The EU maintains that owing to what it terms Israel’s occupation of the Jewish provinces of Judea & Samaria, (also known as the West Bank of the River Jordan following Jordan’s illegal but highly successful occupation of this area between 1948 and 1967 and the ethnic cleansing of all Jews from these provinces), all goods produced in these territories should be discriminated against through selective labelling.
One of the reasons why the EU maintains this position, despite the obvious lack of logic, is that Israel has constructed a security barrier designed to prevent terrorism against civilians. This barrier, the EU maintains, disrupts the free movement of local people (Fatah and PLO supporters whom the EU terms ‘freedom fighters’) wishing to go about their business. The EU takes no account of the fact that their ‘business’ is terrorism, and that the barrier is designed to disrupt the free movement of Islamic terrorists. The barrier has been immensely successful at doing precisely that: preventing terrorism.
Now the EU is up in arms regarding another occupation, that of Western Sahara, where a security barrier has been constructed by Morocco to prevent the free movement of local people, Polisario supporters whom the EU terms ‘freedom fighters’.
Identical situations, you might think. Straightforward.
But nothing is so straightforward that the EU cannot corrupt it for political purposes in the name of anti-Israel aggression.
Because when it comes to Morocco, remarkably, the EU’s position is precisely the opposite of its stance regarding Israel.
The EU, which castigates Israel over the ‘occupation’ of Jewish provinces and the construction of a security barrier, and imposes discriminatory trade and product labelling sanctions against Israeli products, now does an about-turn. Although it claims that it backs Western Sahara, a sizable EU bloc led by Sweden now sides with the occupying power Morocco (despite its controversial security barrier and despite its controversial occupation) and demands that the EU continues to grant Morocco favourable trade terms. Swedish Liberal Party leader Jan Björklund even says that Swedish Foreign Minister Margot Wallström is a hypocrite for handling identical situations in Israel and Morocco in such diametrically opposed ways (link to article in Swedish).
The EU – led by Sweden – aggressively demands punitive measures for the Jewish state of Israel. And then equally aggressively demands that the same measures NOT be applied to the Muslim state of Morocco. Both, according to the EU, occupying powers. Both, according to the EU, having constructed security barriers on disputed territories. Both, according to the EU, using these security barriers to disrupt the free movement of local populations.
So what, then, is the difference?
That’s easy. The difference is the discriminatory double-standards that the EU as a body always, without exception, applies solely to the Jewish state of Israel.
Israel’s conflict with its Arab neighbours is not actually a conflict with its Arab neighbours.
It is a proxy conflict between the EU and Israel, with Israel’s Arab neighbours being massively financed by the EU and given a free EU diplomatic pass to continue their aggression against the Jewish state.
An Israeli military edge against its aggressive neighbours is essential, and will always be so.
Equally important, however, is the need for Israel to engage in the far more crucial, subversive, war of attrition that the EU is waging against the Jewish state.
A war that Israel can probably only win with two weapons: first, judicial process – taking to court and subjecting to trial any and all discriminatory practices aimed solely at the Jewish state, and second, financial constraints – totally draining EU bodies of their financial resources through aggressive litigation. The two measures are intricately interlinked.
It is only when the EU is forced to continuously pay for its own legal defence, when it finds itself tied up in endless and excruciatingly expensive, budget-bleeding legal cases, that it will cease its hobby of Jew-baiting.
Because let’s face it: that is what this is about. Baiting the Jewish state. Is it because many or most EU member states are by nature anti-Semitic? Possibly, but not actually necessarily so.
The answer is probably far more mundane: it’s because they have developed this ill-informed mantra over so many decades that they no longer have the ability to reflect on what they are doing or why. It’s just routine, unquestioningly followed, uncritically pursued.
That routine needs to be irrevocably smashed.
And that will only happen through mind-numbingly expensive litigation linked to a never-ending barrage of legal processes.
Quite simply, the EU-s Jew-baiting will only stop when it becomes too expensive.
And that too is when support for Arab intransigence will evaporate.
Promoting better quality of life. Not just for Israelis – who after all have seen their welfare and scientific and academic achievements skyrocket despite a constant backdrop of conflict.
The main beneficiaries will be the local Arab population, which will finally be free of the constraints of an EU-subsidised sense of self-perceived victimhood, the EU-sponsored anti-Semitism that is eating away at the very fabric of Arab society, the EU-financed hatred disseminated in schoolbooks and TV programmes, the EU-supported illegal Arab settlements sprouting up all over Judea & Samaria, illegal settlements without any essential infrastructure to maintain their populations. In short the EU-backed sense of entitlement that has led to decades of misery for the local Arab population.
Financially destroy the EU’s ability to wage this war against Israel – and the local Arabs will be the biggest winners.
The EU needs help in freeing itself of its addiction to Jew-baiting. EU citizens need to make their voices heard for this to happen. Before an onslaught of defensive Israeli litigation becomes the Jewish state’s only viable weapon and bleeds dry EU finances.
Which will benefit nobody – apart from the lawyers on both sides.