Des accusations d’antisémitisme sont utilisées en Allemagne pour intimider et criminaliser les opposants à la guerre

 


Israël-AllemagneAlors que des millions de gens sont profondément choqués par le bombardement brutal le Gaza par l’armée israélienne, en Allemagne, les politiciens et les journalistes s’en prennent aux opposants à la guerre. Quelques slogans anti-juifs isolés ont été mis en évidence pour qualifier les manifestations d’antisémites et pour les condamner.

Après que des milliers de personnes ont manifesté la semaine passée dans le monde entier contre la guerre, l’armée israélienne a intensifié lundi soir ses attaques sur Gaza. Des articles de presse ont parlé d’une nuit d’épouvante avec des bombardements et des tirs d’artillerie sans répit.

La veille à la télévision, le premier ministre Benjamin Netanyahou avait prévenu la population de se préparer à une opération militaire qui ne cesserait pas tant que le Hamas n’aurait pas été entièrement désarmé.

La brutale guerre aérienne, navale et terrestre menée contre Gaza est un crime de guerre monstrueux. Trois semaines durant, l’armée israélienne a bombardé à l’aide d’une technologie de dernier cri des quartiers résidentiels palestiniens densément peuplés. Mardi, le nombre de Palestiniens tués était passé à 1.110, dont de nombreux enfants figurant parmi les victimes. C’est le chiffre officiel et personne ne sait combien de morts sont ensevelis sous les décombres. Le nombre de blessés se chiffre à 6.000 dont un grand nombre grièvement.

Le gouvernement allemand craint que les crimes horribles commis par le gouvernement israélien ne provoquent un mouvement anti-guerre qui ne se limiterait pas qu’à une simple critique du gouvernement Netanyahou mais viserait également le soutien que Berlin apporte à Israël ainsi que le retour du militarisme allemand. Pour cette raison, ils sont en train de gonfler la menace de l’antisémitisme dans le but de réprimer toute opposition à la guerre.

Au milieu de la semaine passée, le journal allemand Frankfurt Allgemeine Zeitung écrivait, « Après des jours de propagande antisémite durant les manifestations contre l’offensive militaire israélienne, le président allemand Joachim Gauck a lancé un signal fort. » Gauck avait exhorté tous les Allemands à manifester contre l’antisémitisme et non contre le gouvernement israélien.

Le ministre allemand de l’Intérieur, Thomas de Maizière (chrétien démocrate, CDU) a dit qu’Israël avait le droit de se défendre, ce qui ne tolérait « en aucun cas » une remise en cause. Il a dit que le ministère public, la police et les autorités devaient prendre des mesures fortes contre toute forme d’antisémitisme explicite ou caché.

Le ministre allemand de la Justice Heiko Maas (social-démocrate, SPD) a déclaré qu’un « discours de haine contre les Juifs » était absolument inacceptable et que rien ne saurait le justifier. Il a dit que l’antisémitisme ne pourrait jamais de nouveau être toléré en Allemagne et que la liberté d’expression ne justifiait pas l’incitation à la haine raciale et encore moins à la violence. Le ministre de la Justice a remarqué que les slogans anti-juifs devaient entraîner des poursuites pénales. Quiconque s’attaquait de cette manière au judaïsme, s’en prenait aussi à l’Etat de droit allemand.

Le ministre allemand des Affaires étrangères, Frank-Walter Steinmeier (SPD) a aussi, aux côtés de ses collègues de France et d’Italie, mis en garde contre le fait de scander des slogans anti-juifs en Europe. Il a dit que rien, ni même le conflit de Gaza, ne justifiait la diabolisation des Juifs.

Un simple regard sur l’Ukraine montre à quel point cette campagne est malhonnête. Là-bas, le gouvernement allemand coopère étroitement avec des organisations antisémites et fascistes. Svoboda, un parti qui fait l’éloge de Hitler et du régime nazi, a été la force politique la plus significative lors des protestations de Maïdan qui contribuèrent à renverser au début de l’année le président ukrainien Viktor Ianoukovitch.

L’année dernière, le Congrès juif mondial avait demandé que le parti Svoboda soit interdit. Mais cela n’avait pas empêché Steinmeier ou des représentants de l’Union européenne (UE) et des Etats-Unis de collaborer étroitement avec Oleg Tiagnibok, le fondateur du parti. A plusieurs reprises, Tiagnibok a fait connaître sa détermination à anéantir la « mafia judéo-russe qui contrôle l’Ukraine. » Lorsqu’il avait pris la présidence de Svoboda il y a dix ans, il avait dit dans un discours devant ses partisans, « prenez vos armes, combattez ces porcs de Russes, les Allemands, ces porcs de Juifs et autres sous-hommes. »

Tiagnibok avait qualifié de héros John Demjanjuk qui avait été condamné pour le meurtre de plus de 30.000 personnes, principalement des prisonniers juifs dans le camp de concentration de Sobibor. Son adjoint, Iouri Michaltchisin, a fondé le groupe de réflexion appelé Josef Goebbels Political Research Centre.

Bien que tous ces faits soient connus, d’importants postes ministériels ont été attribués à Svoboda en échange de troupes de choc pour le coup d’Etat en Ukraine. Celles-ci jouent actuellement un rôle crucial en terrorisant la population en Ukraine orientale.

Lorsque cela profite aux intérêts allemands, le gouvernement n’éprouve pas le moindre scrupule à coopérer avec des antisémites et des fascistes. Il le fait aussi en Hongrie où le parti néofasciste Jobbik a obtenu 20 pour cent des voix en avril. Partout en Europe, des partis droitiers sont en train d’émerger en réponse directe à la politique antisociale poursuivie par le gouvernement allemand et l’UE.

La campagne actuelle relative à l’antisémitisme n’a donc absolument rien à voir avec les préoccupations légitimes concernant l’éventuelle menace à l’égard des citoyens juifs. Au contraire, elle vise à criminaliser les manifestations contre la guerre et les crimes impérialistes, à limiter le droit de se réunir et à intensifier les mesures d’Etat policier.

De la même manière cynique que l’appel « Plus jamais Auschwitz ! » avait été utilisé dans les années 1990 pour justifier l’intervention de l’armée allemande hors du territoire de l’OTAN, la soi-disant lutte contre l’antisémitisme est un prétexte pour abolir les droits démocratiques et renforcer l’Etat.

Ces derniers jours, lors de certaines manifestations des milliers de policiers en uniforme et en civil étaient de service. La semaine passée à Berlin, la proportion de policiers par rapport aux manifestants était de un pour un. Avant le début de la manifestation, la police s’est arrogé le droit de vérifier les pancartes et les bannières pour ensuite décider d’autoriser ou non les slogans.

Selon un article paru dans le journal Stuttgarter Zeitung, un avocat général et un interprète étaient présents lors de la récente manifestation à Stuttgart, aux côtés d’une vaste présence policière afin de pouvoir intervenir immédiatement et prendre des mesures judiciaires.

Si on laisse de côté la campagne mensongère sur la question de l’antisémitisme, il est évident que les attaques menées par les politiciens et les médias visent directement le caractère anti-guerre des manifestations. En début d’année, Gauck, Steinmeier et la ministre de la Défense, Ursula von der Leyen avaient déclaré que l’époque de la retenue militaire allemande était révolue et qu’à l’avenir l’Allemagne interviendrait de nouveau militairement dans les régions de crise de par le monde, de manière indépendante et avec assurance.

Le soutien apporté au gouvernement à Kiev et à Jérusalem montre ce que cela signifie. Le gouvernement allemand se prépare à des crimes de guerre comparables et envisage de réprimer toute opposition dès le début.

Le retour du militarisme allemand ne vise pas seulement des cibles à l’étranger mais aussi à l’intérieur du pays, c’est-à-dire qu’il est lié à l’abolition des droits démocratiques. Il y a un siècle, avant la Première Guerre mondiale, les opposants à la guerre étaient emprisonnés. En prévision de la Deuxième Guerre mondiale, les structures démocratiques avaient été entièrement détruites et une dictature fasciste établie.

Un rôle clé dans cette campagne de mensonges relative à l’antisémitisme et aux attaques contre les manifestants est joué par le parti Die Linke (La Gauche – homologue allemand du Parti de Gauche de Jean-Luc Mélenchon).

Immédiatement après le début du bombardement de Gaza, le trio dirigeant de Die Linke, Gregor Gysi, Katja Kipping et Bernd Riexinger, avait mis en garde contre une critique tendancieuse. « La communauté internationale serait bien inspirée de ne pas encourager à tort l’un ou l’autre camp en formulant des accusations unilatérales, » ont-ils dit. Ceci reviendrait à n’être « rien d’autre qu’un encouragement à refuser la paix. Personne ne mène une guerre juste dans cette guerre. »

Cet appel à s’abstenir dans un conflit entre une armée dotée d’armes puissantes et une population quasi sans défense qui meurt de faim, qui est privé d’électricité et d’eau et qui est bombardée en permanence, signifie tolérer et soutenir des crimes de guerre.

Le dirigeant de Die Linke à Berlin, Klaus Lederer, est allé encore plus loin vendredi. Il a participé de manière démonstrative au rassemblement pro-Israël à Berlin. Il a affirmé rejeter résolument dans le conflit actuel la condamnation unilatérale d’Israël. Le fait que les appels à manifester contre la guerre actuelle rendent Israël unilatéralement responsable a eu pour conséquence de rallier toutes sortes d’organisations anti-israéliennes et antisémites, a-t-il déclaré. Indépendamment des propos tenus par les organisateurs, il s’agissait de protestations de droite.

Le soutien à la politique belliqueuse d’Israël et au régime de terreur du dirigeant de Die Linke à Berlin montre clairement à quel point Die Linke se situe à droite.

Lundi, l’organe du parti, Neues Deutschland, a publié une interview du politologue Rafael Seligmann sur les manifestations. Elle s’intitulait, « C’est de la haine pure et c’est vil. »

Die Linke se sert de la situation actuelle pour signifier son soutien inconditionnel au gouvernement.

Ulrich Rippert

Article original, WSWS,paru le 1er août 2014

 

Articles Par :Ulrich Rippert

Avis de non-responsabilité : Les opinions exprimées dans cet article n’engagent que le ou les auteurs. Le Centre de recherche sur la mondialisation se dégage de toute responsabilité concernant le contenu de cet article et ne sera pas tenu responsable pour des erreurs ou informations incorrectes ou inexactes.

Le Centre de recherche sur la mondialisation (CRM) accorde la permission de reproduire la version intégrale ou des extraits d’articles du site Mondialisation.ca sur des sites de médias alternatifs. La source de l’article, l’adresse url ainsi qu’un hyperlien vers l’article original du CRM doivent être indiqués. Une note de droit d’auteur (copyright) doit également être indiquée.

Pour publier des articles de Mondialisation.ca en format papier ou autre, y compris les sites Internet commerciaux, contactez: media@globalresearch.ca

Mondialisation.ca contient du matériel protégé par le droit d’auteur, dont le détenteur n’a pas toujours autorisé l’utilisation. Nous mettons ce matériel à la disposition de nos lecteurs en vertu du principe “d’utilisation équitable”, dans le but d’améliorer la compréhension des enjeux politiques, économiques et sociaux. Tout le matériel mis en ligne sur ce site est à but non lucratif. Il est mis à la disposition de tous ceux qui s’y intéressent dans le but de faire de la recherche ainsi qu’à des fins éducatives. Si vous désirez utiliser du matériel protégé par le droit d’auteur pour des raisons autres que “l’utilisation équitable”, vous devez demander la permission au détenteur du droit d’auteur.

For media inquiries: media@globalresearch.ca

Israel Speaks: “We Purposefully Attack Civilians… Because They Deserve It”

By Steve Chovanec
Global Research, August 02, 2014
Reports from Underground 30 July 2014

Region: Asia, Middle East & North Africa
Theme: Crimes against Humanity, Militarization and WMD, Police State & Civil Rights
In-depth Report: PALESTINE

4-year-old-Qassim-Elwan-funeral-400x266In a video recording dated in 2012, Netanyahu can be seen speaking to what presumably are family members, women and children, completely unawares to the fact that his remarks are being recorded the entire time.

Netanyahu explains that, “The main thing, first of all, is to hit them [the Arabs]. Not just one blow, but blows that are so painful that the price will be too heavy to be borne,” a policy doctrine we are now seeing play out in Israel’s current assault on Gaza in which the ‘price’ that is intended to be ‘too heavy to be borne,’ is measured in the indiscriminate murder of innocent civilian lives- their homes, their playgrounds, their beaches, their schools, their mosques, their hospitals; Israel has shown in Protective Edge that no one and no place in Gaza, not even children’s playgrounds and hospitals in which no militants whatsoever are present, is immune from the all-powerful roar of the highly-tuned, well-oiled and technologically sophisticated multi-billion dollar US-made killing machine that it has now descended upon the mostly defenseless, economically strangled, and poverty-induced population of Gaza (a WikiLeaks cable quoted an Israeli official in 2008 telling the US that they would “keep Gaza’s economy on the brink of collapse,” to ensure that the economy was “functioning at the lowest level possible consistent with avoiding a humanitarian crisis.”)

The UN reports as of 29 July that a total of 1,118 people have been killed in the now 23 day assault on Gaza, 827 (or 74%) of which are innocent civilians. Updated figures for 30 July from the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights put the current death toll at 1324, of which 1130 (or 85%) are innocent civilians, along with 5,924 wounded; Gaza’s Health Ministry has confirmed the death of at least 1,359; a number of 7,677 wounded has been confirmed by emergency service spokesman Ashraf al-Qudra.

These figures clearly tell us that only a very small amount of the targets are actually military targets, Hamas militants or resistance fighters, given that they account for only 20-25% of the deaths. The vast majority of those killed have been innocent civilians, this despite the IDF’s sophisticated US-made and financed military technology capable of precision striking and advanced intelligence capabilities, including joint cooperation between Mossad and the NSA.

These figures make more sense however when you put them in the context of advice given to the IDF from Israeli lawyers and statements by top military and political officials.

Don’t Make Me Shoot You

Nafeez Ahmed reports that,

“White highlights a Ha’aretz report from 2009 which revealed that “IDF officers were receiving legal advice that allowed for large numbers of civilian casualties and the targeting of government buildings.”

“The people who go into a house despite a warning do not have to be taken into account in terms of injury to civilians, because they are voluntary human shields,”

said one senior official of the international law division (ILD) of the Israeli Military Advocate General’s Office.

“From the legal point of view, I do not have to show consideration for them. In the case of people who return to their home in order to protect it, they are taking part in the fighting.” (emphasis added)

This statement presupposes that Israel has the right to order people out of their homes, without having to give a justification, without having to prove that it is a military outpost, just an arbitrary pronouncement by the military and either the civilians must flee or be murdered in cold blood by the IDF, in which case they will be referred to as ‘human shields’ and their extrajudicial slaughter justified in the eyes of the military machine and its legal aides; even if the civilian does flee, Israel presupposes the right to destroy their homes, property, and belongings- in other words, their property (and as well their lives) belong to us, because we say so.

According to U.S. Army Manuals terrorism is defined as, the

“calculated use of unlawful violence or threat of unlawful violence to inculcate fear. It is intended to coerce or intimidate governments or societies … [to attain] political, religious, or ideological goals.” [U.S. Army Field Manual No. FM 3-0, Chapter 9, 37 (14 June 2001).]

Israel’s actions are therefore the exact definition of terrorism according to the U.S. army, where even just the threat of violence to obtain political goals is terrorism; Israel is saying to the civilian population “leave your homes, or else,” while then presupposing that if their orders are not heeded they are thus absolved from the responsibility of the murder which they will then go about committing. Even if they were just to threaten the use of violence to get people out of their homes it would be an extreme terroristic crime, let alone when they actually go through with the bombing, indiscriminate of who is inside.

What this amounts to is basically the military/war-time equivalent of holding a gun to someone’s head and saying “don’t make me shoot you,” and then demanding that they give you their wallet… or else. When the person doesn’t comply with your terror demands and use of intimidation, you then shoot them dead and claim that it was their fault for not giving you the money, I wonder how well that defense would hold up in a US court of law? Yet this is exactly what Israel is doing in Gaza, this is exactly what their lawyers and military generals are attempting to justify and codify into law.

Take Away Half the Land; Say the Dead Killed Themselves

Israel has used this terror tactic in order to take away 44% of Gaza’s land, drawing up a 3km buffer zone around the borders and then proceeding to hold the gun to the head of every innocent civilian living within that area and saying “don’t make us shoot you,” instructing them to leave their homes “immediately” or thus end up as ‘human shields,’ in which case, according to the IDF and their lawyers, their deaths will be their own fault.

Israeli-Buffer-Zone

Pepe Escobar thus points out,

“Translation: Israel, in one stroke, is creating OVER 400,000 REFUGEES. But refugees INSIDE the same cage/concentration camp/gulag – a major CRIME under international law. This huge area is now off-limits. All civilians staying behind will be deemed as “combatants”.”

Just as a 75-80% civilian death rate figure falsifies the claim that only military infrastructure and personnel are being targeted, so too does this 3km buffer zone falsify that claim as well; there is no justifiable military reason to annex almost half of Gaza’s land to military invasion and wholesale destruction, the whole ‘tunnel’ argument the least of which as it is pure nonsense coming from a military perspective, and one that has also been used previously,

“The pretext for the [November 4, 2008] raid was that Israel had detected a tunnel in Gaza that might have been intended for use to capture another Israeli soldier. The pretext is transparently absurd, as a number of commentators have noted. If such a tunnel existed, and reached the border, Israel could easily have barred it right there. But as usual, the ludicrous Israeli pretext was deemed credible.” (Noam Chomsky, Peace News, February 2009)

Murder Civilians; Put Pressure on Hamas

In an exchange between former Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin and former Isreali UN Ambassador and Isreali Labor Party Foreign Minister Abba Eban, published in the Israeli press in August of 1981, Mr. Eban wrote,

“The picture that emerges is of an Israel wantonly inflicting every possible measure of death and anguish on civilian populations in a mood reminiscent of regimes which neither Mr. Begin nor I would dare to mention by name.”(1) (emphases added)

Prominent and noted scholar Edward Herman analyzes further the exchange,

“Eban is harshly critical of Begin’s letter because of the support it gives to Arab propaganda; he does not contest the facts. He even defends the earlier Israeli attacks on civilians with the exact logic which orthodox analysts of terrorism attribute to-and use to condemn-retail terrorists: namely, that deliberate attacks may properly be made on innocent parties in order to achieve higher ends. Eban writes that, “there was a rational prospect, ultimately fulfilled, that afflicted populations [i.e., innocent civilians deliberately bombed] would exert pressure for the cessation of hostilities.”

“Begin’s list is indeed “partial.” It is supplemented by former Chief of Staff Mordechai Gur, whom stated that “For 30 years, from the War of Independence until today, we have been fighting against a population that lives in villages and cities,” offering as examples the bombardments that cleared the Jordan valley of all inhabitants and that drove a million and a half civilians from the Suez canal area, in 1970, among others. The Israeli military analyst Zeev Schiff summarized General Gur’s comments as follows:

“In South Lebanon we struck the civilian population consciously, because they deserved it … the importance of Gur’s remarks is the admission that the Israeli Army has always struck civilian populations, purposely and consciously … the Army, he said, has never distinguished civilian [from military] targets … [but] purposely attacked civilian targets when Israeli settlements had not been struck.”(2) (emphases added)

This history is particularly important, it gives a clear context to the recent historical findings which echo the exact same sentiments, and thus prove that the strategic military doctrine has not much changed throughout the years, and that these genocidal policies are instead longstanding and rooted in tradition.

An independent investigation into the IDF by the Jerusalem-based Public Committee Against Torture in Israel (PCATI) in the wake of Operation Cast Lead states that, “The policy of protecting soldiers’ lives, even at the cost of harming uninvolved civilians, cannot by itself explain the large number of casualties,” and so too can this statement be ascribed to the current death toll figures. The report explains this discrepancy however, “in the beginning of October 2008, the Commanding Officer of the IDF’s Northern Command, Maj. General Gadi Eisenkott, gave an interview to Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper, in which he unveiled what he called the “Dahiye Doctrine”:

“What happened in the Dahiye Quarter of Beirut in 2006, will happen in every village from which shots are fired on Israel. We will use disproportionate force against it and we will cause immense damage and destruction. From our point of view these are not civilian villages but military bases.

“This is not a recommendation, this is the plan, and it has already been authorized.” (Yedioth Ahronoth (Hebrew), I have incredible power, I’ll have no excuse,, Saturday Supplement, October 3, 2008, by Alex Fishman and Ariela Ringel-Hoffman.)

According to the approach expressed in the Dahiye Doctrine,

“Israel has to employ tremendous force disproportionate to the magnitude of the enemy’s actions. The intent of this… is to harm the civilian population to such an extent that it will bring pressure to bear on the enemy combatants. Furthermore, this policy is intended to create deterrence regarding future attacks against Israel, through the damage and destruction of civilian and military infrastructures which necessitate long and expensive reconstruction actions which would crush the will of those who wish to act against Israel.” (emphasis added)

“…two months before Operation Cast Lead, the Institute for National Security Studies, a think-tank at the Tel Aviv University which reflects the mainstream of Israeli military thinking, published an article by Dr. Gabriel Siboni, a colonel in IDF reserves. In the article Siboni expresses an identical approach to that of Eisenkott, which he relates in greater detail:

“With an outbreak of hostilities, the IDF will need to act immediately, decisively, and with force that is disproportionate to the enemy’s actions and the threat it poses. Such a response aims at inflicting damage and meting out punishment to an extent that will demand long and expensive reconstruction processes. The strike must be carried out as quickly as possible, and must prioritize damaging assets over seeking out each and every launcher. Punishment must be aimed at decision makers and the power elite… attacks should both aim at Hezbollah’s military capabilities and should target economic interests and the centers of civilian power that support the organization.”

After “What happened in the Dahiye Quarter of Beirut in 2006,” Israel’s then Army Chief of Staff Lt-Gen Dan Halutz threatened that his military would “turn back the clock on Lebanon by 20 years.” A troubling statement given the next paragraph of the PCATI’s report, “Siboni makes it clear that: “This approach is applicable to the Gaza Strip as well.”

Dan Halutz also made a previous appearance in a 2002 Hareetz article when he was asked to describe the emotions that are felt by a pilot that drops a bomb that kills civilians, one which perhaps gives more insight into this psychology, Dan replied,

“No. That is not a legitimate question and it is not asked. But if you nevertheless want to know what I feel when I release a bomb, I will tell you: I feel a light bump to the plane as a result of the bomb’s release. A second later it’s gone, and that’s all. That is what I feel.” (emphases added)

In the opening days of Operation Cast Lead of December ’08 – January ’09 the head of the Israeli army command in Gaza, Yoav Galant, echoed Lt-Gen Halutz’s statements when he confirmed that the attack was designed to “send Gaza decades into the past.”

With the recent headlines depicting the carnage and the slaughter currently plaguing Gaza today, one would be hard pressed to doubt the seriousness of these statements.

They Will Say We Are Defending

Understanding the civilian death toll in this context makes much more sense than listening to the Israeli governments pronouncements of using all necessary means to protect civilian life (a claim which is usually followed by some form of ‘under law’ or ‘all necessary lawful means,’ which given the above is equally as troubling.) However all of this is predicated upon the fact that “Israel has a right to defend itself,” since “Hamas struck first,” but as respected scholar Nafeez Ahmed points out, “Then three Israeli boys were kidnapped in early June of this year. As an investigation by the Jewish Daily Forward found, Netanyahu’s government knew almost immediately that the boys had been killed, and who had killed them – but pretended to know neither to justify a brutal crackdown.

“It was clear from the beginning that the kidnappers weren’t acting on orders from Hamas leadership in Gaza or Damascus.”

Thus ensued an 18-day ‘search-and-rescue operation,’ involving soldiers entering “thousands of homes, arresting and interrogating hundreds of individuals.” To justify the operation, Netanyahu “maintained the fiction” that they hoped to find the boys alive “as a pretext to dismantle Hamas’ West Bank operations.”

In the process, the IDF killed more than half a dozen Palestinians – while a Palestinian teenager was burned to death by settlers.”

And these crimes were then followed by Israel’s unprovoked attacks on Gaza, as the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs recounts,

“On 11 June, the Israeli Air Force targeted an alleged member of an armed group riding on a motorcycle together with a ten-year old child, in the Beit Lahiya area. The man died instantly and the child, who sustained serious injuries, died three days later; two civilian bystanders were also injured.

“Following this incident and through the rest of the week, Palestinian armed groups launched a number of rockets at southern Israel.” (emphasis added)

As I noted here, despite all of these provocations and attacks, Hamas still did not fire any rockets and therefore had abided by the 2012 November ceasefire… until Israel struck them first. After the month long military attack and raid of the West Bank, and the subsequent military aerial bombing raids in Gaza that provoked other Palestinian armed groups to retaliate, on June 29th an Israeli air strike killed 3 Hamas militants, after which Hamas launched its first rocket attack on Israel since 2012, in retaliation to Israel’s attack. Hamas then immediately called for the institution of a ceasefire, their conditions: that the stipulations of the 2012 ceasefire be re-instated, the same one that Israel repeatedly broke. Israel considered the proposal, but later refused, instead deciding to launch another air strike against Hamas on July 6th, Hamas responded the next day, and the day after Operation Protective Edge was launched.

It is within this context that the first round of Hamas rockets were unleashed, and it is through this that we must analyze the claims that Israel is acting defensively.

In the leaked recording of Netanyahu mentioned at the beginning of this report, the Prime Minister further clarifies the ‘pain’ he wished to inflict upon the Arabs, “A broad attack on the Palestinian Authority, to bring them to the point of being afraid that everything is collapsing.” A women can then be heard asking the question, “Wait a moment, but then the world will say ‘how come you’re conquering again?’”

Netanyahu’s reply?

“The world won’t say a thing. The world will say we’re defending.”

Steven Chovanec is an independent geopolitical analyst based in Chicago, IL. He is an undergraduate of International Studies at Roosevelt University and is a regular writer and blogger on geopolitics and important social matters. His writings can be found at undergroundreports.blogspot.com, find him on Twitter @stevechovanec.

Notes:

1.) Abba Eban, “Morality and warfare,” The Jerusalem Post, August 16, 1981 in cited in Edward Herman, The Real Terror Network, (Montreal: Black Rose Books, 1982), p. 77.

2.) Edward Herman, The Real Terror Network, (Montreal: Black Rose Books, 1982), p. 77-78. For further discussion of what Edward Herman describes as “Israel’s Sacred Terrorism,” see p. 76-79.

[This article was made possible by the contributions and reporting of Eva Bartlett at http://ingaza.wordpress.com/, Twitter – @EvaBartlettGaza]