FrontPageMag.com By Robert Spencer By Hugh Fitzgerald Books Jihad Watch Islam 101 Qur'an Blog Raymond Ibrahim Robert Spencer
 
« Quebec: separatist party courts Muslim vote by enlisting accused terrorist | Main | Saudi Prince Gives Millions to Harvard and Georgetown to spread Islam »

December 13, 2005

Israel and the Old/New Imperialism

A new article by Erik Arnold:

"As the Constellation roared into the dark toward teeming Asia, I heard excited voices discussing Palestine.

"No matter what they do, they won't be able to keep the Jews off that agenda," a man said.

"Whether they let us raise the question of Jewish aggression or not, we are going to raise it!"another man shouted.

"Their crimes will not be covered up--The Jews are the greatest racists on earth and I'll prove it!" a dark faced man with a thin moustache shouted above the roar of the plane's four engines...

"What are these?" I asked.

"Photos of Arab refugees driven by Jews out their homes!" he said. "There are nine hundred thousand of them, homeless, starving..."

"Are you a delegate to the Asian-African conference?" I asked him.

"No. I'm a journalist.

"Is Palestine coming up for discussion at Bandung?" I asked.

"We are going to raise it," he swore. "The world must know what has been done! It's our duty to make the world know..."...

Though the conversation about the alleged aggression of the Jews in Palestine raged up and down the aisles of the plane, I could hear but little of it; all I could make out was that the Jews would come under sharp and bitter attack at Bandung, and that they had enemies who had a case and knew how to present that case at the bar of world opinion...

I recalled that six million Jews had been gassed, hounded, slaughtered, and burned by German Hitlerites, and I knew that that people, hapless and haunted, had yet more suffering and trials to bear in this world.

(Richard Wright, The Color Curtain, 1956, pgs.76-78)

The above passage, written by the American author Richard Wright just prior to the start of the Bandung Conference of Non-Aligned Nations held in April, 1955, could as easily have been written by someone today; the aforementioned gathering was the precursor of what may be termed "The New Imperialism", an attempt by Third World nations to impose their collective will in a way that they couldn't do on an individual basis. The danger that this new imperialism, along with its reinvigorated European counterpart, poses to Israel is very grave indeed.

It has now become common practice for Western European governments, with ample backing from the underdeveloped nations, to apply a universal standard of law in judging and punishing both individuals and states deemed guilty of "crimes against humanity." What this law really consists of, or what universally objective touchstone is used as its base, however, is a mystery. In an era when the idea of "diversity" in every way, shape, and form is being constantly championed, the notion of a supra-national law applicable in all countries and circumstances seems somewhat contradictory.

Nevertheless, the individual found "guilty" by these governments and their transnational representatives, such as the Hague Court, is liable to be seized, tried, and, if found culpable, imprisoned if and when he sets foot on European soil. An impressive list has already been compiled that includes everybody from Bosnian Serb generals to ex-Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet. Israeli political figures, and indeed the entire State of Israel, seem poised to join the roster in the near future.

Ominous signs are already on the horizon, and they have been growing more sinister from year to year. In 2001 the European witch hunt against Prime Minister Ariel Sharon began in earnest. According to the British television program Panorama, Sharon bore direct responsibility for the 1982 massacre of Muslims by their Christian Arab brethren. The fact that an Israeli commission of inquiry held at the time found him only indirectly responsible, as well as his successful libel suite against Time Magazine regarding similar charges, apparently was irrelevant to the show's producers. The Prime Minister also faced the possibility of being indicted by a Belgian court on the same charges.

Yet another example involved the hysteria over the appointment of ex-Shin Bet head Carmi Gillon as ambassador to Denmark, with the concomitant threat of his arrest and trial when he arrived in that country. Current defense minister Shaul Mofaz faced a similar problem later when he made a visit to London.

Among organizations representing the collective world community the situation is much the same. The United Nations' poor record regarding both Jews and Israel, with its consistently pro-Arab bias, is too well known to require further elucidation. The Durban Conference on Racism, where Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe, in the very midst of a brutal purge of white farmers from his realm, was given a standing ovation, saw fit to condemn the Jewish State as bigoted and oppressive. The recent Hague Court verdict against Israel's security fence, with the possibility of coercive measures being used to enforce this ruling, is just the latest in a uniform pattern of accumulated antagonism. There is no telling where it will end.

Perhaps the entire Jewish population of Israel will be put on trial for "crimes” committed by its citizen soldiers; most Jews serve in the army, therefore, there is no reason why the New Universal Law cannot find fault with them as well. These attitudes are reinforced by prejudicial thinking that depicts Zionism as a kind of precursor to Nazism. For instance, a passage on Theodor Herzl in the Spanish-language Enciclopedia Alfabetica reads as follows:

...Impresionado por el proceso a Dreyfus, reclamo la creacion de un estado judio que debia basarse en la pureza racial de sus ciudadanos.

(Impressed by the Dreyfus trial, he demanded the creation of a Jewish State that would base itself on the racial purity of its citizens.) Enciclopedia Alfabetica, 1994, volume 5).

That the cosmopolitan Viennese Herzl, who envisioned an important role for Arabs in his Jewish State, could be depicted in such a completely false light leads to the conclusion of either complete ignorance or deliberate distortion on the writer's part.

Europe's desire for Israeli cession of territory to the Arabs is somewhat similar to its treatment of the "Sudeten German Question" of the thirties.

In the one instance as in the other, the imperial nations blithely moved ahead with "peace plans" while lacking all understanding of the realities of each situation. Their simplistic views of immediate solutions to complicated circumstances only served to further inflame those problems they sought to allay.

Czechoslovakia's German minority, complaining of alleged mistreatment and discrimination at the hands of the Czech majority, made increasingly stronger demands for political and cultural autonomy which began to threaten the integrity of the Czech state. These charges were soon followed by acts of terrorism and general political violence. As the Great Democratic Powers of France and Britain decided it was better to placate Hitler and Sudeten leader Konrad Henlein rather than risk an "escalation" in the area, it was agreed at Munich to give the Sudetenlad to the Reich. Czech President Benes was not even invited to be present at his country's dismemberment. Not long afterwards, the bulk of the now hyphenated rump state of Czecho-Slovakia was annexed directly to Germany. Thus was the most politically and economically advanced of the Eastern European states sacrificed on the altar of Chamberlain's "peace in our time."

The "New Imperialism" of the Third World is basically an attempt by these countries to flex their joint muscles, whether it be at international forums, such as the U.N., or assemblies on the level of Bandung and Durban.

In each one of these cases, Israel is always one of the prime topics for discussion. These parleys are used as arenas for Third World nations to play on the West's bad conscience, to tap into its still very much extant anti-Semitism, and to raise the specter, as after the Yom Kippur War of 1973, of a world oil embargo.

Zionism is conveniently denounced as an Occidental subterfuge, ignoring the fact that half of Israel's Jews have roots in the Middle East and that all Jews have a longer historical connection with the land than any other group. The Arab role in the mass Jewish exodus from the Muslim world to Palestine is never dealt with; thus, the Arabs escape all responsibility.

It is much easier for them to be self-righteous than to deal with their own numerous sins.

Posted by Robert at December 13, 2005 5:58 AM
Print this entry | Email this entry | Digg this | del.icio.us

Comments
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)

Good. Now let's talk about Arab collaboration in the Holocaust, and the historic oppression of Jews by Arabs in Israel and other Arab-controlled lands [as dhimmis], so that we don't have to listen to sanctimonious hypocrisy about "Arabs paying for Europe's crimes." After that, how much money does the palestinian authority get from the EU, Japan, and USA? How have the USA, UK, and France made Saudi Arabia rich since 1951, with tax arrangements that amounted to disguised foreign aid subsidies for the Saudis and their Wahhabi sect?

Posted by: Eliyahu [TypeKey Profile Page] at December 13, 2005 6:52 AM

The comparison of Judea-Samaria to the Sudetenland is apt. I do want to add that the Jews in Europe mostly migrated there in the Middle Ages, after the Arab conquest of Israel. See on this point, Cecil Roth in the series "World History of the Jewish People."

Posted by: Eliyahu [TypeKey Profile Page] at December 13, 2005 6:55 AM

"The Arab role in the mass Jewish exodus from the Muslim world to Palestine is never dealt with; thus, the Arabs escape all responsibility.

It is much easier for them to be self-righteous than to deal with their own numerous sins."
-- from the article above

But there is no sin from their, the Muslim, point of view. It is right, it is just, that Muslims should rule everywhere. It is wrong, it is unjust, that non-Muslims should rule anywhere. For a while the main offender was tiny Israel. And the Infidel world, failing to understand Islam, ignoring completely Muslim attacks on non-Muslims within the Muslim lands (those attacks did not start yesterday; what started yesterday is that they have begun to attract attention), and further failing to understand the tenets of Islam which meant that Israel, Sicily, Spain, much of Eastern and southern Europe, were naturally the first aim for Muslim re-conquest, but only the first -- the ultimate goal, of spreading Islam until it dominated everywhere, and Muslim rule was everywhere established, has not and can not change.

Arab attempts to deflect attention from their own mistreatment of non-Muslims needs to be pointed out. But it is not the reason for opposition to Israel, or for that matter the much-discussed desire to retake Al-Andaluz (not Andalucia, but all of Spain). The reason is Islam. The failure of nearly everyone to fulfill the duty to study this, a central duty of Muslims, and to learn about Muslim conquest and subjugation of non-Muslims over 1350 years, is the main folly of the age. Few shall 'scape whipping.

Posted by: Hugh [TypeKey Profile Page] at December 13, 2005 8:48 AM

Both Christians and Muslims have something in common, martyrdom and Arabs know what to do with
"sheep."
The Koran is blessed with lots of evil traditions, sanctified by
enlightened sponsors of a newly elected and enlightened Allah.
Just think, all these sheep, kaffir, looking for "The End", self-immolation, trying to catch-up with Christ, the rest is an evolving
evolution of history.

Posted by: SirSeth [TypeKey Profile Page] at December 13, 2005 10:54 AM

"It is much easier for them to be self-righteous than to deal with their own numerous sins."

"...numerous sins..." ?! Wouldn't it be more accurate to use "innumerable", or "numberless", or "inifinite" to quantify the sins of our enemies in the Arab world? But I suppose this would only make the author sound extremist or biased... After all, we must remain fair and over-careful when we are speaking about our mortal enemy -- an enemy who displays no similar forebearance in their discussion of world affairs, or their open hatred of us...

In fact, the Muslim, seeing our reticence to call out his crimes, doesn't see our tolerance or our forebearance, he infers our weakness, our craven cowardliness...

-- We must stop trying to be "fair" by mitigating our descriptions of Muslim transgressions, or of Muslim aims, both in the Islamic and non-Islamic world. There is so little said about their plans -- which they freely discuss in their media, and also in their Mosques. The average citizen in the West has never been told, for example, that Islam's goal is to dominate the world -- This would come as a complete surprise to the average non-Muslim, I am sure. How different would their lens be for the context of Muslim demands and actions if they knew this salient fact?

Posted by: jsla [TypeKey Profile Page] at December 13, 2005 3:38 PM

What a distinguished cast of characters the Non-Aligned Movement has, and look what they've done for their people in the past 50 years.

True, they're not all bad-- Bhutan, for instance, is just blissfully off on its own. And when the NAM was founded, it probably had the potential to accomplish something for its many newly independent and/or newly modernizing countries.

Half a century later, though, they've paved a few miles of the road to hell with whatever intentions they had. Most member nations are poor, angry, corrupt, ineffectual regimes that choose to blame the West for their own failings in the post-colonial era.

Here's where I'm going with this. The NAM sets the "Axis of Evil" nations (especially that oddball, North Korea) into a larger context of the Axis of Anklebiters, with respect to their connections to terrorism in the Middle East and elsewhere. Their collective spite for the West is blinding them to the crimes committed (e.g., Syria) and the threat posed (e.g., Iran) to the world by the jihadist movement... arguably, a kind of dhimmitute-by-ignorance.

That's a fantastic article by Eric Arnold-- I don't think the NAM has been fully explored as an accomplice to jihadism and terrorism. I know it got me to thinking.

Posted by: Shinoliite [TypeKey Profile Page] at December 13, 2005 11:17 PM

I almost forgot-- for reference, here's a list of the NAM nations:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-Aligned_Movement

Yeah, I know it's been a bad week for Wikipedia, but at least there's no mention here of John Siegenthaler, Sr. as a non-aligned nation. ;)

Posted by: Shinoliite [TypeKey Profile Page] at December 13, 2005 11:20 PM

Every week is a bad week for Wikipedia.

Posted by: Hugh [TypeKey Profile Page] at December 14, 2005 12:43 AM

#Sirseth, you said:

Both Christians and Muslims have something in common, martyrdom and Arabs know what to do with
"sheep."

There are no Muslim martyrs in the Christian sense that they are ready to die for their faith.
In Islam a Shaheed (wrongly translated as martyr) is a person who dies fighting, or blasting himself (in the modern version).

The Shaheed is not a real martir, a martyr is someone willing to die slowly, tortured for refusing to deny his faith, like St. Stephen, St. Andrew, or St. Lucia among others.

In case a Muslim finds himself cornered, he will use taqiyya to pretend he renounces his faith, telling a lie to the unbelievers.

islam is a despicable, innoble religion, please don't compare it to Christianity.

Posted by: rocky [TypeKey Profile Page] at December 14, 2005 4:33 AM

Further to Eliyahu's initial post

Erik Arnold observes:

"It has now become common practice for Western European governments, with ample backing from the underdeveloped nations, to apply a universal standard of law in judging and punishing both individuals and states deemed guilty of 'crimes against humanity'."

Actually, the more important "common practice" is that not all countries are held equally accountable either by the "non-aligned" countries (which were aligned with the USSR in one way or another) or by Western European countries and we know which ones are and which ones aren't.

Hence, Sudan is about to host an important "all Africa" conference despite the continuing outrage in Darfur, etc., with no hew and cry from anyone, African or western European, and such legal actions are never brought against the Robert Mugabees, Saddam Husseins, Kim Il Sungs or the like.

Posted by: waterdragon52 [TypeKey Profile Page] at December 14, 2005 10:35 AM

Eric,
what you report about the Sudan is a disgrace, simply incredible. But we can keep raising the issue as you are doing. As I have said on another thread, the whole 3rd World notion is a dangerous one, obscuring as it does all of the conflicts and historic injustices within the so-called 3rd world countries.

Posted by: Eliyahu [TypeKey Profile Page] at December 14, 2005 1:12 PM

Most of these lies, misimformation, anti western values, anti American,anti Israel comes out of the UN! can anyone find a way of getting rid of the UN!

Posted by: Lulu [TypeKey Profile Page] at December 14, 2005 3:34 PM

Web Site Counter