If there is one person who personifies the expansionist policy of Zionist Israel with ruthless cool-headedness, that person is Benjamin Netanyahu. Many years ago, in 1923, the founder of Jewish Legion, Vladimir Jabotinsky, wrote an article (“The Iron Wall”) in which he said, among other things, that “Zionism is a colonising adventure and therefore stands or falls by the question of armed force. It is important … to speak Hebrew, but unfortunately it is even more important to be able to shoot — or else I am through with playing colonisation”. Netanyahu through and through. There is nothing in the man’s actions and political makeup that disappoints the essentially Mussolini-esque outlook of Jabotinsky. It should be no surprise that negotiations for some form of governing alliance between Netanyahu’s Likud party and Livni’s Kadima party came to naught, after all, the fortunes of Likud are intimately weaved with the right-wing settler movement of Israel … and Netanyahu has become the political embodiment of all its fused social resentment towards Israel’s elite, its ultra-nationalism and anti-Arab chauvinism.
Today Netanyahu leads a party that has at its core the commitment to hold on to the occupied territories as part of the Greater Israel. A Likud government in Israel with Netanyahu at its helm is synonymous with the growth and affirmation of the settler movement. The crowning moment for Netanyahu’s Likud was the assassination of former prime minister Yitzhak Rabin by Yigal Amir, a Jewish zealot in 1995, during peace negotiations between the Israeli state and the PLO. Likud came to power in 1996 and peace talks came to a halt. The same conglomeration of social forces that forestalled any prospect of even a shadow of an independent Palestinian state under the Sharon government are now hammering a governing agreement under Netanyahu’s watch — add twice the racist dose and an overtly brutal pursuance of fashioning the framework of the Greater Israel through a veritable war of terror, waged in the name of a “war on terror”. Netanyahu will never receive the Memo.
On May 12 2002, Netanyahu steered Likud through the adoption of a resolution rejecting the creation of a Palestinian state — now or ever. He dubbed, in a crude, racist slur, a Palestinian state as “Arafat-istan”. When Sharon stated his plan to “disengage” from Gaza, Netanyahu along with other members of Sharon’s own cabinet, resigned in protest. This “withdrawal” of Israel from Gaza was a mere tactical retreat in the face of escalating costs of settlement maintenance. Israel remains, till this day, the occupying power of Gaza, controlling its borders, seaport, airport and water supply. As seen recently, it reserved the right to invade Gaza whenever it sees fit. Naked aggression was not enough for Netanyahu. Colonisation proper with the ultimate aim of having only one national movement in Palestine: a Jewish one.
This is a man who, following Zionist leaders to the letter, denies the very existence of a Palestinian people, who rides bareback on the practice of that slogan “A land without a people for a people without land”, knowing fully well that the land that became Israel was populated by the people who today are forcibly scattered across the sub-region by Israel’s ethnic-cleansing campaigns. Netanyahu will soon lord over a state (for a second time) that is organically incapable of becoming a genuine democracy, where there is no concept of granting and securing equal rights to all. If there were illusions that there will be peace between the Palestinian people and Israel, an Israel with Netanyahu at its helm has dispelled them. Besides, there is no possibility to reconcile states based on ethnic, racial or religious exclusivism with the existence of democracy. Apartheid South Africa is testimony to this.
No section of Israel’s political elite will abandon police repression, military violence and wars of aggression in the region. These methods are inextricably part of the nature and character of the Zionist state since its establishment. Netanyahu is by far the most complete political expression of this phenomenon.
The FACT is that the only reason the Palestinians don’t have a state is because of their hatred of Jew – right from before Israel existed. Every time they have a chance to choose peace and statehood or violence – they choose violence. Because violence and killing Jews is more important to them than peace or statehood. They have only themselves to blame.
I do not see any difference between Netanyahu’s toxic views about Palestine and those by Hamas on Israel. Both will give anything to see the other’s complete destruction. Perhaps when both sides finally convince themselves that their belligerent positions help noone, then peace might prevail.
I think that anyone who is not living in Palestine or Israel should remain neutral and impartial and not allow themselves to be swept up in the hatred and so add fuel to the fire. That way we can all have a positive influence on the situation.
This article only adds to the hatred, it does not offer how we can change, for exapmle, Netanyahu to be a reasonable man instead of an extremist.
I was probably not going to respond at all as what Steven is stating is known the problem is that we all know that it will not change any time soon.
For Duncan to say that the Palestinian people are to blame for the mess is disgusting at the core. In the early Eighties when we black people in the township were prepared to die and face the military might with nothing in our hands we were shot at and our leaders were called terorists. Until recently Nelson Mandela, Thabo Mbeki et al were still on the list of terrorists in the west and needed special permission to visit those countries. If the same analogy were to apply to the situation in Gaza what is the alternative for a young Palestinian who would rather die that live as a prisoner and slave in his homeland.
The biggest problem is when you close borders, kill and bomb at will with impunity you are giving even those that were not going to be hard at heart no choice. Hamas won the elections because the people of Palestine were sick of negotiations for the sake of negotiating. There is no Israeli leader at he moment who has the guts to do the right thingt in the face of all this mess. The only one man who was willing was slaughtered. Unfortunately for the Palestinians they have no powerful friend who is willing to take up their cause like the USA for Israel
extremely well put. It about time someone brought out the truth behind Zionism and the Zionist state of Israel.
Power being “lodged in narrow hearts” is a phenomenon of human politics, Steven.
Political figures do not pursue their objectives for altruistic reasons…not in the real world.
Nor do they balk at orchestrating collective violence should such objectives be challenged.
‘Palestine’ is particularly troublesome since the ‘narrow hearts’ of the leaders of different groups harbor irreconcilable ambitions for the same piece of territory.
It is also the contingence of broader geopolitical interests, of which those of the U.S. enjoy dominance at this time.
It may not always be so.
Do not expect an upsurge in political benevolence should the balance of power in the region undergo a radical shift.
“Besides, there is no possibility to reconcile states based on ethnic, racial or religious exclusivism with the existence of democracy”.
Does this mean you agree that Swaziland, Botswana and Pakistan (seperated ie Apartheid from India in 1948 based on ethnic and religeous exclusivism) to mention a few are also guilty what you accuse Israel of? If so don’t forget to include them in your Apartheid state rants.
All the faults you accuse the Israeli’s of in your article apply equally (in my opinion more so) to Hamas and other Arab political entities. From 1948 until 1967 Gaza was under Egyptiam control and the West Bank under Jordan but no Arab or world organisations canvassed or bore arms against these two states for a Palestine state – please explain the double standards.
Brent
Sounds a little like a rant from the Soviet era, Take the term “expansionist”, Would anyone be able to class Israel as expansionist having 1) returned the Sinai Peninsula to Egypt(3 times the size of Israel), 2) accepted the United Nations corrections to the Lebanese border, and 3) having agreed with the late King Hussein of Jordan to return land in the Arava, and 4) lastly moving voluntarily out of Gaza.
Where on earth would Israel, a country the size of the Kruger Park, expand to?
Hamas won the elections in Gaza the same way that Mugabe”won” in Zimbabwe – by intimidation. Most people will not stand in opposition to Hamas if it means being thrown off buildings, and if you survive, being shot in your hospital bed.
Gaza is no Bantustan – Israel is the Bantustan. Gaza ia a refugee camp where the Muslim refugees were penned up by the Arabs to be used against Israel, who had no right to exist.
In 1947/1948 The UN created 3 Bantustans to protect minorities – Pakistan and Bangladesh to protect the Muslim minority from annihiation by the majority Hindus of India.
Israel – to protect the minority Jews from the majority Muslims who were given the rest of the former Ottoman Empire of the Turks.
They were happy to take Pakistan and Bangladesh and boot out the Hindu, and take in Muslim refugees from India.
They were not prepared to take in Muslim refugees from Israel – called them Palestinians, and penned them up in a refugee camp, 60 years ago.
Noko
Israel at least opens its border with Gaza for Aid, however strictly controlled. Egypt (a Muslim state) won’t open its border with Gaza at all, ever! The Jihad is not only against Jews and Christians but also against secular Muslim states which won’t impose Shia law, of which Egypt is one.
The conflict is not racial – both Jews and Palestinians are Semites. It is a religious war.
the problem is any right wing orthodox group or religious sect can ever find peace!
it doesnt matter whether Jewish , Christian or Muslim – I believe the extremists will forever cause wars etc
@Steven interesting exposition on Zionism and also that Netanyahu fits the Zionist mould to a T. What the outside world needs to do however is to work to find ways of changing things between Israelis and Palestinians in a positive direction given the players as they now are.
How does such an anti-semitic rant promote cohesion? Surely it would be better to provide advice on creative, inclusive and cohesive solutions rather than constantly repeat the problem.
@ Dunn: My conception of cohesion has nothing in common with glossing over attrocities as committed by Israel and the long history of Netanyahu with said. The curious thing about cohesion is not simply that it aims to foster a sense of belonging and espouses principles of respect for different backgrounds, but that it positively encourages an active living together of communities and/or individuals, and not just side by side. The settlement movement and repeated actions of the state of Israel defy these ideals. To talk of positive community relations between the different people living in Israel and these selfsame people and Palestinians without answering the question of how to deal with the racist Israeli regime is sheer nonsense.
It is a crude attempt to equate my opposition to the Zionist regime with anti-Semitism. And it is unfortunate, for this tactic is always used to defend and justify any and every act of violence against the people of Palestine. Moreover, it seeks to deligitimise the opposition to the crimes of Israel within that country and aides a perspective that opposition to Israel amongst Jews inside Israel and internationally is no more than some disoriented opinion of ‘self-hating Jews’. Your slander lacks both historical foundation and any genuine political logic, for through the lens of it any action by Israel against its enemies is irreproachable, while any opposition to these is equivalent to anti-Semitism.
To brand my perspective as anti-Semitic is an example of political dishonesty.
You have missed my point – which was the need to find solutions and not simply to be critical. Mere opposition or criticism, however accurate or necessary, is easy and cheap – but you have offered no creative, inclusive or cohesive solutions. Without a meaningful way forward, history WILL repeat itself and it shall be the people of both Palestine and Israel who will continue to suffer.