Antony Loewenstein

..Over one third of all media reports in Germany see Islam as primarily a terrorist threat and security risk (36.6 % of coverage in German in 2007).

After the Australian Jewish community with Prime Minister Kevin Rudd recently celebrated Israel’s 60th anniversary – something protested by many Arabs, Jews and other concerned citizens – similar shenanigans are occurring in Britain:

On April 7, Prince Philip will be hosting a dinner at Windsor Castle organised by the Jewish National Fund. They will be marking the 60th anniversary of the establishment of the Israeli state. However this is not a private dinner. Nor is the JNF an ordinary organisation.

The JNF was established in 1901 as the land settlement wing of the World Zionist Organisation. It became one of the primary instruments involved in planning for the dispossession and expulsion of the Palestinians. Up until 1948 it purchased land for settlement, often from absentee landlords, and then evicted the peasants from that land. Unlike the normal practice under colonial rule, the Palestinians were not re-employed as wage labourers but excluded from the land altogether. This was the concept of Jewish land. But even by 1947 less than 7% of the land of Palestine had been bought up.

The JNF played a crucial role in planning for the ethnic cleansing of Palestine. In the years leading up to the establishment of the state of Israel, the JNF was a key voice in establishing a consensus in the Zionist leadership for “transfer”. Although not discussed openly, among the Zionist leaders it was accepted that a Jewish state could only come into being if the Arabs were transferred out of the state. Palestine was a land where barely one-third of the inhabitants were Jewish, and even in the area allotted by the United Nations to a Jewish state, barely half of the inhabitants were Jewish. As the head of its Land Settlement Department, Joseff Weitz, wrote in his diary in 1940:

The only solution is to transfer the Arabs from here to neighbouring countries. Not a single village or a single tribe must be let off. [Ilan Pappe: The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine, page 62]

What other country’s ethnic cleansing is celebrated by heads of a state in supposed democracies?

Alastair Crooke, The Guardian, March 24:

Former US secretary of state Henry Kissinger, in a recent interview with a German magazine, embellished Rusi’s complaints of naivety and “flabby thinking”. Radical Islam won’t stop, he warned, and the “virus” would only become more virulent if the US were to withdraw from Iraq.

The charge of naivety is not limited to failing to understand the concealed and duplicitous nature of Hamas and Hizbullah, Iran and Syria; it extends to not grasping the true nature of the wider “enemy” the west is facing. “I don’t like the term ‘war on terror’ because terror is a method, not a political movement; we are in a war against radical Islam,” says Kissinger. But who or what is radical Islam? It is those who are not “moderates”, he explains. Certainly, a small minority of Muslims believe that only by “burning the system” can a fresh stab at a just society be made. But Kissinger’s definition of “moderate” Islam sounds no more than a projection of the Christian narrative after Westphalia, by which Christianity became a private matter of conscience, rather than an organisational principle for society.

If radical Islam, with which these experts tell us we should be at war, encompasses all those who are not enamoured of secular society, and who espouse a vision of their societies grounded in the values of Islam, then these experts are advocating a war with Islam – because Islam is the vision for their future favoured by many Muslims.

Mainstream Islamists are indeed challenging western secular and materialist values, and many do believe that western thinking is flawed – that the desires and appetites of man have been reified into representing man himself. It is time to re-establish values that go beyond “desires and wants”, they argue.

The following letter appears in this week’s Australian Jewish News:

The furore over the recent Palestinian statement published in The Australian doesn’t deserve the overwrought reactions in the Jewish community.

However, the response by the NSW Jewish Board of Deputies and The AJN have been revealing in propagating a deception to embarrass people who hadn’t signed it and to discredit Independent Australian Jewish Voices (IAJV) for circulating it.

Australian Jews who may be new to the Israeli press will be shocked to discover that such views regarding the history of Israel, including its founding in 1948 and subsequent events to this day, are far from what they have been encouraged to believe.

Israelis know that views denounced here as anti-Semitic or self-hating are taken seriously as respected opinion within Israel.

Foremost Jewish, Israeli historians and journalists tell a story that is strenuously denied here by those who, in the familiar slogan from Ed Murrow, confuse dissent with disloyalty.

However, the true friends of Israel are not those who serve as propagandists for official Israeli Government myths, but those who stand with the many Israelis who condemn not only the crimes of Palestinians, but also those of the State of Israel.

The IAJV statement last year was a balanced expression of concerns by Australian Jews appealing for a more honest debate. IAJV’s action in sending out the recent statement was consistent with the original goals that have won support from Jews, Palestinians and the wider community, and did not commit anyone besides those who explicitly endorsed it.

Public support by Australian Jews for Australian Palestinians makes a constructive contribution towards peace and justice for Israelis and Palestinians.

PETER SLEZAK
JAMES LEVY
ANTONY LOEWENSTEIN
Sydney, NSW

Iranian blogger Hoder explains that the majority of Iranians, according to a new poll, support President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s policies:

A lot is being published and said these days about ahmadinejad’s diminishing appeal. But aside from this recent parliament elections, I have another reason to say that it is all wishful thinking.

Just take a look at this recent poll results (full PDF version) on Iran, done by the American ‘Terror Free Tomorrow’ research institution (we’re talking John McCain, Lee H. Hamilton, William H. Frist, and Thomas H. Kean on its board).

Satisfaction with Ahmadinejad’s economic policies, the poll results show, has nearly doubled since last June. 42% now think that “economy is headed toward the right direction,” from 27% last June.

Many progressives in the West have long believed that a majority of Iranians crave a more moderate government. I’m not so sure. Many certainly do, but a strong Islam is vital to many Iranians. Having said that, the conservative forces in the country consistently slander and isolate any possible reformist push.

If only Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel – a master of avoiding Israeli crimes in Palestine – extended his concern to the Palestinians, rather than just seemingly every other oppressed group in the world:

Elie Wiesel has recruited 25 of his fellow Nobel laureates to sign a letter condemning the Chinese government’s “violent crackdown” on protestors in Tibet.

The letter, which was released March 20, urges the Chinese government to show restraint and calls for a resumption of talks with Tibet’s exiled leader, the Dalai Lama, the 1989 Nobel Peace Prize winner.

“We protest the unwarranted campaign waged by the Chinese government against our fellow Nobel laureate, His Holiness the Dalai Lama,” the letter reads. “Contrary to the repeated claims of Chinese authorities, the Dalai Lama does not seek separation from China, but religious and cultural autonomy. This autonomy is fundamental to the preservation of the ancient Tibetan heritage.”

For nearly two weeks, China has worked to suppress reporting of the worst unrest in Tibet in decades. Protests earlier this month defying a Chinese order led to riots in the Tibetan capital of Lhasa and a violent crackdown by China, which has occupied Tibet since 1951.

Wiesel told JTA that he finds China’s insistence on claiming sovereignty in Tibet to be inexplicable.

“One thing is clear,” Wiesel said. “What I say to my fellow Nobel laureates, it is our duty to speak up on moral issues.”

Every “moral issue” except the one over which he could have some impact, the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.

Following allegations that Western web majors such as Yahoo and Microsoft were assisting the Chinese regime in finding Tibetans after the recent violence, Yahoo has denied the allegations:

“Contrary to media reports, Yahoo! Inc. is not displaying images on its web sites of individuals wanted by Chinese authorities in connection with the recent unrest in Tibet,” it said in a statement sent to AFP in Paris.

“We are looking into this matter with Alibaba Group, the company that controls China Yahoo!,” the company said.

YouTube is now also available again in China.

Major questions remain as to the rights and responsibilities of Western internet companies in a repressive regime such as China.

In an upcoming book, Heraldo Muñoz, Chile’s ambassador to the United Nations, writes the efforts by the Bush administration to cajole other countries into supporting the invasion of Iraq “generated lasting ‘bitterness’ and ‘deep mistrust’ in Washington’s relations with allies in Europe, Latin America and elsewhere.”

Gideon Levy, Haaretz, March 23:

The amount of support being shown for Israel these days is almost embarrassing. The parade of highly-placed foreign guests and the warm reception received by Israeli statesmen abroad have not been seen for quite some time. Who hasn’t come to visit lately? From the German chancellor to the leading frontrunner for the American presidency. And the secretary-general of the United Nations is on his way. A visit to Israel has become de rigueur for foreign pols. If you haven’t been here, you’re nowhere.

The visitors are taken, of course, to the Yad Vashem Holocaust memorial, the Western Wall and now to Sderot as well – the new national pilgrimage site. A few also pay a perfunctory visit to Ramallah; no one goes to the Gaza Strip, and they all have nothing but praise for Israel. Not a word of criticism on the occupation, on Israel’s violent operations in the territories, on the siege and the starving – with the exception of a few vague remarks on the need for a solution. Israel squeezes the Sderot “informational” lemon for all it’s worth. 

Also not genuine is the idea that blind, unconditional friendship is friendship. The support for Israel as a just enterprise that is extended by most of the West does not mean accepting all of its caprices. A true friend of Israel, one that is sincerely concerned for its fate, is only that friend who dares to express sharp criticism of its policy of occupation, which poses the most serious risk to its future, and who also takes practical steps to end it. Most of the “friendly” statesmen do not understand this. 

All hail the noble Iraq war, five years in with no end in sight:

Five years into the Iraq war – a disaster of virtually unparalleled proportions – and one of its key original backers, columnist Andrew Sullivan, has explained the faulty reasons behind his support. At least he understands the error of his ways, though I fear he would support another war, by a new President, again based on fear and lies. Sullivan remains a believer in the right of Washington to act as it wants, behaviour that would be condemned if carried out by any other nation.

My friend Luke Skinner, a blogger in Perth, challenged my view that “ethnic cleansing” had taken place in Iraq since 2003. He has many Iraqi friends and sent me his following long essay that provides a useful, and largely ignored, perspective on the conflict. Our mainstream media ignores such views as its peril:

We all know how regularly it happens (“cleansing” of neighbourhoods) but I do still have personal friends in Baghdad who have their original neighbours (of opposite sects) living next door with no hostility between them; though they do, all of them, experience threats to leave on “religious reasons”. Baghdad is a very large city and there is definitely some clear lines between “Sunni” and “Shia” territories- but the common analogy and hence the way I read your words- is of a full scale ethnic (or “sectarian) war which has turned neighbours – who were for years before close friends – against each other.

I do not believe it is so. I believe the mistrust is largely the result of the many poor Shia previously living in the slum city (now Sadr City) and its surrounding poor areas moving towards the middle class mixed-areas; entering any houses left empty; extorting some for money and threatening others to leave on fear of death. Such actions inevitably provoke reactions and when they come you can sure there are some opportunists who take advantage of the situation.

I believe the rise of extremism has to do with opportunistic religious extremists taking full advantage of what could otherwise be “class warfare” for economic gain. As in any war time those already poor are stretched to desperation and hence begin to simply take what they need and eventually what they want; believing they honestly deserve it (and they may too, but so may the people who owned it originally). Not to say they don’t use religion for self-justification or even as their tool and weapon for recruitment/persecution; but it’s sure as hell not the only (perhaps not even the main) driving force behind the displacement of people from their homes in Baghdad.

It was the rich houses which were targeted first; from poorer (or greedy) members of their own sects’. Haifa street and Karrada are good examples. Many of the Iraqi bloggers lived in or had family from those areas which were forcibly displaced by extremists as early as 2004 (Salafi’s in mostly Sunni Haifa, SCIRI/Badr in Karrada); surely it is not coincidence these well-to-do areas were targeted before other areas. They were targeted by the militias whose ranks were filled not with angry middle-class persons, but with those who were previously poverty stricken (in Mehdi’s case), exiled (Badr Brigade) or had been stripped of their power when the Baath party fell. These are the actions of opportunists and while a level of resentment has become deeply imbued amongst the population for the extremists of BOTH sects, I believe it an arguable statement to make that the majority of Iraqi’s, though distrustful of one another do not feel they are PART of a ‘religious’ civil-war, though I do not deny they would feel they are “VICTIMS OF” one.

It’s never EVER going to be as simple as Sunni & Shia enclaves locked in a war of “ethnic cleansing” causing death on the scale of genocide. These are people who love one another; whose families and tribes are intertwined. Beyond the face value of “religious extremism” there are root-causes of what allowed extremism to rise as there are in all nations where religious extremism is rife and I’m of no doubt you could name more than a few.

Many families in Baghdad shared last Eid’s celebrations with members of the opposite sect (or even with Christians) without even leaving their neighbourhoods. Many Iraqi’s celebrated together when the Iraqi soccer team won the Asian Cup. Though I obviously haven’t witnessed with my own eyes; I do not believe Iraqi bloggers (and “former bloggers” who remain in the country) have reason to lie to me about who was at their families Eid festivities (nor who was unable to attend despite all efforts to do so).

In the public domain there are many interpretations of what makes a “ghetto” or an “enclave” or what defines “ethnic cleansing”. Baghdad is a giant place and for all I an aware there are (aside from the Green Zone) only two places with large concrete walls used to separate Sunni & Shia – one is the Sunni neighbourhood of Adhamiya on the Eastern side of the river (which is a well-to-do neighbourhood surrounded by run-down Shia areas with huge Badr & Mehdi presence), the other surrounds a similarly well-off area in the Western neighbourhoods of Dora & Amiriyah. Its hard to draw the line between what is class-warfare and what is religious warfare in post-Saddam Iraq because in many cases the lines for Rich & Poor are drawn roughly along the same lines as Shia & Sunni. Middle class Shia lived in the same neighbourhoods as Middle Class Sunni and their numbers were not so bad before the lower-class Shia wanted to do the same; provoking a defensive response from middle class Sunni who felt they were being invaded and hence expelled many Shia.

Maybe you are the wrong person to be hearing this argument; but none the less I believe it is equally yours as it is my responsibility to accurately represent the intricacies of humanitarian crisis and not to “dumb it down” for readabilities sake. There are miles of blast walls in Baghdad; but the vast majority of them surround the roads in between the Green Zone and the Airport, and not all Sunni areas are cut of from all Shia areas or vice versa- and lest we forget who the walls were erected by…

I challenged Skinner further, asking him whether journalists such as Patrick Cockburn, who regularly write about “ethnic cleansing” in Iraq, are mistaken. He went on:

I don’t think they are being either of those two things; though I dare say the amount of time they spend in the country must also take a toll on the individual journalist as it does the mass population. You (any journalist) go in search of every piece of information you can find to try build your analysis. Surely when you hear thousands of stories of ethnic conflict it will produces what is an undeniable truth: Sunni & Shia are killing each other on a regular basis; and it’s happening across the entire city. It IS happening everywhere in Sunni & Shia parts of Baghdad alike. You consistently hear hostility towards members of the other sect because as a journalist it is your job to find out who was responsible for specific events & actions. The Sunni & Shia conflict and even “cleansing” (invasion) of neighbourhoods is taking place. There are two extremist elements causing mass civilian deaths and promoting civil war. We DO HAVE an ethnic conflict. Surely the vast majority of a good journalists time in the country would be spent ensuring that what they are saying in this regard to this remains true to the day. How much time do they have to start asking new questions?

I guess I have a different window into the country. I have basically been doing a qualitative assessment of the mostly middle-class people I have come across – Iraqis online IN Iraq basically; not all of them bloggers. They are all from a large middle class of people suffering at the hands of an even bigger (in Baghdad at least; maybe not so in Mosul) poor population- who were in turn being exploited by the rich in a power-grab after Saddam’s fall and under the new Government.

The new government, however illegitimate, exists as an indefinite piece of procedure. Iraqi’s are too proud now to return to a dictatorship though many would do so willingly as opposed to suffering the torments of life as is. Iraq is not ripe for political revolution; in fact they are hesitant to try anything new at the moment and the only challenge to the “democratic” process as a process itself comes from the religious extremist groups who have nothing to offer the elite or middle classes.

Hence why those in good jobs and of high intelligence such as librarians, doctors, dentists, teachers, lecturers, civil engineers have targeted. The way chosen to bring the ideas of extremism into reality is by removing any better alternatives.

Many middle class Iraqis’ can still manage to get away with using fake IDs (sometimes with their own names still on them) when they leave their neighbourhood for another ghetto; because the lives of middle class Sunni and Shia are still too intertwined to this day to tell them apart- at least for those still living in their original homes anyway. I have yet to find any evidence to prove that those living in their own homes are not still in the majority of Baghdad’s current population; please correct me here if I’m wrong!!

How would a journalist be able to confirm or deny such things? It is the job of statisticians and the population itself to keep track of such things. On the job journalists make assessments they would later rethink or refine often; it’s not a crime. Its the practice of good journalism; find the truth; report it and then find the deeper truth again. Follow the process until you die and report it all along the way.

Glenn Greenwald, Salon, March 20:

More strikingly, not a single one of them [pro-war media commentators] appears to have learned the real lesson worth learning from the whole [Iraq] disaster: The U.S. should not — and has no right to — invade, bomb and occupy other nations that haven’t attacked or even threatened to attack us. None of them say: “Wars that aren’t directly in response to an actual or imminent attack shouldn’t be commenced because doing so leads to the deaths of hundreds of thousands or millions of human beings for no justifiable reason.” Not even the most regretful war advocate seems to have reached that conclusion.