A Curious Double Standard
I find It increasingly difficult to reconcile our (excluding Tucker Carlson, Donald Trump and Ron DeSantis) aversion
to Russia’s incursion in Ukraine with our acceptance of Israeli historical
similar activities on Palestine. Wait, I know,” but it’s Israel!” So? When does
one inhumane land grab become morally ok and another not? Why was the brutal
English annexation of Ireland abhorrent, the Russian incursion in Ukraine
horrific, but the Israeli continued incursion into the West Bank “OK”?
Having said that, and probably pissed off some readers, I will attempt to
explore a bit closer to the less well-defined edges of this 75 plus years’ old
dilemma. Up front, a lot of this is exacerbated by Evangelical Christians in America, especially Congress, more on that later.
Briefly, then, Israel exists, in its current
form primarily due to the civilized world's shock and horror of the Holocaust
and the fact that Zionists aided by wealthy European Jews and at the urging
Zionism's founders, Theodor Herzl, and later Chaim Weizmann, had, by that time,
already been settling in the British mandate region of the Levant known as
Palestine.
As European Jews stepped up immigration in the
period after WWI, Britain tried in 1922, 1930, and 1939 to limit immigration
(and acquisition of land) by Zionist Jews in response to indigenous Arab
pressures. This was a bit odd, in that the Balfour Declaration of 1917 had
supported the concept of a Jewish homeland in Palestine. Unfortunately, the
British had also made promises to the Sharif of Mecca which said in part,
"Great Britain is prepared to recognize and support the independence of
the Arabs in all the regions within the limits demanded by the Sharif of
Mecca." (Yes, that was taken to mean Palestine for the
Palestinians) These assurances were given as an inducement for Arabs to take
arms against the Turks. Remember that whole Peter O'Toole/Lawrence of Arabia
thing? This had been understood by the Arabs as including all of what is today
Israel and its occupied territories of Palestinian Arab majority, but a year
later the British, who apparently had their fingers crossed earlier, pulled all
of Syria and a bit of northern Palestine out of the mix. meanwhile, regardless
of British pressures, more Zionists came to Palestine.
Following WWII,
there came a realization that there was a multitude of homeless or nationless
Jews as a result of the holocaust and equally horrid, but less well published,
Russian atrocities at home and elsewhere. There was great sympathy almost
everywhere except Arab Palestine for what now became a tidal wave of Jewish
immigration to the region. There was significant monetary and moral support
from most victor nations including the USA, many of whose Jewish citizens had a
sort of "There, but for the grace of God, go I" revelation.
Without too
much detail, the Zionists used many tactics including the bombing of the King
David Hotel in 1946 by the militant Zionist Irgun, led by Menachem Begin,
eventually to become Israel's sixth prime minister. It must be noted that
during the time period in question, Britain was, by UN edict, still nominally
responsible for governing the region. The Irgun action was simply terrorism, as
British government officials based at the hotel were targets, and 91 of them
died in the blast. Soon after that, Britain, a la Pontius Pilate washed their
hands of this largely home-grown mess, mostly of their creation, turning it
over to the United Nations.
In November, 1947, the UN adopted a
resolution recommending the adoption and implementation of the Partition Plan, which
among other verbiage provided as follows: Independent Arab and Jewish States
and the Special International Regime for the City of Jerusalem. The resolution acknowledged
Britain's planned termination of the British Mandate for Palestine and
recommended the partition of Palestine into two states, one Arab and one
Jewish, with the Jerusalem-Bethlehem area being under special UN/International
protection. The resolution included a
detailed description of the recommended boundaries for each proposed state as
well as a plan for economic union between the proposed states, and for the
protection of religious and minority rights. The resolution sought to address
the conflicting objectives and claims to the Mandate territory of two competing
nationalist movements, Zionism (Jewish nationalism) and Arab nationalism, as
well as, predictably, to resolve the plight of Jews displaced as a result of
the Holocaust. Along with all the above,
it should be noted that there had been no Jewish state in the Levant
for the previous 18 centuries!
The more recent
history of Arab/Israeli conflict is well enough known by many that I shall
elide past it to focus on why I am concerned about the more recent state of
affairs, which, at one time, included Alan Dershowitz and, believe it or not,
Don King, (who knew?) siding with then candidate Trump in castigating SecState
Kerry and President Obama for supporting a UN resolution calling for Israel to
stop expanding settlements in the territories occupied since 1967, which are
nominally Palestinian, but occupied by Israel, frequently at bayonet point.
First, and
perhaps most persuasive to me, is the fact that the vast majority of the
world's nations hold the Israeli occupation of the west bank and Gaza to be
illegal. We, the great advocates of democracy and majority rule, are in
the minority here.
Second, the
gist of the proposal was simply that increased settlement by Israel makes the
chance of a peaceful settlement of any kind remote. This was complicated by then
Israeli P.M. Netanyahu, now back in power, who has ignored all counsel, save
his own, refusing any such advice. He has also convinced the Knesset to
authorize rebuilding on the West Bank, Palestinians be damned!
Third, the
proposed resolution did not, in any sense, weaken US military or even more
significantly, economic commitment, to Israel's defense or independence, and
the facts are staggering. The following information is from an article from the
Washington report and is revelatory. I have abridged for length, not meaning:
"Since
1992, the U.S. has provided Israel an additional $2 billion annually in loan
guarantees...... between 1974 and 1989, $16.4 billion in U.S. military loans
were converted to grants...... Indeed, all past U.S. loans to Israel have been
forgiven by Congress, spiking Israel's often-touted claim that they
have "never defaulted" on a U.S. government loan. (ed. note: because it's impossible to default
on a gift!) U.S. policy since 1984 has been that economic assistance to
Israel must equal or exceed Israel's annual debt repayment to the United
States. Unlike other countries, which receive aid in quarterly installments,
aid to Israel since 1982 has been given in a lump sum at the beginning of the
fiscal year, leaving the U.S. government to borrow from future revenues. Israel
even lends some of this money back through purchase of U.S. treasury bills and
collects the additional interest.!!
In addition,
there is the more than $1.5 billion in private U.S. funds that go to Israel
annually in the form of $1 billion in private tax-deductible donations and $500
million in Israeli bonds. The ability of Americans to make what amounts to
tax-deductible contributions to a foreign government, made possible through a
number of Jewish charities, does not exist with any other country. Nor do these
figures include short- and long-term commercial loans from U.S. banks. (as
high as $1 billion annually in recent years)
Total U.S. aid
to Israel has hovered around one-third of the American foreign-aid budget, even
though Israel comprises just .001 percent of the world's population and already
has one of the world's higher per capita incomes. Israel's Gross national
Product (GNP) is higher than the combined GNP of Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan,
the West Bank and Gaza. At a per capita income of about $14,000,
Israel ranks as the sixteenth wealthiest country in the world; Israelis enjoy a
higher per capita income than oil-rich Saudi Arabia and are only slightly less
well-off than most Western European countries.
The resolution
in question would have had zero effect on any of these commitments or military
assurances, moreover, President Obama signed the largest single Israeli aid
package ever granted, which makes one question what Trump's true agenda, was, but
one supposes it was an attempt to curry votes in 2016.
Fourth in line
of concerns I have is that if this were any nation except Israel, we'd almost
certainly be "siding" with the other guys. The Ukraine is currently relevant
here, as were the three Baltic States, all of whose independence from an
uninvited invader (Russia) the US has supported and are supporting in the case
of Ukraine. Based on the current state of affairs, it almost makes one wonder
if the Mohawks wanted to reclaim New York State whose side would the rest of us
favor? Yes, that last is a reductio ad absurdum, yet it is relevant, and the
circumstances troublingly similar. In fact, any American Indian tribe can
relate! Anyone supporting the Republic of Ireland should also be able to
relate.
Fifth, and most
absurd, is to examine the real reasons for US slavish support for Netanyahu's earlier
(and currently continuing) adventures in Palestine. As sick and sad as it may
seem to many, religion is at the root - not Judaism, but fanatical Evangelical
Christianity. A fair number of Republican legislators and their supporters have
been conned by their shamans into believing that the Bible foretells that the
"end times" must be precipitated by the resurgence of the nation of
Israel. To them, this means the modern state. Most Jews do not live in Israel.
Not every inhabitant of Israel is Jewish; there are also many non-Jews living
in Israel, and not all Jewish Israelis are 'settlers' who want to conquer more
and more Palestinian land. The vast majority of Jews believe that the State of
Israel should continue to exist. But many Jews, both living in Israel and
elsewhere, are in favor of a Palestinian state alongside Israel as a possible
solution to the conflict. Netanyahu’s policies and far Right
Evangelical sympathies would seem to reveal a differing opinion.
Now,
I'm all in favor of these people going to meet whatever cosmic muffin they
envision, but I refuse to get on the bus with them. Of course, there have been
more than a thousand such prophesies, including the one which makes the rest
irrelevant, and that was the alleged statement by Yeshua bar Yusef (Jesus) that
he'd be back with the pork chops while some witnesses to his life were still
living. Didn't happen. I imagine wealthy Jewish supporters of Israel laughing
up their sleeves at these yokels, and saying, oh, well the checks cash
anyway!" Of course, there are some wealthy members of the tribe who might
also consider a reputed 3600 year old oral contract as worthless; that is, of course
unless it's the deed to Palestine.
No comments:
Post a Comment