Chava Gurion

The European Thorn in Israel 's Bosom

Squeezing history

The problem really started 63 B.C., when the pagan European Romans under Pompeius conquered Syria by military power, entered the Holy Temple in Jerusalem and from then ruled the Holy Land - while the later Germans lived in pagan clans, worshipping many "gods of nature", ruled by physical strength of their leaders, and neither Jesus nor Muhammad were a faint idea in the mind of the High Holy One. So the later following Diaspora drama of the Jews started with the European idea of conquering and ruling the world, at the very beginning executed by pagan, later Christian Romans, who had skipped the Greek model of ancient democracy and returned to politics of emperors, until in the 18 th , 19 th and 20 th century the idea of Enlightenment very slowly diffused European minds, at last to give birth to modern democracy after World war II, when Europe lied in ruins for tolerating the evil work of "emperors" far too long. No wonder that the Shoa took place in Europe , but Zionism was no answer to it. Zionism was the answer to the European mind of many centuries. The Shoa only was the last and by far strongest argument of after-war-Zionism. Europe is the thorn in Israel 's bosom.

Yes, this is polemic, but not worse than redefining world's history in the way of self-nominated "new historians" in Europe and even Israel, who interestingly not before now found out, that every today Palestinian has his ancestors in the Chaldeans or lately in the Canaanites and Amorites, who were - according to the Bible - defeated and expelled by the Israelites under Joshua, many hundred years before the pagan Romans were a faint idea in the mind of the High Holy One. Interestingly, for the holy purpose even the Koran, which adopted Moshe as a great prophet of the One-God-religions rooting from Abraham, did not give a damn for "poor pagan Canaanites conquered and expelled" by the Israelites. By the way, not even Jerusalem is mentioned in the Koran. But whenever the Jews have a very long history, worldwide accepted and content of the three leading One-God-religions, indisputably localized at a place now desired by two parties, so please let us have the second party, the Palestinians (a political invention of the 20 th century), a longer one. Papers are patient when the target is blaming the Jews, and most patient when the target is blaming Israel .

It is absolutely disgusting that in our whole wide world even some Jews and deplorably even Jewish scholars – most of the times exactly those, who warm their asses in most safety and most democratic western countries not to get hit by katyushas in Israel – babble about peace, know much better how to govern Israel (it is so easy, just give the Palestinians everything they want, break down the wall, let everybody in, give them back for free all the properties their ancestors had sold to our ancestors, let the today 4-6 million and steadily increasing (1950: 1 million) come back, "rooting" from the 300-400 thousand who really fled in 1948, kiss your little brethren and let them be the greater part of our Jewish state until they show us how to govern in peace…), complain in articles how "Jews can do so" (having been an oppressed and persecuted people during history and now "oppressing and persecuting" another people) and, last not least, support the artificial creation of a "new Palestinian history" with their own odd scholarly approach, mostly not even mentioning that terrorism against Israel exists and not even reflecting one of the facts every simple television-consumer is aware of. Even when biased media usually falsify the balance between Islamic terror and Israeli interventions against this terror, almost in similar ways the scholarly lefties do, media at least report on bombs and rockets killing and hurting Israeli civilians.

Not so some odd Jewish scholars - only one example of such a biased approach was delivered by Sara Roy, Senior Research Scholar, Center for Middle Eastern Studies, Harvard University , in: How Can Children of the Holocaust Do Such Things? A Jewish Plea . ( Counterpunch, Weekend Edition April 7 / 8, 2007), "naturally" forwarded to us by John Bunzl, one of the Lefties' "new historians" of the make-love-not-war generation, who try to escape from the Israeli "fate" of withstanding Islamic fundamentalism and terrorism by kissing the Palestinians.

Love and hate of European Rightists und Lefties

As much as racism is intolerable in democratic Europe and xenophobia does not match political correctness, we know it from stickers, worn by brave burghers during election campaigns, saying: "I love local residents". No reasonable person would dare to wear a sticker saying: "I hate aliens". Political correctness as a system is outing the love for the opposite to the hidden hatred.

The Rightists are easy to unveil. All one, if their ideas root from "neo-Nazism" or from political parties attested to be the "New Right", they have some thoughts and emotions in common. Their world is not colored nor blurred or shaded, it is simply black and white. They are full of fear and envy. They fear to get overwhelmed by alien cultures, they fear the "clash of civilizations", they fear not to be understood in their own language in their own country and, at the most, they fear not to get enough from their country, because the "aliens take it all". The termini technici "xenophobia" and "racism" are not sufficient for this complex and I am still researching for a better one in my almost finished doctoral thesis. As far as some parts of Rightists are pronounced or even fundamental Christians in a still Christian Europe, they fear the most what they see the most: Moslems and Islamic fundamentalism, even shown there and endangering peaceful, conservative Europe . They don't fear Jews so much now, for a simple reason: Since the Shoa and as a result of reckonable migration from Islamic or Arab countries, today Jews are not so present, not so many. Jews have learnt to be decent in Europe and to shut up. That way a Rightist's scream "I love Jesus" mostly means "I hate Moslems". The radical or extreme rights' approach "I love my country" can mean "I hate the EU and the USA" on a basis of anti-capitalism and anti-imperialism - according to the lefties and joint to anti-Semitism and anti-Israelism the same way. "I love the Palestinians" in the Right's access also can mean "I love underdogs like me, the 'oppressed' ones", therefore "I hate Israel".

Anyway, the fear of Moslems in Europe seems so strong that even some radical right groups pronounce their worry "being forced to protect the Jews against radical Moslems", while others hiss the Palestinian flag in their garden to protest against "Israel's policy" and declare not to be anti-Semitic.

Although the Lefties come to the very same results, their approach is more complex and more sophisticated. While the Right can meet the hearts of very simple people by populism and black-white-paintings, the Left's approach is mostly based on better political education and ideological theories. Deplorably, early Zionism, rooting from socialistic theories and forcing Jewish workers to immigrate to Palestine as an oppressed minority under Ottoman emperor's and later Mandate rule before 1948, is completely forgotten for them. Maybe in the eyes of radical Trotskyites Israel lost her "Marxist innocence" by successful military defense, winning five wars against surrounding aggressors, but later powered by the "wrong" partner USA . Of course, the Middle East conflict also was a projection of the East-West-conflict during the Cold War. But today? The peace movement of the Left still is biased as far as it is only anti-militaristic, anti-imperialistic and anti-nationalistic against the West and the USA (and Israel, of course, as the USA's "militaristic and imperialistic" finger in Middle East), while militarism of former Soviet Union or until today Cuba always was and is acceptable as "defenders of peace". Eternal support of the "poor and oppressed ones", on the background of Israel seen with Trotskyites' eyes as "imperialistic and militaristic" power, automatically leads them to support the Palestinians, when both their eyes deny to see: Hamas terror attacks against Israeli civilians are militaristic, using international financial aid for arming the terror cells (youngsters included) is militaristic, and the big, supporting Arab League is not far away from imperialism. Some Lefties say "I love peace" and mean "I hate the USA and Israel".

Austria is different

Deplorably this is no compliment. In these days, in April 2007, the Austrian President Heinz Fischer explained in his speech before the Nobel-Institute in Oslo (parts of it where published in: Der Standard, Wednesday, April 18, 2007, p.39), concerning the Middle-East conflict the key question was the peaceful together and side by side of Palestinians and Israeli. And that he himself, as a young colleague in Bruno Kreisky's team in the seventies, had experienced how Bruno Kreisky had emphasized Israel's right of existence and right of safe borders in talks with Arafat and other representatives of the Arab world, and that he had pointed out in talks with Israeli politicians, the suffering of the Palestinian population was the bottom for acts of despair and terrorism. Also president Fischer thinks, that born terrorists do not exist and terrorism primary develops from despair, injustice and hopelessness. Bravo. Now, more than thirty years later, not only the dominating political groups of Palestinians like Hamas, Al Aqsa brigades, a. s. o., but also Hezbollah in Lebanon and Iran still deny Israel's right of existence, right of safe borders and a life without terrorism, as long as Israel stays a state, a "Zionist object", doesn't depose her government, doesn't allow free access to all so called Palestinian refugees and doesn't accept a status as an Israeli minority within a great, free Palestine "from the river to the sea". It would be interesting to hear Kreisky and Arafat discussing in their paradise, if all the theories of the Left, like social democracy, equality, fraternity and solidarity, really match everybody and bring peace to everybody. Whenever terrorism develops from despair, injustice and hopelessness, the question may be allowed if justice simply means to give everybody what he demands for.

At the same time, in Austria everything is possible. Café Critique, an organization who supports many requests of SPME-Austria, has published in their bulletin this week:

"If you want to know something about the regime in Teheran, who wants to destroy Israel , just invite a representative of this regime for an event in Vienna . And when you want to discuss how to stop terrorism by love for peace and appeasement, just ask the Islamistic djihadists of Hezbollah. In this week, the Austrian Institute for International Policy (OEIIP) has invited for a lecture, content of the string "Nuclear Non Proliferation and Iran", hold by the steady representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran at the United Nations in Vienna, Ali Asghar Soltanieh, to whom the door is opened to an academic forum at the University of Vienna, in the location of the Small Hall. And the "Theatre in Josefstadt" opens it doors for a matinee, "for a culture of peace in a climate of fear" under the motive "women against terrorism". This event is organized by "Women Without Borders" who want to "open a dialogue to hear the voices of women, who are targets, victims, contemporary witnesses and activists of peace". For the opening, Austrian Chancellor Alfred Gusenbauer is announced. The organizers let open, if they see a target, a victim, a contemporary witness or more a activist of peace in Zeinab al Saffar. Anyway, they unveil her profession: She is the "young female face" of the weekly policy program 'In their Eyes', in Al Manar TV in Beirut , the media channel of Hezbollah. Now we may wonder what kind of cognition the organizers expect from a representative of an anti-Semitic terror organization in the fight against terrorism, and from a representative of the Iran apocalyptic regime on matters of real intentions of the leadership in Teheran...." (Continued originally in German, translated to English by the author).

There is almost nothing to add but one. Since the second Intifada, at least since the war in Lebanon in summer 2006, anti-Israeli (or hidden anti-Semitic) groups, who veil their selves by being "just for peace" or "for justice" and therefore "naturally pro-Palestinian", find more and more attention, more and more open doors in Austria. And the most disgusting fact is, that these open doors more and more lead to academic levels and to Austrian universities. It will be a main task for SPME-Austria to study and analyze this bundle of biased academic influence and to report on it.

Democracy in the Middle East

A "cultural cancer tumor" or a perspective? Of course, the West thinks to save the rest of the world by implanting the socialization form of western democracy as much as possible. All this with the right of proved success in the own range, but without clues about guaranteed success in transferring this model of western democracy on a very different, historic developed culture. In economic aspects, the success of democracy has a relative value and is to be seen in relation to the special region. Western democracy cannot limit its targets, selling itself as a new implantation into a closed cultural society only by promises of economic improvement.

Competition of values

Though in idealistic and immanent values like freedom, equality, self-determination and human rights, western democracy lacks of immediately comprehensible persuasiveness to compete successfully in a patriarchic, more and more religiously indoctrinated society with values of a paradise hereafter, the purity of Islam, the order of Sharia, the demureness, the honor of family, the honor of virginity (as a relevant economic property of the father) a. s. o. Whether with paradise rewarding, nor with the rights of free movement, undressing the Tshador, driving a car or making up, you can feed yourself here and now, were life for the poor, simple people is meager and only some few leaders fill their sacks unnoticed. This seems to be the main problem in imparting western democracy to the Middle East : with the standards of strict Koran teaching, western society must appear decadent. One doesn't immediately receive something real for adopting their values but only risks to lose the beautiful hereafter also.

The other side

By access from the fundamentalist's Islamic world, the rest of the world could only be saved by Islamization, which includes relinquishment of western democracy as an adequate form of society. The West is not understood as a "rescuer" from a need, which is barely realized because of the lack of local possibilities to compare with western standards or because these are disavowed by political-religious discrimination by media. In this sense, an implantation of western democracy into environs of an Islamic cultured area – as democracy has grown there historically only by and in Israel, and not only since 1948, but by the Zionist Movement since the former turn of the century and the several aliyot of Jews to (former) Palestine since 1886 – can be understood as a cultural source of friction, as an undesirable intruder, as a hindrance to the own claim to save the world.

Democracy and Islamism don't seem to be compatible.

Fear - a perspective

Israel 's fears of future, that any concession to the Palestinians - and may it go farer than acceptable - never would satisfy them enough to live in peace side by side, are real and justified. There is no sign from the still dominating and ruling fundamentalistic groups within the Palestinian Authority to refrain from terrorism, to refrain from their claim on "whole Palestine from the river to the sea" and to recognize the legacy of the State of Israel. Already in these days, former Minister of foreign affairs of the Palestinian Autonomy (PA), Machmoud A-Zahar of Hamas again has ruled out a recognition of Israel, Radio Israel reported. The Koran would prohibit such a recognition, said Zahar in an interview with a website belonging to Hamas. Additionally Hamas further on keeps a firm hold on the principle that whole Palestine is Moslem country, he explained. Zahar also asserted the Fatah-movement of Palestinian leader Machmoud Abbas would build up a new army and train soldiers in several Arab countries to eliminate Hamas. (Source: ICEJ-news service, International Christian Embassy Jerusalem, on 04/21/2007 ).

In the other hand, the Arab reception of Israel as an expanding economic and military power brings up many fears and also this is understandable. Democracy can only be a natural culture to people born in it. All the others have to learn democracy in a long process of experience, which surely grips far too late for today crisis and tensions. Democracy has no immediate receipts against fears. Democracy can only brake the spiral of fear, which both sides have in common, when it has become natural political culture on both sides of the conflict. For the long duration of this process, the yet democratic side has to protect itself against the other side. Often with stronger measures than democracy could be happy with.

Democracy in education, scholarship and media

In Europe , in Austria since 1978, political education more or less has become part of lessons in upper classes of schools. Since in several European countries exist ideas to novel national constitutions concerning the right of political voting for teenies aged 16, it seems necessary to start this education earlier. Of course, this must not give place to ideological indoctrination. The responsibility of teachers will grow in this point. The youth should receive insights in political, cultural and economical systems and their history, should recognize connections, correlations and coherences, judge critical and perform their own opinion. Their readiness to participate actively in political processes should be supported. Also different opinions should be announced to focus on the principle, that democracy allows for different ideas of values when they don't violate legal basic values.

This is my point. How could teachers teach their pupils such principles, when their own education at colleges and universities sometimes lacks of democratic basic values? Must a student simply have the luck to choose such lectures where he or she becomes less indoctrinated by biased scholars? Where are the "different opinions" in Middle East studies at Austrian universities? Does Israel bashing really meet democratic standards? How does it come that we find so many Israel bashers between scholars teaching at Austrian universities and institutes? And how does it come that a "critical, serious" newspaper, Der Standard (April 21/22, 2007, p. 27), broadly reports on the event with Zeinab al Saffar on this Sunday in Vienna and doesn't find any word of critical, reflective comment on her "values" as a political hardliner, saying "we don't see resistance against any form of occupation as terrorism" and , concerning suicide bombers, "I respect persons who take resort in this option. I understand what they feel" ….? And why can't we find a small sentence in the same newspaper, that Machmoud A-Zahar of Hamas again has ruled out a recognition of Israel ?

Also ignorance is democratic. And our western democracy, harnessed by media and opinion making institutions, still is better than totalitarian systems, where people can't even choose the institution or media by which they are harnessed.

European history, ideologies, democracy, education, scholarship, media, event culture…many thorns in Israel 's bosom.