I want to talk about a sensitive and multi-faceted subject
but I'm pretty sure I'm not a good enough writer to capture all that
nuance. Instead, for the purposes of this essay, I'm going to revert to a
trick that you might find in the pantomimes that are currently playing
throughout Dublin during this holiday season. Whenever a character wants
to get the point across that they “don't really mean all that they are saying”
- that perhaps there is another level of understanding that is required
beyond the mere words they spout or actions they take - they will turn to the
audience and give them an exaggerated wink. For example, the big bad
wolf might be following little red riding hood across the stage and get asked
"You aren't following me so that you can steal the goodies I'm bringing to
Grandma, are you?" The wolf will say something like "Of course not my
dear - I'm only following you to make sure nothing falls out of your basket - I
only want to make sure you get to Grandma safely." Red then replies,
"Oh that's OK then" and turns back while the wolf - well, the wolf
turns to the audience, points to his eye and gives a protracted, over-the-top
"WINK". Having seen this all the kiddies watching know
for sure that this wolf is not really looking to keep Grannie's goodies safe -
he just wants to establish where Red is going. I think that there is more than a bit of that (not all that subtle) hidden messaging going on in
much of the recent rhetoric emanating from any number of sources in Ireland -
and in order to point out where that is taking place I'm going to resort to
inserting the occasional "WINK".
For the subject of this article is going to be the reaction of a broad swathe of the Irish public to the recent events in the Middle East. In order to show the depth of their concern for the "people of Palestine" certain of the populace based here, comfortably sitting on their collective fat arses thousands of miles from the conflict, have helpfully: voted to fly the Palestinian flag over Dublin City Hall; celebrated the return of a child taken hostage by the same people operating under that flag by saying "a child was lost and now is found" – (thus stretching the definitions of "lost and found" to the breaking point); retweeted (reX’d?) suggestions that Israel be relocated to an area found in Russia somewhere north of Mongolia “that is already allocated as a Jewish ruled region”, adopted the seemingly tourist oriented slogan “from the river to the sea”; helpfully explained that the attack on the October 7th rave was perfectly civilized until the police showed up and insisted on interrupting the invasion and otherwise voiced their ”concern” in a variety of equally useful and inciteful ways. Throughout this campaign these “concerned” groups and individuals have made it clear that their “concern” is based solely upon their affinity for the poor victims of over-the-top Israeli aggression, and derives not one iota from that nasty, bigoted sentiment known as “anti-semitism”. Goodness gracious, not at all. Why, some of their favourite comedians are Jewish. Honestly – you’d think that it had hardly ever occurred to them that there were Jews in Israel. New York and Hollywood – yes – but Israel – it had nearly slipped their mind.
Oh – you know what’s coming now don’t you…
Oh yes you do…
“WINK”.
I resort to an optical flutter here for the simple reason
that I can’t imagine any other rational explanation for such irrational
conclusions. Take, for example, the
above noted reference to a “lost child”.
That bit of political doublespeak came from no less than the once and
current Irish Prime Minister (Taoiseach) Leo Varadkar. Varadkar is one of those politicians who
tries so hard to be inoffensive that he almost always manages to give
offense. One can look back through the archive of this blog to find similar examples, such as Leo endeavouring to pay loving tribute to a police force that included the Black and Tans. If Leo were giving a toast at a
wedding he would compliment the bride by saying “doesn’t she look so adequate
today” or wish the loving couple to live together in happiness “for all the
days of their lives or an otherwise mutually acceptable length of time”. Leo’s
“child was lost and now is found” moment arose when he was attempting to
celebrate the return of Emily Hand, an Irish citizen who was not “lost” but abducted
by Hamas on October 7th, held captive and was informed of the fact
that her step-mother had been murdered once, in Varadkar-speak, she had been
“found”.
Let’s be clear (even if the Taoiseach’s statement wasn’t) the
only children Leo Varadkar should be referring to as “lost” will be those
trying to find their way to the new Children’s Hospital that his government has
located somewhere in an inaccessible corner of Dublin. The supposed analogy to the biblical story of
the prodigal son is embarrassingly inappropriate (the “lost child” in that
story had voluntarily wandered off to spend his inheritance, not been torn from
his house and carried off into captivity) and the Israeli government properly summonsed
the Irish ambassador to voice a direct complaint about the tasteless
comment. One can only imagine the back
and forth at that meeting – but I would hope the Israeli minister only looked
across to his Irish counterpart and said something along the lines of “Dude – REALLY?”
Still, that didn’t stop the political class in Ireland
(both in partnership and opposition) from rallying around their leader, saying
that the Israeli response was an “overreaction” and that “everyone knew what
the Taoiseach was saying”. The scary
thing is – I think everyone does. The categorization of Emily as being the
victim of circumstance rather than of horrific intent goes to the heart of the
matter. Varadkar was, as he always does,
attempting to play to all sides, regardless of degree of fault. One would
almost worry that such a statement could only arise if the speaker kind of
blamed the victim for being associated with the people who were the object of
the attack. Certainly, it couldn’t be
that this was an easier statement to make because, after all, Emily was at a
kibbutz – hanging around with, you know, all those – ummm – Jews.
Certainly not.
Never.
“WINK”.
I take no joy in accusing any group of people of collective
anti-semitism of this sort, but there are certain indicators that, if present,
make such a conclusion inevitable. Here
are some of them:
1. 1. You
hold the object of your ire to a standard of conduct that you would never apply
to yourself.
To listen to the rhetoric from much of the Irish media you
would think that the current state of affairs in Gaza arose strictly from the
events of the 7th of October.
That the forces of Hamas attacked Israel on that day and that the
Israeli response arises from that single act.
If that had been true – if the Hamas attack was limited to a single massive stand-alone
raid conducted across the Israel/Gaza border – I would still argue that
no Irish citizen (or citizen of any country) would ever stand for such an event
and would want the all the forces at their disposal brought to bear against the
perpetrators. I suspect that even if October 7th were the only
provocation they had faced the same people who say that the Israeli response is
“excessive” would be crying out for exactly the same reply if something like
that had ever happened to them.
But, while that might be the case – that’s not even close
to reflecting the true history of what has happened in the area around Gaza.
How many attacks aimed at Israel from Gaza do you think have actually
taken place since the turn of the millenium?
Dozens?
Nope.
Hundreds?
Nope.
Thousands?
Warmer – but not really that close.
Give up?
It is estimated that since the year 2000 Hamas forces have
launched upwards of 20,000 rockets across the border into Israel. That’s an average of about 3 rockets every
day for the last two decades.
Israel did not attack the Hamas presence in Gaza precipitously – before
taking these steps they had reinforced the border crossings (which Hamas
managed to breach), invested in a defensive missile shield (which Hamas managed
to overwhelm) and had attempted to shut off the flow of rocket-building
material from Hamas allies like Iran (which the Iranians and Hamas have
obviously been able to avoid). When, on
the 7th of October Israel was faced with an attack from Hamas – it
wasn’t the instigation of a conflict – it was the escalation of one. The level of restraint shown by Israel up to
the time of 7 October was extraordinary – and while the Israeli government’s
policies concerning Gaza and West Bank can (and should) be questioned – the
fact that those policies were being debated while under a level of attack that
was miles beyond anything any other similarly situated nation endures is
unquestionable.
Which is why criticism of the Israeli response following 7
October is, in many ways, so unjustifiable. There is simply no way, no way
whatsoever, that anyone who has not experienced this type of attack can say
that they would not respond exactly the same way. That’s because they can’t even say that
before October’s events they wouldn’t have reacted in much the same manner.
Dublin, in the 1970’s, was hit with one day, one, where multiple
bombs were planted in the city centre. It is still a source of anguish here (as
it should be). Imagine, for one second, if instead of one day Ireland had faced
24 years of multiple explosions raining down on it from across the border. Then, after trying to defend against this
outrage, on a single day 5,000 more such bombs were shipped across the line,
while terrorists raided Dundalk, Drogheda and Carrick-on-Shannon, killing,
raping, maiming, snatching up hundreds of hostages and then racing back across
the border to thumb their noses at you.
If you had the capacity to respond – wouldn’t you? And if you expected
someone else not to respond – would that expectation be based on reality – or
on something a bit more biased?
Like, for instance, they’re Jews and they kind of asked for
this.
Of course, that would never be behind such a sentiment.
No way – you would never expect someone to put up with more
than you ever would just because of their – ummm – “Semitic heritage”.
Would never even enter your mind.
“WINK”
2. 2. You
willfully ignore the opinions of others despite the fact that you would
ordinarily readily accept them.
In my opinion the fate of the people of Gaza is down to the
tactics, policies and actions of its rulers – Hamas. While the actions of the
Israeli forces deployed in Gaza are terrible – there is a general reluctance to
acknowledge that this is not a war of their making – nor is it a type of war
of their making. However, rather than taking the time to understand the actual
history of the Hamas government in Gaza people are simply defaulting to
labeling every Israeli activity as a “war crime”. But when forced to fight this
type of battle the resulting carnage – however terrible – is not a war “crime” –
it is simply “war”. That is what we are
confronted with in Gaza – a war – and, to our collective horror we are seeing
just how bad that is. But its nature and
character are not dictated by Israel but by Hamas. It is Hamas who has turned Gaza, initially
the site of a hoped-for Palestinian homeland – into an oversized, tunnel ridden,
heavily armed military encampment. It is
Hamas who have turned “civilian” sites (hospitals, schools, entire apartment complexes)
into virtual building sized booby traps. It is Hamas who have made every
crevice of the territory they rule into a battlefield.
“Who the hell are you to tell us about the history of Hamas
– you’re a nobody” you may say. Yup. I’m nobody and you would never be expected to
listen to me. If I were to
say that Hamas is the reason Palestinians don’t already have a homeland, if I
were to say that Hamas is the cause of civilian deaths in Gaza because they
weaponize civilians and consider all Palestinians to be drafted into the battle
against “the Jews”, if I were to say that the constant violence
directed by Hamas against Israel is primarily based upon the goal of a Jewish
genocide – you could ignore me. I’m
nobody.
But there are others who have espoused exactly the same
opinions who Ireland most certainly does not treat as a nobody – unless and
until their opinions become inconvenient. Bill Clinton, for example, is the
subject of virtual meltdown every time he visits these shores. Huge crowds greet his appearances, his role
in the Irish peace process is constantly lauded, his efforts during that period
have spawned innumerable books and even formed the basis for much of the sub-plot
of “Derry Girls” – there’s even a statue of him in Ballybunion, where
Clinton, at one time, played a round of what is alleged to have been “golf”.
So – what does this somebody have to say about Hamas? Well,
he blames them for the fact that his Middle East peace effort ultimately
failed. He considers them to have a genocidal approach to Israel and the Jews
that make their home there. He points out that they are notorious for placing
their own citizenry in harms way as a distinct military tactic. But don’t take my word for it – here he is, as
quoted in a Politico article when the topic of appeasing Hamas came up:
"Depends on whether you care what happens to the Palestinians as opposed to the Hamas government and the people with guided missiles," the former president answered.
“They were human beings in Gaza,” the audience member said.
“Yes, they were,” Clinton said. “And Hamas is really smart. When they decide to rocket Israel, they insinuate themselves in the hospitals, in the schools, in the highly populous areas, and they are smart.”
The line prompted applause, and he continued: “They said they try to put the Israelis in a position of either not defending themselves or killing innocents. They’re good at it. They’re smart. They’ve been doing this a long time.”
“I killed myself to give the Palestinians a state. I had a deal they turned down that would have given them all of Gaza,” Clinton said.
Oh – by the way – that article was published in 2016. Hamas had been “doing this a long time” back
then – they’ve been doing it even longer since.
Their strategy is to integrate the population into the terrorist
infrastructure – thus making any retaliation subject to the claim of targeting
innocents. Of course – it is no such thing – rather it is the act of putting innocents
in the target that creates the situation we find ourselves in – and it is Hamas
who put the pieces for this war in place.
So, what is to be done about this situation? Most commentators agree (and history shows) that
if you begin a war against Hamas and then leave Hamas in control at the end of
that period – all you do is guarantee another war. As cruel as this response has been it would
be even crueler to end it in such a manner as to do nothing but ensure we end
up right back here again anyway. Yet,
despite this difficult but seemingly unavoidable logic all one reads here is
how Israel “needs to adhere to the “rules of warfare” (as if the battlefield is
the equivalent of a game of Risk where you simply look on the back of the box
for the rules), must accept a cease fire while the enemy continues to hold hostages, weapons, territory and power - and should allow unnamed “third parties” to act as
peacekeepers when there is absolutely no peace to keep.
When Bill Clinton, Joe Biden, Barack Obama or whichever
American president or notable shows up in Ireland he is grandly feted and the
country virtually shuts down. They are accorded levels of respect and granted
degrees of wisdom that – and as an American I can say this – probably extend
well beyond what one should reasonably expect. That is – they are given these
accolades in all areas except when it comes to Israel. Then they are merely
seen as being manipulated by the puppet masters who represent certain unspecified
“interests”. Then they are gullible Yanks
slave to the influence of parties with another (unnamed) agenda.
Interests?
Agendas?
Puppet masters?
You couldn’t be inferring that these might involve – oh, I
don’t know – those infernal Jews?
Certainly not. Shame
on me for even bringing that up.
“WINK”
3. 3. You
conveniently ignore the conduct of those that you would ordinarily condemn,
simply because that conduct is targeted at the group for which you hold a
prejudice.
Hamas, the aforementioned group that rules Gaza with an
iron hand and makes its own citizens a part of their terrorist machinery – are –
to put it mildly, not good guys. Yet it
seems to bring a tear to the eye of a huge portion of the Irish population
whenever Hamas causes a conflict and Israel retaliates. Here is what Amnesty International said about
Hamas' reaction the last time they instigated an Israeli response:
Many of these unlawful killings were publicly billed as attacks
against people assisting Israel during the July and August 2014 conflict as
part of an operation, codenamed “Strangling Necks”, to target “collaborators”.
However, in reality, at least 16 of those executed had been in Hamas custody
since before the conflict broke out. Many had been awaiting the outcome of
their trials when they were taken away from prison and summarily executed.
Hamas forces also abducted, tortured or attacked members and
supporters of Fatah, their main rival political organization within Gaza,
including former members of the Palestinian Authority security forces. Not a
single person has been held accountable for the crimes committed by Hamas
forces against Palestinians during the 2014 conflict, indicating that these
crimes were either ordered or condoned by the authorities.
“Instead of upholding justice, the Hamas authorities and
leadership have continuously encouraged and facilitated these appalling crimes
against powerless individuals. Their failure to even condemn the unlawful
killings, abduction and torture of perceived suspects leaves them effectively
with blood on their hands...”
So – while the
vast majority of Irish roundly condemn Israeli actions against Hamas – Hamas seems
to view it as an opportunity to clean house.
There is no way that any reasonable person should be treating anything
associated with Hamas as admirable or even worthy of sympathy. Furthermore, and without unduly belaboring the point, this
should extend to the outside operators who supply Hamas, mainly Iran and Qatar.
Both of these countries could really care less about the plight of the Palestinians.
What they are really doing is ensuring that the endless state of conflict
between Israel and the Palestinian people continues. So long as there is an Israeli (read “Jewish”)
bad guy out there this can be used to create a convenient target or, yes, “scapegoat”, for the potentially troublesome citizenry of those countries. Qatar
is the master of this tactic – invest in a World Cup, funnel money to terrorists
– anything to keep the general public from questioning why, in the 21st
century, it is ruled by a hereditary monarch holding near complete power. In Iran there is even more reason to
fulminate conflict away from the homeland. Iranian dissenters have been taking
to the streets in increasing numbers and the best-known of them, Narges Mohammadi, was just awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for her work on behalf of women’s, and
more generally, human, rights in Iran. It would have been interesting to hear
her Nobel lecture, but that couldn’t happen because she is in an Iranian prison. These are the sorts of people that align themselves against Israel.
And make no
mistake about it – when I say they align against Israel I mean they target Jews
specifically. There is no distinction
made between Israel as a country and its citizenry. There are no Israeli civilians – they are all
Jews, and all Jews are enemies as far as Hamas and Israel’s Arab enemies are
concerned. The phrase “from the river to the sea” sounds innocuous but what it
derives from is an unambiguous message of hate. It describes the goal of
pushing all Israeli Jews from the Jordan river into the Mediterranean Sea. It posits
a genocide. Take a look at this quote from a book outlining the role of the United Nations in the Middle East:
With the UN patrols gone the Egyptian and Israeli soldiers faced each
other with no buffer in between, while the government controlled radios in
Cairo and other Arab capitals blared martial music and slogans like “Death to
the Jews of Israel, drive them into the sea”.
That’s actually
from a children’s book – published in 1968, more than a half century ago.
Nothing seems to ever change. When uninformed people chant “Intifada” or “From
the River to the Sea” – they aren’t expressing solidarity with an oppressed
people – they are (hopefully unknowingly) advocating the extermination of Jews.
There is no way
that most Irish people would associate themselves with regimes that routinely
enslave people, murder dissidents, abuse women and advocate genocide. But that
is what is being done in the most matter-of-fact way all the time when common
cause is found with Hamas and its allies.
Why is that?
Well – it can’t
be anything to do with the fact that we are talking about Israel, a country
full of…
C’mon you know
what I mean…
Orange groves?
Nope.
Winners of the
Eurovision contest?
Only one of those
– c’mon now, what is Israel known for?
Surely you can’t
be referring to people of the Jewish faith?
Well, yes.
Let me assure you
– in its support for the Palestinian cause the handwringing denizens of Ireland
have never, sir, never – even considered the fact that there are a large number
of Jews in Israel to be relevant.
Certainly not…
“WINK”
4. 4. You routinely engage in expressions of false equivalence.
Let me be clear about something from the outset of this section. I do not consider the current government in Israel to be even remotely blameless for the mess that currently exists in the region. One can only hope, and it appears that this day is arriving soon, that the people of Israel hold Benjamin Netanyahu accountable for spending far more time over the past decade worrying about his personal legal defense than about the defense of his own country. I think there is ample evidence being accumulated that shows the right-wing interests in Israeli politics felt the continued presence of Hamas in Gaza actually helped them – and so endeavoured to keep them around on the assumption that they could be “controlled”. Well, how’s that working out for ya?
But there is still an enormous difference between the Israeli government and the forces arrayed on behalf of Hamas. For one, there is the ability to criticize the Israeli government – as I just did and as millions of Israeli Jews and non-Israeli Jews are doing. If the same thing were to be done by an opponent of Hamas in Gaza – they’d be shot. That’s a fairly trustworthy sign that attempting to equate the two regimes is an exercise in false equivalence.
Why then do so many people do it? Anti-semitism is an easy avenue to follow – and I think its (largely unacknowledged) existence provides a slippery slope for people who would otherwise not fall into this trap. Because they have this built in prejudice it becomes easy to end up advocating for causes that are not worthy of their consideration.
So do I think anyone who I suspect of holding such prejudices to be a “bad person”? Strangely – no, I do not. Of course, I think anti-semitism is bad – but people come by their prejudices in many ways and sometimes may not even be aware they hold them. I point them out here because I think people sometimes rely too much on the escape that a “WINK” seems to offer. So, I don’t think you are necessarily a bad person if you ignore the roots of your mistaken belief.
I just think you’re delusional.
I think – and this is the real point of my taking the time to write this – that you may very well be a good person – and you very clearly know the difference between good and bad. What you don’t understand is the difference between bad and evil.
The United States’ approach to the siege in Waco Texas was bad policing, bad tactics and resulted in a bad outcome.
Timothy McVeigh pulling up with a half-ton of explosives to blow up a building full of children and clerical workers is evil.
The pursuit of a war in Iraq to effect regime change was a bad policy that gave rise to enormous suffering.
The circumstance that gave rise to that war was Al Qaeda commandeering four planes and flying them into multiple buildings as part of a sick semi-religious mission. That was evil.
The acts of the Israeli government in allowing Qatar to fund Hamas in an effort to maintain a semblance of government in Gaza while using the continued existence of Hamas to prop up its own legitimacy? That was a foolish and bad undertaking, for which a price should be exacted.
Flying terrorists into a rock concert/rave and invading peaceful villages to murder, rape and kidnap in the name of killing Jews? – flat out evil.
We
have to be able and unafraid to differentiate between these two types of events,
those that are merely bad and those that represent a true evil. If we do not do
so we will never overcome the single greatest threat that continuing to equate
them creates – that of normalizing evil. Increasingly, behaviour that would
have been seen, at one point in time, as well beyond the pale is now being
treated as just the next inevitable step in the road to anarchy. Known evils –
like incipient anti-semitism – make the trip down that road so much easier to
take. Hamas is an evil organization – and
until that is recognised the people of the region – Palestinian and Israeli,
Jew and gentile, will continue to suffer.
As difficult as it is to see happen it is better to have this done with
now than to plaster over the wound, let Hamas grow back and then do all this
over yet again. Keeping the prejudices
of anti-semitic tropes alive only creates more suffering – it doesn’t solve
anything.
Problem solved.
“WINK”
