Column One: The elephant of Jew hatred (JERUSALEM POST OP-ED) By CAROLINE B. GLICK 04/20/12)
Source: http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Article.aspx?id=266790
JERUSALEM POST
JERUSALEM POST Articles-Index-Top
Publishers-Index-Top
Hatred of Jews is the central animating feature of the political and
strategic reality of the Middle East. It is hatred of Jews that
dictates the legal regimes, foreign policies, military aspirations,
cultural mores, educational themes and even public health policies of
our neighbors from Ramallah to Tehran.
Despite the centrality of Jew-hatred in all aspects of public life in
the Arab and Muslim world, our neighbors’ unrelenting and irrational
abhorrence for Israel and the Jewish people remains a dirty secret
that you aren’t supposed to mention in polite company. From
Washington to Brussels, talk of the policy implications of Arab and
Muslim Jew-hatred is prohibited.
Omar Abu-Sneina, a convicted terrorist murderer, is one of the
thousand Palestinian terrorists that Israel released from prison in
order to secure the release of Israeli hostage IDF Sgt.- Maj. Gilad
Schalit. Originally from Hebron, Abu-Sneina was released to Hamas-
controlled Gaza.
This week the IDF announced that since his release Abu-Sneina has
returned to the terror business. The Shin Bet (Israel Security
Agency) intercepted a computer memory card he sent his family in
Hebron with instructions for how his fellow terrorists should go
about kidnapping and holding IDF soldiers hostage. The instructions
demonstrate how for Abu-Sneina, Israelis don’t even deserve to be
treated like animals.
Among other things, he discussed how to hide a hostage. As he put
it, “Avoid hiding [the captive soldier] in desolate places, tunnels
or forests, unless the aforementioned [captive] is a corpse or a
severed head. If the aforementioned is a live human, that must be
visited at least once a week and provided with food and drink, it is
best to hide him in a house, an agricultural farm, a workplace, etc.”
Abu-Sneina’s coldblooded cruelty and rejection of the inherent value
of the lives of Israelis is not simply a function of the fact that he
is a terrorist. It is a reflection of the values of Palestinian
society. Those values are continuously expressed and reinforced by
Fatah- and Hamas-controlled media outlets, cultural and educational
institutions and religious authorities. The ubiquitousness of Jew-
hatred in the daily lives of Palestinians is so overwhelming it is
difficult to imagine any facet of Palestinian life that isn’t
inundated by it.
Take grammar lessons. According to a translation provided by
Palestinian Media Watch, the Palestinian Authority’s Arabic language
matriculation examinations for high school students include questions
such as “Punctuate the underlined phrase: Do not view the occupier as
human.” And “Punctuate the underlined phrase: We shall die in order
that our land may live.”
THIS WEEK, a Palestinian court sentenced Muhammad Abu Shahala to
death for selling a home in Hebron near the Cave of the Patriarchs to
Jews. Shahala was arrested shortly after several Jewish families
moved into the house last month. He was reportedly tortured and
quickly tried and sentenced to die by a PA court.
The PA was established in May 1994. The first law it adopted defined
selling land to Jews as a capital offense. Shortly thereafter scores
of Arab land sellers began turning up dead in Jerusalem and Judea and
Samaria in both judicial and extrajudicial killings.
Leaders of the Jewish community of Hebron wrote a letter to
international leaders this week asking them to intervene with PA
Chairman Mahmoud Abbas and demand that he cancel Shahala’s sentence.
They addressed the letter to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, US
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, President of the European Council
Herman Van Rompuy, the director-general of the International Red
Cross, Yves Daccord, as well as Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and
President Shimon Peres. In it they wrote, “It is appalling to think
that property sales should be defined as a ‘capital crime’ punishable
by death.
“The very fact that such a ‘law’ exists within the framework of the
PA legal system points to a barbaric and perverse type of justice,
reminiscent of practices implemented during the dark ages.”
They went on to make the reasonable comparison between the PA’s law
prohibiting land sales to Jews to Nazi Germany’s Nuremburg laws that
constrained and finally outlawed trade between Jews and Germans. The
letter concluded with the question, “Is the Palestinian Authority a
reincarnation of the Third Reich?”
The Palestinians of course are far from unique in their obsession
with hating Jews. Their hemorrhage of hatred, their obsessive need to
reject any move towards peaceful coexistence with Israel, or what the
renowned late Palestinian poet Yousuf Al Khatib referred to
picturesquely as “the Jewish filth of Europe,” is matched in every
Arab land. And of course, it is the primary obsession of the Iranian
regime.
The parallels between Nazi laws and the laws of the PA and the Arab
states that outlaw all cooperation with Israel and make such
cooperation a capital offense are obvious and straightforward. Yet
generally speaking, anyone who points out this fact is automatically
dismissed as an alarmist or an extremist. Given the PA’s relative
military weakness when compared with Israel and the Arab world’s
current lack of interest in waging active war against Israel, noting
their inarguable ideological affinity with the Nazis is considered
socially and even intellectually unacceptable. The fact that they
lack the ability to implement their ideology renders it improper to
mention it.
The social prohibition on drawing parallels between the threats
facing Israel today and those that faced the Jewish people 70 years
ago is not limited to the discourse on the Arab world’s conflict with
Israel. It also extends to polite society’s discourse on Iran’s
nuclear program, which the Iranian regime has repeatedly made clear
is aimed at destroying Israel.
In his address to the nation at the annual Holocaust Remembrance Day
ceremony at Yad Vashem on Wednesday evening, Prime Minister Binyamin
Netanyahu took aim at that taboo when he attacked those who accuse
him of belittling the Holocaust by comparing the annihilation of
European Jewry to the threat posed by Iran’s nuclear weapons program.
Netanyahu said, “I know there are also those who believe that the
unique evil of the Holocaust should never be invoked in discussing
other threats facing the Jewish people. To do so, they argue, is to
belittle the Holocaust and to offend its victims.
“I totally disagree. On the contrary. To cower from speaking the
uncomfortable truth – that today like then, there are those who want
to destroy millions of Jewish people – that is to belittle the
Holocaust, that is to offend its victims and that is to ignore the
lessons.
“Not only does the prime minister of Israel have the right, when
speaking of these existential dangers, to invoke the memory of a
third of our nation which was annihilated. It is his duty.”
NETANYAHU IS right, of course. Unfortunately for Israel, raising the
Holocaust in the context of a discussion about contemporary threats
to the Jewish people is the rhetorical equivalent of dropping a
nuclear bomb. Just as no one is allowed to use a nuclear bomb, no one
is allowed to mention the Holocaust. And that means that there is
ultimately no way to speak about the violent hatred that animates our
enemies in every aspect of their policy making. From the seemingly
anodyne issue of property sales to the existential issue of nuclear
weapons programs, the Jew-hatred that lies at the foundation of their
actions is out of bounds for discussion.
Actually, the situation is both better and worse than that.
Netanyahu’s rhetorical boldness in drawing the parallel between Iran
and the Nazis is arguably the only reason that the EU and the Obama
administration have taken any actions against Iran. No, as their
feckless negotiations with the mullahs, their foot-dragging in
implementing economic sanctions, and their outspoken opposition to
military action against Iran make clear, they do not really mind the
prospect of Iran acquiring the ability to wipe out the Jewish state.
The only reason they have adopted sanctions at all is because
Netanyahu’s Holocaust rhetoric made them fear that Israel would
attack Iran’s nuclear installations if they didn’t.
On the other hand, when it comes to their direct dealings with Jew-
haters, Westerners not only fail to confront them about their
prejudice. They enable it. For instance, at a townhall meeting during
her visit to Tunisia last month, Hillary Clinton was asked how US
leaders can be trusted when during elections, “most of the candidates
from both sides run towards the Zionist lobbies to get their support.”
Rather than reject the anti-Jewish premise of the question – that
Jews exert inordinate control over US politics or that there is
something wrong with candidates expressing support for Israel –
Clinton treated the question as legitimate.
She said, “A lot of things are said in political campaigns that
should not bear a lot of attention.”
Clinton even congratulated her anti-Jewish questioner, saying, “I
think it’s a fair question because I... sometimes am a little
surprised that people around the world pay more attention to what is
said in our political campaigns than most Americans.”
Similarly, a report on the behind the scenes goings on at last
weekend’s nuclear negotiations with Iran published by Al-Monitor
described the friendly discussion that took place at a dinner Friday
night between EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton and Iranian
chief negotiator Saeed Jalili. According to a European diplomat, the
conversation was aimed at breaking the ice. And it included a
discussion of “political party funding in the US.”
It is hard to imagine that such a discussion involved anything other
than a group tongue-clucking session directed against the inordinate
impact of “Jewish money” on US electoral politics. That is, it is all
but impossible to imagine that the discussion involved anything other
than Ashton attempting to build a rapport with her Iranian
counterpart based on shared hatred or contempt for Jews.
The fact that the West refuses to consider the policy implications of
the most powerful force in Arab and Iranian policy-making and
political life does not mean that Israeli policy-makers should
necessarily expand their discussion of the topic – although it would
probably not hurt for them to do so. What it means is that the
general policy debate in the West about the nature of Middle Eastern
politics is completely divorced from reality.
Because the Americans and the Europeans refuse to acknowledge the
elephant of Jew-hatred in the middle of the room, they cannot be
trusted to make reasoned or rational policy decisions. And since they
cannot be trusted to act rationally, Israel cannot rely on the
Americans or the Europeans as allies or partners when it confronts
threats from its Jew-obsessed neighbors. (© 1995-2011, The Jerusalem
Post 04/20/12)
Return to Top
MATERIAL REPRODUCED FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY