Posted on 11/29/2001 3:56:50 PM PST by dennisw
Commentary November 29, 2001
Why Europe Hates Israel
By Bret Stephens, an editorial page writer for The Wall Street Journal Europe.
BRUSSELS -- Yesterday, a Belgian court heard arguments from
lawyers representing 23 Palestinians, survivors of the 1982 Sabra and
Chatilla massacres near Beirut, that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel
Sharon should be prosecuted in Belgium for crimes against humanity.
Though Mr. Sharon almost certainly will never sit in a Belgian jail,
the trial could hardly be freighted with more significance.
More than a half-century after the Holocaust, a Europe awakened to
the importance of human rights is looking to sanction the leader of
the world's only Jewish state for a crime that was actually committed
by a Christian Lebanese militiaman, later employed by the Syrian
regime of Hafez Assad. And yet blame for the massacres seems to be
apportioned to Mr. Sharon alone. Why?
Sensational Indictment
The short answer is the Belgian legal system, whose well-meaning
laws lend themselves to this sort of opportunistic and sensational
indictment. A slightly longer answer is that many Europeans are
sincerely convinced that Mr. Sharon really is a war criminal, as a
BBC documentary attempted to show last summer.
But the real answer is that
European governments today are,
by and large, tacit enemies of the
state of Israel, much as they
might protest that they merely
take a more "evenhanded"
approach to the Arab-Israeli
conflict.
Consider a few recent examples.
In April, France voted to censure
Israel at the U.N. Human Rights
Commission in Geneva -- while
abstaining from a vote of censure against China. During his
diplomatic foray to Tehran in September, British Foreign Secretary
Jack Straw offered that "one of the factors which helps breed
terrorism is the anger which many people in this region feel at events
over the years in Palestine." The European Union has so far refused
to follow America's lead by freezing the assets of terrorist groups such
as Hezbollah and Hamas, with the European Commission's external
relations spokesman, Gunnar Wiegand, arguing that "Hezbollah could
play a major role in regional stability."
That Europe today should be hostile to Israel may seem a bit of a
mystery, not least given the usual sympathy of aims between
democratic states. The explanation comes in several parts. First, as
historian Howard Sacher points out, Europe's left sees in Israel's
political evolution a betrayal of its utopian ideals. It's easy to forget
that in the years following the establishment of Israel, many
Europeans looked to it as a model socialist country. They admired its
largely state-run economy and especially its collectivist kibbutzim.
Hundreds of young European leftists, most of them non-Jews, flocked
to these farms in the 1960s, looking for the kind of workers' paradise
they could not find on the other side of the Berlin Wall.
This fondness, however, evaporated after the 1967 war, when Israel
went from being the Middle East's underdog to its Goliath, holding a
colonial-like mandate over the lands that came into its possession.
Partly under the sway of Soviet propaganda, partly in keeping with
the fashion of radical chic, European leftists abruptly transferred their
allegiances to the Palestinians and the PLO, which in the 1970s drew
the likes of current German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer to their
meetings. Meanwhile, successive Israeli governments veered to the
right. "The era when Yitzhak Rabin or Golda Meir could address their
European counterparts as 'comrades' at gatherings of the Socialist
International had passed," says Mr. Sacher.
There was also a shift of attitudes on the European right. With the
exception of Britain, whose notoriously Arabist Foreign Office has
dominated its Mideast policy under both Conservative and Labour
governments, much of the Continental right had at one time looked
on admiringly at "plucky little Israel." Thus, beginning in 1952, the
conservative German government of Konrad Adenauer provided Israel
with critical financial support in the form of Holocaust reparations,
while Charles de Gaulle's France helped to build its nuclear reactor at
Dimona.
But it was also de Gaulle who, in 1967, slapped an arms embargo on
Israel for firing the first shot in the Six Day War. Thereafter, the
hostility increased, partly because France fancied itself a champion of
its former Arab colonies, partly out of simple anti-Americanism. But
the chief reason, of course, was Europe's dependence on Arab oil. As
French President Georges Pompidou put it to Henry Kissinger during
the 1973 OPEC oil embargo, "You only rely on the Arabs for about a
tenth of your consumption. We are entirely dependent on them."
Since then, Europe's reliance on Mideastern oil has abated, but the
habit of reflexively seeking to appease the Arabs at Israel's expense
has not. In 1974, French Foreign Minister Michel Jobert toured the
Middle East, seeking to earn price concessions on oil for France by
mouthing a hard anti-Israel line. In 1980, the European Community
formally recognized the PLO despite the fact that Yasser Arafat had
neither made peace with Israel nor dropped his overt sponsorship of
terrorism. Currently, the EU supplies the Palestinian Authority with
the bulk of its foreign aid, even as much of that money goes
indirectly to funding textbooks describing Jews as monkeys and
vermin.
Given all this, many Jews have been led to conclude that what's at
work here is a thinly veiled form of anti-Semitism. But while there
might be some truth to this, it's easily exaggerated. Mr. Straw, of
German-Jewish descent, is clearly no anti-Semite, and the one bright
spot of Jacques Chirac's presidency has been his efforts to
acknowledge the sins of France's suppressed Vichy past.
Underlying Guilt
Underlying European policy is an uneasy sense of guilt. In the
immediate postwar period, Europe's guilty conscience worked in
Israel's favor. But in the postcolonial spirit of the '60s, the balance of
guilt switched to the Arab side: It was they who were being oppressed;
and it was Europe that, with its previous support for Israel, had
helped inflict the oppression. So Europe pressures Israel to withdraw
from the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, heedless of the dire security
consequences that such withdrawal would entail. That Israel has so far
refused to accede to this pressure stands as an infuriating rebuke to
modern Europe's fundamental conception of itself as the virtuous
defeated, free to pass judgment while absolved of the moral
responsibilities of wielding actual power.
Whatever the case, a foreign policy based on a combination of
left-wing disillusionment, French opportunism and all-around
cravenness cannot yield good results. With the U.S. State Department
increasingly leaning toward the European line on Israel, it's well that
the basis of that policy be properly understood.
Yes, Sharon is rather a Churchillian-like figure. Thanks for the picture.
Yes it does. Your Constitution gives the responsibility of elected officials to act in the economic, political and social interests of the Republic. And so the U.S. instituted the Open Door Policy. A great decision indeed.
Where has that sentiment been previously expressed?
Oh, yeah. From every tin horn anti-American pig around the world.
So sad when an "American" shares the view of America's enemies.
Most likely far more than any other place on earth. It simply means the American farmer is among the best. BTW, I was a REMF for 20 years too. I loved it, even the time I spent at Lakenheath, Mildenhall and Greenham Common.
Why don't you ask them.
If it is the Freedom, Capitalism, and Non-interferance that took us to where we could use our military to bully folks why is it you then say we HAD to in order to survive?
The U.S. opened international markets. These had to be protected by force from time to time as necessary. That's life in an imperfect world.
If force is more productive then do you not think that the most represhive regimes in the world should also be the strongest?
The U.S. has used force where necessary, at times reluctantly, and in furtherance of the Open Door Policy.
In the short term force does work well, but in the long term it suffers under the weight of the regime required to enforce its tyranny.
Tyranny? The U.S. hasn't been tyrannical. Maybe this is a hopeful wish on your part so you can pat yourself on the back.
. Suffice it to say that I can not find it in the official version of the Constitution. None of the powers enumerated mention giving away cash or using the military for other countries. If you think that the Constitution enumerated powers to the Congress and then reserved the rest to States and the people only as a suggestion than please do not ever make a contract with me.
Does the Constitution tell you how and when to go the bathroom or when or not to trade with Japan, or Canada, or Russia? I didn't think so.
And when the countries the US is attempting to dominate decide to look after their interests, they will have some new friends and we will not be among them.
They can behave themselves or they will pay a price.
America will pay the price, as did Rome and the British. Oh, I get it. Being from Canada, you still think there's a British empire. Times change - for most people.
It's a new world after 9/11 get on board or get off
Says you. Bombing one of the poorest countries on the face of the earth may make you feel all warm and fuzzy, but if it is not accompanied by a masssive rebuilding, it will eventually make more and more critics and outright enemies.
Israel made peace with Egypt and Jordan and that still wasn't enough for your Jihadist friends
And Egypt is getting a shipment of US cruise missiles as a big "Thank You" gift.
The U.S., since it is one of the biggest if not the biggest countries giving foreign aid will makes its allies as well. So what.
These days the US is almost completely dependent on China for its manufacturing. This means in the long run it will be China not America that makes the things the people of the world will need, and China will provide them directly, not through a US middleman at marked-up prices.
Meanwhile the American economy will accumulate more and more budget deficits from the costs of attempting to project force everywhere in the world, and be less and less able to fund overseas projects as domestic needs take precedence.
That's what.
They're doing it now and will continue to do it, genius
Right now they don't have to do anything. In the future they will, genius.
Since this is 2001, and not Lebanon
There is no statute of limitations of murder, and Sharon is a war criminial. End of story.
Nope.
America will pay the price, as did Rome and the British. Oh, I get it. Being from Canada, you still think there's a British empire. Times change - for most people.
I'm very thankful as a Canadian that the U.S. is the dominant force internationally, both militarily and economically. If we can contribute our part to maintaing this then we will have done our part for freedom. That's bad in your books though.
Says you. Bombing one of the poorest countries on the face of the earth may make you feel all warm and fuzzy, but if it is not accompanied by a masssive rebuilding, it will eventually make more and more critics and outright enemies.
I'm weeping for the dimantling of the Taliban and the hunt for Bin Laden, I really am.
And Egypt is getting a shipment of US cruise missiles as a big "Thank You" gift.
Such is the reality of real-politik.
These days the US is almost completely dependent on China for its manufacturing. This means in the long run it will be China not America that makes the things the people of the world will need, and China will provide them directly, not through a US middleman at marked-up prices.
I'm not concerned at all about the U.S.'s abilities internationally against China. The U.S. wins hands down.
Meanwhile the American economy will accumulate more and more budget deficits from the costs of attempting to project force everywhere in the world, and be less and less able to fund overseas projects as domestic needs take precedence.
The U.S. was doing very well before 9/11. That's why it's time to care of the Jihadists. Are you or are you not on board?
Right now they don't have to do anything. In the future they will, genius.
Thankyou, I am a genius.
There is no statute of limitations of murder, and Sharon is a war criminial. End of story.
No.
A Belgian court has chosen to charge the Primer Minister with these crimes. Using the same logic his country uses against Arafat and the PLO, he is guilty.
The lame excuses of "I was charged because you don't like us" and the "I call myself an anti-terrorist, so I get out of jail free" are not going to be upheld by this court.
As usual your crowd tries to divert attention from its own misdeeds by arm-waving about "terror" done by others, instead of making sure its own side doesn't engage in "terror" itself.
The West will never get out of its self-declared war until it comes up with rules which apply equally to all countries and all people, so expect a few more of these indictments here and there in the years to come.
And since by your own words it's perfectly all right for the West to impose itself on other countries to guarantee its oil supply, you have no grounds to complain even if the West does cut deals to keep its oil flowing regardless of whether the occupiers of Palestine like it or not.
No indictment and no convictions. So much for that.
The lame excuses of "I was charged because you don't like us" and the "I call myself an anti-terrorist, so I get out of jail free" are not going to be upheld by this court.
Oh, you can read minds? What are you a prophet it now?
As usual your crowd tries to divert attention from its own misdeeds by arm-waving about "terror" done by others, instead of making sure its own side doesn't engage in "terror" itself.
Your crowd is the anti-American crowd and blame the West crowd.
The West will never get out of its self-declared war until it comes up with rules which apply equally to all countries and all people, so expect a few more of these indictments here and there in the years to come.
You're anti-West, so your opinion counts for squat.
And since by your own words it's perfectly all right for the West to impose itself on other countries to guarantee its oil supply, you have no grounds to complain even if the West does cut deals to keep its oil flowing regardless of whether the occupiers of Palestine like it or not.
Israel is an ally of the West. United States considers her " a good friend". Tough luck.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/579904/posts
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
America is widely disliked throghout the world for its double standards of which its Middle East policies are simply the most
egregious example.
If America can't make the lives of other people in the world better by promoting freedom and justice for all people, not just
some, and instead supports oppressive regimes which don't have the support of the world's population, and instead chooses as
its destiny to attack and punish rather than to build and uplift, we will soon find we will have eveyone in the world against us.
Then Bush can huff and puff about "terror" all he wants, just like his Israeli counterpart and it will simply make his - and our -
country more enemies.
23 posted on 11/28/01 9:54 PM Pacific by AGAviator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]
TRANSLATION: I hate the U.S.A. The U.S.A is bad. The U.S.A. doesn't promote justice. I hate Sharon and he is like Bush.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
After September 11 about one third of people in Moscow were polled as saying we deserved it, plus many people in South
America, India, and China - all non-Islamic countries. Oh and let's not forget Cuba and Africa. Yeah I know they're nothings,
but you know what? There's billions more where they come from.
That's the real world and that's what happens when your policies are based on thinking onself better than everyone else on the
planet and not having to play by the same rules.
The reaction to this arrogance is what you dismiss as "envy."
There will be a lot more of your "envy" coming our way in the years ahead from many different countries, with less and less for
them to be envious of as we sink beneath the weight of trying to rule the world without ever making a serious attempt to make it
better. You may not like it, but tough shit!!!
29 posted on 11/28/01 11:53 PM Pacific by AGAviator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]
TRANSLATION: The U.S.A. is to blame for everyones problems. The U.S.A. is not making serious attempts to help the world. The U.S.A. is arrogant and is rightfully to be blamed by China, South America, Africa, etc. for all the worlds problems.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A classic "double standard." America is taking "innocent lives, unconcerned with the conflict" every day. They're called
"collateral damage." And don't start harping about the 4,000 in New York and Washington. Afghans lost 2,000,000 fighting a
war so Americans didn't have to, and the minute their enemy left, the US left them and their ruined country.
If we must "go it alone", it will be messy.
It will be messy, soon.
We cannot "make the world better"
Then we are acting as armed interlopers any time we do gobeyond our own borders, and have no right to expect anything but
the treatment always given to people who believe that might makes right.
44 posted on 11/29/01 9:12 AM Pacific by AGAviator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]
TRANSLATION: The U.S.A. is hypocritical. I don't care about the 4,000 in New York because the Afghans lost 2,000,000 and the U.S.A. should be blamed for that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Listen dummy. It's the West that has been invading the Islamics backyards for the last couple hundred years, not the other way
around.
And as far as we're so smart, we're so great, enjoy it while it lasts, which should be a few years. In less than 50 years we've
gone from being the greatest producing country on the face of the world to the greatest consumer and the biggest debtor. You
can't go to a store in this country without seeing most of its merchandise from China, Singapore, Mexico, anywhere there's
cheap labor to feed the self-indulgent consumers. Once the real estate bubble busts like the NASDAQ did, you're going to see
some serious economic difficulties, not this little piddly stuff we've gone through since March. Those high-tech gizmos don't
come cheap you know. And we'll be needing lots and lots of them.
49 posted on 11/29/01 10:13 PM Pacific by AGAviator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]
TRANSLATION: The West is to blame for the Islamic States problems. I hope the U.S.A. fails. A few more years of prosperity and it should come to an end (goody!).
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Once again, you make no sense
Israel has been fighting a war against Middle Eastern people for the last 50 years. Their war has been aided and abetted by
American money and American weapons. After 50 years some of the people being attacked by our weapons decided to attack
American targets, including innocent civilians.
And what's this superhuman BS? The Jewish state wouldn't even exist if it weren't for Americans.
56 posted on 11/30/01 11:01 AM Pacific by AGAviator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]
TRANSLATION: See why the U.S.A. was attacked by the Jihad? It's the U.S.A.'s fault.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A comment by a Canadian, Lent: The above is some of the most scrurrilous anti-American rhetoric I've seen on Free Republic. AGAviator deserves the Chomsky award for bashing the U.S.A. The U.S.A. is not a perfect country (a simple notion attenuated to a fault and anti-American rhetoric by her enemies). The U.S.A. was wrong in its Balkan involvement for example, i.e., taking the side against the Serbs. However, such problems do not translate to the kind of virulent anti-Americanism noted above. I have relatives in the U.S. I went to school there for 4 years. I married an American. Individuals like AGAviator are not conservatives. They are wolves exploiting an imperfect world. AGAviator, maybe it's time you surrender your citizenship. Maybe give it to me. I'm more an American then you'll ever be.
Explain what principle(s) of conservatism propping up a socialist, Middle Eastern theocratic state which imposes a reign of terror on its non-Jewish inhabitants follows.
It certainly does not follow "all men are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights" [Declaration of Independence]
or "avoiding entangling alliances" [George Washington, Farewell Address],
or "a new nation, dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal" [Gettysburg Address].
No, it is you who is the fellow traveler, seeing everything in the context of whether the preeminent country in the world will completly subordinate its role to the whims of a parasitic neo-colonialist nation-state of four million, to further some dubious interpreation of outmoded scriptures.
AGAviator, maybe it's time you surrender your citizenship. Maybe give it to me.
Since you only see America useful for one thing, which is supporting a foreign power completely incapable of doing anything for America, you need to get your new citizenship papers from your foreign masters directly. Not from an American.
America's role in the world is to pursue its own interests, not your interests and not those of your foreign masters.
...TRANSLATION...TRANSLATION...TRANSLATION
TRANSLATION: Lent can't discuss the topic, which is Sharon being a war criminal under the exact same standards his country uses for justifying attacks on Arafat.
So Lent starts his usual obfuscation and spamming in the hope of drowning out the train of thought with a barrage of words and a furious commentary on them that is unrelated to the subject at hand.
To: madrussian
There are now thousands of civilian deaths from the American bombings, including civilians who came across unexploded
cluster bomblets. The cluster bombs are said to have a dud rate of around 10%. Multiplying even a few percent by the
thousands of bomblets expended so far gives a lethal legacy completely at odds with the propaganda about "precision
bombing."
America is on its way to being ranked right up there with Russia as an enemy among the general population, especially when
people see their one-time allies the Americans teaming up with returning Russians. The buying off of local tribal chiefs who've
been bribed with a private air force and promises of aid will simply make it more difficult to determine which people in their
midst will be guerillas and which will be "friendlies." They will need support indefinitely into the future, because if they get armed
too heavily themselves the weapons will have a way of changing owners.
12 posted on 11/28/01 12:30 AM Pacific by AGAviator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]
TRANSLATION: The U.S.A.'s involvment in Afghanistan is brutal and hegemonic. The U.S.A. is brutalizing the Afghan population with its bombs and is approaching public enemy #1 status as Russia was (is).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sure I believe it, Spam-Boy.
All men - Americans, Palestinians, Israelis, Mexicans, and Chinese - are created equal by their Creator, who is God. No exceptions. No equivocations.
This was a "revloutionary" concept. They believed in it so strogly, they actually went out and killed soldiers of a regime that did not believe this.
This concept runs directly contrary to one certain people running around saying they have a right to take a particular piece of real estate by force because they are "God's chosen."
For once, you have it right. Oh, and how do you like those Russians landing in Kabul? You don't think they're there to send America any kind of a message about whose back yard that country is, do you?
AGAviator
Anti-American
Traitor
Benedict Arnold
Anti-West
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.