domingo, 18 de março de 2012
IDF opposes the screening of Israeli documentary about West Bank legal system
18 March 2012, Haaretz הארץ (Israel)
The documentary film The Law in These Parts, critical of the IDF justice system in the territories, was not authorized to be screened for IDF soldiers.
By Nirit Anderman
The IDF Spokesperson's unit has recently forbidden the screening of an Israeli documentary film about the West Bank legal system before an Israeli Defense Forces unit.
The creators of the film, which critically examines Israel's legal system in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza, contacted senior officials within the IDF court system in attempts to screen the film before soldiers serving in military courts. The IDF Spokesperson's unit, however, thwarted the plan and forbade the screening.
The Law in These Parts, directed by Ra'anan Alexandrowicz, was first shown at the most recent Jerusalem Film Festival, and won the prize for best documentary. Two months ago, it competed in the prestigious Sundance Film Festival where it won the World Cinema Grand Jury Prize in Documentary.
In the film, Alexandrowicz interviews several Israeli lawmakers who were former senior officials in the military courts, in order to better understand the development of the Israeli legal system in the territories. Alexandrowicz attempts to understand the logic used by the people who created the legal system, and determine what are the ramifications of such a court system on the principles of law and justice in Israel.
A few months ago, the creators of the film contacted officers within the IDF courts and offered to screen The Law in These Parts for the judges in the military courts at the Ofer prison, located near Ramallah. The filmmakers also offered to hold and participate in a discussion of the film and its contents with the judges, as they have done at screenings in the past.
"Despite their disagreement with a large portion of the film's contents, the officials in the unit expressed interest in our offer," said producer Liran Atzmor. "However they told us that a screening of this type can only be done with permission from the Spokesperson's unit," he added. Despite the agreement between the filmmakers and the court officials to screen the film, the IDF Spokesperson's unit did not give permission to hold the screening. The event planned for the judges at the Ofer prison was cancelled but according to sources, a small screening, initiated by a few officers with a copy of the film provided by the filmmakers, was held for a few justice officials and the Military Advocate General.
Another incident of IDF opposition to the film arose nearly two months ago, when a professor at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem decided to show the film to his students. The professor, who preferred to remain anonymous, contacted the Military Advocate General to invite a representative to join the screening and participate in a discussion with the students. The professor's request was turned down, as the Military Advocate General's office had received "orders not to comment on this film."
In the end, an agreement was reached and the Military Advocate General sent a representative to discuss the issues presented in the film, however not as part of a screening of the film. The students saw the film a week later.
"We think that the film The Law in These Parts is very relevant to military history, and should very much interest the Military Advocate General," said Atzmor. The filmmakers were astonished that "the IDF Spokesperson's unit did not see fit to authorize the screening of the film, even in a closed setting for military officials, and refused to send a representative to an academic screening of the film."
At this point the film has been screened all over the country at more than 150 separate screenings, among them screenings for public defenders, State Attorney workers, members of the Council for Peace and Security, and law schools. Atzmon noted "that in two weeks, the film will be shown on television, which makes the attempt to keep the film under wraps that much stranger."
When asked for comment, the IDF Spokesperson's unit replied "In these matters, the IDF does not comment about the internal decision-making process to newspapers."
Read this article in Hebrew
Israeli documentary on West Bank legal system wins prestigious Sundance prize
Israël : au Beitar Jérusalem, on n’aime pas les Arabes
Association France Palestine Solidarité http://www.france-palestine.org (France)
Maxime Perez - Jeune Afrique, jeudi 15 mars 2012
Lié au courant ultranationaliste, le club de football Beitar Jérusalem continue de s’illustrer par le comportement ouvertement raciste de son public et de ses dirigeants.
Cette année risque d’être amère à plus d’un titre pour les fans du Beitar Jérusalem. Leur équipe fétiche est non seulement en train de rater sa saison sur le plan sportif, mais son ennemie jurée, la formation arabe israélienne de Bnei Sakhnine, pointe à la quatrième place du championnat, synonyme de qualification pour l’Europa League. Le comble de l’humiliation s’est produit le 4 février au Teddy Stadium, l’antre mythique des jaune et noir, redouté pour son ambiance infernale, où les joueurs originaires de Galilée ont infligé une correction au Beitar (0−3). Fous de rage, les ultras de Jérusalem ont entonné des chants racistes contre Sakhnine, puis caillassé l’autobus de l’équipe à la fin du match. Loin d’en être à leur coup d’essai, les Beitarim vouent une haine féroce aux Palestiniens d’Israël, soupçonnés d’être « une cinquième colonne à la solde des terroristes ». Pas une année ne passe sans qu’ils ne défraient la chronique par leurs propos anti-Arabes et un comportement violent dans les tribunes.
Historiquement proche de la droite nationaliste israélienne, le club de football du Beitar est lié au mouvement sioniste éponyme, fondé à Riga en 1923 et dirigé par Zeev Jabotinsky. Dans l’entre-deux-guerres, avant de rejoindre la Palestine, ses membres formaient des groupes d’autodéfense dans les grandes villes d’Europe de l’Est et faisaient le coup de poing. Une tradition maintenue jusqu’à aujourd’hui, en particulier lors des confrontations avec l’Hapoël Tel-Aviv, club affilié à la gauche israélienne et accusé de traîtrise pour avoir favorisé la coexistence sur la pelouse de Juifs et d’Arabes. Jusqu’à la mort du dictateur irakien Saddam Hussein, les supporteurs du Beitar n’hésitaient pas à scander : « Ya Saddam habibi, roudrou roudrou Tel-Aviv ! » (« Saddam, mon ami, lâche tes bombes sur Tel-Aviv »), allusion aux Scud qui frappèrent la métropole israélienne pendant la première guerre du Golfe. Les fans du Beitar s’en prennent aussi aux symboles de la paix. En novembre 2007, ils ont accueilli par un concert de sifflets la minute de silence en hommage à Itzhak Rabin. Des chants à la gloire d’Ygal Amir - l’assassin de l’ancien Premier ministre - ont résonné dans les travées du stade. L’incident a pro¬voqué un tollé général.
Interdiction de stade
Le Beitar est régulièrement épinglé par la Fédération israélienne de football. Pourtant, ni les matchs à huis clos, ni les pertes de points, ni les lourdes amendes infligées au club ne semblent avoir d’effet dissuasif sur ses supporteurs. La plupart sont des Mizrahim (« Orientaux »), issus des couches populaires séfarades, et ne jouissent pas d’une réputation d’enfants de choeur. En Israël, le Beitar Jérusalem est un club à part, le seul par exemple où l’hymne national est imposé avant chaque début de match. Autre particularité : l’interdiction formelle de recruter des joueurs arabes. En plus de soixante-quinze années d’existence, aucun responsable du club n’a trahi cette règle d’or, pas même l’entraîneur français Luis Fernandez, passé par le Beitar en 2005-2006. Gare à celui qui oserait la remettre en question. En novembre 2009, le capitaine de l’équipe, Aviram Baruchyan, a été contraint de s’excuser auprès des supporteurs pour avoir déclaré qu’il serait heureux d’accueillir un joueur arabe. « Le plus douloureux pour moi est d’avoir heurté les fans du Beitar, concéda-t-il à l’issue d’une réunion de réconciliation avec La Familia, les ultras du club. S’ils ne veulent pas d’Arabes dans l’équipe, il n’y en aura pas. »
Les dérives racistes du Beitar se banalisent dans un championnat où évoluent actuellement une cinquantaine de joueurs arabes israéliens. « Cette ségrégation doit cesser, s’insurge le journaliste de Haaretz Yoav Borowitz, favorable à un boycott du club. Que dirait-on si on empêchait des juifs de jouer dans le championnat de France ou d’Angleterre ? » D’autant qu’à Jérusalem la minorité arabe des quartiers est a dû récemment débourser 100 millions de shekels (20 millions d’euros) pour les travaux de rénovation du Teddy Stadium, en prévision de l’Euro Espoirs qu’Israël est supposé accueillir en juin 2013.
THE GLOBAL MARCH TO JERUSALEM (GMJ) – 30TH MARCH 2012
18 March 2012, Global March to Jerusalem http://www.globalmarchtojerusalem.org (Palestine)
The Global March to Jerusalem (GMJ) is a groundbreaking new initiative that is organising non-violent civil resistance on 30th March 2012 in Palestine and the four neighbouring countries: Egypt, Lebanon Jordan and Syria.
The GMJ is comprised of a diverse coalition of Palestinian, Arab and international activists who are united in the struggle to liberate the holy city of Jerusalem (the city of Peace) from illegal Zionist occupation.
The peaceful marchers will demand freedom for Jerusalem and its people. Our aim is to end the Zionist policies of apartheid, ethnic cleansing and Judaisation, which all harm the people, land and sanctity of Jerusalem. Judaisation has involved the unrestricted expansion and funding of illegal Israeli settlements, the continued dispossession and demolition of Palestinian property, and the construction of a Separation Wall surrounding the city, all of which have changed the demographics of the holy city from a Palestinian to a Jewish majority.
Global participation in the march will confirm to the world that these policies and practices of the racist state of Israel against Jerusalem and its people are a crime not only against Palestinians but against all humanity.
The march will unite the efforts of Palestinians, Arabs, Muslims, Christians, Jews, and all citizens of conscience in the world to put an end to Israel’s disregard for international law through the continuing occupation of Jerusalem and the rest of Palestinian land.
While the GMJ is made up of grassroots movements in each participating country, the march is centralized through an International Central Committee, consisting of 42 elected regional delegates. National delegates will appoint 15 members for the International Executive Committee and recruit hundreds of dignitaries and luminaries for the International Advisory Board.
Our plan is to organize massive marches towards Jerusalem, or to the nearest point possible according to the circumstances of each country, in Palestine (the 1948 seizures, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip) and the four neighbouring countries: Jordan, Egypt, Syria and Lebanon. Internationals will participate in land caravans or fly directly to one of the main sites for the march. In addition, mass protests will be organised in front of Israeli embassies in the capitals of different countries, or in the main public squares in the big cities of the world.
The recent successes of the Egyptian and Tunisian revolutions are a reminder that this inspirational movement for nonviolent civil resistance was actually born in Palestine with the first Intifada. By renewing the struggle to liberate Palestine through a peaceful national mass movement that is supported by the global community, we aim to change the nature of the confrontation by compelling the occupiers to face millions of demonstrators demanding Freedom for Palestine and its capital Jerusalem.
Marcha Mundial a Jerusalén (GMJ) – 30 de Marzo de 2012
La Marcha Global a Jerusalén es una iniciativa nueva e innovadora que está organizando una marcha pacífica y no violenta de resistencia civil para este 30 de marzo de 2012 en Palestina y en sus cuatro países vecinos: Egipto, Jordania, Líbano y Siria.
La GMJ se compone de una coalición de diversos activistas palestinos, árabes e internacionales que están unidos en la lucha para liberar la ciudad santa de Jerusalén (la ciudad de la Paz) a partir de la ilegal ocupación sionista.
Los manifestantes pacíficos demandan la liberación de Jerusalén y de su población nativa palestina. Nuestro objetivo es poner fin a las políticas sionistas de Apartheid, limpieza étnica y de judaización, como todo el daño a la gente, la tierra y a la santidad de Jerusalén. La judaización ha implicado la expansión sin restricciones y la financiación de asentamientos ilegales israelíes, el despojo continuado y la demolición de propiedades palestinas y la construcción de un muro de separación que rodea la ciudad, todos los cuales han cambiado la demografía de la ciudad santa de una mayoría palestina a una judía.
La participación en la Marcha Global a Jerusalén confirmará al mundo que estas políticas y prácticas del estado racista de Israel contra Jerusalén y su gente es un crimen no sólo contra los palestinos sino contra toda la humanidad.
La marcha unirá los esfuerzos de palestinos, árabes, musulmanes, cristianos, judíos y a todos los ciudadanos de conciencia en el mundo para poner fin al desprecio de Israel hacia el derecho internacional a través de la continua ocupación de Jerusalén y el resto del territorio palestino.
La GMJ se compone de movimientos de base en cada país participante, la marcha se centraliza a través de un Comité Central Internacional, que consta de 42 delegados regionales electos. Los delegados nacionales nombrará a 15 miembros para el Comité Ejecutivo Internacional y reclutará a cientos de dignatarios para el Consejo Asesor Internacional.
Nuestro plan consiste en organizar marchas masivas hacia Jerusalén, o al punto más cercano posible de acuerdo a las circunstancias de cada país, en Palestina (las fronteras de 1948, la Ribera Occidental y la Franja de Gaza) y sus cuatro países vecinos: Jordania, Egipto, Siria y el Líbano. Los activistas internacionales participarán en las caravanas por tierra o volarán directamente a uno de los principales lugares de interés para la marcha. Además, se organizarán protestas masivas frente a las embajadas israelíes en las capitales de diferentes países, o en las principales plazas públicas en las grandes ciudades del mundo.
Los éxitos recientes de las revoluciones de Egipto y Túnez son un recordatorio de que este movimiento de inspiración para la resistencia civil no violenta en realidad nació en Palestina con la primera Intifada, al renovar la lucha para la liberación de Palestina a través de un movimiento internacional pacífico de masas, que es apoyado por la comunidad internacional, nuestro objetivo es cambiar la naturaleza de la confrontación obligando a los ocupantes a hacer frente a millones de manifestantes exigiendo la liberación de Palestina y su capital Jerusalén.
Der Globale Marsch nach Jerusalem (GMJ) – 30. März 2012
Der globale Marsch nach Jerusalem (GMJ) ist eine bahnbrechende neue Initiative, die den gewaltfreien bürgerlichen Widerstand organisiert für den 30. März 2012 in Palästina und den Nachbarländern: Ägypten, Libanon, Jordanien und Syrien.
Der GMJ setzt sich zusammen aus einer breitgefächerten Koalition von Palästinensern, Arabern und internationalen Aktivisten, die geeint sich im Kampf zur Befreiung der heiligen Stadt Jerusalem (der Stadt des Friedens) von der illegalen zionistischen Besatzung.
Die friedlichen Demonstranten fordern Frieden für Jerusalem und seine Bewohner. Unser Ziel ist es, die zionistische Politik der Apartheit, ethnischen Säuberungen und Judaisierung zu beenden, die allesamt den Menschen und dem Land Schaden zufügen und die Unantastbarkeit von Jerusalem verletzen. Die Judaisierung hat die unbeschränkte Expansion und Gründung von illegalen israelischen Siedlungen mit sich gebracht, die fortgesetzte Enteignung und Zerstörung von palästinensischem Eigentum sowie den Bau einer Separationsmauer, die die Stadt einschließt; all dies hat den demographischen Wandel der heiligen Stadt von einer palästinensischen zu einer jüdischen Bevölkerungsmehrheit hervorgerufen.
Die globale Beteiligung an dem Marsch wird der Welt bestätigen, dass diese Politiken und Praktiken des rassistischen Staates Israel gegen Jerusalem und seine Bewohner nicht nur ein Verbrechen gegen die Palästinenser sind, sondern gegen die gesamte Menschheit.
Der Marsch wird die Bemühungen von Palästinensern, Arabern, Muslimen, Christen, Juden und allen Menschen mit Gewissen in der Welt einen, der Missachtung des Völkerrechts durch Israel mit seiner andauernden Besetzung von Jerusalem und dem übrigen palästinensischen Land ein Ende zu setzen.
Obgleich der GMJ sich in jedem der teilnehmenden Länder aus Bürgerinitiativen zusammensetzt, so wird er dennoch zentral geleitet durch ein internationales Zentralkomitee, das aus 42 gewählten Landesdelegierten besteht. Die nationalen Vertreter werden 15 Mitglieder für das internationale Exekutiv-Komitee ernennen und hunderte von Würdenträgern und bekannten Persönlichkeiten für den internationalen Beratungsausschuss anwerben.
Unser Plan besteht darin, massive Märsche nach Jerusalem oder zu dem nächst möglichen Punkt gemäß den Umständen der einzelnen Länder zu organisieren, in Palästina (den 1948 beschlagnahmten Gebieten, der Westbank und im Gaza-Streifen) sowie den vier Nachbarländern: Jordanien, Ägypten, Syrien und Libanon. Internationale Aktivisten werden an Landkarawanen teilnehmen oder direkt zu einem der Hauptschauplätze des Marsches fliegen. Zusätzlich werden Massenproteste vor den israelischen Botschaften in den Hauptstädten verschiedener Länder organisiert oder auf den wichtigsten öffentlichen Plätzen in den Großstädten der Welt.
Die jüngsten Erfolge der ägyptischen und tunesischen Revolution erinnern uns daran, dass diese inspirierende Bewegung für gewaltfreien zivilen Widerstand eigentlich in Palästina geboren wurde in Form der ersten Intifada. Bei der Wiederaufnahme des Kampfes zur Befreiung Palästinas durch eine friedvolle nationale Massenbewegung, die von der weltweiten Gemeinschaft unterstützt wird, wollen wir das Wesen der Konfrontation verändern, indem wir die Besatzer zwingen, Millionen von Demonstranten gegenüber zu stehen, die Freiheit für Palästina und seine Hauptstadt Jerusalem fordern.
The Global March to Jerusalem (GMJ) is a groundbreaking new initiative that is organising non-violent civil resistance on 30th March 2012 in Palestine and the four neighbouring countries: Egypt, Lebanon Jordan and Syria.
The GMJ is comprised of a diverse coalition of Palestinian, Arab and international activists who are united in the struggle to liberate the holy city of Jerusalem (the city of Peace) from illegal Zionist occupation.
The peaceful marchers will demand freedom for Jerusalem and its people. Our aim is to end the Zionist policies of apartheid, ethnic cleansing and Judaisation, which all harm the people, land and sanctity of Jerusalem. Judaisation has involved the unrestricted expansion and funding of illegal Israeli settlements, the continued dispossession and demolition of Palestinian property, and the construction of a Separation Wall surrounding the city, all of which have changed the demographics of the holy city from a Palestinian to a Jewish majority.
Global participation in the march will confirm to the world that these policies and practices of the racist state of Israel against Jerusalem and its people are a crime not only against Palestinians but against all humanity.
The march will unite the efforts of Palestinians, Arabs, Muslims, Christians, Jews, and all citizens of conscience in the world to put an end to Israel’s disregard for international law through the continuing occupation of Jerusalem and the rest of Palestinian land.
While the GMJ is made up of grassroots movements in each participating country, the march is centralized through an International Central Committee, consisting of 42 elected regional delegates. National delegates will appoint 15 members for the International Executive Committee and recruit hundreds of dignitaries and luminaries for the International Advisory Board.
Our plan is to organize massive marches towards Jerusalem, or to the nearest point possible according to the circumstances of each country, in Palestine (the 1948 seizures, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip) and the four neighbouring countries: Jordan, Egypt, Syria and Lebanon. Internationals will participate in land caravans or fly directly to one of the main sites for the march. In addition, mass protests will be organised in front of Israeli embassies in the capitals of different countries, or in the main public squares in the big cities of the world.
The recent successes of the Egyptian and Tunisian revolutions are a reminder that this inspirational movement for nonviolent civil resistance was actually born in Palestine with the first Intifada. By renewing the struggle to liberate Palestine through a peaceful national mass movement that is supported by the global community, we aim to change the nature of the confrontation by compelling the occupiers to face millions of demonstrators demanding Freedom for Palestine and its capital Jerusalem.
Marcha Mundial a Jerusalén (GMJ) – 30 de Marzo de 2012
La Marcha Global a Jerusalén es una iniciativa nueva e innovadora que está organizando una marcha pacífica y no violenta de resistencia civil para este 30 de marzo de 2012 en Palestina y en sus cuatro países vecinos: Egipto, Jordania, Líbano y Siria.
La GMJ se compone de una coalición de diversos activistas palestinos, árabes e internacionales que están unidos en la lucha para liberar la ciudad santa de Jerusalén (la ciudad de la Paz) a partir de la ilegal ocupación sionista.
Los manifestantes pacíficos demandan la liberación de Jerusalén y de su población nativa palestina. Nuestro objetivo es poner fin a las políticas sionistas de Apartheid, limpieza étnica y de judaización, como todo el daño a la gente, la tierra y a la santidad de Jerusalén. La judaización ha implicado la expansión sin restricciones y la financiación de asentamientos ilegales israelíes, el despojo continuado y la demolición de propiedades palestinas y la construcción de un muro de separación que rodea la ciudad, todos los cuales han cambiado la demografía de la ciudad santa de una mayoría palestina a una judía.
La participación en la Marcha Global a Jerusalén confirmará al mundo que estas políticas y prácticas del estado racista de Israel contra Jerusalén y su gente es un crimen no sólo contra los palestinos sino contra toda la humanidad.
La marcha unirá los esfuerzos de palestinos, árabes, musulmanes, cristianos, judíos y a todos los ciudadanos de conciencia en el mundo para poner fin al desprecio de Israel hacia el derecho internacional a través de la continua ocupación de Jerusalén y el resto del territorio palestino.
La GMJ se compone de movimientos de base en cada país participante, la marcha se centraliza a través de un Comité Central Internacional, que consta de 42 delegados regionales electos. Los delegados nacionales nombrará a 15 miembros para el Comité Ejecutivo Internacional y reclutará a cientos de dignatarios para el Consejo Asesor Internacional.
Nuestro plan consiste en organizar marchas masivas hacia Jerusalén, o al punto más cercano posible de acuerdo a las circunstancias de cada país, en Palestina (las fronteras de 1948, la Ribera Occidental y la Franja de Gaza) y sus cuatro países vecinos: Jordania, Egipto, Siria y el Líbano. Los activistas internacionales participarán en las caravanas por tierra o volarán directamente a uno de los principales lugares de interés para la marcha. Además, se organizarán protestas masivas frente a las embajadas israelíes en las capitales de diferentes países, o en las principales plazas públicas en las grandes ciudades del mundo.
Los éxitos recientes de las revoluciones de Egipto y Túnez son un recordatorio de que este movimiento de inspiración para la resistencia civil no violenta en realidad nació en Palestina con la primera Intifada, al renovar la lucha para la liberación de Palestina a través de un movimiento internacional pacífico de masas, que es apoyado por la comunidad internacional, nuestro objetivo es cambiar la naturaleza de la confrontación obligando a los ocupantes a hacer frente a millones de manifestantes exigiendo la liberación de Palestina y su capital Jerusalén.
Der Globale Marsch nach Jerusalem (GMJ) – 30. März 2012
Der globale Marsch nach Jerusalem (GMJ) ist eine bahnbrechende neue Initiative, die den gewaltfreien bürgerlichen Widerstand organisiert für den 30. März 2012 in Palästina und den Nachbarländern: Ägypten, Libanon, Jordanien und Syrien.
Der GMJ setzt sich zusammen aus einer breitgefächerten Koalition von Palästinensern, Arabern und internationalen Aktivisten, die geeint sich im Kampf zur Befreiung der heiligen Stadt Jerusalem (der Stadt des Friedens) von der illegalen zionistischen Besatzung.
Die friedlichen Demonstranten fordern Frieden für Jerusalem und seine Bewohner. Unser Ziel ist es, die zionistische Politik der Apartheit, ethnischen Säuberungen und Judaisierung zu beenden, die allesamt den Menschen und dem Land Schaden zufügen und die Unantastbarkeit von Jerusalem verletzen. Die Judaisierung hat die unbeschränkte Expansion und Gründung von illegalen israelischen Siedlungen mit sich gebracht, die fortgesetzte Enteignung und Zerstörung von palästinensischem Eigentum sowie den Bau einer Separationsmauer, die die Stadt einschließt; all dies hat den demographischen Wandel der heiligen Stadt von einer palästinensischen zu einer jüdischen Bevölkerungsmehrheit hervorgerufen.
Die globale Beteiligung an dem Marsch wird der Welt bestätigen, dass diese Politiken und Praktiken des rassistischen Staates Israel gegen Jerusalem und seine Bewohner nicht nur ein Verbrechen gegen die Palästinenser sind, sondern gegen die gesamte Menschheit.
Der Marsch wird die Bemühungen von Palästinensern, Arabern, Muslimen, Christen, Juden und allen Menschen mit Gewissen in der Welt einen, der Missachtung des Völkerrechts durch Israel mit seiner andauernden Besetzung von Jerusalem und dem übrigen palästinensischen Land ein Ende zu setzen.
Obgleich der GMJ sich in jedem der teilnehmenden Länder aus Bürgerinitiativen zusammensetzt, so wird er dennoch zentral geleitet durch ein internationales Zentralkomitee, das aus 42 gewählten Landesdelegierten besteht. Die nationalen Vertreter werden 15 Mitglieder für das internationale Exekutiv-Komitee ernennen und hunderte von Würdenträgern und bekannten Persönlichkeiten für den internationalen Beratungsausschuss anwerben.
Unser Plan besteht darin, massive Märsche nach Jerusalem oder zu dem nächst möglichen Punkt gemäß den Umständen der einzelnen Länder zu organisieren, in Palästina (den 1948 beschlagnahmten Gebieten, der Westbank und im Gaza-Streifen) sowie den vier Nachbarländern: Jordanien, Ägypten, Syrien und Libanon. Internationale Aktivisten werden an Landkarawanen teilnehmen oder direkt zu einem der Hauptschauplätze des Marsches fliegen. Zusätzlich werden Massenproteste vor den israelischen Botschaften in den Hauptstädten verschiedener Länder organisiert oder auf den wichtigsten öffentlichen Plätzen in den Großstädten der Welt.
Die jüngsten Erfolge der ägyptischen und tunesischen Revolution erinnern uns daran, dass diese inspirierende Bewegung für gewaltfreien zivilen Widerstand eigentlich in Palästina geboren wurde in Form der ersten Intifada. Bei der Wiederaufnahme des Kampfes zur Befreiung Palästinas durch eine friedvolle nationale Massenbewegung, die von der weltweiten Gemeinschaft unterstützt wird, wollen wir das Wesen der Konfrontation verändern, indem wir die Besatzer zwingen, Millionen von Demonstranten gegenüber zu stehen, die Freiheit für Palästina und seine Hauptstadt Jerusalem fordern.
terça-feira, 13 de março de 2012
ISRAËL N’ATTAQUERA PAS
13 mars 2012, Association France Palestine Solidarité http://www.france-palestine.org (France)
Uri Avnery אורי אבנרי
Israël n’attaquera pas l’Iran. Point. Les États-Unis n’attaqueront pas l’Iran. Point.
Les Etats-Unis n’attaqueront pas. Ni cette année, ni dans les années qui viennent. Pour une raison beaucoup plus importante que des considérations électorales ou des limites militaires. Les Etats-Unis n’attaqueront pas, parce qu’une attaque signifierait une catas¬trophe nationale pour eux-mêmes et un considérable désastre pour l’ensemble du monde.
“Si vous voulez comprendre la politique d’un pays, regarder la carte,” disait Napoléon. Quelques minutes après le déclenchement d’une attaque, l’Iran fermera le Détroit d’Hormuz, par lequel passe presque tout le pétrole exporté par l’Arabie Saoudite, les Émirats arabes unis, le Koweit, le Qatar, Barhein, l’Irak et l’Iran – 40% du pétrole mondial transporté par mer passe par le Détroit. Quelques minutes après cela, les prix du pétrole grimperont, doubleront, tripleront ou quadrupleront – et les économies américaine et mondiale s’effondreront.
Des questions aussi mineures ne traversent pas l’esprit des généraux, des commentateurs militaires et autres individus qui regardent le monde avec d’étroites œillères de “sécurité”.
Fermer le Détroit serait la plus facile des opérations militaires. Quelques missiles, lancés à partir de la mer ou de la terre, suffiraient. Pour le rouvrir, envoyer les puissants porte-avions de la Marine américaine ne serait pas suffisant. Les États-Unis devraient conquérir de grandes parties de l’Iran, afin de mettre le Détroit hors de portée des missiles iraniens. L’Iran est plus grand que l’Allemagne, la France, l’Espagne et l’Italie réunies. Ce serait une guerre longue, à peu près à l’échelle de la guerre du Vietnam.
Pour l’Iran, il n’y a aucune différence entre une attaque israélienne et une attaque américaine. Ils seraient traités exactement de la même façon. Dans les deux cas, les conséquences seront la fermeture du Détroit et une guerre à grande échelle.
Tout ceci est plus qu’assez pour que les États-Unis n’attaquent pas, et pour qu’ils interdisent à Israël d’attaquer.
Il s’est passé 56 ans depuis qu’Israël a fait la guerre sans en aviser les Américains et obtenir leur consentement. Quand Israël a fait cela en 1956, le président Eisenhower a effacé tous les résultats de la victoire, jusqu’au moindre détail. Avant la guerre des Six Jours et à la veille de la première guerre du Liban, le gouvernement d’Israël envoya des émissaires spéciaux à Washington pour s’assurer de leur consentement sans équivoque. Si cette fois il lançait une attaque contre la volonté des Américains, qui réapprovisionnerait les arsenaux des FID (forces israéliennes de défense) ? Qui protégerait les villes d’Israël qui seraient exposées à plusieurs dizaines de milliers de missiles de l’Iran et de ses alliés ? Sans parler de la vague d’antisémitisme dont on peut craindre l’explosion lorsque l’opinion publique américaine découvrira que c’est Israël, et Israël seul, qui leur apporte cette catastrophe nationale.
La pression économique et diplomatique américaine pourrait suffire pour arrêter la poursuite de la Bombe par les ayatollahs. Cela a fonctionné dans la Libye de Kadhafi et cela fonctionne aujourd’hui avec la Corée du Nord de Kim. Les Persans sont une nation de marchands et il est peut-être possible de trouver un accord avec eux.
Ceci est cependant discutable, car il y a quelques années les néoconservateurs à Washington s’engagèrent dans un débat désinvolte sur la possibilité d’occuper l’Iran – ce qui a certainement convaincu les Iraniens qu’ils devaient acquérir l’arme de dissuasion suprême. Qu’aurions-nous fait à leur place ? Ou plutôt, qu’avons-nous fait effectivement (selon des rapports étrangers, etc.) quand nous étions dans leur situation ?
Alors que va-t-il se passer ? Si aucun accord n’est trouvé, l’Iran développera des armes nucléaires. Ce n’est pas la fin du monde. Comme cela a été indiqué par certains de nos plus courageux chefs de la sécurité, ce n’est pas une menace existentielle. Nous vivrons dans une situation d’équilibre de la terreur. Comme l’Amérique et la Russie pendant la Guerre Froide. Comme l’Inde et le Pakistan aujourd’hui. Ce n’est pas agréable, mais ce n’est pas si terrible non plus.
L’Iran n’a jamais attaqué aucun autre pays depuis mille ans. Ahmadinejad parle comme un démagogue sauvage, mais la direction iranienne avance en réalité avec beaucoup de précaution. Israël ne menace aucun intérêt iranien. Un suicide national collectif n’est pas envisageable.
Le ministre de l’Education Gidéon Saar s’est vanté, et à juste titre, que Netanyahou avait détourné l’attention mondiale des Palestiniens vers le problème iranien. Un fantastique succès, vraiment. Obama lui a dit, en effet : OK, allez jouer avec les colonies autant que vous voulez, mais s’il vous plaît, laissez l’Iran aux adultes.
Uri Avnery אורי אבנרי
Israël n’attaquera pas l’Iran. Point. Les États-Unis n’attaqueront pas l’Iran. Point.
Les Etats-Unis n’attaqueront pas. Ni cette année, ni dans les années qui viennent. Pour une raison beaucoup plus importante que des considérations électorales ou des limites militaires. Les Etats-Unis n’attaqueront pas, parce qu’une attaque signifierait une catas¬trophe nationale pour eux-mêmes et un considérable désastre pour l’ensemble du monde.
“Si vous voulez comprendre la politique d’un pays, regarder la carte,” disait Napoléon. Quelques minutes après le déclenchement d’une attaque, l’Iran fermera le Détroit d’Hormuz, par lequel passe presque tout le pétrole exporté par l’Arabie Saoudite, les Émirats arabes unis, le Koweit, le Qatar, Barhein, l’Irak et l’Iran – 40% du pétrole mondial transporté par mer passe par le Détroit. Quelques minutes après cela, les prix du pétrole grimperont, doubleront, tripleront ou quadrupleront – et les économies américaine et mondiale s’effondreront.
Des questions aussi mineures ne traversent pas l’esprit des généraux, des commentateurs militaires et autres individus qui regardent le monde avec d’étroites œillères de “sécurité”.
Fermer le Détroit serait la plus facile des opérations militaires. Quelques missiles, lancés à partir de la mer ou de la terre, suffiraient. Pour le rouvrir, envoyer les puissants porte-avions de la Marine américaine ne serait pas suffisant. Les États-Unis devraient conquérir de grandes parties de l’Iran, afin de mettre le Détroit hors de portée des missiles iraniens. L’Iran est plus grand que l’Allemagne, la France, l’Espagne et l’Italie réunies. Ce serait une guerre longue, à peu près à l’échelle de la guerre du Vietnam.
Pour l’Iran, il n’y a aucune différence entre une attaque israélienne et une attaque américaine. Ils seraient traités exactement de la même façon. Dans les deux cas, les conséquences seront la fermeture du Détroit et une guerre à grande échelle.
Tout ceci est plus qu’assez pour que les États-Unis n’attaquent pas, et pour qu’ils interdisent à Israël d’attaquer.
Il s’est passé 56 ans depuis qu’Israël a fait la guerre sans en aviser les Américains et obtenir leur consentement. Quand Israël a fait cela en 1956, le président Eisenhower a effacé tous les résultats de la victoire, jusqu’au moindre détail. Avant la guerre des Six Jours et à la veille de la première guerre du Liban, le gouvernement d’Israël envoya des émissaires spéciaux à Washington pour s’assurer de leur consentement sans équivoque. Si cette fois il lançait une attaque contre la volonté des Américains, qui réapprovisionnerait les arsenaux des FID (forces israéliennes de défense) ? Qui protégerait les villes d’Israël qui seraient exposées à plusieurs dizaines de milliers de missiles de l’Iran et de ses alliés ? Sans parler de la vague d’antisémitisme dont on peut craindre l’explosion lorsque l’opinion publique américaine découvrira que c’est Israël, et Israël seul, qui leur apporte cette catastrophe nationale.
La pression économique et diplomatique américaine pourrait suffire pour arrêter la poursuite de la Bombe par les ayatollahs. Cela a fonctionné dans la Libye de Kadhafi et cela fonctionne aujourd’hui avec la Corée du Nord de Kim. Les Persans sont une nation de marchands et il est peut-être possible de trouver un accord avec eux.
Ceci est cependant discutable, car il y a quelques années les néoconservateurs à Washington s’engagèrent dans un débat désinvolte sur la possibilité d’occuper l’Iran – ce qui a certainement convaincu les Iraniens qu’ils devaient acquérir l’arme de dissuasion suprême. Qu’aurions-nous fait à leur place ? Ou plutôt, qu’avons-nous fait effectivement (selon des rapports étrangers, etc.) quand nous étions dans leur situation ?
Alors que va-t-il se passer ? Si aucun accord n’est trouvé, l’Iran développera des armes nucléaires. Ce n’est pas la fin du monde. Comme cela a été indiqué par certains de nos plus courageux chefs de la sécurité, ce n’est pas une menace existentielle. Nous vivrons dans une situation d’équilibre de la terreur. Comme l’Amérique et la Russie pendant la Guerre Froide. Comme l’Inde et le Pakistan aujourd’hui. Ce n’est pas agréable, mais ce n’est pas si terrible non plus.
L’Iran n’a jamais attaqué aucun autre pays depuis mille ans. Ahmadinejad parle comme un démagogue sauvage, mais la direction iranienne avance en réalité avec beaucoup de précaution. Israël ne menace aucun intérêt iranien. Un suicide national collectif n’est pas envisageable.
Le ministre de l’Education Gidéon Saar s’est vanté, et à juste titre, que Netanyahou avait détourné l’attention mondiale des Palestiniens vers le problème iranien. Un fantastique succès, vraiment. Obama lui a dit, en effet : OK, allez jouer avec les colonies autant que vous voulez, mais s’il vous plaît, laissez l’Iran aux adultes.
SUPREME LEADER’S SPEECH TO NUCLEAR SCIENTISTS
22 February 2012, Ayatollah Sayyid Ali Khamenei http://www.khamenei.ir (Iran)
The following is the full text of the speech delivered on February 22, 2012 by Ayatollah Khamenei the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution in a meeting with Iranian nuclear scientists in Tehran.
In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful
I am very happy to meet you dear people, the valuable brothers and sisters who are active in an arena of historic significance which is a source of national pride. We have said a lot of good things about you behind your backs and we truly respect you. And today is an opportunity to express our respect face to face. I am thankful to God. Of course, these are blessings from God. All these blessings are from the Creator. "And whatever favor is (bestowed) on you it is from Allah." [The Holy Quran, 16: 53] It is a divine blessing to have competent, intelligent, scholarly, innovative and motivated manpower. It is a blessing from God. I am grateful to you and I am also thankful to Allah the Exalted for blessing this nation and this system with your existence.
One point is that everybody who is rendering services in a particular area should be well aware of the value of his services. If he appreciates the value of his services, he will continue his work in the best possible way. But if he fails to do so, he will naturally abandon his duty. If a person who is guarding a particular place fails to appreciate the value of his work, he will naturally let down his guard and fall asleep. Therefore, the first point is that we should be aware of the significance of the work we are doing.
Now I would like to say a few things in this regard. There are many different aspects to your work. One aspect of your work is that it instilled a sense of national dignity into this nation and this country, which is very important. Nations face serious trouble only when they lose their dignity, when they serve foreigners for free and forget their own value. This shows the importance of dignity. An oppressed nation - such as the nations in North Africa and other places - rises up only when it feels its dignity has been trampled upon. Then it rises up and no power can stand in the way of such a nation. This has already happened. This shows the importance of dignity. The Revolution instilled a sense of dignity into our nation and our country. They tried to discourage our nation on many occasions. They tried to convince our people that they were incompetent. "Yes, you carried out a revolution, but you cannot run the country by yourselves. You cannot make progress. You cannot keep up with the world." Every scientific advance is a testimony to the competence of our nation. And your work in nuclear technology instilled a sense of dignity into this nation. This is one dimension of the significance of your work.
The value of such things cannot be measured with materialistic calculations. Of course, all these things are being measured with money in the materialistic world. All human values are finally reduced to money. And this is the affliction of the materialistic world and it will definitely bring materialistic people down. The truth is that there are certain things whose value cannot be measured with money. One may light-heartedly mention money just to make a comparison. I remember I had travelled to one of our provinces. One of the meetings that had been arranged was a meeting with our academics. It was a very enthusiastic meeting. One of the learned professors - whom I knew from before - delivered a speech at the meeting. A few people spoke at the meeting and this learned man was among them. In order to attract the attention of government officials and myself to the problems of the province, he mentioned the capacities that the province enjoyed. For example, he said that certain projects in the province were worth billions and that there was room for such and such investments. I told him that the things he mentioned were materialistic and that he himself was worth several billions more. A learned professor living in a city, in the capital city of a province - can this be compared with the materialistic advantages that the province enjoys? This is the value of ideas and outstanding personalities. You should know that the work you are doing is important.
Of course, as I said, your work has many different aspects. In their propaganda, they have been trying to say that the work on nuclear energy is ideologically motivated - that it has nothing to do with our national interests. This is while your work is directly related to our national interests. The work on nuclear energy is directly related to our national interests. The report that was presented by Dr. Abbasi explained certain aspects of the relationship between nuclear energy and our national interests. The work on nuclear energy is for the sake of the nation, the country and the future.
The arrogant powers of the world - which consider ruling the world as their right - refer to themselves as the global community. This is while they are not the global community. The global community consists of the people and their governments. There are a few countries that refer to themselves as the global community and they issue orders, speak, dismiss and demand on behalf of the global community. These countries have built their global hegemony on their monopoly on science and technology. Some of the uproar that they cause is because they do not want this monopoly to be broken. If the people manage to make progress in nuclear technology, in aerospace, in electronic areas and in different industrial, technological and scientific areas, there will no longer remain a way for them to maintain their bullying and coercive hegemony.
One of the biggest crimes that has been committed against humanity is that over the past two, three centuries - after the Industrial Revolution - knowledge has turned into a means for bullying. The English, who were among the pioneers of the Industrial Revolution, used their knowledge to shackle other nations around the world. Do you know what happened during the reign of the English in the vast and rich Indian subcontinent? And the events were not just limited to the Indian subcontinent. The whole of East Asia was under their boots for more than a century and they dominated the people of East Asia by using their knowledge as a tool. The people felt frustrated. Many people were killed. Many wishes were dashed. Many nations fell behind. Many countries were destroyed. This was how they used their knowledge. This is the biggest treachery to knowledge, just as it is the biggest treachery to humanity. They do not want this monopoly to be broken. Any nation that manages to stand on its own feet independently - and not with their permission and approval and under their yoke - will contribute to undermining this monopoly. Fortunately, this work has already started in Iran.
You should pursue this important field and this essential and great work in an absolutely serious way. Rely on Allah, and Allah the Exalted will help you. There are human and natural capacities. Fortunately, today there are political capacities as well. Sometimes there might be human and natural capacities, but political capacities might be lacking in a country: the hegemony of the enemy does not let such a country breathe and utilize its human and natural capacities. The Revolution took place and created these political capacities. You can - and you must - move forward.
The purpose of the uproar they cause is to stop us. They know that we are not after nuclear weapons. They already know this. I do not have any doubts that in the countries that are opposed to us, the organizations in charge of decision-making are fully aware that we are not after nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons are not at all beneficial to us. Moreover, from an ideological and fiqhi perspective, we consider developing nuclear weapons as unlawful. We consider using such weapons as a big sin. We also believe that keeping such weapons is futile and dangerous, and we will never go after them. They know this, but they stress the issue in order to stop our movement.
We want to prove to the world that nuclear weapons do not bring about power. This is because the nuclear powers are suffering from the biggest problems today. They dominated the world through nuclear threats, but today such threats are no longer effective. We want to say that we are not after nuclear weapons, that we do not believe nuclear weapons bring about power and that we can break the kind of power that is based on nuclear weapons. By Allah's favor, our nation will do this.
Of course, you know that the pressure they exert on us - the pressure of sanctions, threats, assassinations and other such things - is a sign of their weakness. It shows that whatever they do will only strengthen our nation. Their actions will only convince our people that they have chosen the right goal and that their movement is continuing in an appropriate way. As a result, the enemy has been infuriated.
This movement is not just a nuclear movement. Today their pretext is the nuclear issue. They use the nuclear pretext to impose sanctions on us. How long is it since the nuclear issue was first brought up? The sanctions have been there for thirty years. Why were they imposing sanctions on us when the nuclear issue did not exist? It is just a matter of fighting a nation that has decided to become independent, a nation that has decided to resist oppression, a nation that has decided to expose oppression, a nation that has decided to stand up against oppressors and oppression, a nation that is determined to convey this message to the entire world. We have tried to convey this message and by Allah's favor, we will try even harder in the future. Sanctions, political pressure and other such things will not be effective. When a nation decides to stand firm, when a nation believes in divine assistance and its domestic power and capacities, nothing can stand in its way.
This is my advice: strengthen your resolve. Increase the motivation to continue this path in your organization and among the people who have taken on this important responsibility. Your work is significant. Your work is important and by Allah's favor, it will determine the future of this country. The issue is not that we will be able to use the nuclear industry to promote our national interests. The issue is that this movement strengthens the resolve of our youth, our scientists and our people, and it makes them steadfast on their path. This is an important point. Keeping our people steadfast and motivated is more important than the direct rewards of the nuclear industry. You are active in this arena and God willing, Allah the Exalted will help you.
We will pray for you. We will definitely help and support you whenever necessary. We believe that by Allah's favor, you will move forward and remove the obstacles from your path one after the other. By Allah's favor, your future will be far better than your present.
Greetings be upon you and Allah's mercy and blessings
The following is the full text of the speech delivered on February 22, 2012 by Ayatollah Khamenei the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution in a meeting with Iranian nuclear scientists in Tehran.
In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful
I am very happy to meet you dear people, the valuable brothers and sisters who are active in an arena of historic significance which is a source of national pride. We have said a lot of good things about you behind your backs and we truly respect you. And today is an opportunity to express our respect face to face. I am thankful to God. Of course, these are blessings from God. All these blessings are from the Creator. "And whatever favor is (bestowed) on you it is from Allah." [The Holy Quran, 16: 53] It is a divine blessing to have competent, intelligent, scholarly, innovative and motivated manpower. It is a blessing from God. I am grateful to you and I am also thankful to Allah the Exalted for blessing this nation and this system with your existence.
One point is that everybody who is rendering services in a particular area should be well aware of the value of his services. If he appreciates the value of his services, he will continue his work in the best possible way. But if he fails to do so, he will naturally abandon his duty. If a person who is guarding a particular place fails to appreciate the value of his work, he will naturally let down his guard and fall asleep. Therefore, the first point is that we should be aware of the significance of the work we are doing.
Now I would like to say a few things in this regard. There are many different aspects to your work. One aspect of your work is that it instilled a sense of national dignity into this nation and this country, which is very important. Nations face serious trouble only when they lose their dignity, when they serve foreigners for free and forget their own value. This shows the importance of dignity. An oppressed nation - such as the nations in North Africa and other places - rises up only when it feels its dignity has been trampled upon. Then it rises up and no power can stand in the way of such a nation. This has already happened. This shows the importance of dignity. The Revolution instilled a sense of dignity into our nation and our country. They tried to discourage our nation on many occasions. They tried to convince our people that they were incompetent. "Yes, you carried out a revolution, but you cannot run the country by yourselves. You cannot make progress. You cannot keep up with the world." Every scientific advance is a testimony to the competence of our nation. And your work in nuclear technology instilled a sense of dignity into this nation. This is one dimension of the significance of your work.
The value of such things cannot be measured with materialistic calculations. Of course, all these things are being measured with money in the materialistic world. All human values are finally reduced to money. And this is the affliction of the materialistic world and it will definitely bring materialistic people down. The truth is that there are certain things whose value cannot be measured with money. One may light-heartedly mention money just to make a comparison. I remember I had travelled to one of our provinces. One of the meetings that had been arranged was a meeting with our academics. It was a very enthusiastic meeting. One of the learned professors - whom I knew from before - delivered a speech at the meeting. A few people spoke at the meeting and this learned man was among them. In order to attract the attention of government officials and myself to the problems of the province, he mentioned the capacities that the province enjoyed. For example, he said that certain projects in the province were worth billions and that there was room for such and such investments. I told him that the things he mentioned were materialistic and that he himself was worth several billions more. A learned professor living in a city, in the capital city of a province - can this be compared with the materialistic advantages that the province enjoys? This is the value of ideas and outstanding personalities. You should know that the work you are doing is important.
Of course, as I said, your work has many different aspects. In their propaganda, they have been trying to say that the work on nuclear energy is ideologically motivated - that it has nothing to do with our national interests. This is while your work is directly related to our national interests. The work on nuclear energy is directly related to our national interests. The report that was presented by Dr. Abbasi explained certain aspects of the relationship between nuclear energy and our national interests. The work on nuclear energy is for the sake of the nation, the country and the future.
The arrogant powers of the world - which consider ruling the world as their right - refer to themselves as the global community. This is while they are not the global community. The global community consists of the people and their governments. There are a few countries that refer to themselves as the global community and they issue orders, speak, dismiss and demand on behalf of the global community. These countries have built their global hegemony on their monopoly on science and technology. Some of the uproar that they cause is because they do not want this monopoly to be broken. If the people manage to make progress in nuclear technology, in aerospace, in electronic areas and in different industrial, technological and scientific areas, there will no longer remain a way for them to maintain their bullying and coercive hegemony.
One of the biggest crimes that has been committed against humanity is that over the past two, three centuries - after the Industrial Revolution - knowledge has turned into a means for bullying. The English, who were among the pioneers of the Industrial Revolution, used their knowledge to shackle other nations around the world. Do you know what happened during the reign of the English in the vast and rich Indian subcontinent? And the events were not just limited to the Indian subcontinent. The whole of East Asia was under their boots for more than a century and they dominated the people of East Asia by using their knowledge as a tool. The people felt frustrated. Many people were killed. Many wishes were dashed. Many nations fell behind. Many countries were destroyed. This was how they used their knowledge. This is the biggest treachery to knowledge, just as it is the biggest treachery to humanity. They do not want this monopoly to be broken. Any nation that manages to stand on its own feet independently - and not with their permission and approval and under their yoke - will contribute to undermining this monopoly. Fortunately, this work has already started in Iran.
You should pursue this important field and this essential and great work in an absolutely serious way. Rely on Allah, and Allah the Exalted will help you. There are human and natural capacities. Fortunately, today there are political capacities as well. Sometimes there might be human and natural capacities, but political capacities might be lacking in a country: the hegemony of the enemy does not let such a country breathe and utilize its human and natural capacities. The Revolution took place and created these political capacities. You can - and you must - move forward.
The purpose of the uproar they cause is to stop us. They know that we are not after nuclear weapons. They already know this. I do not have any doubts that in the countries that are opposed to us, the organizations in charge of decision-making are fully aware that we are not after nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons are not at all beneficial to us. Moreover, from an ideological and fiqhi perspective, we consider developing nuclear weapons as unlawful. We consider using such weapons as a big sin. We also believe that keeping such weapons is futile and dangerous, and we will never go after them. They know this, but they stress the issue in order to stop our movement.
We want to prove to the world that nuclear weapons do not bring about power. This is because the nuclear powers are suffering from the biggest problems today. They dominated the world through nuclear threats, but today such threats are no longer effective. We want to say that we are not after nuclear weapons, that we do not believe nuclear weapons bring about power and that we can break the kind of power that is based on nuclear weapons. By Allah's favor, our nation will do this.
Of course, you know that the pressure they exert on us - the pressure of sanctions, threats, assassinations and other such things - is a sign of their weakness. It shows that whatever they do will only strengthen our nation. Their actions will only convince our people that they have chosen the right goal and that their movement is continuing in an appropriate way. As a result, the enemy has been infuriated.
This movement is not just a nuclear movement. Today their pretext is the nuclear issue. They use the nuclear pretext to impose sanctions on us. How long is it since the nuclear issue was first brought up? The sanctions have been there for thirty years. Why were they imposing sanctions on us when the nuclear issue did not exist? It is just a matter of fighting a nation that has decided to become independent, a nation that has decided to resist oppression, a nation that has decided to expose oppression, a nation that has decided to stand up against oppressors and oppression, a nation that is determined to convey this message to the entire world. We have tried to convey this message and by Allah's favor, we will try even harder in the future. Sanctions, political pressure and other such things will not be effective. When a nation decides to stand firm, when a nation believes in divine assistance and its domestic power and capacities, nothing can stand in its way.
This is my advice: strengthen your resolve. Increase the motivation to continue this path in your organization and among the people who have taken on this important responsibility. Your work is significant. Your work is important and by Allah's favor, it will determine the future of this country. The issue is not that we will be able to use the nuclear industry to promote our national interests. The issue is that this movement strengthens the resolve of our youth, our scientists and our people, and it makes them steadfast on their path. This is an important point. Keeping our people steadfast and motivated is more important than the direct rewards of the nuclear industry. You are active in this arena and God willing, Allah the Exalted will help you.
We will pray for you. We will definitely help and support you whenever necessary. We believe that by Allah's favor, you will move forward and remove the obstacles from your path one after the other. By Allah's favor, your future will be far better than your present.
Greetings be upon you and Allah's mercy and blessings
¿QUÉ INTENCIONES TIENE IRÁN?
3 marzo 2012, La Jornada http://www.jornada.unam.mx (México)
Noam Chomsky*
l número de enero-febrero de la revista Foreign Affairs ofrece un artículo de Matthew Kroenig titulado Tiempo de atacar a Irán; por qué un ataque es la opción menos mala, junto con comentarios sobre otras formas de contener la amenaza iraní.
Los medios resonaron con advertencias sobre un posible ataque israelí contra Irán mientras Estados Unidos vacilaba, manteniendo abierta la opción de la agresión, con lo que sistemáticamente se viola la carta de Naciones Unidas, fundamento del derecho internacional.
Conforme aumentan las tensiones, los escalofriantes ecos de los preparativos para las guerras de Afganistán e Irak están en el aire. La febril retórica de la campaña de las elecciones primarias en Estados Unidos refuerza el resonar de los tambores de guerra.
Se le suelen atribuir a la comunidad internacional –nombre clave de los aliados de Estados Unidos– las preocupaciones por la inminente amenaza de Irán. Los pueblos del mundo, sin embargo, tienden a ver las cosas de otra manera.
Los países no alineados, movimiento de 120 naciones, han apoyado vigorosamente el derecho de Irán a enriquecer uranio, opinión que compartían la mayoría de los estadunidenses (encuestados por WorldPublicOpinion.org) antes de la inmensa ofensiva propagandística lanzada hace dos años.
China y Rusia se oponen a la política de Estados Unidos en Irán, como también India, que anunció que no acataría las sanciones estadunidenses y aumentaría el volumen de su comercio con Irán. Turquía ha seguido una línea similar.
Los europeos consideran a Israel como la mayor amenaza a la paz mundial. En el mundo árabe, Irán no es del agrado de nadie pero sólo una minoría muy pequeña lo considera una amenaza. Más bien, se calcula que Israel y Estados Unidos son las amenazas preminentes. La mayoría piensa que la región sería más segura si Irán tuviera armas nucleares. En Egipto, en vísperas de la primavera árabe, 90 por ciento tenía esta opinión, de acuerdo con encuestas de la Institución Brookings y Zogby International.
Los comentaristas occidentales han hablado mucho de que los dictadores árabes supuestamente apoyan la posición estadunidense sobre Irán, mientras pasan por alto el hecho de que la gran mayoría de la población está en contra, postura tan reveladora que no necesita comentarios.
En Estados Unidos, algunos observadores también han expresado desde hace tiempo sus preocupaciones por el arsenal nuclear de Israel. El general Lee Butler, ex jefe del comando estratégico de Estados Unidos, declaró que las armas nucleares de Israel eran peligrosas en extremo.
En una publicación del ejército de Estados Unidos, el teniente coronel Warner Farr advirtió que “un objetivo de las armas nucleares israelíes, que no suele decirse pero que es obvio, es ‘utilizarlas’ en Estados Unidos”, presuntamente para asegurar un apoyo continuo de Washington a las políticas israelíes.
Una preocupación primordial en estos momentos es que Israel trate de provocar alguna acción de Irán, que a su vez incitara un ataque de Estados Unidos.
Uno de los principales analistas estratégicos de Israel, Zeev Maoz, en Defensa de Tierra Santa, un análisis exhaustivo de la política de seguridad y exterior de Israel, llega a la conclusión de que el saldo de la política nuclear de Israel es decididamente negativo, dañino para la seguridad del Estado. Él más bien insta a Israel a buscar un tratado regional de proscripción de armas de destrucción masiva y crear una zona libre de ellas, como lo pedía ya en 1974 una resolución de la Asamblea General de Naciones Unidas.
En tanto, las sanciones de Occidente contra irán ya están teniendo los efectos acostumbrados, causando escasez de alimentos básicos, no para el clero gobernante sino para la población. No es de extrañar que la valerosa oposición iraní también condene las sanciones.
Las sanciones contra Irán podrían tener el mismo efecto que sus predecesoras contra Irak, que fueron condenadas por genocidas por los respetables diplomáticos de Naciones Unidas que las administraban y que finalmente renunciaron como una forma de protesta.
En Irak, las sanciones devastaron a la población y reforzaron a Saddam Hussein, con lo que probablemente le evitaron la suerte corrida por la galería de otros tiranos apoyados por Estados Unidos y Gran Bretaña, dictadores que prosperaron prácticamente hasta el día en que varias revueltas internas los derrocaron.
Existe una discusión poco creíble sobre lo que constituye exactamente la amenaza iraní, aunque tenemos una respuesta autorizada, proporcionada por las fuerzas armadas y los servicios secretos de Estados Unidos. Sus presentaciones ante el Congreso han dejado en claro que Irán no representa ninguna amenaza militar.
Irán tiene una capacidad muy limitada de desplegar sus fuerzas y su doctrina estratégica es defensiva, destinada a disuadir una invasión el tiempo necesario para que la diplomacia haga sentir sus efectos. Si Irán está desarrollando armas nucleares (lo cual todavía no está determinado), eso sería parte de su estrategia de disuasión.
El concepto que tienen los analistas israelíes y estadunidenses serios es expresado claramente por Bruce Riedel, veterano con 30 años de antigüedad en la CIA, quien en enero declaró que si yo fuera un asesor de seguridad nacional iraní, querría tener armas nucleares como factor de disuasión.
Otra acusación que Occidente presenta contra Irán es que la república islámica está tratando de ampliar su influencia en los países vecinos, atacados y ocupados por Estados Unidos y Gran Bretaña, y que apoya la resistencia a la agresión israelí en Líbano y a la ocupación ilegal de territorios palestinos, que cuentan con el apoyo de Estados Unidos. Al igual que su estrategia de disuasión de posibles actos de violencia por parte de países occidentales, se dice que las acciones de Irán son amenazas intolerables para el orden global.
La opinión mundial concuerda con Maoz. Es abrumador el apoyo a la idea de establecer una zona libre de armas de destrucción masiva en el Medio Oriente. Esa zona abarcaría Irán, Israel y, de preferencia, a esas otras dos potencias nucleares que se han negado a ingresar en el tratado de no proliferación nuclear, Pakistán e India, países que, al igual que Israel, desarrollaron sus respectivos programas con ayuda estadunidense.
El apoyo a esta política en la conferencia de revisión del tratado de no proliferación nuclear, en mayo de 2010, fue tan fuerte que Washington se vio obligado a aceptarla formalmente, pero con condiciones: la zona no entraría en efecto antes de lograr un arreglo de paz entre Israel y sus vecinos árabes; el programa de armas nucleares de Israel estaría exento de las inspecciones internacionales; y ningún país (entiéndase Estados Unidos) podría ser obligado a proporcionar información sobre las instalaciones y las actividades nucleares israelíes, ni información relativa a transferencias anteriores de tecnología nuclear a Israel.
En la conferencia de 2010 se convocó a una sesión para mayo de 2012, para avanzar en el establecimiento de la zona libre de armas de destrucción masiva en Medio Oriente.
Sin embargo, con toda la alharaca en torno de Irán, hay muy poca atención a esa opción, que sería la forma más constructiva de manejar las amenazas nucleares en la región: para la comunidad internacional, la amenaza de que Irán alcance la capacidad nuclear; para la mayor parte del mundo, la amenaza planteada por el único Estado de la región que tiene armas nucleares y un largo historial de agresiones y la superpotencia que lo patrocina.
No se puede encontrar ninguna mención al hecho de que Estados Unidos y Gran Bretaña tienen una responsabilidad única de dedicar sus esfuerzos a esa meta. Al tratar de darle una tenue cobertura legal a su invasión de Irak, esos países invocaron la resolución 687 de Naciones Unidas (1991), diciendo que Irak la estaba violando por construir armas de destrucción masiva.
Podemos pasar por alto esa declaración, pero no el hecho de que la resolución explícitamente compromete a los países signatarios a establecer una zona libre de armas de destrucción masiva en el Medio Oriente.
El libro más reciente de Noam Chomsky es Making the Future: Occupations, Interventions, Empire and Resistance, recopilación de sus artículos para The New York Times Syndicate.
* Chomsky es profesor emérito de Lingüística y Filosofía en el Instituto de Tecnología de Massachusetts, en Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Noam Chomsky*
l número de enero-febrero de la revista Foreign Affairs ofrece un artículo de Matthew Kroenig titulado Tiempo de atacar a Irán; por qué un ataque es la opción menos mala, junto con comentarios sobre otras formas de contener la amenaza iraní.
Los medios resonaron con advertencias sobre un posible ataque israelí contra Irán mientras Estados Unidos vacilaba, manteniendo abierta la opción de la agresión, con lo que sistemáticamente se viola la carta de Naciones Unidas, fundamento del derecho internacional.
Conforme aumentan las tensiones, los escalofriantes ecos de los preparativos para las guerras de Afganistán e Irak están en el aire. La febril retórica de la campaña de las elecciones primarias en Estados Unidos refuerza el resonar de los tambores de guerra.
Se le suelen atribuir a la comunidad internacional –nombre clave de los aliados de Estados Unidos– las preocupaciones por la inminente amenaza de Irán. Los pueblos del mundo, sin embargo, tienden a ver las cosas de otra manera.
Los países no alineados, movimiento de 120 naciones, han apoyado vigorosamente el derecho de Irán a enriquecer uranio, opinión que compartían la mayoría de los estadunidenses (encuestados por WorldPublicOpinion.org) antes de la inmensa ofensiva propagandística lanzada hace dos años.
China y Rusia se oponen a la política de Estados Unidos en Irán, como también India, que anunció que no acataría las sanciones estadunidenses y aumentaría el volumen de su comercio con Irán. Turquía ha seguido una línea similar.
Los europeos consideran a Israel como la mayor amenaza a la paz mundial. En el mundo árabe, Irán no es del agrado de nadie pero sólo una minoría muy pequeña lo considera una amenaza. Más bien, se calcula que Israel y Estados Unidos son las amenazas preminentes. La mayoría piensa que la región sería más segura si Irán tuviera armas nucleares. En Egipto, en vísperas de la primavera árabe, 90 por ciento tenía esta opinión, de acuerdo con encuestas de la Institución Brookings y Zogby International.
Los comentaristas occidentales han hablado mucho de que los dictadores árabes supuestamente apoyan la posición estadunidense sobre Irán, mientras pasan por alto el hecho de que la gran mayoría de la población está en contra, postura tan reveladora que no necesita comentarios.
En Estados Unidos, algunos observadores también han expresado desde hace tiempo sus preocupaciones por el arsenal nuclear de Israel. El general Lee Butler, ex jefe del comando estratégico de Estados Unidos, declaró que las armas nucleares de Israel eran peligrosas en extremo.
En una publicación del ejército de Estados Unidos, el teniente coronel Warner Farr advirtió que “un objetivo de las armas nucleares israelíes, que no suele decirse pero que es obvio, es ‘utilizarlas’ en Estados Unidos”, presuntamente para asegurar un apoyo continuo de Washington a las políticas israelíes.
Una preocupación primordial en estos momentos es que Israel trate de provocar alguna acción de Irán, que a su vez incitara un ataque de Estados Unidos.
Uno de los principales analistas estratégicos de Israel, Zeev Maoz, en Defensa de Tierra Santa, un análisis exhaustivo de la política de seguridad y exterior de Israel, llega a la conclusión de que el saldo de la política nuclear de Israel es decididamente negativo, dañino para la seguridad del Estado. Él más bien insta a Israel a buscar un tratado regional de proscripción de armas de destrucción masiva y crear una zona libre de ellas, como lo pedía ya en 1974 una resolución de la Asamblea General de Naciones Unidas.
En tanto, las sanciones de Occidente contra irán ya están teniendo los efectos acostumbrados, causando escasez de alimentos básicos, no para el clero gobernante sino para la población. No es de extrañar que la valerosa oposición iraní también condene las sanciones.
Las sanciones contra Irán podrían tener el mismo efecto que sus predecesoras contra Irak, que fueron condenadas por genocidas por los respetables diplomáticos de Naciones Unidas que las administraban y que finalmente renunciaron como una forma de protesta.
En Irak, las sanciones devastaron a la población y reforzaron a Saddam Hussein, con lo que probablemente le evitaron la suerte corrida por la galería de otros tiranos apoyados por Estados Unidos y Gran Bretaña, dictadores que prosperaron prácticamente hasta el día en que varias revueltas internas los derrocaron.
Existe una discusión poco creíble sobre lo que constituye exactamente la amenaza iraní, aunque tenemos una respuesta autorizada, proporcionada por las fuerzas armadas y los servicios secretos de Estados Unidos. Sus presentaciones ante el Congreso han dejado en claro que Irán no representa ninguna amenaza militar.
Irán tiene una capacidad muy limitada de desplegar sus fuerzas y su doctrina estratégica es defensiva, destinada a disuadir una invasión el tiempo necesario para que la diplomacia haga sentir sus efectos. Si Irán está desarrollando armas nucleares (lo cual todavía no está determinado), eso sería parte de su estrategia de disuasión.
El concepto que tienen los analistas israelíes y estadunidenses serios es expresado claramente por Bruce Riedel, veterano con 30 años de antigüedad en la CIA, quien en enero declaró que si yo fuera un asesor de seguridad nacional iraní, querría tener armas nucleares como factor de disuasión.
Otra acusación que Occidente presenta contra Irán es que la república islámica está tratando de ampliar su influencia en los países vecinos, atacados y ocupados por Estados Unidos y Gran Bretaña, y que apoya la resistencia a la agresión israelí en Líbano y a la ocupación ilegal de territorios palestinos, que cuentan con el apoyo de Estados Unidos. Al igual que su estrategia de disuasión de posibles actos de violencia por parte de países occidentales, se dice que las acciones de Irán son amenazas intolerables para el orden global.
La opinión mundial concuerda con Maoz. Es abrumador el apoyo a la idea de establecer una zona libre de armas de destrucción masiva en el Medio Oriente. Esa zona abarcaría Irán, Israel y, de preferencia, a esas otras dos potencias nucleares que se han negado a ingresar en el tratado de no proliferación nuclear, Pakistán e India, países que, al igual que Israel, desarrollaron sus respectivos programas con ayuda estadunidense.
El apoyo a esta política en la conferencia de revisión del tratado de no proliferación nuclear, en mayo de 2010, fue tan fuerte que Washington se vio obligado a aceptarla formalmente, pero con condiciones: la zona no entraría en efecto antes de lograr un arreglo de paz entre Israel y sus vecinos árabes; el programa de armas nucleares de Israel estaría exento de las inspecciones internacionales; y ningún país (entiéndase Estados Unidos) podría ser obligado a proporcionar información sobre las instalaciones y las actividades nucleares israelíes, ni información relativa a transferencias anteriores de tecnología nuclear a Israel.
En la conferencia de 2010 se convocó a una sesión para mayo de 2012, para avanzar en el establecimiento de la zona libre de armas de destrucción masiva en Medio Oriente.
Sin embargo, con toda la alharaca en torno de Irán, hay muy poca atención a esa opción, que sería la forma más constructiva de manejar las amenazas nucleares en la región: para la comunidad internacional, la amenaza de que Irán alcance la capacidad nuclear; para la mayor parte del mundo, la amenaza planteada por el único Estado de la región que tiene armas nucleares y un largo historial de agresiones y la superpotencia que lo patrocina.
No se puede encontrar ninguna mención al hecho de que Estados Unidos y Gran Bretaña tienen una responsabilidad única de dedicar sus esfuerzos a esa meta. Al tratar de darle una tenue cobertura legal a su invasión de Irak, esos países invocaron la resolución 687 de Naciones Unidas (1991), diciendo que Irak la estaba violando por construir armas de destrucción masiva.
Podemos pasar por alto esa declaración, pero no el hecho de que la resolución explícitamente compromete a los países signatarios a establecer una zona libre de armas de destrucción masiva en el Medio Oriente.
El libro más reciente de Noam Chomsky es Making the Future: Occupations, Interventions, Empire and Resistance, recopilación de sus artículos para The New York Times Syndicate.
* Chomsky es profesor emérito de Lingüística y Filosofía en el Instituto de Tecnología de Massachusetts, en Cambridge, Massachusetts.
domingo, 11 de março de 2012
U.S. WON'T SAVE ISRAEL FROM HANGING ITSELF
11 March 2012, Haaretz הארץ (Israel)
The 'peace camp' has melted like ice after relying for years on strange mantras such as 'the Americans are opposed to the settlements,' 'the administration will initiate a peace plan,' and of course, 'the Israeli right is irritating our greatest friend in the West.'
By Yitzhak Laor
The two representatives of the region's vassal made a pilgrimage to the American capital to give President Barack Obama the two ends of the rope we're supposed to hang ourselves with - not all of us, not right away, not only us. First President Shimon Peres arrived as the representative of the "peace camp," and was followed immediately by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
The "peace camp" has melted like ice after relying for years on strange mantras such as "the Americans are opposed to the settlements," "the administration will initiate a peace plan," and of course, "the Israeli right is irritating our greatest friend in the West." That was a baseless platform that eventually led to the peace camp's demise. You can't spend night and day making vain prophesies and recruiting supporters to the struggle. Peace Now, Meretz and the Labor Party relied on the best-quality hashish of "the Americans will not allow it." But the Americans gave, and how they gave! Dollars and burial stones.
Wars broke out, despite the strongest convictions of their opponents, as if the Americans were opposed, while the Israel Defense Forces, which is not an American army, heaven forbid, tried to be clever and outsmart the Americans. People believed that in the end, after the mass killings (in Lebanon and the Gaza Strip ), there would be a happy end and "the Americans would force a peace agreement on the sides" - because the Americans are a policeman on behalf of Western justice.
Now that the "peace camp" has waned and the people need the simple faith that we're the ones who decide on the agenda, Netanyahu's prestige is rising. According to the new folklore, the prime minister "dictated the Americans' agenda," as if Israel's strength weren't built by the Americans precisely for this necessity - the carrot and the stick of control in the Middle East. The stick is a direct Israeli threat, like the one against Iran. The carrot is "an Israeli withdrawal," "a comprehensive settlement" or "the United States will restrain Israel." The neighborhood thug will not attack because the U.S. will not allow him to.
This is a structure in which different forces act. The United States is a coalition of interests, sometimes even opposing interests, of those who support and those who oppose terrible wars - in the administration, in the economy and in politics. But the U.S. continues to act as it always has acted. Hans Morgenthau's doctrine dictates that they rely on the existing balance of power in regional conflicts.
There's no doubt that the United States has never been interested in the sources of the conflict with the Palestinians, but rather tries to benefit by nurturing it, fanning its flames, paying for it and "conducting negotiations" via the strong side to gain control in the region. There's no better example than the scuttling of the agreed-on solution by the two superpowers after the Yom Kippur War, in favor of a partial agreement that ensured control over the Palestinians and the extension of the settlements.
Within this structure, Israel's permanent role is to fix "an agenda," and the Americans' role is to say that "Israel has the right to defend itself" - and also to say the exact opposite.
Of course, within this structure there's great value in the "moderate camp" because the United States chooses the "moderate camp" from the strong side. That's why the visit by Peres - the statue of the "peace camp" - took place a day before Netanyahu's.
This is the rope Israel is gradually hanging itself with. Those celebrating the victory of Iran Now over Palestine Now know well that this Now - via the destructive power that the U.S. finances and which nurtures the settlements and the army - is designed to turn us into a country where it may be interesting to live but where it's also very bad to live.
DEBUNKING ANTI-IRAN PROPAGANDA: THE MYTH OF THE "NEW HOLOCAUST"
By Benjamin Schett*
6 March 2012, The Centre for Research on Globalisation -- CRG http://www.globalresearch.ca (Canada)
URL of this article: www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=29626
In a pattern of propaganda now well-established in the mainstream media, fear-mongering against Iran is reaching an all-time peak. A case in point includes ongoing accusations that Iran is in violation of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, despite statements to the contrary from U.S. Defence Secretary Leon Panetta as well as a number of American intelligence officials[1].
In addition, claims that Iran is involved in terrorist activities were released by the Obama administration, fabricating an Iranian conspiracy with the goal to assassinate the Saudi Ambassador to the U.S.
(For details, see: http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=27094)
Most recently, Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has accused Iran of having planned terrorist attacks in India, Georgia and Thailand.
(For details, see: http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=29320)
As it stands, the intensification of propaganda is fuelling an anti-Iranian proxy conflict in Syria and creating the serious danger of aggression against Iran in the coming months by Israel's extremist government and/or the Obama administration. These media fabrications also do not question why the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran would increase worldwide tensions so much more than the hyper-developed nuclear weapons programs of countries like Israel and the United States. (Notwithstanding the fact that there is no existing proof that suggests that Iran is doing anything other than developing a peaceful civilian atomic program.)
Opponents of possible armed aggression against Iran are regularly accused of repeating the mistakes from the period prior to World War II, namely of not taking seriously the purportedly dangerous eliminatory "anti-Semitism" of the Iranian regime. This charge is echoed by the Anti-Defamation League, one of the biggest pro-Zionist U.S. groups, who is lobbying for taking any "necessary" measures in order to overthrow the Iranian government and its president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad:
"Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's anti-Semitic and anti-Israel views place him and the Iranian regime among the foremost threats to Jews and the state of Israel."[2]
Moreover, Israeli President Shimon Peres called Iran a "danger to the entire world" while addressing the German Bundestag in a speech marking Holocaust Remembrance Day in 2010.
The symbolism of such actions is clear: whoever refuses to participate in the campaign against Iran is neglecting the threat of a new Holocaust, the insinuation being that if Iran were to get nuclear weapons, it would use them against the state of Israel.
First of all, suggesting that the current situation in Iran is even remotely comparable to the crimes committed by the Nazis inexcusably downplays the suffering of Jews, Roma, Communists, Slavic nations and other victims of Fascism.
In addition, while the strategic motivation behind arguments made by Israeli decision-makers is clear, the facts are not. In fact, the alleged statements made by Ahmadinejad calling for Israel to be "wiped of the map" were proven to be fake thanks to a false translation from Farsi into English. (See: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2006/jun/14/post155) This has been well known already for some time, although it does not seem to faze the war propagandists.
The other question that should be asked by anyone investigating accusations against the Iranian government of being the "foremost threat against Jews" is how do Jews actually live in Iran? If the Iranian president is supposed to be some kind of reborn Hitler, would that not be reflected in imposed anti-Jewish legislature in his country, calls for pogroms, etc.?
The evidence on Jewish life in Iran, from various sources, including Jewish and American mainstream is revealing. For example, a website belonging to the Foundation for the Advancement of Sephardic Studies and Culture (FASSAC) acknowledges that:
"While Jewish communities in Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Egypt, Morocco and Algeria have all but vanished, Iran is home to 25,000 – some here say 35,000 – Jews."[3]
This makes Iran’s Jewish community the largest in the Middle East, outside of Israel. Furthermore, many Iranian Jews show pride in their mixed Jewish-Iranian heritage and would not consider emigration:
"Jewish leaders say their community has far stronger roots in Iran than other Middle East Jewish communities, which were virtually eradicated by massive immigration to Israel in the 1940s and 1950s. Esther, the biblical Jewish queen who saved her people from persecution in the fifth century B.C., is reputed to be buried in Hamadan, in western Iran. The grave of the Old Testament prophet Daniel lies in southwestern Iran."
As we see, Jewish roots in Iran date back to biblical times: "The Jews trace their heritage in Iran to the Babylonian Exile of the 6th century BC..."[4]. Indeed, several Persian kings enjoy a positive reputation in the Old Testament because of their friendly attitude towards the Hebrew people.
Today, Jewish religion and culture is still present in everyday life in Iran:
"Tehran has 11 functioning synagogues, many of them with Hebrew schools. It has two kosher restaurants, and a Jewish hospital, an old-age home and a cemetery. There is a Jewish representative in the Iranian parliament. There is a Jewish library with 20,000 titles..."
It can't be denied that there must have been considerable concern among Iranian Jews in the time following the Islamic Revolution in 1979, as it was hard to predict how things would develop under the new radically anti-Zionist leadership, and many chose to emigrate on this account. Nonetheless:
"Khomeini [the spiritual leader of the Islamic Revolution] met with the Jewish community upon his return from exile in Paris and issued a ''fatwa'' decreeing that the Jews were to be protected. Similar edicts also protect Iran's tiny Christian minority."
The Iranian leadership seems to draw a clear line between Zionism as a political ideology (inspired by Western European colonialist ideas in the 19th century), and Judaism. This conclusion can be underlined by several statements President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has made throughout recent years. In a Christmas message to the people of Great Britain, broadcast by Channel Four, Ahmadinejad started his speech with the following lines:
"Upon the anniversary of the birth of Jesus, Son of Mary, the Word of God, the Messenger of mercy, I would like to congratulate the followers of Abrahamic faiths, especially the followers of Jesus Christ, and the people of Britain."
The religious pathos might not be to everybody's taste, but the more relevant question would be whether these could realistically be the lines of a fanatical preacher of hate, as he is portrayed by mainstream media in the West. In fact, by addressing the "followers of Abrahamic faith", president Ahmadinejad expresses his respect for the three religions of the book: Judaism, Christianity and Islam.
Critics might argue that a conciliatory message prepared for a Western audience might serve the purpose of leaving the people outside Iran in the dark about its real hidden agenda. Thanks to the Internet, it is not necessary to speak Farsi to get an impression of what Ahmadinejad is saying in front of an audience in his own country. In a speech delivered in May 2007 in the city of Esfahan (available on YouTube with English subtitles), he explains to the crowd what his response is to people who accuse him of being anti-Semitic on account of his heavy criticism of the Israeli regime:
"Some officials from that country (USA)... said all kinds of things. One of them was: "They [the Israeli leaders] are Jewish, why are you anti-Jewish?" I said: I am not anti-Jewish at all... But they are lying. They are not Jewish, but a bunch of corrupt criminals abusing the name of Judaism."[5]
In May 2006, the National Post published an article claiming that the Iranian parliament had passed a sumptuary law forcing religious minorities, Jews included, to follow a specific dress code:
"It also envisages separate dress codes for religious minorities, Christians, Jews and Zoroastrians, who will have to adopt distinct colour schemes to make them identifiable in public. The new codes would enable Muslims to easily recognize non-Muslims so that they can avoid shaking hands with them by mistake, and thus becoming najis (unclean)."[6]
However, the story turned out to be a hoax and the National Post issued an apology by its editor-in-chief[7]. But the intention of this falsification is obvious: it was meant to remind people of the yellow star that Jews were forced to wear in Nazi Germany, and thereby create fears of similar events happening in Iran that might lead to some kind of new Holocaust.
One of the particularly critical Jewish responses to this provocation came from Iran’s Jewish Member of Parliament, Moris Motamed. (It should be noted that Jews, Christians and Zoroastrians all have their own guaranteed seat in the Iranian Parliament (Majilis), which is one of the results of Khomeini's fatwa calling for the protection of these religious minorities). As Motamed outlined in an interview with Counterpunch:
"Unfortunately, this was fake news published in a Canadian newspaper. I considered this news a big insult to the religious minorities of Iran. I refuted the story vigorously, to the point that the source of the news and the Canadian government officially apologized to the Iranian government."[8]
The same Motamed, who officially represents the Iranian Jewish community, does not criticize Iran’s nuclear program, unlike many foreigners who claim to act in favour of Judaism by encouraging "strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities":
"As a Jewish Iranian, I consider enrichment of peaceful nuclear technology the obvious right of Iranian society. What is sad here — and I’m so sorry about it — is that before the Islamic Revolution, we witnessed... western Europe and America pressuring Iran to obtain nuclear technology and establish a nuclear power plant. Now the idea is brought up: "Why do you want nuclear technology? What is the point of nuclear technology for you when you have rich resources like fuel and gas and oil?" My question here is why at that earlier time, the problem of natural resources was not brought up?"
In further demonizing the Iranian state, Western media and pro-Zionist lobbyists accuse Ahmadinejad of making ambiguous statements about the Holocaust. Clearly, however, holocaust denial does not represent the official position of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Otherwise it couldn't be explained why in 2007 the Iranian state television broadcast a series emphasising the suffering of Europe’s Jews in the Second World War, in what can be likened to an Iranian version of "Schindler’s List":
"The central character is an Iranian diplomat, who provides false Iranian passports to enable Jews to flee the Nazi-occupied France, a sort of Iranian Schindler. He even has a love affair with a Jewish woman."[9]
This Iranian diplomat saving Iranian Jews, named Abdol Hossein Sardari, actually existed in real life and has been honoured in past decades by Jewish organisations, including the Simon Wiesenthal Centre.[10]
It should not be the goal of this article to make a final judgement on Jewish life in Iran, because this would be an almost impossible enterprise without having the personal experience of how life looks when belonging to a religious minority in a very religious country. But it is important to put the collected information into perspective. It is apparent Iranian Jews have the right to freely practice their religion and to maintain their culture and traditions. Jewish institutions such as synagogues, Jewish libraries, hospitals and restaurants are well-established across the country.
By contrast, the impression we get from one of America's closest Middle Eastern allies, the totalitarian Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (a rival of Iran), looks very different. Neither Jewish nor Christian worship is allowed, and Saudi school textbooks spread hateful messages such as the following, according to Daily Mail:
"In one, for ninth-graders, students are taught the annihilation of the Jewish people is imperative. One text reads in part: 'The hour (of judgment) will not come until the Muslims fight the Jews and kill them. There is a Jew behind me come and kill him.'"[11]
This is not the first time that the U.S. government is fighting alongside extremists against states that they perceive as barriers to the proliferation of their economic, geopolitical and imperial agendas, while at the same time pretending to combat "terrorism", "ethnic cleansing" and other crimes against humanity.
All things considered, the hypocrisy is plainly clear. It is therefore not only necessary but also imperative to oppose the dangerous propaganda and warmongering spread by the most aggressive factions within the U.S. and Israeli establishments, and ensure that truth prevails over rampant militarization.
*Benjamin Schett is an independent Swiss-based researcher and student of East European History at the University of Vienna. He can be reached at schettb@gmail.com
Notes
[1] http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/story/2012-01-08/iran-nuclear-weapons/52451620/1.
[2] http://www.adl.org/main_International_Affairs/ahmadinejad_words.htm.
[3] http://www.sephardicstudies.org/iran.html.
[4] http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/293359/Iran.
[5] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEDqygQMoZ8&feature=results_video&playnext=1&list=PL77FD8F72F884C7F8.
[6] Original article: http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=398274b5-9210-43e4-ba59-fa24f4c66ad4&k=28534&p=1.
[7] http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=6df3e493-f350-4b53-bc16-53262b49a4f7
[8] http://www.counterpunch.org/2008/07/14/talking-to-iran-s-only-jewish-member-of-parliament.
[9] http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7119474.stm.
[10] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdol_Hossein_Sardari.
[11] http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2077658/The-Arabic-textbooks-children-chop-hands-feet-Sharia-law.html.
LOS HUÉRFANOS PALESTINOS SE SOLIDARIZAN CON LA PRESA PALESTINA HANA SHALABI
9 marzo 2012, Rebelión http://www.rebelion.org (México)
Rana Baker*
The Electronic Intifada
Traducido del inglés para Rebelión por Sinfo Fernández.
Siempre que mis pies me encaminan hacia la tienda de campaña instalada en solidaridad con Hana Shalabi, mis ojos se posan en un trozo de papel pegado en una inmensa pancarta junto a la cual los Shalabi acogen con una sonrisa a todos los que llegan para desear la rápida liberación de su hija. En ese pequeño trozo de papel blanco puede leerse hoy “20” [*].
La batalla de los estómagos vacíos prosigue adelante. Un estómago vacío contra todo un sistema criminal; una joven contra soldados armados para quienes las órdenes están por encima de cualquier tipo de conciencia que pudieran albergar. Shalabi es una “terrorista”, ¿cómo os atrevéis a defenderla?
Para los retorcidos estándares de Israel, yo también soy terrorista. Quizá mantenerme al lado de una “terrorista” degrada mi condición de estudiante, activista, hija, amiga, lo que pueda ser, al nivel de terrorista. Quizá todos los que apoyamos la causa de Shalabi somos terroristas, incluso aquellos israelíes que están claramente en contra de la detención administrativa y que la han descrito como una de las leyes más antidemocráticas de Israel.
También dirán que son terroristas los niños con los que hoy me reúno. ¿Qué diferencia hay? Siempre les han tratado también como una amenaza, como terroristas que quizá acaben asesinados.
Quince niños huérfanos
Me sorprendió ver hoy a primera hora en la tienda a quince niños huérfanos pertenecientes a la Asociación de Huérfanos al-Amal. Esta asociación es bien conocida por los servicios que proporciona a los niños huérfanos de Gaza. Huérfanos sin hogar encuentran en la asociación casa, colegio y una familia que les cuida.
“Muchos de los huérfanos que viven en las viviendas de la asociación son hijos e hijas de las familias que murieron asesinadas durante la Operación Plomo Fundido”, dijo Rayi Shenaino, miembro de la junta de dirección de al-Amal.
Los niños habían ido para expresar sus sentimientos compasivos en una inmensa tela colocada sobre un muro justo enfrente de la tienda de campaña en solidaridad de Hana Shalabi. Cada niño llevó pincel y acuarelas y pintó algo sobre la tela. Los niños pintaron palomas, ramas de olivo, banderas palestinas, soles dentro de los cuales escribieron el nombre de Hana, y frases como “Estoy con Hama Shalabi”, “Sí a la libertad, no a la opresión” y cosas como “Estamos con Khader Adnan y Hana Shalabi”.
Le pregunté a una de las huérfanas, Nur Yasin, de once años, por qué había ido hasta allí. “Por la libertad”, dijo, dejando asomar una tímida sonrisa en su rostro. “¿La libertad de quién, habibti?”, añadí tratando de sonsacar palabras de la pequeña boca. “De Hana”, “confío en que vuelva”.
Donya Felfel, de ocho años, me dijo que estaba en la tienda para “visitar” a Hana y que confiaba en que “saliera de la prisión para jugar con sus hermanas y su madre”.
“Quiero que Hana sepa que no la olvidamos y que estamos a su lado. Quiero decirle que la detención administrativa se acabará”, dijo Yaser al-Nabulsi, de catorce años, también huérfano.
La forma en que esos niños expresaron su solidaridad con Hana Shalabi demuestra que todos los niños palestinos, no importa lo jóvenes que sean, no pueden escapar de la politización de sus vidas. Sin embargo, “no se les está enseñando a convertirse en suicidas-bomba”, un mito constantemente invocado por Israel y sus partidarios.
Un mensaje potente
A diferencia de la idea que probablemente se tenga de cómo es un huérfano, esos huérfanos son muy distintos.
“Queremos enviar un mensaje potente”, dijo Maram Humaid, una joven activista y organizadora de la pintura del mural, “de que a pesar del hecho de que los niños son huérfanos, no esperan que el mundo muestre su solidaridad con ellos; en cambio, son ellos los que defienden la solidaridad con otros; ese es un mensaje potente que el mundo debiera conocer, que los niños palestinos no son débiles”.
Censuras
Los dibujos y pinturas que los niños hicieron hoy me recordaron las pinturas censuradas por los grupos de lobbys pro Israel hace pocos meses en Estados Unidos.
Se me ocurrió preguntarme si también se prohibiría mostrar estas pinturas si alcanzaran a llegar a aquel país. Quizá es que, para los enfermizos criterios del Estado de apartheid y sus partidarios, las palomas son antisemitas e incitan a la violencia.
N. de la T.:
[*] Este artículo se publicó el 6 de marzo, en el momento de su publicación en Rebelión, Hana llevará 23 días en huelga de hambre. Véanse informaciones anteriores en: http://www.rebelion.org/noticia.php?id=145518; http://www.rebelion.org/noticias/2012/3/145893.pdf
*Rana Baker, de 20 años de edad, es estudiante de Administración de Empresas y miembro del comité organizador de la campaña por el Boicot, Desinversión y Sanciones a Israel con sede en Gaza.
Shalom 1492: Rana’s blog is Palestine: Memory Drafts and Future Alleyways and she can be followed on twitter at: @RanaGaza.
Fuente: http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/rana-baker/palestinian-orphans-solidarity-hana-shalabi
Rana Baker*
The Electronic Intifada
Traducido del inglés para Rebelión por Sinfo Fernández.
Siempre que mis pies me encaminan hacia la tienda de campaña instalada en solidaridad con Hana Shalabi, mis ojos se posan en un trozo de papel pegado en una inmensa pancarta junto a la cual los Shalabi acogen con una sonrisa a todos los que llegan para desear la rápida liberación de su hija. En ese pequeño trozo de papel blanco puede leerse hoy “20” [*].
La batalla de los estómagos vacíos prosigue adelante. Un estómago vacío contra todo un sistema criminal; una joven contra soldados armados para quienes las órdenes están por encima de cualquier tipo de conciencia que pudieran albergar. Shalabi es una “terrorista”, ¿cómo os atrevéis a defenderla?
Para los retorcidos estándares de Israel, yo también soy terrorista. Quizá mantenerme al lado de una “terrorista” degrada mi condición de estudiante, activista, hija, amiga, lo que pueda ser, al nivel de terrorista. Quizá todos los que apoyamos la causa de Shalabi somos terroristas, incluso aquellos israelíes que están claramente en contra de la detención administrativa y que la han descrito como una de las leyes más antidemocráticas de Israel.
También dirán que son terroristas los niños con los que hoy me reúno. ¿Qué diferencia hay? Siempre les han tratado también como una amenaza, como terroristas que quizá acaben asesinados.
Quince niños huérfanos
Me sorprendió ver hoy a primera hora en la tienda a quince niños huérfanos pertenecientes a la Asociación de Huérfanos al-Amal. Esta asociación es bien conocida por los servicios que proporciona a los niños huérfanos de Gaza. Huérfanos sin hogar encuentran en la asociación casa, colegio y una familia que les cuida.
“Muchos de los huérfanos que viven en las viviendas de la asociación son hijos e hijas de las familias que murieron asesinadas durante la Operación Plomo Fundido”, dijo Rayi Shenaino, miembro de la junta de dirección de al-Amal.
Los niños habían ido para expresar sus sentimientos compasivos en una inmensa tela colocada sobre un muro justo enfrente de la tienda de campaña en solidaridad de Hana Shalabi. Cada niño llevó pincel y acuarelas y pintó algo sobre la tela. Los niños pintaron palomas, ramas de olivo, banderas palestinas, soles dentro de los cuales escribieron el nombre de Hana, y frases como “Estoy con Hama Shalabi”, “Sí a la libertad, no a la opresión” y cosas como “Estamos con Khader Adnan y Hana Shalabi”.
Le pregunté a una de las huérfanas, Nur Yasin, de once años, por qué había ido hasta allí. “Por la libertad”, dijo, dejando asomar una tímida sonrisa en su rostro. “¿La libertad de quién, habibti?”, añadí tratando de sonsacar palabras de la pequeña boca. “De Hana”, “confío en que vuelva”.
Donya Felfel, de ocho años, me dijo que estaba en la tienda para “visitar” a Hana y que confiaba en que “saliera de la prisión para jugar con sus hermanas y su madre”.
“Quiero que Hana sepa que no la olvidamos y que estamos a su lado. Quiero decirle que la detención administrativa se acabará”, dijo Yaser al-Nabulsi, de catorce años, también huérfano.
La forma en que esos niños expresaron su solidaridad con Hana Shalabi demuestra que todos los niños palestinos, no importa lo jóvenes que sean, no pueden escapar de la politización de sus vidas. Sin embargo, “no se les está enseñando a convertirse en suicidas-bomba”, un mito constantemente invocado por Israel y sus partidarios.
Un mensaje potente
A diferencia de la idea que probablemente se tenga de cómo es un huérfano, esos huérfanos son muy distintos.
“Queremos enviar un mensaje potente”, dijo Maram Humaid, una joven activista y organizadora de la pintura del mural, “de que a pesar del hecho de que los niños son huérfanos, no esperan que el mundo muestre su solidaridad con ellos; en cambio, son ellos los que defienden la solidaridad con otros; ese es un mensaje potente que el mundo debiera conocer, que los niños palestinos no son débiles”.
Censuras
Los dibujos y pinturas que los niños hicieron hoy me recordaron las pinturas censuradas por los grupos de lobbys pro Israel hace pocos meses en Estados Unidos.
Se me ocurrió preguntarme si también se prohibiría mostrar estas pinturas si alcanzaran a llegar a aquel país. Quizá es que, para los enfermizos criterios del Estado de apartheid y sus partidarios, las palomas son antisemitas e incitan a la violencia.
N. de la T.:
[*] Este artículo se publicó el 6 de marzo, en el momento de su publicación en Rebelión, Hana llevará 23 días en huelga de hambre. Véanse informaciones anteriores en: http://www.rebelion.org/noticia.php?id=145518; http://www.rebelion.org/noticias/2012/3/145893.pdf
*Rana Baker, de 20 años de edad, es estudiante de Administración de Empresas y miembro del comité organizador de la campaña por el Boicot, Desinversión y Sanciones a Israel con sede en Gaza.
Shalom 1492: Rana’s blog is Palestine: Memory Drafts and Future Alleyways and she can be followed on twitter at: @RanaGaza.
Fuente: http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/rana-baker/palestinian-orphans-solidarity-hana-shalabi
Reputed novelist Grossman comes out against U.S. or Israeli attack on Iran
9 March 2012, The Israeli Communist Party המפלגה הקומוניסטית הישראלית (Israel)
info@maki.org.il
In his first public statement on the conflict with Iran, David Grossman, the leading Israeli novelist of the last generation and strongest voice of his country’s moral conscience, told "The Nation" that he opposed an attack on the Islamic republic by Israel or the U.S., saying the likely consequences were more daunting even than those of Iran building nuclear weapons.
“I don’t want Iran to have nuclear weapons, but I think that if the sanctions do not work, Israel and the whole world, painfully, will have to live with it,” Grossman said, warning that bombing Iran would set in motion “a nightmare that’s hard to describe.” Nonetheless, he said he had “a very bad feeling” that Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak were going to order an attack, even against America’s wishes. “There is a dynamic to all these warlike declarations,” he said.
David Grossman during a demonstration against settlements in Sheikh Jarrah, Occupied East Jerusalem (Photo: Coteret)
spoke with Larry Derfner by phone from his home outside Jerusalem on Tuesday. The day before, Netanyahu had brought his militant views on Iran to a White House meeting with President Barack Obama, and later delivered a fright-inducing speech to the AIPAC convention, employing Holocaust analogies and vowing that “never again” would the Jewish people entrust their survival to any nation but their own.
“Israel,” said Grossman, “is a deeply traumatized community that finds it very difficult to separate between real dangers and echoes of past traumas, and sometimes I think our prime minister fires himself up in mixing these real dangers with those echoes from the past.”
He said he feared that Netanyahu and Barak would bomb Iran partly out of a perceived strategic need to back up their threats with action, but also because of what he sees as Netanyahu’s sense of historic responsibility to save the “people of eternity.”
“He has this idea that we are the people of eternity, am ha’netzach from the Bible, and our negotiations, as he sees it, are with eternity, with the primal currents of history and mankind, while the United States, with all due respect, is just another superpower like Rome or Athens or Babylon, and we’ve survived them all,” said Grossman. “I’m afraid that this way of thinking might encourage Netanyahu to take the step” of attacking Iran.
Grossman’s son, Uri, was killed in the 2006 Lebanon War two days after the author called publicly for a cease-fire, and while he was writing the last chapters of his greatly acclaimed epic of war and peace, “To the End of the Land.” An impassioned critic of Israeli militarism and treatment of Palestinians, he deplored the overkill of the December 2008-January 2009 war in Gaza, and took part in last year’s weekly protests against the dispossession of Palestinians in occupied East Jerusalem’s Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood, getting beaten by Israeli police at one of them.
Citing the large presence of “more secular, educated, realistic” people in Iran, masses of whom protested bravely in 2009 against the regime, Grossman said this face of Iran held out the hope of a future leadership that might be less hostile to Israel – but he warned that this hope would be destroyed, too, in an Israeli attack.
“If Israel bombs Iran,” he said, “I think it will be seen as an arrogant, megalomaniacal, violent nation even by the most sober, moderate Iranians.” Thus, Israel’s hope for peace, or even just quiet, with a future, better Iranian government “would be eradicated for generations,” he maintained.
A Communist Party of Israel leading member praised Grossman declaration: "An attack on Iran will not prevent its further nuclear arming. An attack on Iran will enflame the entire Middle East. A nuclear Iran is indeed a threat to the region, but an attack will lead to an inevitable catastrophe. There's no agreement amongst the Israeli people for an attack that stands against our country's interest!"
Related:
David Grossman speaks out against war Iran
info@maki.org.il
In his first public statement on the conflict with Iran, David Grossman, the leading Israeli novelist of the last generation and strongest voice of his country’s moral conscience, told "The Nation" that he opposed an attack on the Islamic republic by Israel or the U.S., saying the likely consequences were more daunting even than those of Iran building nuclear weapons.
“I don’t want Iran to have nuclear weapons, but I think that if the sanctions do not work, Israel and the whole world, painfully, will have to live with it,” Grossman said, warning that bombing Iran would set in motion “a nightmare that’s hard to describe.” Nonetheless, he said he had “a very bad feeling” that Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak were going to order an attack, even against America’s wishes. “There is a dynamic to all these warlike declarations,” he said.
spoke with Larry Derfner by phone from his home outside Jerusalem on Tuesday. The day before, Netanyahu had brought his militant views on Iran to a White House meeting with President Barack Obama, and later delivered a fright-inducing speech to the AIPAC convention, employing Holocaust analogies and vowing that “never again” would the Jewish people entrust their survival to any nation but their own.
“Israel,” said Grossman, “is a deeply traumatized community that finds it very difficult to separate between real dangers and echoes of past traumas, and sometimes I think our prime minister fires himself up in mixing these real dangers with those echoes from the past.”
He said he feared that Netanyahu and Barak would bomb Iran partly out of a perceived strategic need to back up their threats with action, but also because of what he sees as Netanyahu’s sense of historic responsibility to save the “people of eternity.”
“He has this idea that we are the people of eternity, am ha’netzach from the Bible, and our negotiations, as he sees it, are with eternity, with the primal currents of history and mankind, while the United States, with all due respect, is just another superpower like Rome or Athens or Babylon, and we’ve survived them all,” said Grossman. “I’m afraid that this way of thinking might encourage Netanyahu to take the step” of attacking Iran.
Grossman’s son, Uri, was killed in the 2006 Lebanon War two days after the author called publicly for a cease-fire, and while he was writing the last chapters of his greatly acclaimed epic of war and peace, “To the End of the Land.” An impassioned critic of Israeli militarism and treatment of Palestinians, he deplored the overkill of the December 2008-January 2009 war in Gaza, and took part in last year’s weekly protests against the dispossession of Palestinians in occupied East Jerusalem’s Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood, getting beaten by Israeli police at one of them.
Citing the large presence of “more secular, educated, realistic” people in Iran, masses of whom protested bravely in 2009 against the regime, Grossman said this face of Iran held out the hope of a future leadership that might be less hostile to Israel – but he warned that this hope would be destroyed, too, in an Israeli attack.
“If Israel bombs Iran,” he said, “I think it will be seen as an arrogant, megalomaniacal, violent nation even by the most sober, moderate Iranians.” Thus, Israel’s hope for peace, or even just quiet, with a future, better Iranian government “would be eradicated for generations,” he maintained.
A Communist Party of Israel leading member praised Grossman declaration: "An attack on Iran will not prevent its further nuclear arming. An attack on Iran will enflame the entire Middle East. A nuclear Iran is indeed a threat to the region, but an attack will lead to an inevitable catastrophe. There's no agreement amongst the Israeli people for an attack that stands against our country's interest!"
Related:
David Grossman speaks out against war Iran
Assinar:
Postagens (Atom)