1 feb 2020
By Joseph Massad for Middle East Eye
Western and Israeli propaganda never tire of telling the world of the age-old Israeli quest for peace, and how much Israel longs to be accepted by Palestinians and the rest of the Arab peoples as a Jewish state – an oasis of European civilisation lodged smack in the middle of the Arab world.
Indeed, the racist wisdom of former Israeli Foreign Minister Abba Eban (born in South Africa as Aubrey Solomon Meir) that Palestinians “never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity” for “peace” was recently reiterated by US President Donald Trump’s son-in-law and adviser, Jared Kushner.
Kushner, speaking of Trump’s “deal of the century”, declared on CNN that if Palestinians reject the plan, “they’re going to screw up another opportunity, like they’ve screwed up every other opportunity that they’ve ever had in their existence”.
Kushner, a primary author of the plan, must be forgiven for his lack of originality, as Zionists, who exhausted the colonial lexicon, have run out of racist cliches and are doomed to repeat them ad nauseum.
Taking Every Opportunity
What Eban and Kushner meant when they spoke of opportunities was the opportunity for Palestinians to surrender all their rights to the Zionist Jewish colonisation of their homeland, end their resistance once and for all, and grant legitimacy to the Zionist theft of their country.
The recently released Trump plan [pdf] does not mince words at all on this: “Palestinian leaders must embrace peace by recognizing Israel as the Jewish state, rejecting terrorism in all its forms.”
In contrast, we are told that the peace-loving Zionists have not missed a single opportunity for peace, by which it is meant that they have accepted every opportunity and proposal that granted legitimacy to their ongoing theft of Palestinian lands.
As a matter of fact, not only have the Zionists not missed these opportunities, they have instigated them, proposed them, planned them and executed them.
The Zionist colonisation of Palestine has taken every opportunity since its inception to tell the Palestinian people that Jews are superior to them, that Jewish colonial rights to Palestinian lands are superior to any rights that the indigenous Palestinians think they have, and that the only option available to Palestinians that Zionists would accept is full surrender to Jewish colonisation.
Anything short of this will be condemned by Israel and its European and North American allies, alongside a global campaign to delegitimise any rejection of Israel’s colonial theft of Palestinian land as outright “antisemitism”.
Legitimising Land Theft
Zionists helped write, and then accepted, the Balfour Declaration of 1917, in which the British foreign secretary dismissed the indigenous people of Palestine as irrelevant to the plan to establish a Jewish “national home” in their country.
Zionists also supported the British colonial mandate over Palestine, which sponsored the establishment of the Jewish settler-colony on Palestinian lands.
Indeed, the Zionist leadership accepted every act committed by the British that denationalised tens of thousands of Palestinians (through the Palestine citizenship law of 1925) and transferred “state” lands to Jewish colonists.
When the British Peel Commission proposed taking more than one third of Palestine and giving it to Zionists, calling for the expulsion of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians from the invented “Jewish” part of Palestine, Zionist leader David Ben-Gurion celebrated.
When the United Nations, under US pressure and manipulation, issued its Partition Plan in 1947, granting 55 percent of the land of the Palestinians to Jewish colonists, the Zionists immediately accepted it and proceeded to expel the Palestinian inhabitants.
This readiness to instigate, propose, accept and create opportunities to steal more land, legitimise that theft, and expel more Palestinians continued unabated after 1948.
After the final conquest of the remaining parts of Palestine in 1967 and the expulsion of more Palestinians, Israel sought more opportunities to keep its stolen land – and to keep Palestinians away from it.
Indeed, when former Egyptian president Anwar Sadat ceded Palestinian rights to independence and statehood at Camp David, the Israelis who imposed these conditions readily accepted the deal.
When a defeated Palestine Liberation Organisation offered its surrender at Oslo in 1993, relinquishing the rights of Palestinians to their lands and country, the Israelis who drafted the agreement also readily accepted it.
Sealing All Previous Deals
As for the Trump deal – which the Israelis coauthored, and which hopes to seal all previous deals, calling further for the denationalisation of Palestinian citizens of Israel who live in what is known as the Triangle area inside Israel – the Israelis immediately jumped at this opportunity to rid themselves of more Palestinians.
What the Israelis never accepted, and cannot accept, is the right of Palestinians to their lands, to statehood and to independence – let alone the rights of those whom Israel expelled to return and reclaim the land and property that Israel confiscated, or the Palestinian right to equality, currently denied by a battery of Israeli laws that grant colonial and racial privileges to Jews.
That Israel has never missed any opportunity to deny the Palestinian people their rights, and accepted every opportunity to steal their land, is a fact the Israelis never deny.
That Israel demands that the Palestinians recognise its right to oppress them by granting Israel legitimacy is also a fact that the Palestinians understand well, but have always rejected.
Whereas Palestinians have “missed every opportunity” to recognise the right of their oppressors to oppress them, Israel has never missed a single opportunity to demand that they do so.
Trump’s “Vision to Improve the Lives of the Palestinian and Israeli People” is simply the latest version of this colonial and racist demand.
Joseph Massad is Professor of Modern Arab Politics and Intellectual History at Columbia University in New York. He is the author of many books and academic and journalistic articles. His books include Colonial Effects: The Making of National Identity in Jordan, Desiring Arabs, The Persistence of the Palestinian Question: Essays on Zionism and the Palestinians, and most recently Islam in Liberalism. His books and articles have been translated to a dozen languages.
Western and Israeli propaganda never tire of telling the world of the age-old Israeli quest for peace, and how much Israel longs to be accepted by Palestinians and the rest of the Arab peoples as a Jewish state – an oasis of European civilisation lodged smack in the middle of the Arab world.
Indeed, the racist wisdom of former Israeli Foreign Minister Abba Eban (born in South Africa as Aubrey Solomon Meir) that Palestinians “never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity” for “peace” was recently reiterated by US President Donald Trump’s son-in-law and adviser, Jared Kushner.
Kushner, speaking of Trump’s “deal of the century”, declared on CNN that if Palestinians reject the plan, “they’re going to screw up another opportunity, like they’ve screwed up every other opportunity that they’ve ever had in their existence”.
Kushner, a primary author of the plan, must be forgiven for his lack of originality, as Zionists, who exhausted the colonial lexicon, have run out of racist cliches and are doomed to repeat them ad nauseum.
Taking Every Opportunity
What Eban and Kushner meant when they spoke of opportunities was the opportunity for Palestinians to surrender all their rights to the Zionist Jewish colonisation of their homeland, end their resistance once and for all, and grant legitimacy to the Zionist theft of their country.
The recently released Trump plan [pdf] does not mince words at all on this: “Palestinian leaders must embrace peace by recognizing Israel as the Jewish state, rejecting terrorism in all its forms.”
In contrast, we are told that the peace-loving Zionists have not missed a single opportunity for peace, by which it is meant that they have accepted every opportunity and proposal that granted legitimacy to their ongoing theft of Palestinian lands.
As a matter of fact, not only have the Zionists not missed these opportunities, they have instigated them, proposed them, planned them and executed them.
The Zionist colonisation of Palestine has taken every opportunity since its inception to tell the Palestinian people that Jews are superior to them, that Jewish colonial rights to Palestinian lands are superior to any rights that the indigenous Palestinians think they have, and that the only option available to Palestinians that Zionists would accept is full surrender to Jewish colonisation.
Anything short of this will be condemned by Israel and its European and North American allies, alongside a global campaign to delegitimise any rejection of Israel’s colonial theft of Palestinian land as outright “antisemitism”.
Legitimising Land Theft
Zionists helped write, and then accepted, the Balfour Declaration of 1917, in which the British foreign secretary dismissed the indigenous people of Palestine as irrelevant to the plan to establish a Jewish “national home” in their country.
Zionists also supported the British colonial mandate over Palestine, which sponsored the establishment of the Jewish settler-colony on Palestinian lands.
Indeed, the Zionist leadership accepted every act committed by the British that denationalised tens of thousands of Palestinians (through the Palestine citizenship law of 1925) and transferred “state” lands to Jewish colonists.
When the British Peel Commission proposed taking more than one third of Palestine and giving it to Zionists, calling for the expulsion of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians from the invented “Jewish” part of Palestine, Zionist leader David Ben-Gurion celebrated.
When the United Nations, under US pressure and manipulation, issued its Partition Plan in 1947, granting 55 percent of the land of the Palestinians to Jewish colonists, the Zionists immediately accepted it and proceeded to expel the Palestinian inhabitants.
This readiness to instigate, propose, accept and create opportunities to steal more land, legitimise that theft, and expel more Palestinians continued unabated after 1948.
After the final conquest of the remaining parts of Palestine in 1967 and the expulsion of more Palestinians, Israel sought more opportunities to keep its stolen land – and to keep Palestinians away from it.
Indeed, when former Egyptian president Anwar Sadat ceded Palestinian rights to independence and statehood at Camp David, the Israelis who imposed these conditions readily accepted the deal.
When a defeated Palestine Liberation Organisation offered its surrender at Oslo in 1993, relinquishing the rights of Palestinians to their lands and country, the Israelis who drafted the agreement also readily accepted it.
Sealing All Previous Deals
As for the Trump deal – which the Israelis coauthored, and which hopes to seal all previous deals, calling further for the denationalisation of Palestinian citizens of Israel who live in what is known as the Triangle area inside Israel – the Israelis immediately jumped at this opportunity to rid themselves of more Palestinians.
What the Israelis never accepted, and cannot accept, is the right of Palestinians to their lands, to statehood and to independence – let alone the rights of those whom Israel expelled to return and reclaim the land and property that Israel confiscated, or the Palestinian right to equality, currently denied by a battery of Israeli laws that grant colonial and racial privileges to Jews.
That Israel has never missed any opportunity to deny the Palestinian people their rights, and accepted every opportunity to steal their land, is a fact the Israelis never deny.
That Israel demands that the Palestinians recognise its right to oppress them by granting Israel legitimacy is also a fact that the Palestinians understand well, but have always rejected.
Whereas Palestinians have “missed every opportunity” to recognise the right of their oppressors to oppress them, Israel has never missed a single opportunity to demand that they do so.
Trump’s “Vision to Improve the Lives of the Palestinian and Israeli People” is simply the latest version of this colonial and racist demand.
Joseph Massad is Professor of Modern Arab Politics and Intellectual History at Columbia University in New York. He is the author of many books and academic and journalistic articles. His books include Colonial Effects: The Making of National Identity in Jordan, Desiring Arabs, The Persistence of the Palestinian Question: Essays on Zionism and the Palestinians, and most recently Islam in Liberalism. His books and articles have been translated to a dozen languages.
26 jan 2020
The Board of Deputies of British Jews (BoD), described by Jewish activist Tony Greenstein as a “pro-Israeli advocacy group”, has expressed outrage over a BBC correspondent’s remarks made during a report on the Holocaust memorial at the Yad Vashem’s Hall of the Dead, marking 75 years since the liberation of Auschwitz by Soviet soldiers.
Orla Guerin, who has previously worked as BBC’s Jerusalem correspondent, was in Jerusalem to cover the solemn event, and began with interviewing a Holocaust survivor, before describing the Hall of the Dead in her report, according to Days of Palestine.
However, the 33 seconds which caused controversy, was her narration over footage of Israeli soldiers entering the hall: “Young soldiers troop in to share the binding tragedy of the Jewish people. The state of Israel is now a regional power. For decades it has occupied Palestinian territories. But, some here will always see their nation through the prism of persecution and survival,” Guerin added.
This prompted the BoD’s vice president, Amanda Bowman, to respond: “In an otherwise moving report on the experiences of a Holocaust survivor, Guerin’s attempt to link the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to the horrors of the Holocaust was crass and offensive.”
Other groups have joined the condemnation, the Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA) has made a formal complaint to the BBC, and threatened to refer the matter to regulatory body, Ofcom. The CAA cited the international definition of anti-Semitism in “drawing comparisons between Israeli policy and the Nazis.”
However, the BBC denied the accusations, stating: “The brief reference in our Holocaust report to Israel’s position today, did not imply any comparison between the two, and nor would we want one to be drawn from our coverage.” Nevertheless, the coverage did draw criticism from former BBC executives.
The Jewish Chronicle’s Stephen Pollard lamented: “I cannot recall a more foul – sickening, indeed – report by any journalist, either in print or broadcast.” In his opinion, the BBC has brought itself “eternal shame” for allowing the material to be broadcast.
Gary Sinyor, also in The Jewish Chronicle, writing in defence of Guerin’s comments, argues that the real “offensive” language was not allegedly drawing comparisons with Nazis, but the continued illegal Israeli occupation of Palestinian lands, when she stated: “For decades, it has occupied Palestinian territories.” Although he believes the remark was not necessary, Sinyor explains: “She’s not comparing the Holocaust with the Palestinians.”
The BoD’s website made it clear that they were against the politicising of the report on the memorial: “Linking the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to a report on the 75th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz-Birkenau.”
However, it appears that Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu’s inflammatory reference to Iran, a country with the second-largest Jewish population in the region, as the “most anti-Semitic regime on the planet”, during an address marking the same event, along with fear-mongering accusations of nuclear weapons development, went unnoticed by the very same critics.
Orla Guerin, who has previously worked as BBC’s Jerusalem correspondent, was in Jerusalem to cover the solemn event, and began with interviewing a Holocaust survivor, before describing the Hall of the Dead in her report, according to Days of Palestine.
However, the 33 seconds which caused controversy, was her narration over footage of Israeli soldiers entering the hall: “Young soldiers troop in to share the binding tragedy of the Jewish people. The state of Israel is now a regional power. For decades it has occupied Palestinian territories. But, some here will always see their nation through the prism of persecution and survival,” Guerin added.
This prompted the BoD’s vice president, Amanda Bowman, to respond: “In an otherwise moving report on the experiences of a Holocaust survivor, Guerin’s attempt to link the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to the horrors of the Holocaust was crass and offensive.”
Other groups have joined the condemnation, the Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA) has made a formal complaint to the BBC, and threatened to refer the matter to regulatory body, Ofcom. The CAA cited the international definition of anti-Semitism in “drawing comparisons between Israeli policy and the Nazis.”
However, the BBC denied the accusations, stating: “The brief reference in our Holocaust report to Israel’s position today, did not imply any comparison between the two, and nor would we want one to be drawn from our coverage.” Nevertheless, the coverage did draw criticism from former BBC executives.
The Jewish Chronicle’s Stephen Pollard lamented: “I cannot recall a more foul – sickening, indeed – report by any journalist, either in print or broadcast.” In his opinion, the BBC has brought itself “eternal shame” for allowing the material to be broadcast.
Gary Sinyor, also in The Jewish Chronicle, writing in defence of Guerin’s comments, argues that the real “offensive” language was not allegedly drawing comparisons with Nazis, but the continued illegal Israeli occupation of Palestinian lands, when she stated: “For decades, it has occupied Palestinian territories.” Although he believes the remark was not necessary, Sinyor explains: “She’s not comparing the Holocaust with the Palestinians.”
The BoD’s website made it clear that they were against the politicising of the report on the memorial: “Linking the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to a report on the 75th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz-Birkenau.”
However, it appears that Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu’s inflammatory reference to Iran, a country with the second-largest Jewish population in the region, as the “most anti-Semitic regime on the planet”, during an address marking the same event, along with fear-mongering accusations of nuclear weapons development, went unnoticed by the very same critics.
20 jan 2020
Five United Nations special rapporteurs have unveiled a letter to the German government censuring a German law that targets a pro-Palestinian boycott movement while insisting that criticism of the Israeli regime “is not anti-Semitic.”
The UN experts made the letter public this week, after the 60-day reply period ended without a response from the German officials in Berlin, the UK-based Middle East Eye reported Friday.
In May 2019, the German parliament passed a motion condemning the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement as anti-Semitic.
In their October letter, the UN officials challenged the German law as “anti-Semitic” and called on Berlin to provide information on how the anti-BDS legislation complies with international human rights law, freedoms of opinion and expression, and the right to peaceful assembly.
The law – titled “Resisting the BDS Movement with Determination – Combating Anti-Antisemitism” – falsely accuses BDS of utilizing “patterns and methods” used by the Nazis during the Holocaust.
Reacting to passage of the German law, the BDS movement — founded in 2005 by Palestinian activists — accused Berlin of “complicity in Israel’s crimes of military occupation, ethnic cleansing, siege and apartheid.”
In their letter, the UN experts also pointed out that the law “unduly interferes with the right of people in Germany to engage in political speech, namely, to express support for the BDS movement.”
“We further express our concern that the motion may hinder the peaceful activities of human rights defenders, groups and organizations denouncing human rights violations as part of the BDS movement by shrinking the civic space available to them to express legitimate grievances,” they wrote, according to Al Ray.
The German city of Dortmund reversed its decision, last September, to award a literary prize to novelist Kamila Shamsie, due to her support for the BDS movement.
The Israeli regime, meanwhile, has tasked its ministry of strategic affairs and public diplomacy — a body founded in 2006 that collaborates with Tel Aviv’s interior ministry — to organize campaigns against the BDS movement.
It issued a list back in 2018 consisting of nearly 20 international NGOs whose members would be denied entry into the Israeli-occupied territories. The list also included the UK-based Palestine Solidarity Campaign organization.
The UN experts made the letter public this week, after the 60-day reply period ended without a response from the German officials in Berlin, the UK-based Middle East Eye reported Friday.
In May 2019, the German parliament passed a motion condemning the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement as anti-Semitic.
In their October letter, the UN officials challenged the German law as “anti-Semitic” and called on Berlin to provide information on how the anti-BDS legislation complies with international human rights law, freedoms of opinion and expression, and the right to peaceful assembly.
The law – titled “Resisting the BDS Movement with Determination – Combating Anti-Antisemitism” – falsely accuses BDS of utilizing “patterns and methods” used by the Nazis during the Holocaust.
Reacting to passage of the German law, the BDS movement — founded in 2005 by Palestinian activists — accused Berlin of “complicity in Israel’s crimes of military occupation, ethnic cleansing, siege and apartheid.”
In their letter, the UN experts also pointed out that the law “unduly interferes with the right of people in Germany to engage in political speech, namely, to express support for the BDS movement.”
“We further express our concern that the motion may hinder the peaceful activities of human rights defenders, groups and organizations denouncing human rights violations as part of the BDS movement by shrinking the civic space available to them to express legitimate grievances,” they wrote, according to Al Ray.
The German city of Dortmund reversed its decision, last September, to award a literary prize to novelist Kamila Shamsie, due to her support for the BDS movement.
The Israeli regime, meanwhile, has tasked its ministry of strategic affairs and public diplomacy — a body founded in 2006 that collaborates with Tel Aviv’s interior ministry — to organize campaigns against the BDS movement.
It issued a list back in 2018 consisting of nearly 20 international NGOs whose members would be denied entry into the Israeli-occupied territories. The list also included the UK-based Palestine Solidarity Campaign organization.
18 jan 2020
Chief International Criminal Court prosecutor, Fatou Bensouda, has rejected Benjamin Netanyahu’s charge of anti-Semitism, in response to her announcement to launch a full investigation into alleged Israeli war crimes in the Palestinian Territories, Middle East Monitor reported.
“This is a particularly regrettable accusation that is without merit,” Bensouda stressed during an interview with The Times of Israel.
“I, along with my office, execute our mandate under the Rome Statute with utmost independence, objectivity, fairness and professional integrity. We will continue to meet our responsibilities as required by the Rome Statute without fear or favor,” she added.
On 20 December 2019, the ICC Chief prosecutor announced her decision to open official investigation into Israeli war crimes and crimes against humanity in occupied Palestine.
“This is a particularly regrettable accusation that is without merit,” Bensouda stressed during an interview with The Times of Israel.
“I, along with my office, execute our mandate under the Rome Statute with utmost independence, objectivity, fairness and professional integrity. We will continue to meet our responsibilities as required by the Rome Statute without fear or favor,” she added.
On 20 December 2019, the ICC Chief prosecutor announced her decision to open official investigation into Israeli war crimes and crimes against humanity in occupied Palestine.
9 jan 2020
Shas Rabbi Shalom Cohen with Yisrael Beytenu Chairman Avigdor Liberman, who immigrated to Israel from the Soviet Union
Letter from the party's spiritual leader calls on Yitzhak Yosef to keep expressing his position against 'destroyers of the religion' without fear of criticism, despite massive backlash from across the political spectrum
The spiritual leader of the ultra-Orthodox Shas party, Rabbi Shalom Cohen, published a letter on Thursday backing Shepardi Chief Rabbi Yitzhak Yosef as he came under fire earlier this week after labeling immigrants from the former Soviet Union as "religion-hating gentiles."
The letter was published in Shas's Haderech weekly magazine and called on Yosef to keep expressing his position against "the destroyers of the religion" without fear of criticism.
"I heard with great sorrow what they did to his honor for sharing his pain over the immigration of non-Jews to the Land of Israel," Cohen wrote.
"I know that there are G-d-fearing Jews among the [post-Soviet] aliyah and his remarks weren't targeted at them, but at those many non-Jews who immigrate to the Holy Land," the letter said.
"Be strong and of good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed. Go in this thy might, and thou shalt save Israel, like the people of Israel were ordered in yesteryear to guard the fortification of the walls of the religion."
It is incumbent upon the chief rabbi to stand at the gate and proudly and fiercely warn of the destroyers of the religion who rise to smite the Torah of Israel."
Yosef launched his vituperative attack at a rabbinical conference held in Jerusalem last week, where he criticized the Law of Return, which makes anyone with a Jewish grandparent eligible for Israeli citizenship. More than one million people from the former Soviet Union have immigrated to Israel since its collapse in 1989.
Yosef has refused to apologize for the attack on the country's Russian-speaking Jewish community, despite immense political and public uproar.
Letter from the party's spiritual leader calls on Yitzhak Yosef to keep expressing his position against 'destroyers of the religion' without fear of criticism, despite massive backlash from across the political spectrum
The spiritual leader of the ultra-Orthodox Shas party, Rabbi Shalom Cohen, published a letter on Thursday backing Shepardi Chief Rabbi Yitzhak Yosef as he came under fire earlier this week after labeling immigrants from the former Soviet Union as "religion-hating gentiles."
The letter was published in Shas's Haderech weekly magazine and called on Yosef to keep expressing his position against "the destroyers of the religion" without fear of criticism.
"I heard with great sorrow what they did to his honor for sharing his pain over the immigration of non-Jews to the Land of Israel," Cohen wrote.
"I know that there are G-d-fearing Jews among the [post-Soviet] aliyah and his remarks weren't targeted at them, but at those many non-Jews who immigrate to the Holy Land," the letter said.
"Be strong and of good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed. Go in this thy might, and thou shalt save Israel, like the people of Israel were ordered in yesteryear to guard the fortification of the walls of the religion."
It is incumbent upon the chief rabbi to stand at the gate and proudly and fiercely warn of the destroyers of the religion who rise to smite the Torah of Israel."
Yosef launched his vituperative attack at a rabbinical conference held in Jerusalem last week, where he criticized the Law of Return, which makes anyone with a Jewish grandparent eligible for Israeli citizenship. More than one million people from the former Soviet Union have immigrated to Israel since its collapse in 1989.
Yosef has refused to apologize for the attack on the country's Russian-speaking Jewish community, despite immense political and public uproar.