the situation and feeling good involves one’s fantasies and dreams more than reality.

      Reply to Comment
    31. And as usual, XYZ, my point escapes you completely, because it’s outside your wavelength: the 1973 war was arranged by Kissinger. Its occurrence and its outcome were predetermined for reasons that completely escape your comprehension, as they are supposed to do.

      Reply to Comment
    32. Danny

      “I said the Arabs were defeated in 1973 militarily. Since I am a “right-winger” and my statement both offended Arab “pride” and seemed to make Israel look “good” somehow, it must be denounced, whether there is a factual basis or not for the denunciation”
      .
      By the same token, you can say that Israel won militarily in 2006, since it destroyed half of Lebanon; but of course you would be incorrect. You rightists are a primitive bunch – for you it’s enough to tally the score – 10,000 for us, 2,700 for them – and conclude that we won. So simple, and so base. I’ll bet you were moved when your hero G.W. Bush stood on the aircraft carrier and proclaimed: “Mission accomplished!” Right? Well, guess what… Israel has been fighting wars since day one, and it doesn’t seem to matter, because the outcome is always the same – MORE WARS!!! How long do you think Israel will be able to continue on this destructive path? The Egyptians may have been just dumb Arabs back in ’67, but they learned quickly and in ’73 gave us a beating we are still thinking about to this day. And judging from the 2006 war, the Arabs are continuing to catch up to us militarily. With every war, they learn our weaknesses and exploit them. Israel cannot win wars anymore, and it doesn’t matter how many we kill vs. how many they kill.

      Reply to Comment
    33. Greg

      And yet you continue…

      Please, please, for one short moment, just one tiny, insignificant moment, take a break from this endless, turgid, badly-acted opera and listen to yourselves.

      Reply to Comment
    34. I thought I might learn something but the only thing learned is that I’d better do something for my headache. When are we going to learn to look for sustainable answers. You leave me feeling hopeless.

      Reply to Comment
    35. Click here to load previous comments

The stories that matter.
The missing context.
All in one weekly email.

Subscribe to +972's newsletter