علی صدارت– رای دیوان بین‌المللی دادگستری در مورد اسرائیل، و تحلیل آن در رابطه با ایران
تاریخ تولید و انتشار: ۶ بهمن ۱۴۰۲ = 26-01-2024 جمعه
مصاحبه آقای حسین جوادزاده از رادیو عصر جدید با علی صدارت
❊
مطلب را به شکل صوتی، در👇همین‌جا👇بشنوید:
❊
❊❊❊ گزارش، بررسی و ارزیابی رویدادها ❊❊❊
❊
امروز، ساعاتی پیش، دیوان بین‌المللی دادگستری دولت اسرائیل را ملزم کرد که:
۱- قدمهایی برای پیش‌گیری نسل کشی بردارد،
۲- نگذارد ارتش اسرائیل نسل‌کشی کند،
۳- مردمی که نسل‌کشی کرده‌اند را تنبیه کند،
۴- تمهیدات لازم برای رسیدگی به زندگی رقت‌بار در غزه را اتخاذ کند،
۵- اقدامات موثر برای اینکه مدارک و اسناد دال بر نسل‌کشی از بین برده نشوند را انجام دهد، و
۶- ظرف یک ماه گزارش خود را به دادگاه تسلیم کند.
–
گرچه لابی بسیار قوی صهیونیسفر از فشار افکار عمومی شکست جانانه‌ای خورد و نتوانست از پذیرش پرونده شکایت افریقای جنوبی توسط دیوان بین‌المللی دادگستری جلوگیری کند، و نیز نتوانست رای مطلوب صهیونیسفر را تحمیل کند، ولی متاسفانه شاهد ضوابط دوگانه بودیم که عبارت‌های به‌کار برده شده در محکومیت روسیه برای حمله به اوکراین در حکم امروز این دیوان غایب هستند.
–
با افزودن به فشارهای افکار عمومی بر صهیونیسفر به طور عموم، و دولت اسرائیل به طور ویژه، و با کم شدن خشونت و جنگ در فلسطین، مسلما خشونت و تجاوزات به حقوق در میهن ما هم کمتر خواهد شد.
❊
❊
❊❊❊ گزارش، بررسی و ارزیابی رویدادها ❊❊❊
❊
مطلب را به صورت تصویری در اینجا ببینید و در هم‌رسانی مشارکت بفرمایید:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nli2s6TRshs
–
❊
مطلب را همچنین می‌توانید به شکل صوتی، در👇همین‌جا👇بشنوید و در هم‌رسانی مشارکت بفرمایید:
https://open.spotify.com/episode/2RnRiIgnGLtlDgL9SupOJO
–
❊
❊اطلاع‌یابی و اطلاع‌رسانی، حقی از حقوق بشر است❊
حقوق‌مدارتر شدن و حقوق‌مدارتر کردن، از پیش‌نیازهای برپایی و پویایی مردمسالاری در هر جامعه‌ای است. برای این کار، یکی از مهمترین راه‌ها، احقاق حق اطلاع‌یابی، و احقاق حق اطلاع‌رسانی است.
یک راه آسان برای مشارکت در ساختن سرنوشتی خوب و خوب‌تر در اینجا برای شما فراهم شده است:
لینک مطلب در رسانه‌ها و شبکه‌بندی‌های اجتماعی، برای: عضو شدن و دنبال کردن و مشترک شدن، رای‌دادن، ابراز نظر، پسندیدن، پیاده کردن، به دوستان خود ایمیل کردن، و…، و لطفا هم‌رسانی:
https://www.instagram.com/reel/C2k8ssvSdgG/
–
همراهان گرامی در اینستاگرام، شما می‌توانید از اینستاگرام خود در گوشی موبایل، به کانال مخابراتی ما (خبرنامه علی صدارت) ملحق شوید:
Use the Instagram app on your mobile device to join this broadcast channel:
https://ig.me/j/AbZQnDEDWb26LXMO/
or:
https://www.instagram.com/j/AbZQnDEDWb26LXMO/
❊
❊
https://www.facebook.com/Sedarat57/videos/724884403072828
–
https://www.facebook.com/Sedarat57/live_videos/
❊
https://castbox.fm/channel/علی-صدارت-id3317800?country=us
❊
❊
در واتساپ با شناسه:
علی صدارت-نظر، خبر، تحلیل
با آدرس:
https://chat.whatsapp.com/IT11IqMZ44v9L62gPRghhu
❊
برخی منابع، مراجع، ماخذ، مطالب مرتبط،….
رویدادها و خبرها…
توصیۀ دیوان بین المللی دادگستری لاهه به حکومت اسرائیل برای توقف نسل کشی در نوار غزه و خواست رها سازی گروگان ها و …
https://enghelabe-eslami.de/6063/
دیوان بین المللی دادگستری لاهه امروز در حکمی به اسرائیل دستور داد تا یک رشته اقدامات فوری در غزه اتخاذ کند، اما از صدور دستور برقراری آتش بس در جنگ این کشور و حماس خودداری کرد.
بر اساس اظهارات قاضی این دادگاه، اسرائیل باید تمام توانش برای توقف نسل کشی در غزه را بکار گیرد، امکان ورود هر چه سریع تر کمک های ضروری به این منطقه را فراهم کند و از تحریک مستقیم به نسل کشی در جریان این جنگ، جلوگیری و محرکین آن را مجازات کند.
جلسه امروز در دادگاه بین المللی لاهه بخشی از پرونده‌ای است که توسط آفریقای جنوبی مطرح شده و در آن اسرائیل را به «ارتکاب به نسل‌کشی» علیه فلسطینیان متهم می‌کند.
اسرائیل به شدت این اتهام را رد کرده و انتظار نمی رود که دادگاه برای چندین سال در مورد این ادعا تصمیم گیری کند.
قاضی دادگاه در جلسه امروز چه گفت؟:
در جریان دادگاه امروز، قاضی جون داناهیو تأیید کرد که دادگاه عالی سازمان ملل صلاحیت رسیدگی به پرونده نسل کشی علیه اسرائیل را دارد.
او گفت که آفریقای جنوبی وجهه قانونی برای طرح دعوی علیه اسرائیل به اتهام ارتکاب به نسل کشی را دارد و هر کشوری که کنوانسیون مقابله با نسل کشی را امضا کرده است، می تواند علیه کشور دیگری مسئله نسل کشی را مطرح و شکایت کند.
قاضی جون داناهیو همچنین گفت که آفریقای جنوبی حق دارد که اختلاف با اسرائیل را در مورد نقض تعهدات طبق کنوانسیون مورد نظر مطرح کند.
بر اساس کنوانسیون نسل کشی سازمان ملل متحد، مصوب سال ۱۹۴۸، تلاش عمدی برای نابود کردن تمام یا بخشی از یک گروه بر اساس ملیت، قومیت، نژاد یا مذهب آن، نسل کشی محسوب می‌شود..
قاضی این دادگاه در بخش دیگری از صحبت هایش به وضعیت انسانی در غزه اشاره کرد و به نقل از مارتین گریفیث، هماهنگ کننده امداد رسانی سازمان ملل گفت که «غزه به محل مرگ و نا امیدی تبدیل شده است.»
قاضی دادگاه عالی سازمان ملل گفت که ١.٧ میلیون نفر در غزه آواره شده اند و این منطقه محصور «غیرقابل سکونت» شده است.
با این حال او خاطر نشان کرد، آماری که از غزه منتشر می شود را بطور مستقل نمی توان تأیید کرد.
او گفت که ۱.۴ میلیون نفر اکنون در پناهگاه های سازمان ملل هستند و به همه نیازهای ضروری دسترسی ندارند.
در دادگاه امروز، همچنین ضمن ابراز نگرانی نسبت به سرنوشت گروگان هایی که در دست حماس هستند، خواسته شد که این افراد فوراً آزاد شوند.
اقدامات موقتی که دادگاه بین المللی لاهه به آن رأی داد:
• اسرائیل باید تمام تمهیدات را برای جلوگیری از هر اقدامی که می تواند نسل کشی تلقی شود، بکار گیرد، از جمله کشتن اعضای یک گروه، ایجاد صدمۀ بدنی، شرایط طراحی شده با هدف نابودی یک گروه و جلوگیری از تولد،
• اسرائیل باید اطمینان حاصل کند که ارتش این کشور هیچ اقدام نسل کشی را مرتکب نمی شود،
• اسرائیل باید هرگونه اظهار نظر عمومی که می تواند تحریک به ارتکاب نسل کشی در غزه تلقی شود را متوقف کند و به مجازات برساند،
• اسرائیل باید اقداماتی را برای تضمین دسترسی بشر دوستانه اتخاذ کند،
• اسرائیل باید از تخریب مدارکی که می تواند در پروندۀ نسل کشی استفاده شو،د جلوگیری کند،
• اسرائیل باید ظرف یک ماه پس از صدور این دستور، گزارشی را به دادگاه ارائه کند.
❊
❊
ICJ Stops Short of Ordering Ceasefire in Gaza to Stop Genocide
The ICJ ruled that Israel’s military shall not commit acts forbidden by Article 2 of Genocide Convention but stopped short of ordering Israel to cease its military operation in Gaza. Read here…
❊
Ahead of ICJ Verdict,
Israeli Onslaught Continued
A global human rights coalition expressed hope Thursday that the imminent verdict by the International Court of Justice will be a step toward stopping the genocide. Read here…
❊
The ICJ ruled that Israel’s military shall not commit acts forbidden by Article 2 of Genocide Convention but stopped short of ordering Israel to cease its military operation in Gaza. Read here…
❊
Israeli minister renews call for striking Gaza with ‘nuclear bomb’
Israeli Heritage Minister Amichai Eliyahu has extremist rhetoric against Palestinians
Anadolu Staff |
24.01.2024 – Update : 24.01.2024
Israel’s far-right Heritage Minister Amichai Eliyahu on Wednesday renewed his call for striking the Gaza Strip with a “nuclear bomb.”
“Even in The Hague they know my position,” The Times of Israel newspaper quoted Eliyahu as saying during a tour in the West Bank city of Hebron, in reference to his previous call for using nuclear weapons in the Gaza Strip.
In November, Eliyahu said dropping a “nuclear bomb” on the Gaza Strip is “an option.”
The hardline minister, who has extremist rhetoric against Palestinians, also called for encouraging Gaza’s population to migrate from the enclave.
On Dec. 29, South Africa filed a lawsuit with the International Court of Justice (ICJ) requesting an injunction against Israel on the grounds that Israeli attacks on Gaza violate the Genocide Convention.
The South African legal team has included Eliyahu’s statements on the Gaza Strip in the file presented to the court.
Following the completion of hearings on Jan. 11 – 12, the court began deliberations after examining the parties’ submissions and evidence.
Israel has launched a deadly offensive on the Gaza Strip following an Oct. 7 Hamas attack, killing at least 25,700 Palestinians and injuring 63,740 others. Nearly 1,200 Israelis are believed to have been killed in the Hamas attack.
The Israeli war has left 85% of Gaza’s population internally displaced amid acute shortages of food, clean water and medicine, while more than half of the enclave’s infrastructure has been damaged or destroyed, according to the UN.
❊
Illegal US Yemen Bombing Intensifies Risk of Regional War
The Houthis say their attacks in the Red Sea will continue until there is a ceasefire in Gaza, writes Marjorie Cohn. Read here…
❊
How Israel Became Exempt From the Global Reckoning Over Racism
World sensitivity to racism and oppression is surging, but historical injustice in Israel is hardly drawing to an end. In fact, it’s only getting worse
For a few weeks, a furious debate has been raging in the German media, centering around the Cameroonian philosopher Achille Mbembe. In the eyes of many, Mbembe, who has taught at Yale and Berkeley, is the most influential African intellectual of our time. He is one of the most prominent and most incisive thinkers about postcolonialism in the present period. He coined the term “necropolitics,” referring to the use of political power to determine who will live and who will die…
❊
Defending Apartheid
https://tothepointanalyses.com/defending-apartheid/
Defending Apartheid—An Analysis (9 January 2021) by Lawrence Davidson
Part I—Apartheid
In 2017 the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA) issued a report on the conditions of Palestinians under Israeli rule. The report covered the situations of both Palestinian citizens of Israel and the subject population in the Occupied Territories. The report concluded “Israel has established an apartheid regime that dominates the Palestinian people as a whole.”
Though U.S. and Israeli pressure managed to suppress the report, evidence for this charge of apartheid is clear-cut. More recently, the facts have been brought together in a succinct presentation by the noted journalist Jonathan Cook. In a 2018 issue of The Link, a publication of Americans for Middle East Understanding, he wrote an expose` entitled “Apartheid Israel.” Some of the particulars Cook looks at are: citizenship inequality, nationality inequality, marriage inequality, legal inequality, and residential inequality. The predictable Palestinian struggle seeking equality and the end of apartheid is seen as a subversive movement by both Israel’s Jewish majority and its increasingly rightwing governments.
Of course, some Israeli Jews do understand that the country has a serious problem with racism. For instance, this comes through in the June 2020 Haaretz report that indicates that as “world sensitivity to racism and oppression” increases “historical injustice in Israel is … only getting worse.”
Part II—The “Nation-State” Law
One of the ways things are getting worse in Israel is through the enshrining of Zionist-inspired apartheid in law. On 18 July 2018 the Israeli Knesset (Parliament) enacted a “Nation-State” Law. It defines the State of Israel as the nation-state “of the Jewish people only.” In other words, only Jews can hold “nationality rights” in Israel.
MK (member of the Knesset) Yariv Levin dubbed the law “Zionism’s flagship bill … that will put Israel back on the right path. A country that is different from all others in one way, that it is the nation-state of the Jewish people.” MK Amir Ohana, who chaired the special committee that shaped the bill, stated: “This is the law of all laws. It is the most important law in the history of the State of Israel, which says that everyone has human rights, but national rights in Israel belong only to the Jewish people.” The absurdity of this proposition is exposed by the fact that the Palestinian minority has been denied significant aspects of its human rights for over 70 years. As it turns out, the two categories of rights, national and human, have been interdependent ever since the development of the sovereign state.
Part III—Hanna Arendt’s Insight
Acting on the claim that one can separate out human rights, much less civil rights, from “national rights” has proven disastrous in the modern political era. Significantly, it was a brilliant Jewish intellectual, Hanna Arendt, who pointed this out following the horror of the Holocaust and on the occasion of the U.N. pronouncement of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Arendt pointed out that, in the era of the nation-state, rights are defined and enforced within state entities claiming sovereignty over both territory and population. If a state decides that for racial, ethnic, religious, or any other reason, that only one portion of its population is worthy of first-class citizenship, it can proceed to deny to all those who do not qualify any and all rights. This is, of course, what the Nazis did to the Jews, and more recently is reflected in how Myanmar treats its ethnic minorities, how China treats its Uyghur population, and Saudi Arabia discriminates against its Shia religious minority, and so.
The United Nations has proven unable to effectively challenge this perversion of sovereignty. Keep in mind that the United Nations is itself made up of nation-states which reserve the power to discriminate as a consequence of sovereignty. This has made it difficult for the U.N., as an organization, to enforce a “universal” and “inalienable” conception of rights. In truth, the only way to achieve universal rights is to replace the nation-state’s claim that its sovereignty allows it alone to grant rights—replace it with enforceable international law that assures equitable application of rights.
Part IV—Israel’s High Court of Justice Defends Apartheid
Israel is now acting out the scenario Arendt identified. There were many complaints against the nation-state bill, coming not only from the Palestinian Arabs, but also from the Druze community and even elements of the Mizrachi Jewish population. Thus, on 22 December 2020, fully two and a half years after the passage of the bill, the High Court of Justice held a public review of the law.
Two sections of the law drew particular objection from those appearing before the court. First was the objection to the bill’s official designation of “Jewish settlement as a value that the state is obligated to promote.” Considering the fact that such settlements most often lead to eviction of Palestinians from their land and homes, and the steady segregation of populations based on ethnicity and religion, it can’t help but be seen as an important historical factor in Zionist apartheid. The second was the law’s purposeful demotion of Arabic—it will no longer be an official language of Israel. The implication here is that loss of recognition of the language spoken by the Palestinians, Druze, and at least the first generation of Mizrachi Jews is equivalent to their loss of equal social and political status with those who speak Hebrew.
Throughout the ensuing debate the eleven High Court judges could not, or would not, recognize that giving elite legal and social status in law to one group of religiously identified citizens must have detrimental legal consequences for other non-elite citizens and subjects. That it would was a point made by Attorney Hassan Jabareen, the director of Adalah—the Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights.
The rejoinder of the judges made in reference to the emphasis on “Jewish settlement” was that “the fact that Jewish settlement is perceived as a national value does not mean that there should be no equal allocation and legitimate civil rights for others.” As observers noted, this reply is ahistorical. It simply ignores Israel’s history of “over 70 years of discrimination, in which hundreds of towns, cities, and villages were established for Jews while not a single new locale was built for Palestinian citizens. As if Palestinian land was not expropriated for constructing Jewish communities.”
The same obtuseness was displayed when it came to the demotion of the Arabic language. The judges just could not see why losing its status as an official language was so painful for Arabic speakers. They were not moved when one of the plaintiffs pointed out, “there is a violation of convention here. The rules of the game have changed. My language, at least formally, has maintained its status from the time of the Ottomans until the 20th Knesset. Language was the only collective right [afforded to] the indigenous minority in its homeland.”
The cultural divide between Jews and non-Jews in Israel/Palestine that has been evolving into apartheid since before 1948 reached a tragic legal climax in the decision-making of these eleven judges. They confirmed in law a process that condemns non-Jews to a legal no-man’s-land. As the Druze lawyer told the court, “There is not a word on minority rights; it is a badge of shame for the State of Israel. … It is doubtful whether Jewish students who are educated on this law will be willing to accept Arab citizens at all in the future.”
Part V— “The Desired Reality”
Why were the eleven Israeli High Court judges so obtuse? Perhaps it is because they have been acculturated to see Zionist Israel as an exceptional place—a justification unto itself. As Yariv Levin described it above, Israel is “a country that is different from all others in one way, that it is the nation-state of the Jewish people.” This exclusiveness is the raison d’être of the Zionist project—it is its ultimate “noble” goal. For those within the exclusive Zionist tent, assigning the term apartheid to their accomplishment is to judge a special case by supposedly non-applicable generic rules. To persist in doing so is regarded as a sign of anti-Semitism rather than facing the facts.
This situation has been addressed by the Haaretz journalist Amira Haas. Haas is “the daughter of Holocaust survivors and resides in Ramallah, where she is the only Jewish Israeli journalist living in the West Bank.” She was in the United States in June 2019 and gave an interview to Mari Cohen for the publication Jewish Currents.
Haas explains the current situation this way: “The current reality is actually one state, which is an apartheid state. This means there are two separate laws: one for Palestinians and one for Israeli Jews. The Palestinian population is subdivided into groups and subgroups like the nonwhite population of [former apartheid] South Africa. They’re disconnected from each other. They are treated differently by Israel, while Israeli Jews live in the entire country, like one people, with full rights.”
The apartheid nature of Israel is a developmental plan of the state. Haas explains that Israel’s main goal is “to get more land, and to manipulate the Palestinian demography. … You see that this is really a plan. [Israeli leaders] sit and they think about how to implement it, and what regulations will achieve this goal. … One by one, step by step.” And, one has to conclude after seventy years that Israeli apartheid is sustainable because most of the world’s governments accept it. That, of course, could change, but there is no sign that it will in the near future.
It is also sustainable because it is what Israeli Jews want. “For Israel, this is the desired reality: that Palestinians live in their enclaves, deprived of any ability to develop their economy, and that the world gives them donations so that they can sustain themselves. And that’s it. There is no desire on the part of Israel to reach a different reality. There has been a kind of an illusion among Jews [in the diaspora] that Israel wants a solution. But [Israeli Jews] don’t see that this is a problem.”
Can it get worse? Yes, it can. Religious fanaticism can make it worse. Haas goes on to explain, “The question is, will the Israeli messianic religious right-wing segment of the population that has gained a lot of power in Israeli politics—will it succeed in accomplishing its aims: the mass expulsion of Palestinians and annexation of the great majority of the West Bank? It’s not enough for them to have Palestinians living in enclaves. They want more.”
It is this overall attitude that explains the ability of Israeli Jews to feel little or no obligation to help Palestinians in the Occupied Territories to maintain their health care systems or provide Covid-19 vaccinations. The act of official segregation has not diminished Israeli control, only any acceptance of Israeli responsibility.
Part VI — Conclusion
History is full of tragic irony. At the end of the 19th century Germany was considered one of the most civilized nations on the planet. One world war and a Great Depression later, many Germans were electing Nazis and gearing up for the Holocaust. Up until the mid-20th century, the Jewish people were considered peace-loving and a reservoir of brilliant minds. One Holocaust later, many of them, both survivors and those in the diaspora, had joined a Zionist movement determined to create a racist warrior state.
Over time we become products of our local environment. That environment narrows our range of thought and choice. When the environment changes, those who endure change with it, not always for the best. The Holocaust traumatized its survivors, and some of them went on to produce “a nation-state for the Jewish people.” They might have pulled this off benignly if they had done so on some unpopulated planet. However, they chose Palestine in an allusion to biblical Israel—a disingenuous choice given that most Zionists were atheists. Palestine was not an unpopulated place, and thus, today, over 20 percent of Israel’s population is not Jewish.
The fact that Palestinians have no nationality rights means, historically, that their possession of any other sort of rights is precarious. They are like the Jews in any number of anti-Semitic historical circumstances—a fact that seems to have escaped our modern-day Hebrews.
It didn’t have to be this way. As a species we have a very wide range of experience, and with the proper historical awareness we can broaden out our current decision-making beyond the dictates of our local environment. In fact, after World War II some Jews tried to do just this. Even through the trauma of the Holocaust, they could see that the goal of a Jewish state in Palestine meant war with the indigenous population. Their own sense of the Jewish past told them that there were alternatives. These people were known as “cultural Zionists,” and they sought a democratic, equalitarian Palestine as a shared, multicultural home that guaranteed the protection and continuing development of Jewish cultural heritage, alongside those of Muslims and Christians. Palestine could have become a “spiritual” home for the Jews, with generous though controlled immigration opportunities. It was a possible peaceful route to Jewish recovery after the Holocaust.
Whatever one might think of this alternative, it was never seriously considered by those “political” Zionists convinced by persistent anti-Semitism that the survival of the Jews could only come through having their own nation-state. This path combined an evolving Jewish nationalism with a racist exclusiveness (the “chosen people” claim) that also ran through Jewish history. Zionists ignored that part of their historical reality, and today’s Apartheid Israel, along with its insistence that Judaism and Zionism are synonymous, is the result. As you sow, so shall you reap.
❊
Israel’s Rutted Path
https://tothepointanalyses.com/israels-rutted-path/
Israel’s Rutted Path—An Analysis (11 March 2023) by Lawrence Davidson
Part I—Ruts: Ideological and Otherwise
In the 1970s I spent several years in Edmonton, Alberta. This is one of Canada’s Western provinces and Edmonton, the provincial capital, is only 900 miles south of the Arctic Circle. The winters are long and cold, and it snows a lot. Once the average daytime temperature falls below freezing, usually by the end of October, the snowfalls pile up one after the other. At least during my time, municipal plowing was only performed for heavily trafficked roads. Side roads were quickly snowed over and reduced to ruts that intersected at certain crossroads. To drive onto one of these roads was a risky commitment. You had to go where the ruts took you and hope that that was, approximately, where you wanted to go.
Edmonton’s ruts were the physical consequence of the weather plus where the city government decided not to plow. However, there are other kinds of ruts that impact our lives. There are ideological ruts that result in tunnel vision that direct our behavior as surely as the seemingly endless piles of snow on the streets of Alberta’s capital.
We can apply this analogy to present day Israel where a deep ideological rut laid down over a century ago has divided into two routes to the same destination. The destination is the transformation of all of Palestine into a unitary Zionist Israeli state. The ideological path to this end can now be religious or secular in character. Originally, it was secular. Thus, most of the founding Zionists from Herzel through David Ben Gurion were not very religious Jews, although most of them understood the Bible as history and were fixated on biblical Canaan. This fixation was a product of a long-standing interpretation of the relationship between God and the ancient Hebrews as an historical reality. So, in this case, you had a cadre of not particularly religious European Jews willing to wholeheartedly assert that there really was a divine promise that gave the land of Canaan over to Jews—just like it said in the Bible. Under such circumstances the founders of Israel would find it difficult to completely separate religion from state affairs.
Seen within the 19th-20th century historical context of the Jews, this confusion is not surprising. Religion is a powerful form of authority and a binding agent for disparate peoples. The “wandering” Jews were such a population. As is often mentioned by today’s Zionists, Jews had for centuries prayed for a return to Jerusalem, thus binding them religiously to this far away place most had never seen. This act of yearly prayer mystically maintained a divine land grant and somehow negated the claims of others who, over the same centuries, had actually lived in the alleged “promised land.” One might also note that “next year in Jerusalem” evokes a city and not a country occupying all of present Palestine from the Mediterranean sea to the Jordan river. It all made no logical sense at all, but then it was based on faith and not fact.
Part II—Same Goal, Different Justifications
One can see the impact of the underlying religious sentiment even among the secular “pioneer” Zionists of the 20th century. David Ben Gurion, Israel’s first prime minister, was not a religious Jew and he did not have a high regard for the observant orthodox sects who survived the Holocaust and made their way to Palestine. They were the opposite of the new Jewish men and women who were supposed to be fighters—“conquerors” of the new Israel. Nonetheless, he repeatedly compromised with them, particularly immediately after World War Two, when such orthodox groups seemed close to extinction. As a result, religious fundamentalist Jews ranging from Orthodox to “ultra” Orthodox, revived and stood as a potential political power center in modern Israel.
It took until the late 1970s and the rightwing government of Menachem Begin to see how this potential might be realized. Begin’s Likud (the word means “Consolidation”) party won enough votes in the national election of 1977 to form a ruling coalition. Begin invited into his government the ultra-Orthodox party Agudat Yisra’ek (translates as “Association for Israel”) and the National Religious Party (NRP). Agudat was given the government’s Finance portfolio and the NRP received the Education portfolio. Begin also began a program of settlement expansion into the West Bank (aka Judea and Samaria) that followed from his religious belief in a “promised land” given by God to a “chosen” people. This expansion process has never really stopped.
While the drive to conquer and colonize all of Palestine went unquestioned by most secular and religious leaders, their motives were different. The secular justification would be along the lines of pre-state Revisionist leader Vladimir Jabotinsky’s view: the promises of international (European) leaders constituted the basis for a legitimate claim to a Jewish state in Palestine—one that needed defensible borders and sufficient territory to accommodate the in-gathering of world Jewry. This secular position allowed for a modicum of sensitivity to pressure from Western allies, particularly Israel’s patron, the United States. However, the religious leaders who are now in power show no sign of such sensitivity. It can be argued that the religious men and women in today’s coalition government of Benjamin Netanyahu care little or nothing for either the international community or international law.
The situation is complicated by the fact that even as Israel moves toward a religiously inspired authoritarian government (it has always been authoritarian for its Palestinian subjects), its secular opposition is not a united one. It should be noted that most of those filling the streets in protest against the domestic “reforms” of the Netanyahu government are secular Ashkenazis. That is, they are Israeli Jews of European origin. Sephardic Israelis (not to mention Israeli-Arabs), of Middle Eastern origin, are less well represented. The religiously driven government seems unimpressed with the protests and is apparently willing to forcibly suppress them.
Part III—Who is Talking to U.S. Jews?
The religious Zionists presently in power also seem indifferent to the usually more liberal Jews living outside of Israel. Thus, many of those who now seek to influence diaspora Jews to remain loyal to the Zionist myth are on the secular end of this spectrum. Particularly active in this effort is the politically rightwing Danny Ayalon, former Israeli ambassador to the U.S. In a 23 January 2023 English language interview with the Jewish Broadcasting Service, Ayalon stated “In my mind there shouldn’t be any daylight between Jews overseas and in Israel itself. I do not see a difference between Zionism and Judaism. Every Jew in the Haggadah calls for ‘Next year in Jerusalem.’ This is what Zionism is all about.” He goes on to express concern about those American Jews who “automatically” take the side of the Palestinians. He calls the latter “our mortal enemy.” Such Jews “actually call into question the very legitimacy of the Jewish state and of Zionism.” He sees this as a form of anti-Semitism. There are plenty of Americans who agree with him. However, most of them aren’t Jewish.
They are gentiles such as Mike Pompeo, the former U.S. secretary of state. Pompeo is a Christian fundamentalist (about 15% of American Christians are fundamentalist) who once declared “that God sent [former president] Trump to save Israel.” Pompeo also disregards international law when it comes to Israel. “[Israel] is not an occupying nation. As an evangelical Christian [ LD: please note that not all evangelicals would agree with Pompeo], I am convinced by my reading of the Bible that 3,000 years on, in spite of the denial of so many, [this land] is the rightful homeland of the Jewish people.” In other words, his faith in an unsubstantiated bible story that “the Lord is at work here,” is stronger than his dedication to the rule of law. It is a sure sign of the irresponsibility of an opportunist such as Donald Trump that he would make such a person his secretary of state.
Subsequently, Pompeo was involved in reversing U.S. policy that was based on international law. For instance, “overturning legal advice from 1978” that declared Israel’s settlements in the West Bank violated the Geneva Convention, and the move of the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem.
Pompeo’s exit from the State Department in 2022 did not really change this lawless disposition. This is because the next President, Joe Biden, is enough of a secular Zionist himself (as against Pompeo’s religious Zionist enthusiasm) to keep the U.S. response to Israeli crimes passive. Thus, when it became clear that the present Netanyahu government would expand colonization in Palestinian territory, accompanied by ever more violent behavior on the part of both Israeli settlers, police and army, the U.S. government’s response was in the form of words and not actions. Indeed, Biden reiterated that he would never cut or condition U.S. aid to Israel. Netanyahu and his neofascist coalition has probably concluded that there will be no important consequences out of Washington whatever happens on the West Bank. This attitude was reinforced by a mid-February visit to Israel by Chuck Schumer, the Democratic leader in the U.S. Senate. Treating Netanyahu like a close friend, he and the prime minister discussed everything but the latter’s ongoing attempt to “gut Israeli democracy.”
Part IV—Conclusion
Both Israeli and U.S. leaders are stuck in a long running ideological rut. How long is this rut? Consider that most of today’s Israeli government agrees wholeheartedly with Mike Pompeo’s assertion that “the Lord is at work here.” In the Old Testament books of Deuteronomy and Leviticus (circa 8th century BCE) God commands the Hebrews to massacre most of the Canaanites and take their land. The modern Israeli Zionists are still at it. For those caught in this sort of rut, whether expressed in secular or religious terms, there is nowhere else to go except down a road that leads to pogroms against Palestinians in towns like Huwara and military strikes against civilians in cities like Jenin and Gaza. Zionism has put out the “light unto the nations.”
❊
Gaza Is Exposing Western Liberals For The Frauds They Are
The job of the so-called liberal “moderate” has never been to oppose racism, fascism, tyranny, injustice or genocide, their job is to perpetually give the thumbs-up to one head of the two-headed monster that is the murderous western empire.
❊
New York Times Spins
Lemkin’s Work on Genocide
Raphael Lemkin’s application of the term genocide to the Ottoman Turk’s systematic mass slaughter of the Armenians predated the Holocaust, write Mischa Geracoulis and Heidi Boghosian. Read here…
❊
The Roots of Israel’s
Purge & Purify Strategy
https://tothepointanalyses.com/the-historical-roots-of-israels-purge-and-purify-strategy/
In the 16th century, the Catholic Church claimed to be the one true form of Christianity. Centered in Rome, it had ideologically created a largely unified Europe—in accordance with the belief that for a state to be stable, the citizens must follow the same religion (or ideology). And indeed, the Catholic Church was organized like a state, owned about one-third of the land of central and Western Europe, collected taxes throughout this area, and had grown exceedingly rich. The Church bureaucracy, empowered and well-to-do, claimed to represent God’s will on Earth and they usually had sufficient authority to enforce that claim.
❊
An Anniversary the West
Would Rather Forget
contemporary relevance of the Nazi effort to exterminate Russians by enforced starvation during the Siege of Leningrad. Read here…
_____
❊
US Supreme Court Defends
Free Speech on Palestine
The dismissal marks the third consecutive time a federal court has dismissed the Jewish National Fund’s case against the U.S. Campaign for Palestinian Rights. Read here…
❊
❊
“Many of My Shows Have Been Canceled”: Chinese Artist Ai Weiwei on Israel, Gaza & Censorship
We speak with acclaimed Chinese artist Ai Weiwei, who recently had an exhibition in London canceled after he publicly criticized Israel’s assault on Gaza. “We are … Read More →
❊
ICJ Orders Israel to Prevent Genocide But Stops Short of Calling for Ceasefire
Israel Pounds Khan Younis, Targets Hospitals as Death Toll Tops 26,000
CIA Dir. Burns to Travel to France for Truce Talks with Qatar, Egypt and Israel
Minneapolis and Somerville, MA, Pass Gaza Ceasefire Resolutions
U.S. and Iraq to Start Talks on Phased Withdrawal of U.S. Coalition Forces
Activists Protest in Front of Henry Kissinger’s Memorial Service
❊❊❊
آدرس مطلب در سایت (سایت علی صدارت : رسانه‌های ملیِ همگانی به مثابه شاخه چهارم دولت) را در ذیل آورده‌ایم.
در این آدرس، می‌توان به بعضی دیگر رسانه‌ها که هم این مطلب و نیز برخی دیگر از مطالب سایت در آن‌ها منتشر می‌شوند، دسترسی داشت.
از این راه می‌توان به‌عنوان یک «کنش‌گر حقوق بشر» فعال شد. با عضو شدن، و دنبال کردن، و مشترک شدن، و رای‌دادن، و ابراز نظر، و پسندیدن، و پیاده کردن، و به دوستان خود ایمیل کردن، و…، و ابتکار برای سایر روش‌های هم‌رسانی، برای احقاق حقِ اطلاع‌یابی و اطلاع‌رسانی، نقش‌آفرین گردید:
https://alisedarat.com/2024/01/26/12841/
❊❊❊
لینکهای دسترسی به سایر تولیدات ما، و سایر رسانه‌های ما، و نیز راههای تماس و ارتباط با ما:
Discover more from رسانه‌های ملیِ همگانی به‌مثابه شاخه چهارم دولت ❊سایت شخصی علی صدارت❊
Subscribe to get the latest posts to your email.
بازتاب: رای دادگاه بین‌المللی در مورد اسرائیل، و تحلیل آن در رابطه با ایران: علی صدارت | اشتراک eshtrak