الهزات الارتدادية لهزيمة غزة تضع الكيان على مفترق طرق

نوفمبر 17, 2018

محمد صادق الحسيني

أجرت مجلة «شتيرن» الألمانية مقابلة صحافية مع رئيس الموساد السابق، اسحق هوفي في ثمانينيات القرن الماضي، والتي كانت يومها هي الأولى التي يجريها رئيس للموساد مع أي وسيلة إعلام في العالم، بما في ذلك وسائل الإعلام الإسرائيلية.

وقد سأله الصحافي الذي أجرى المقابلة يومها عن سر هذه النجاحات الكبرى التي يحققها الموساد والسمعة العالمية التي يتمتع بها هذا الجهاز في كل أنحاء العالم وعما يتمتع به قادته من نجومية بين قادة الأجهزة الأمنية في العالم…!

فأجابه رئيس الموساد قائلاً: إن السبب في غاية البساطة. فنحن لسنا سوبر مان ولا نحن من غير جنس البشر وإنما يعود سبب كل هذه النجاحات لأننا نقوم بعملنا الاستخباري بشكل علمي ومدروس ومبني على منهج ثابت بينما أعداؤنا، أي الأجهزة الأمنية العربية، لا يقومون بعملهم كما يجب ولذلك فهم فاشلون.

أما الآن وبعد إبداع غزة فإننا نستطيع القول:

لقد ولّى هذا الزمن يا قادة الموساد وقادة أمان الاستخبارات العسكرية وقادة الشاباك الاستخبارات الداخلية .

وإذا كان نظراؤكم من قادة الأجهزة العربية لم يعملوا سابقاً وقد لا يعملون لاحقاً للتصدي لنشاطاتكم الإجرامية، وإن عملهم يتركز على قمع شعوبهم ولنا في جريمة قتل الخاشقجي الحية خير مثال.

لكن غيرها من أجهزة الأمن العربية المقاومة هذه المرة صممت وقرّرت أن تعمل بشكل يفوق مستوى عملكم بكثير.

فها هي أجهزة الأمن في محور المقاومة تثبت يوماً بعد آخر قدرتها على الإبداع وتحقيق الانتصارات الكبرى على أجهزتكم، رغم الفرق الهائل في الإمكانيات المتوفرة لدى الطرفين، خاصة بعد تولي محمد بن سلمان ومنذ حزيران 2016 ورغم التمويل المتعاظم لعمليات الموساد في الخارج والتي تزداد من المركز الخارجي لقيادة هذا الجهاز أي من العاصمة الأردنية عمان.

وهكذا فقد كان اكتشاف مقاتلي المقاومة الفلسطينية، شرق خان يونس، لقوة خاصة إسرائيلية من لواء غولان، قبل أيّام، والتصدي لها ببسالة والاشتباك معها وإيقاع قتلى وجرحى في صفوفها ومنعها من الانسحاب من ميدان المعركة واضطرار القيادة العسكرية الإسرائيلية لاستخدام سرب مقاتلات من طراز أف 16 بالإضافة الى سربي مروحيات حربية أقامت لهم خيمة نارية تحركوا تحتها حتى تمكنوا من عبور الحدود.

وهذا يعني أن أجهزة المقاومة الفلسطينية، الأمنية والعسكرية، كانت في أعلى حالات الجهوزية والاستعداد للتصدي لكم وإفشال جهود أجهزتكم الاستخبارية الثلاثة التي خططت لعملية خطف القيادي في حماس، مروان عيسى من خان يونس، وفشلت في ذلك فشلاً ذريعاً، وألحقت بكم هزيمة أمنية وعسكرية قاتلة في الوقت ذاته.

لا بل إن المقاومة الفلسطينية لم تقف عند هذا الحد، بل إنها وبعد دفن شهدائها، سرعان ما انتقلت الى الرد الهجومي على جيشكم العاجز فأمطرت مستوطناتكم ومواقعكم العسكرية، المحيطة بغزة، بوابل من الصواريخ جعلت صراخ مستوطنيكم يصل الى آذان نتن ياهو العاجز عن تقديم أي حل لهم ما اضطرهم الى النزول الى الشوارع والتظاهر ضد الحكومة الإسرائيلية، في محيط غزة وفِي تل أبيب أيضاً، تعبيراً عن غضبهم وإحباطهم من عجز جيشكم عن حمايتهم. خاصة بعد ما شاهد العالم هذا العجز عبر عملية الكورنيت الذي فجّر حافلة النقل العسكري الإسرائيلية شرق غزة وعملية العلم الإبداعية اللتين كان لهما أثر الصاعقة الكهربائية في أوساط جيشكم ومستوطنيكم.

وهنا لا بدّ من تسجيل هزيمة عسكرية ونفسية عميقة أصبتم بها مما اضطر هذا العنصري والعنجهي، نتن ياهو، الى التوسل لدى مصر كي تطلب من المقاومة الفلسطينية في غزة الموافقة على وقف إطلاق النار، الذي تمّ التوافق عليه بعد التدخل المصري على عكس أكاذيبه، حيث ادعى في تصريحاته لوسائل الإعلام أن المقاومة هي مَن طلب وقف إطلاق النار.

أي أن بيت العنكبوت هذا، «إسرائيل»، لم يحتمل هزيمة أمنية تبعتها، بعد أقل من ثمانٍ وأربعين ساعة، هزيمة عسكرية مدوية انتهت بوقف إطلاق النار.

الأمر الذي كان حمل معه هزة ارتدادية قوية، ذات طبيعة عسكرية سياسية، ففي تل أبيب أطاحت الهزيمة بوزير الحرب الإسرائيلي افيغادور ليبرمان، والذي شكلت استقالته من الحكومة ضربة قوية لرئيس الوزراء، ليس على الصعيد السياسي والصراعات القائمة على السلطة بين الأحزاب الإسرائيلية فحسب، بل وكان لهذه الاستقالة تأثير أكثر عمقاً على علاقات أعمدة دولة الكيان في ما بينها.

فللمرة الأولى، منذ إنشاء «إسرائيل»، يتدخل الجيش بصورة مباشرة في السياسة الإسرائيلية، وذلك رداً على اشتراط نفتالي بينيت، رئيس حزب البيت اليهودي، حصوله على منصب وزير الدفاع مقابل بقاء حزبه في الحكومة، الأمر الذي دفع برئيس أركان الجيش الإسرائيلي وقيادة الأركان كاملة بالطلب رسمياً من نتن ياهو عدم إخضاع موضوع اختيار وزير «الدفاع» الإسرائيلي لأمزجة الأشخاص والقوى السياسية وإنما إخضاع هذا الأمر لمصلحة إسرائيل العليا.

مما يعني أن قيادة الجيش الإسرائيلي الأركان العامة ، وبعد تنفسها الصعداء إثر استقالة ليبرمان، الذي لم يكن يتمتع لا باحترام ولا محبة الأركان العام له، نقول إن هذا التحرك يعني أن الجيش الإسرائيلي قد وضع فيتو قوياً ومباشراً، ليس فقط على أشخاص بعينهم، من الذين يدور الحديث حول رغبتهم في تولي هذا المنصب فقط وإنما هم بذلك يعترضون بشدة على مبدأ المحاصصة والمساومات والابتزاز السياسي الذي تتعامل به القوى السياسية الإسرائيلية في ما بينها ويرفضون أن يكونوا ضحية هذا الواقع.

هذا إن دلّ على شيء فإنما يدلّ على أن الجيش الإسرائيلي بدأ يشعر لأول مرة في تاريخه أن زعماءه الفاشلين والذين يهزمون في المعارك بدأوا يضعون الكيان برمّته في الميزان…!

ثمّة من يذهب إلى أبعد من ذلك فيقول إن ارتدادات هزيمة قادة الكيان على يد المقاومة الفلسطينية ستكون له سلسلة من الانعكاسات المتوالية التي ستظهر آثارها بشكل هزائم لحلفاء الكيان على مستوى الإقليم، وربما المعادلة الدولية أي ان الهزيمة الكبرى هذه المرة ستمتد الى سواحل باب المندب وهرمز وغيرها من ميادين المواجهة بين حلف المقاومة وأصدقائها روسيا والصين وبين القوى الصهيوأميركية وحلف شمال الأطلسي عامة!

بعدنا طيّبين، قولوا الله…

Related Articles

Related Articles

Advertisements

US warns of ‘consequences’ as Palestine joins international bodies

US warns of ‘consequences’ as Palestine joins International Bodies 

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas chairs a meeting of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) Executive Committee in the West Bank city of Ramallah on November 15, 2018. (Photo by AFP)Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas chairs a meeting of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) Executive Committee in the West Bank city of Ramallah on November 15, 2018. (Photo by AFP)

The United States has threatened “consequences” as Palestinians step up efforts for statehood demanding accession to almost a dozen international bodies and conventions.

The threat came after Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas signed the documents on Thursday to join the Universal Postal Union, a UN agency that coordinates international postage, and 10 international protocols and conventions.

The move infuriated the US, Israel’s staunch ally, with a State Department official claiming that the Palestinian efforts to join international institutions were “premature” and “counterproductive.”

“We are currently reviewing possible consequences of the Palestinians’ recent actions,” the official said in a statement published by the Times of Israel on Sunday.

In November 2012, the UN General Assembly upgraded Palestine’s status from “non-member observer entity” to “non-member observer state” despite strong opposition from Israel.

Since then, the Palestinians have joined dozens of international or organizations and agreements, among them the International Criminal Court, as part of a campaign to garner support for the recognition of their homeland as a sovereign state.

Washington has asked the Palestinians not to join international agencies, citing laws dating to the early 1990s that require the US government to cut off funding to any UN organization that grants the Palestinians full membership.

Abbas, however, said a Palestinian agreement with the US not to join international bodies was conditioned on the US not ending aid payments, not moving its embassy to Jerusalem al-Quds and not changing the status of the Palestine Liberation Organization mission in Washington.

The US withdrew some funding for UNESCO after the Palestinians joined the cultural and education organization back in 2011. It also pulled out of the agency altogether in 2017.

Most recently, Washington cut funds to the UN Palestinian refugee agency UNRWA.

The US-Palestine ties deteriorated last December when President Donald Trump recognized Jerusalem al-Quds as the “capital” of Israel.

The American embassy was also relocated from Tel Aviv to the ancient city in May, sparking angry reactions from Palestinians and severe criticism from the international community.

At that time, Abbas formally declared that Palestinians would no longer accept the US as a mediator to resolve the conflict because Washington was “completely biased” towards Tel Aviv.

Israeli Sources Admit Hamas Possesses Game-changing Missiles

An unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) launched by Hamas resisstance movement during the Israeli war on Gaza in July 2014

http://english.almanar.com.lb/624461

November 18, 2018

An Israeli website known for its close links to the regime’s military intelligence services has admitted that the Palestinian resistance movement Hamas is now possessing “game-changing” missiles that could hit targets in Israel with considerable ease and precision.

The Debka file said in a report on Saturday that its sources had identified the type of modern missiles used by Hamas in recent attacks on the Israeli-occupied territories that inflicted considerable damage and casualties on the regime and forced the Israeli government to accept a ceasefire with the Palestinians.

It said the missiles were of the 333mm-caliber type and had a medium range of 11 kilometers. The report added that the missiles were capable of destroying Israel’s “artillery emplacements, Iron Dome batteries, armored force concentrations – whether over ground or in trenches, as well as combat engineering equipment and command centers”.

“It is not launched from stationary batteries, but from any combat 4×4 vehicle or jeep, each of which carries two rockets,” said the report, adding that the main advantage of the missiles was its mobility which allowed Hamas to fire them from any area in the Gaza Strip without Israeli radars noticing them.

The report came days after Israelis signed into a ceasefire with Hamas after a barrage of resistance missile attacks on southern occupied territories killed one and injured more than 80 Israelis.

The Israeli government decision to accept the Egyptian-brokered ceasefire, prompted its minister for military affairs Avigdor Lieberman to resign. Hamas called the resignation, which could bring about early elections in the occupied lands, as “an admission of defeat” and a “political victory” for the Palestinian resistance.

Lieberman said after resigning from the Israeli cabinet that Hamas was on its way to become a serious threat to Israel, saying in a year time, the group and its partner in Gaza, the Islamic Jihad Movement, would reach the military prowess of Hezbollah, the dominant resistance movement in Lebanon which has successfully defended the small country against Israeli aggression in the past.

The Debka file report about Hamas missiles also came hours after Hamas leader in Gaza Yahya Sinwar warned Israel not to test the resistance group again.

“I advise Israel not to try and test us again. This time you did not have a lot of casualties and you managed to rescue your special forces,” said Sinwar at a memorial service for the Palestinians killed in recent clashes.

“Whoever tests Gaza will find only death and poison. Our missiles are more precise, have a greater range and carry more explosives than in the past,” said Sinwar, adding, “Our hands are on the trigger and our eyes are open.”

Source: Press TV

Lieberman on Hamas: ’We’re Feeding a Monster’ That Will Become Hezbollah’s Twin

Local Editor

Outgoing “Israeli” War Minister Avigdor Lieberman said on Friday that he does not remember whether he tried to push his cabinet to assassinate Hamas chief Ismail Haniyeh.

About a month before being assigned in his post, Lieberman vowed to kill the resistance leader “in 48 hours” if the bodies of “Israeli” soldiers held in Gaza were not returned.

His Friday comments came as a response to a question from a Haaretz reporter during a tour of the “Israeli”-occupied communities near the Gaza border.

During the tour, Lieberman doubled down on his criticism of the Zionist government’s policy on Gaza, which prompted his resignation on Wednesday.

Lieberman accused cabinet members of being two-faced, torpedoing his moves in the cabinet meetings before attacking him in the media. Those cabinet ministers, he said, “who torpedoed any solid decision during the daily cabinet meetings, went on air the next day and said, ‘what about Haniyeh, what about the 48 hours?'”

Regarding the truce “Israel” reached with Hamas on Tuesday after three days of Palestinian resistance against the “Israeli” attacks, Lieberman said that

“we are feeding the monster and if we don’t stop it from getting stronger and gathering force, we will have Hezbollah’s twin in a year… we bought short-term quiet that will harm the long-term quiet.”

Source: News Agencies, Edited by website team

RELATED VIDEOS

Related Articles

Hamas Leader to “Israel”: Don’t Try Us, Tel Aviv Our next Target

 

Local Editor

The Leader of Hamas Resistance Movement Yihye Sinwar had threatened the apartheid “Israeli” entity, warning “Don’t try us again,” as he held up a pistol that the Resistance men captured from elite “Israeli” Forces.

In a stern speech on Friday evening to honor Gaza’s Khan Younis martyr, Sinwar threatened to target Tel Aviv next time should “Israel” test the Resistance again.

“If we are attacked, we can bombard Tel Aviv — to the point, we have more missiles and more accurate ones,” he said.

Sinwar further revealed that he also had pictures of the incident and the retrieval of the commander of the force that was killed known to the public only as Lieutenant Colonel M. due to the military censor.

“This time you succeeded in leaving with killed and wounded, next time we will release our prisoners from prison and even more soldiers will remain in our hands,” Sinwar declared gravely.

He also asserted that the relative calm since the 2014 “Israeli”-Gaza conflict was not in vain, suggesting that the Resistance groups reinforced their arsenal with more damaging capabilities.

“The “Israeli” enemy understood that our quiet in recent years was not casual,” he said, adding that during the latest escalation, “the rocket fire was measured but in larger numbers and with much more powerful warheads.”

Source: News Agencies, Edited by website team

 

Related Videos

Related Articles

The Twisted Logic of the Jewish ‘Historic Right’ to israel, the Jews never existed as a ‘people’ – still less as a nation

The Twisted Logic of the Jewish ‘Historic Right’ to Israel
By Shlomo Sand

A synagogue in Sarcelles, outside Paris. CAPUCINE GRANIER-DEFERRE / NYT

Our political culture insists on seeing the Jews as the direct descendants of the ancient Hebrews. But the Jews never existed as a ‘people’ – still less as a nation

I enjoy the vacillations of Chaim Gans, even if I don’t always understand them. I have the highest esteem for his intellectual honesty – even if at times, perhaps like everyone, he tries to resolve contradictions with lame arguments.

However, before going into the heart of the matter, I must pause over an annoying mistake – I’m certain that at bottom it’s not deliberately misleading but a folly – concerning my writings. In the article, “From rabid Zionism to egalitarian Zionism” (November 9), Gans writes, “because, according to [Sand], there is purportedly no genetic continuity between ancient and modern Jewry, it follows that the Jewish nationhood engendered by Zionism is a total fabrication, a nationhood created out of thin air.”

If my assumption that Gans has perused my books is correct, he appears to have read them both too quickly and at a diagonal. Since the publication of my first book “The invention of the Jewish people” a decade ago, I have made a point of emphasizing that it’s not only Jews who don’t possess a common DNA – neither do all other human groups that claim to be peoples or nations – besides which I have never thought that genetics can confer national rights. For example, the French are not the direct descendants of the Gauls, just as the Germans are not the offspring of the Teutons or of the ancient Aryans, even if until a little more than half a century ago many idiots believed just that.

One trait that all peoples have in common is that they are retroactive inventions with no distinctive genetic “traits.” The acute problem that genuinely disturbs me is that I live in a singular political and pedagogical culture that continues persistently to see the Jews as the direct descendants of the ancient Hebrews.

The founding myth of Zionism – which proceeds in an unbroken line from Max Nordau and Arthur Ruppin, to worrisome geneticists in several Israeli universities and at Yeshiva University in New York – acts as the principal ideological glue for the nation’s everlasting unity, and today more than ever. The justification for Zionist settlement/colonization (choose your preferred term – they mean the same thing) is the meta-paradigm that is expressed in the declaration of the establishment of the state, namely: “We were here, we were uprooted, we came back.”

Full disclosure: Even when I believed, mistakenly, that the “Jewish people” was exiled by the Romans in 70 C.E. or 132 C.E., I didn’t think that this conferred on the Jews some sort of imagined “historic right” to the Holy Land. If we seek to organize the world as it was 2,000 years ago, we will turn it into one big madhouse. Why not bring Native Americans back to Manhattan, for example, or restore the Arabs to Spain and the Serbs to Kosovo? Of course, such twisted logic of “historic right” will also commit us to supporting the continued settlement/colonization of Hebron, Jericho and Bethlehem.

As I pursued my research, my realization that the Exodus from Egypt never happened and that the inhabitants of the Kingdom of Judah were not exiled by the Romans, left me nonplussed. There is not one study by a historian who specializes in antiquity that recounts that “exile” or any serious historiographic study that reconstructs a mass migration from the place. The “exile” is a formative event that never took place, otherwise it would be the subject of dozens of research studies. Judahite farmers, who constituted an absolute majority of the population at the first century C.E., were not seafarers like the Greeks or the Phoenicians, and did not spread across the world. It was Jahwist monotheism, which since the Hasmonean era had become a dynamic religion engaged in conversion, which laid the foundations for the Jews’ age-old existence around the globe.

Here’s where we get to the heart of Gans’ arguments. This distinguished jurist and political theorist is not prepared to accept the standard justifications for settlement and for Zionism’s conception of land ownership since the end of the 19th century. He is well aware that such popular propositions would oblige him to justify continuation of the present-day settlement project, and perhaps also to deny the rights of the natives who still remain in “the land of Israel.”

Gans even knows that there never actually was a Jewish nation, which is why he resorts to the literal image of a “profile” – a surprising and original term in the national context – wholly based on ignorance. For him to understand what Clermont-Tonnerre meant in his famous speech (a subject I addressed in an article in the Haaretz Hebrew edition last August), a perusal of Wikipedia would have sufficed. He’d have learned immediately that by “nation,” the French liberal was referring to a closed, insular religious community. Did the Jews, in contrast, not see themselves as a people or a nation according to the modern usage of these terms?

Until the modern era, the terms “people” or “nations” were used in a variety of senses. In the Bible, Moses goes down to the people and speaks with them directly (without a loudspeaker, newspapers, television or Twitter). The people also gathers to welcome Joshua and to congratulate him on his victories. In the Middle Ages the Christians viewed themselves as “people of God,” a term in wide use for hundreds of years. In our time, the terms “people” or “nations” are applied in a different way, albeit not always accurately. A “people” is, generally, a human community living within a defined territory, whose members speak a common language and maintain a secular culture with the same, or similar, foundations. “Nation,” on the other hand, is a term that is today generally applied to a people that claims sovereignty over itself or has already achieved it

I don’t think peoples existed before the modern era – that possibility would have been ruled out by the level of communication they had. There were large clans, tribes, powerful kingdoms, large principalities, religious communities and other groups with various forms of political and social bonds – usually loose ones. In an age when few people could read and write, when each village had a different dialect and the lexicon was appallingly meager, it’s hard to talk about a people with a shared consciousness. Minorities of educated literates do not yet constitute nations, even if they have sometimes created that impression.

I don’t understand why all cats have to be called cats and all the dogs, dogs – and only one cat has to be called a dog. The Jews, like the Christians, Muslims or the followers of the Bahá’í Faith, had in common a strong belief in God alongside diverse and closely linked religious practices. However, a Jew from Kiev could not converse with a Jew from Marrakesh, didn’t sing the songs of the Yemeni Jew and didn’t eat the same foods as the Falash Mura, or Beta Israel, community of Ethiopia. The whole fabric of day-to-day secular life was completely different in each community. Accordingly, to this day – and rightly so – the only way to join the “Jewish people” is through an act of religious conversion.

The Christians, by contrast, viewed the Jews as members of an abominable money-worshipping faith. The Muslims perceived them as adherents of an inferior religion. With the advent of progress in the modern era, many Europeans started to treat them as a defiled race. Anti-Semitism endeavored mightily to cast the Jews as an alien people-race with different blood (DNA hadn’t yet been discovered).

But what in blazes was their self-“profile”? A salient product of the Zionist education system, Chaim Gans tells us that they saw themselves as a kind of nation that dreamed of getting to the “Land of Israel.” I would not suggest that Gans should read distinctively Jewish authors such as Hemann Cohen or Franz Rosenzweig, or the Talmud, which rejected collective emigration to the Holy Land. I’m sure he won’t have time for that. I would only ask him to read a short history that is slightly more reliable.

Until World War II, the vast majority of Eastern and Western Jews – traditionalist, Orthodox, Conservative, Reform, Communists and Bundists – were avowed anti-Zionists. They did not wish for sovereignty over themselves within a nation-state framework in the Middle East. The Bundists did in fact see themselves, and quite rightly, as a Yiddish people in need of cultural-linguistic autonomy, but they rejected outright the proposal to immigrate to Palestine as part of a project of a trans-world Jewish nation.

And here we come to the last desperate attempt to justify the Zionist enterprise retroactively: Zionism as a response to an emergency situation. History, unfortunately, was more tragic. Zionism failed utterly to rescue Europe’s Jews, nor could it have done so. From 1882 until 1924, the Jews streamed in their masses – about 2.5 million – to the North American continent of promise. And yes, had it not been for the racist Johnson-Reed Immigration Act that prevented continued immigration, another million or perhaps two million of these souls might have been saved.

Additional full disclosure: I was born after the war in a DP camp in Austria. During my first two years I lived with my parents in another camp, in Bavaria. My parents, who lost their parents in the Nazi genocide, wanted to steal into France or, alternatively, immigrate to the United States. All the gates were closed, however, and they were compelled to go to the young country of Israel, the only place that agreed to accept them. The truth is that for Europe, after its participation in the mass slaughter of the Jews, it was convenient to spew out the remnant of a native population that hadn’t taken part in the awful murder, and thereby created a new tragedy, though of a completely different scale.

Chaim Gans isn’t comfortable with this historical narrative, especially when the oppression of the natives and the plundering of their land is continuing even now. Zionism, which succeeded in forging a new nation, is not prepared to recognize its political-cultural-linguistic creation, nor even the specific national rights which that process conferred on it. But Gans, ultimately, is right. From Meir Kahane to Meretz, all Zionists continue to view the state we live in not as a democratic republic belonging to all its Israeli citizens – who definitely have a right to self-determination – but as a political entity that belongs to the Jews of the world, who like their forebears have no wish to come here or to define themselves as Israelis.

What remains for me, then, is to go on being a-Zionist or post-Zionist while doing what I can to help rescue the place I live in from an ever-intensifying racism, due, among other reasons, to the teaching of a false historical past, fear of assimilation with the Other, revulsion of the indigenous culture and so on. For, as the Turkish poet Nazim Hikmet wrote, “If I don’t burn / if you don’t burn / … if we don’t burn / how will the light / … vanquish the darkness?”

Shlomo Sand is a historian and professor emeritus of Tel Aviv University.

This article was originally published by Haaretz

Echoing Prominent Israeli, Chomsky Warns of the Rise of ‘Judeo-Nazi Tendencies’ in israel (apartheid state)

Echoing Prominent Israeli, Chomsky Warns of the Rise of ‘Judeo-Nazi Tendencies’ in Israel

Professor Noam Chomsky. (Photo: via Facebook)

Prominent Jewish intellectual Noam Chomsky has raised concerns over what he believes is the rise of “Judeo-Nazi tendencies” in Israel. Speaking to i24NEWS last week, the renowned political dissident, linguist and scholar repeated warnings given by Yeshayahu Leibowitz, an Israeli public intellectual, biochemist and polymath, concerning the dehumanizing effect of Israel’s brutal occupation of Palestine on the victims and the oppressors.

Chomsky commented on remarks by Leibowitz who was nominated for the Israel Prize saying that “Leibowitz warned that if the occupation continues, Israeli Jews are going to turn into what he called, Judeo-Nazis”. Chomsky recognized the description was a “strong term” and that most people wouldn’t be able to get away with describing Israel in this manner but explained that Leibowitz’s status meant that he was able to speak about Israel without incurring fury.

 

Leibowitz who passed away in 1994 in Jerusalem, cautioned that the state of Israel and Zionism had become more sacred than Jewish humanist values and controversially went on to describe Israeli conduct in occupied Palestinian territories as “Judeo-Nazi” in nature.

Outraged by Israel’s killing of 60 villagers of Qibya in 1953, most of whom were women and children by the notorious Israeli commando Unit 101, known for its brutality and retribution campaigns, Leibowitz has been quoted as saying:

“We have to ask ourselves where this youth of ours emerged from; young people who had no mental inhibitions about committing this atrocity? What inner motivation for such acts could have been at work here? This youth is not a mob but the product of Zionist, humanist social education.”

 

Echoing Leibowitz, Echoing Leibowitz, Chomsky said:

“If you have your jackboot on somebody’s neck, you have to find a way to justify it.” Repeating Leibowitz’s warning he added that “blaming the victim was a direct reflection of the continued occupation, the humiliation of people, the degradation, and the terrorist attacks by the Israeli government”.

The former MIT linguist said that being critical of the occupation in Israel today means being labeled a traitor, a phenomenon which has caused the left to virtually disappear from the political spectrum. He pointed to opposition to the situation in the Gaza Strip, which he likened to a concentration camp, as an example of the delegitimization of the left.

Chomsky said:

“Take Gaza. If you are going to place two million people in a concentration camp, which is in effect what it is, and put them under a vicious siege, you have to ask yourself; am I justified in doing this? People who try to oppose it are traitors, Arab lovers and so on. You have seen this phenomenon in European history, I don’t have to give you examples.”

Speaking about a common myth in Israeli society that a military presence in the West Bank is necessary for security reasons, Chomsky dismissed that idea saying that the opposite is true; that “a military occupation” of the West Bank only endangers Israel’s security.

“Ask any Israeli strategic analysts. They all understand that occupation of the West Bank is a threat to Israeli security.”

Chomsky went on to present a number of incidents where Arab leaders have offered Israel peace in return for withdrawal from the West Bank, all rejected by Israel. Israel, he told, i24NEWS is deliberately choosing expansion over security.

(MEMO, PC, Social Media)

%d bloggers like this: