Is there no end to the demonization of Israel? Three recent events, three signs, force us to ask the question once again. First of all, in France, this strange "boycott" campaign that looks like it's spreading. Of course there are situations in which a boycott is justifiable. And I am the first to have advocated it when, in sum, the right of peoples to self-determination becomes the right of tyrants to determine their destiny, or that of the neighboring people. But in the case of a democracy like Israel? In the case of the sole democracy in the Middle East, the only state in the region where political differences can be solved by compromise? In the face of one of the only nations in the world that, with the miracle of a regime that, from its very birth was, in fact, a democracy has answered the timeless question as to whether one can improvise democracy, invent it out of nothing, and whether it can surge from a people who have often known only totalitarianism and tyranny? And what can one say, finally, of this collective punishment supposedly inflicted upon a country that, in its relations with its political adversary, in other words, the Palestinians a) counts a large minority of citizens willing to grant any and all concessions; b) counts a majority that has long since been converted to the two-state solution, in return for guarantees of security, and c) where there exist virtually no reasonable authorities who have not resigned themselves, whether they like it or not, to putting to rest their utopian dreams and accepting the sharing of the land. This business of a boycott, whether economic, cultural, or as applied to sports, makes no sense. Or, if it does, one shudders at the thought of the expression of such, for we are so close, here, to the most irrational, the craziest, and the most rabid of hatreds.
The second event took place in Toronto, where Tears of Gaza, a film by Vibeke Lokkeberg, Norwegian ex-model and actress converted to war documentary film making, was shown. To me, there is nothing as noble as the war documentary genre. But nothing is more difficult. And I know, having risked an attempt myself, that one can only qualify it as such if the film maker respects simple but strict rules. Probity, to begin with. What's the point of drawing tears over the supposed "massacre of civilians", even "genocide" of the war of Gaza when the Palestinians themselves estimate (as recently as this November 4th, according to the declarations of Fathi Hamad, Hamas's Minister of the Interior) that 700 combatants--I underline the word--were killed in January 2009 during this war, thus corroborating the Israeli figures?
In addition, contextualization. Has one the right to show images, dreadful like all images of war, without mentioning one word about the ideology of the masters of Gaza, their responsibility in triggering these operations, as well as their style of fighting--by obliging parents, for example, to turn their children into human shields? And then, the last requisite is the accuracy of what one shows. We showed archive footage too, in Bosna!, but most of the images shown were our own, shot by Alain Ferrari and me in Sarajevo as it was being bombed. Whereas, the crew of this film never set foot in Gaza and was content to splice together film sequences shot by cameramen under the strict surveillance of Hamas militia men. Such a film--that, unfortunately, will soon pop up at every film festival on the planet--is not a documentary but a work of propaganda. It is a film that, by satanizing Israel, is promoting not peace, but war.
And the last sign concerns, exactly, Norway, and beyond Norway, this Scandanavia I love but
have had difficulty recognizing these last few years. Isn't it regrettable to learn, for example,
that the country of the Oslo accords was the first, after Toronto, to greet the film as a triumph?
Apart from the film, of which one might suspect the author's nationality influenced its favorable reception, isn't it distressing to think that a book like Susan Abulhawa's Mornings in Jenin, a concentration of anti-Israeli and anti-Jewish clichés masquerading as fiction, is a best seller there, praised by most of the major media? Worse still, isn't it disquieting to learn that, in the same city where Itzak Rabin and Yasser Arafat were that close to making peace, the Israeli embassy has been forced to move because it is harassed and threatened, thus posing a "threat" to the peace and tranquillity of the residents of the upscale Parkveien neighborhood by its very presence and by the security barriers (referred to in Oslo as the 'Wailing Wall") it was obliged to set up to protect itself from the bully boys?
And what a pity, finally, to see what has happened in Sweden, next door, where twenty fascist-leaning deputies are currently sitting in the national parliament, and where a growing fringe of the left interprets the ideals of tolerance as an authorization to voice their reprobation for the very existence of a State of Jewish majority in the Middle East. And what a pity that the city of Malmö, the country's third largest, is run by a mayor whose claim to fame is that of having declared war--so he trumpets--on both antisemitism and on Zionism. Adventures in progressive dialectic. Grimaces from what was once the very face of social democracy in Europe. It is frightening.
And we are there.
Why would there be when the policies and actions continue on the same course or worse?
(Natan Sharansky "Antisemitism in 3-D," Forward, (January 21, 2005) p.9
Anti-Semites principles when they criticize Israel, for example, denying Israelis the right to follow their legitimate claims while encouraging the Palestinians to do so.
Anti-Semites reject Israel the right to protect itself, and overlook Jewish victims, while blaming Israel for pursuing their murderers.
Anti-Semites seldom make constructive statements about Israel. They describe Israelis using derogatory terms and hate-speech, suggesting, for example that they are racists or Nazis.
I consider religion and the actions of a democratic state, as two different things. Stressing that point will help to combat racism. It would also help if the US wasn't shielded from the voices of the many Israeli's who don't agree with their governments actions and policies. How many in this country has even heard of B'Tselem?
Of course Palestinians in Gaza had an election a few years ago and have been under US/Israeli siege ever since for voting for the wrong people.
The numbers of rockets fired from Gaza fell substantially over the past few months. Yet the blockade is still in place. So Gazans are bombed when rockets fall, and blockaded anyway when there are none. The logic of that one escapes me.
Your premise is incorrect. Israel is NOT a democracy.
You mistakenly conflate anti-zionism with anti-semitism. Please don't draw world Jewry into a de facto association with a modern colonial-settler movement. THAT is dangerous.
Are you saying that Israel is giving the Palestinian people the right to self-determination or are you denying the Palestinians even the right to be called People? Do you think that Occupation is a way of self-determination or do you think that people are free to do what they want as long as they give up their homeland?
Bizarre, at least !!
It is the only country in the middle east rated as "Free" by the non political Freedom House.
And these days, anti-zionism is clearly anti-semitism. Particularly when you people use outright falsehoods in order to demonize and delegitimize the rights of the Israelis to freedom and self determination.
No one is really fooled by the "I'm only anti-zionist, not an anti-semite" mantra any more. The sole obsession with the extermination of the only majority Jewish state in the world makes that abundantly clear.
"David J. Kramer" Executive Director of Freedom House,
"[ ]Senior Fellow at the Project for the New American Century"
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=David_J._Kramer
"The Project for the New American Century (PNAC) is a neo-conservative think tank with strong ties to the American Enterprise Institute.
PNAC's policy document, "Rebuilding America's Defences," openly advocates for total global military domination. Many PNAC members hold highest-level positions in the George W. Bush administration.
" men who created and nurtured the imperial dreams of PNAC became the men who run the Pentagon, the Defense Department and the White House. When the Towers came down, these men saw, at long last, their chance to turn their White Papers into substantive policy."
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Project_for_the_New_American_Century
That would be a first step in the right direction.
What do you mean by "restore" the full unconditional right of return. There has never been a full unconditional right of return. The property I live on was once owned by Tories who support the British during Americas revolution. When the war was over they lost their land because they supported the losing side. Had the British won they would have reaped the rewards. This is not unique it happens in almost every war. There is NO full unconditional right of return.
http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/poll-most-palestinians-want-peace-with-israel-1.297196
Your reference to Hamas”s “style of fighting--by obliging parents, for example, to turn their children into human shields” is equally, if not more, true of the Israeli army. Actually, the BBC link you cite clearly states that Amnesty found that “Israeli troops had forced Palestinian civilians to stay in their homes after taking them over as sniper positions or bases.”
Here is the link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7818122.stm
Half-truths are not the best way to have an enlightened and honest discussion.
That is just a lie, and ironic considering your "half-truths."
Israel has done these things to keep the Palestinians from leaving but they don't do it so that they will be killed. Hamas not only is proud to do it as a matter of policy *and* so they can make more "martyrs."
A little truth next time. It goes farther.
And the second point I'd make is on party affiliation of the Mayor of Malmo. It might be disturbing to you or even embarrassing, but Mr. Ilmar Reepalu, mayor of Malmo of 15 years, is a Social Democrat. And if you see it troubling that there are 20 far right deputies in Swedish parliament, I see more troubling that anti-Semitism is now openly expressed from the left. It is not surprising that Jewish community on Malmo, about 700 Swedish citizens, don't feel safe, welcome in the city. And I'll draw the parallel with Germany of early 30's or Soviet Union of early 50's when totalitarian regimes built a wall of indifference, resignation, and condemnation around Jews.
It might be also instructive to draw a parallel with how Palestinians in East Jerusalem (not to mention the West Bank or Gaza) are treated by the Israeli government.
If the Palestinians wanted "lands," "lives" and "dignity" all they ever needed to do was accept the UN partition plan. Or the Camp David offer. Or Taba. Or Olmert's offer in 2008.
They want all of Israel, because they consider all of Israel to be "their land." They have told us this a thousand times, and your trying to put words in their mouth helps no one.
And yet when their brethren had complete control of "their lands" for 20 years - Egypt in Gaza and Jordan in the West Bank including Jerusalem - was there even a single voice expressing the desire to have their own state, their lands back, their dignity as you claim ?
The answer is a resounding NO
Your post is nothing more then your own baseless opinion.
repeating the lie over and over still won't make it true