Indispensable Solidarity with Israel – Actualized Version

Systematic filtering and censorship of information has been taking place since the Spanish-American War (1898-1899).1) Today’s severe political disorientation is the result of a never consistent fight against this unconstitutional practice of manipulating public opinion. Worse, the views thus generated polarize and disrupt solidarity within and between civilized nations. The bill for this lack of critical vigilance has so far been two world wars and a looming third.

After 1948, 1956, 1967 and 1973, we are now in the fifth Middle East war – a farce in itself. Throughout history, wars have been a common phenomenon – but not between always the same opponents. Before WW II, any clear winner had the opportunity to create peace conditions that gave them greater security. The established framework for stable coexistence was based on the respect which a loser automatically develops after the regional ranking is decided on the battlefield. Also, alone for security reasons, border adjustments usually took place. Stable coexistence was guaranteed as long as the hierarchy remained.

The main winners of WW I and WW II most obviously failed in both cases in establishing a stable, lasting peace order. This order had to have consisted in starting a development towards the United States of Europe – by simply following the integrative path of the USA. This role model had shown that people from all over Europe can form a new nation within few generations. Instead, the Versailles Treaty pathed the way to WW II with over 50 million deaths. But the establishment of a desirable stable peace order failed a second time. With the enormous weapons deliveries to the Soviet Unión not stopped at an appropriate moment, Western politicians allowed the communist state to finalize WW II as a dangerous Superpower. This way, Great Britain and the USA violated another rule of Macchiavelli which says that he who helps another one to become strong will fall.

When the victorious powers founded the UN in 1945, its idealistic charter promised a new era of peaceful conflict resolution instead of wars and civil wars. But hundreds of major military confrontations since then show that even this third attempt to create a sustainable peace order has failed.

To learn from these historical mistakes requires two crucial questions to be answered, “how and by which forces have the twice-victorious Western allies been hindered in building sustainable peace?”

The Middle East conflict turns out to be a model for the explanation. – Even after four victorious wars, Israel wasn’t allowed to establish a sustainable peace order and the forces which hindered its efforts were openly visible. These were mainly the Arab League and the UNO. The UN, among others, passed demonstrably unfair resolutions against the Jewish state from the start. In this way, Israel was denied the “equality of peoples” under Article 1, Paragraph 2 of its own charter. Simultaneously, the world organization failed obliging the Arab states to recognize Israel’s right to exist. The refusal to this day constitutes a breach of Article 2(1), which proclaims the right to sovereign equality of all Member States.

Instead, after Israel’s victory in 1967, the Arab League was ‘allowed’ to announce the three Nos – no recognition of Israel, no negotiations with Israel and no peace with Israel. This Khartoum Declaration was clearly at odds with the bridging spirit of the UN Charter. Thus, UN’s correct reaction had been to insist on an immediate revocation.

The unfair partisanship of the United Nations has resulted in the psychological catastrophe of Palestinian’s chronic disrespect of the regional hierarchy. Western politicians have their share in the guilt, too. They never have realized that the fair response to the consistent partisanship of Arab countries – and even the whole Muslim world – in all wars in the Middle East had to consist in a clear siding with Israel.

It was never just about the hierarchy between Israel and its Arab neighbors, but also about that between the cultural areas of Western free civilization and the Muslim world. Politicians ignored this fact even when it was communicated to them in fall 1947 from the mouth of Azzam Pasha, then leader of the Arab League. Azzam foresaw the war of 1948 and declared: “This war will be distinguished… (It) will be impossible to contain the zealous volunteers arriving from all corners of the world to avenge the martyrdom of the Palestine Arabs, and viewing the war as dignifying every Arab and every Muslim throughout the world …”2)

This supposedly neutral positioning became commonplace in Western politics, in mainstream media and organizations like NGOs. Unobtrusively at the beginning, it turned over into a systematical distortion of Israel’s history and legal status. This propaganda war grew persistently over decades, and since October 7, 2023, it has reached the proportions of a tsunami.

These destructive developments in Western attitude and thinking inevitably had to result in dangerous actions. And they do so long since without detection – exactly since the zeitgeist has switched from the free and integrating spirit of the American founding decades towards polarization and restrictions on freedom. The turning point was in the Spanish-American War. Then, our civilization entered an era of combined self-destructing violence and systematical hindering of the freedom of the press. As stated at the beginning, “today’s severe political disorientation is the result of a never consistent fight against this unconstitutional practice of manipulating public opinion.”

A lack of sane rational critique on their government’s increasingly militarist policy has become the outstanding feature of Western journalism.

It created the mental ambience, in which the great powers and their common child the UN could disregard fundamental political rules and violate own principles – all to the detriment of Western nations. In 79 postwar years, the supposed defenders of freedom have installed and supported dozens of dictatorships, overthrown democratically elected presidents and sided with militant Islamic groups.3)

Worse still, the West’s military involvements, particularly in Muslim countries, have led to the opposite of the promised liberation, namely to the destruction of the reputation of free democracy and Western civilization. It took the so-called Coalition of the Willing, a conglomerate of almost 50 predominantly Western and Muslim countries, more than 8 years to deploy in Iraq. And despite these exorbitant efforts, the results were the opposite of the promised prosperity and free democracy. Instead, the economy of this oil-rich country is ‘sustainably’ ruined, the government is – as usual – corrupt, around half a million civilians died, many more left the country and in large areas the environment is radioactively contaminated by DU munitions. In sharp difference to the present Gaza conflict, where much lower civilian victim figures are covered by the press with loud moaning, in the Iraq war civilian suffering and destruction in general were widely kept out of the reporting. Instead, technical details of the attacker’s weapons gave the impression of an almost clean war – a lie.4)

The difference in military efficiency between tiny Israel and the supposed superpower USA is so ridiculously inverted that a fitting conclusion is: “More than just something has to be wrong with the US military, but leaving the question open by whose influence.”

Israel’s military is still by far the best in the world in terms of quality, but since 1967 the global political atmosphere has changed enormously to the detriment of free Western nations, including Israel. Previous sympathy for the Jewish state has given way to violent demonstrations against it, instigated by “benevolent” organizations and media. The centuries-old narratives that tell us these were “controlled by Jews” turn out to be cynical fairy tales. It doesn’t matter whether some ultra-rich people claim Jewish identity as long as their actions run counter to Jewish values and solidarity.

The existence of such organizations and media would not pose a threat if they were solidarity-based parts of their Western societies and of a fair market of ideas. But both assumptions are incorrect. The fair market is systematically under attack. Today, it is not the quality and consistency of ideas that determines whether they are ignored and forgotten or widely disseminated, but rather the power of money.

George Soros is one of the less moneyed of the ultra-rich persons who represent the “modern” (spell: undemocratic) way of spreading political ideas and driving movements. The billionaire donates large parts of his fortune to a wide range of organizations with a predominantly anti-patriotic and anti-Israel orientation.

In this way, a small monetary aristocracy shapes mainstream thinking and triggers political decisions by funding organizations of their choice. Like historical nobility, today’s financial elite is prone to narcissism, thus their attitudes are at odds with freedom, democracy, actual integration and patriotism. Under their influence, the survival interests of Western nations are counteracted in favor of an illusion – a pseudo-integrative one-world order. The plans for civilization’s future have been drawn up long since by the UN and their strategic partner WEF. But reading between the lines, their rose-colored vision proves to be the opposite of what’s awaiting us. Simply extrapolating the current trends, an Orwellian system comes into sight, with a money elite controlling the rules. Obviously, the chosen path towards this historically inconsistent goal is to replace developed nations with a less critical, predominantly Muslim population.

Taking this hostile political environment into account means:

– The survival interests of Judaism, Israel and of all other nations of Judeo-Christian civilization are closely linked. Therefore, much more contacts between Israeli, American and European patriots and constitutionalists are necessary.

– The global propaganda war requires a more coordinated presentation of Israel’s legal situation and correct history (as well as Europe’s distorted colonial history).

– The high number of enemies and false friends outside and within the West makes it likely that there will be some among them who consider a war of mutual annihilation between Israel and Iran to be a desirable “solution”.

– In this context, invading Rafah would mean falling into a trap with no way out.

REFERENCES

1) https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/ADA227383.pdf

2) https://www.meforum.org/3082/azzam-genocide-threat

3) https://en.interaffairs.ru/article/a-complete-list-of-wars-and-armed-conflicts-ever-unleashed-by-the-us/

4) https://www.helsinkitimes.fi/world-int/23200-20-lies-about-the-iraq-war-reflections-on-the-20th-anniversary.html