Showing posts with label Eitay Mack. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Eitay Mack. Show all posts

12 May 2023

When the Government of the Israeli Labour Party Actively Supported the Military Junta in Greece

It was during the fiercest repression of  the Greek people that Zionism formed an alliance with their fascist oppressors

The Greek Junta (1967-1974), whose coming to power was backed by the United States and Henry Kissinger, set the scene for the coming to power of similar pro-American military juntas, like that of Pinochet in Chile. Israel at the time was ruled by an Israeli Labour government coalition, not Likud, not Religious Zionism not the right-wing of the Zionist movement. It included Mapam, the so-called left Zionist party which in 1969 formally joined what became the Israeli Labour Alignment.

As Eitay Mack shows in The suppressed history of Israel’s support for the brutal Greek junta the Israeli government’s had extremely friendly relations with the Junta and this

 ‘relationship blossomed during the dark days of the military junta that ruled Greece from 1967 and 1974 — a period marked by the brutal repression, imprisonment, torture, and murder of opponents of the regime, and a period that was deliberately omitted from the celebratory narrative Israel promotes.’

Despite knowledge of the torture, murder and disappearance of its political opponents, the Israeli government had a closer relationship with the Junta than with previous civilian governments. The Israeli government was concerned with winning the support of the Junta for Israel in the United Nations and international forums.

From October 1968 onwards close military and economic ties developed between Israel and the Greek Junta. Israel’s only concern was with the fact that their budding relationship might receive undue publicity.

The head of the office of the Director General of Israel’s Foreign Ministry, Hanan Bar-On, asked the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs to “try as much as possible to be modest in publicizing the progress of our practical relations with Greece, be they in commerce or in other areas.”  When members of the Junta’s air force delegation later visited Israel for negotiations on the renovation and maintenance of aircrafts, they arrived in civilian clothes.

Mack reports that the Junta was becoming ever more oppressive inside its borders. On November 17, 1973, in response to a student strike, an attack was made by the military on the National Technical University of Athens with tanks, killing dozens of civilians. Although news of the atrocity was reported all over the world, including in Israeli newspapers, ‘the State of Israel did not waver in its support of the junta or take a step back in its economic relationship.’

Israel’s response was to double down on its support for the Junta and its military and economic trading relationships. As Mack notes:

The story of Israel’s support for the military junta in Greece offers insight into the nature and logic of Israel’s relations with dozens of dictatorships around the world during the 1960s and ’70s. Israel was not interested in the fate of the opposition and left-wing activists who were tortured and murdered by the security forces, nor did it seem to care that its diplomacy, military, and economy were directly aiding in the oppression of millions. This history suggests that the State of Israel was not merely a passive player, following only the will of the great powers; it was and remains a powerful and autonomous promoter of its own interests first and foremost, willing to compromise on values like democracy and human rights in order to gain international support in its own oppression of the Palestinian people.

Nowhere was this more evident in Israel’s relationship with the Argentinian Military Junta (1976-83) which tortured and ‘disappeared’ up to 3,000 Argentine Jews. Once again Israel’s own interest in supplying the Junta with weapons and military training trumped any concern for Argentine’s Jews.  So much so that in the case of Argentina Israel actually denied visas to Jews who were deemed subversive of the Junta.  See Jews targeted in Argentina's dirty war

The suppressed history of Israel’s support for the brutal Greek junta

Declassified files reveal the extent of Israel’s ties with the regime known for torturing and murdering thousands of its citizens in the 1960s-70s.

By Eitay Mack April 28, 2023

 

The leaders of the 1967 Greek coup d'état: Brigadier Stylianos Pattakos, Colonel Georgios Papadopoulos and Colonel Nikolaos Makarezos. (Unknown/CC BY-SA 4.0)

Greece is one of the few countries in Europe today that openly embraces the Israeli army, holding joint military exercises with Israel and acting as an enthusiastic partner for Israeli arms and surveillance companies. Against the background of Israel’s current constitutional and political crisis, Greece has also reportedly been trying to attract more Israeli hi-tech companies, many of which build military or dual-use products, by offering them extremely generous incentives. 

This close relationship has also had a major impact on Greek domestic politics. Last year, for example, it was revealed that an Israeli former intelligence general named Tal Dilian, who runs a spyware company from an office in Athens, was involved in a political and legal scandal over the spyware’s use against Greek politicians and journalists; both the head of intelligence and the adviser to the prime minister of Greece were forced to resign.

George Papadopoloous

How did this unique relationship form? Publicly, Israel and Greece trace their strong ties back only to 1990, when full diplomatic relations were established and an Israeli embassy opened in Athens. On May 21, 2015, the 25th anniversary of that milestone, the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs published a celebratory statement explaining its narrative of Greek-Israeli diplomacy, according to which the period between 1952 and 1990 saw only low-level relations between the two countries.

In recent years, the statement continues,

“a strategic partnership has developed between the two countries … based on democratic values and common interests shared by the two countries, which face challenges in the Eastern Mediterranean region … The two countries, Greece and Israel, are modern and democratic scions of ancient nations … The bilateral cooperation between the two countries promotes common values, progress and stability in the region. Both countries strive to continue to promote peaceful and good neighborly relations with peoples and nations in the region.”

This account of the military relations between Israel and Greece is, however, untrue. Telegrams in the files of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in the Israel State Archives, which were opened to the public between 2019-2020, show that the two countries’ special relationship was in fact born much earlier than 1990, and had nothing to do with the “democratic values” of either Greece or Israel. The relationship blossomed during the dark days of the military junta that ruled Greece from 1967 and 1974 — a period marked by the brutal repression, imprisonment, torture, and murder of opponents of the regime, and a period that was deliberately omitted from the celebratory narrative Israel promotes. 

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu meets with Greek Foreign Minister Nikos Dendias at the prime minister’s office in Jerusalem, January 31, 2023. (Marc Israel Sellem/POOL)

Before the junta came to power, Greece’s relations with Israel were cold: it preferred to build diplomatic and economic ties with Arab countries, and even voted against the 1947 UN Partition Plan. Then, under the pretext of dealing with the “communist threat,” a group of generals staged a military coup in Greece in April 1967. Immediately upon seizing power, the military junta began a campaign to eliminate its real and imagined opponents, an effort embraced or tacitly supported by most Western European countries and the United States. 

Although there is disagreement regarding the exact number of victims of the junta, several thousand activists, students, artists, writers, actors, journalists, and even World War II veterans were arrested, subjected to severe torture, and murdered. Some were held in detention and torture camps for many years, with little food and water and no medical treatment. The torture practices included whipping the feet with sticks and plastic tubes, inserting a tube into the detainee’s body and pouring water inside, banging the head against the wall or the floor, the torturers jumping on the detainee’s stomach, pulling out nails, causing burns and extinguishing cigarettes on the body, electrocution, and even sexual torture.

Although most of the files and documents of Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs remain classified, the telegrams in the archives that have been made available to the public reveal that Israel was well aware of these human rights violations and nevertheless continued its close military and political ties with the military junta and even considered it more friendly to Israel than the civilian regimes that preceded it. And yet, cognizant of diplomatic optics, Israel sought to hide the nature of its relations with Greece — a practice that continues to this day.  

Establishing the relationship

A telegram sent by the head of the Israeli mission in Athens, Yehoshua Nissim Shai, only two months after the coup, demonstrates Israel’s awareness of the political repression in Greece at the time. In June 1967, Shai complained that it was not possible to carry out Israeli PR activities in Greece because the locals were afraid to engage in any political matters:

“It is … absolutely forbidden for an individual to engage in political matters in the severe military regime that prevails in this country … It is enough for a person to express any political opinion without the approval of the authorities for him to find himself arrested the next day.”

Despite Shai’s awareness of these political crimes and apparent personal discomfort with them, a series of communications and meetings that took place in the immediate aftermath of the junta’s coup are indicative of the quickly warming relations between the two countries. 

 

A military tank seen on the street during the coup that brought the Greek junta to power, 21 April 1967. (CC BY 2.0)

Less than one month after sending the telegram, Shai reported in another telegram on his meeting with the junta’s foreign minister and his effort to motivate the junta to take a more sympathetic and understanding stance toward Israel. The foreign minister responded that the junta, and even he personally, had a very positive attitude toward Israel and “is happy about the glorious victory of the IDF” in the 1967 war, which had ended just a few weeks earlier. According to the minister, because of the junta’s diplomatic interests in the Arab world, he could not take a public pro-Israel line as he wanted, but he promised to do everything possible to soften the position of the Greek representative at the UN toward Israel. 

In another telegram describing a subsequent meeting with General Nikolaos Makarezos, one of the leaders of the coup, Shai reported:

“The conversation revolved around his visit to Israel at the beginning of this year. The minister mentioned his contacts with Mossad personnel and spoke highly of Israel’s achievements.”

On Sept. 17, the relationship developed further. The deputy speaker of the Knesset at the time, Yitzhak Navon, visited Greece and met with Constantine Kollias, the prime minister appointed by the military junta. According to the summary of the meeting, Navon tried to convince Kollias to vote with Israel in international forums such as the United Nations. Kollias expressed appreciation and admiration for the State of Israel, saying that he saw Greece and Israel as fighting “against the common enemy — communism” and added that “your hopes [are] our hopes.” Kollias later explained that he was upset with “attacks … in the press by Jews on the Greek government and police.” 

Instead of calling out Kollias’s complaint for being tinged with the antisemitic trope that Jews control the media, Navon tacitly validated his concern and said,

“The government of Israel has no control over the press in the world, not even in Israel itself. But it is possible to ‘soften’ this attitude in certain cases. Greece’s support for Israel may bring it sympathy in the free world.”

A market for modern and cheap weapons

A year later, the nascent diplomatic ties between Greece and Israel crossed over into military cooperation. In October 1968, Yaakov Ben-Sher, Israel’s commercial attaché in Greece, wrote that he met with Makarezos to discuss a visit by a delegation of Greek military officers to Israeli Military Industries, the state-owned weapons manufacturer, at Israel’s invitation. It was agreed that the delegation would not arrive in uniform and that the visit would not be publicized. The next month, Ben-Sher wrote that among the goals of the visit were “establishing a maintenance plant for aircraft in Greece, Israel Aerospace Industries, [and] the presentation of weapons and military equipment produced in Israel.”

 

Workers at an IMI factory manufacturing gun barrels in 1955. (GPO)

The junta’s air force delegation visited Israel between Nov. 25 and Dec. 3, 1968. A report prepared by the Greek delegation after the trip outlined their activities in Israel: the group visited Israeli Military Industries’ factory; was interested in Uzi submachine guns, lighting bombs, and smoke grenades; and discussed the possibility of Israel maintaining the junta’s air force aircrafts, and even Israeli assistance in the establishment of an arms manufacturing industry in Greece. 

The Greek military delegation wrote that

“due to the constant development of the Greek army and due to the reduction of the U.S. military aid program, Greece is dependent on the international arms markets, since the supply of the necessary equipment and weapons would not be immediately resolved by establishing a national arms industry. From this perspective, Israel is a market for modern and cheap weapons and is a site for extensive commercial exchanges and close economic cooperation for the benefit of both sides.”

On Jan. 30, 1969, Ben-Sher reported that he met again with the junta’s minister of coordination, Makarezos, and talked with him about the purchase of Gabriel missiles, land army communication equipment from Tadiran (an Israeli company), and even Israeli assistance in building a nuclear reactor in Greece. According to a telegram from June 5, 1969, sent by the Israeli mission in Athens, the chairman of the Greek Atomic Energy Commission visited Israel during the previous month, but it is not clear from Israeli Foreign Ministry documents disclosed to the public if and how Israel aided Greece’s nuclear development.

‘The rulers of today will also be the rulers of tomorrow’

As diplomatic relations between the State of Israel and the junta tightened, so did their economic ties. On Feb. 8, 1969, a new commercial agreement was signed, revealing the inextricable link between each country’s military and economy. In a telling symbol of the increasingly close ties, Yaakov Cruz, the former deputy head of the Mossad, was appointed to the position of head of the Israeli mission in Athens in early 1968. 

During May 1969, preparations began for a visit to Greece by an Israeli economic delegation, including representatives of the arms manufacturers. For reasons of political sensitivity, Israel decided to downgrade the level of participants in, and the visibility of, the delegation. In response, Cruz sent a telegram to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in which he tried to reverse the decision to downgrade. “Our relations with the current government have improved a lot compared to our relations with its predecessors,” wrote Cruz. 

 

Protest against the junta by Greek political exiles in Germany, April 30, 1967. (Bundesarchiv, Bild 183-F0503-0204-005/CC-BY-SA 3.0)

“Many of the Greek exiles were our most prominent opponents when they were in power, led by Andreas Papandreou,” he continued. “All Western countries, without exception, make great efforts, and often without limits, to succeed in as many economic transactions as possible with Greece, including the supply of military equipment.” Cruz concluded his telegram by writing that, in his opinion, Israel should not be ashamed of its relations with the junta, since it was equally clear to all Western countries, and in particular to the USA, that the “the rulers of today will also be the rulers of tomorrow.” 

On May 16, 1969, Cruz reported on a meeting he and the CEO of Israel Aerospace Industries, Al Schwimmer, held with the head of the military junta in order to “present the possibilities and proposals of Israel Aerospace Industries.” Cruz wrote that he reviewed with the head of the junta the progress that had taken place since his last visit: “Three agreements have been signed between us, two military delegations have already visited, and a third will leave next week to Israel. A goodwill delegation to promote economic ties is about to come to Greece at the beginning of June, and the visit of the CEO of Israel Aerospace Industries is also part of the effort to develop these ties.” The head of the junta thanked Cruz for the explanations he received and emphasized the need for cooperation between the two countries.

Keeping it a secret

At the beginning of June 1969, another Israeli economic delegation visited Greece. In several telegrams around that time, Cruz wrote that the members of the Israeli delegation received important proposals such as “establishing a maintenance plant for aircrafts, overhauling aircrafts’ engines and selling weapons”; that the delegation met with the Greek military’s chief of staff, the junta’s officers, and other senior officials; and that the Israeli company Tadiran had signed a deal with the regime worth $2 million. 

In a telegram sent by economic attaché Ben-Sher on Oct. 30 of the same year, he wrote that

“the Greek army ordered communication equipment from Tadiran in the amount of $2,316,500. The order was finally approved by the Israeli prime minister and the minister of defense. The contract will be signed within a week to 10 days. The contract is to be executed in 1970.” 

The close relations with a military junta that had become infamous for its human rights violations raised some concerns, however. “In my conversations with various people, they expressed their regret at the publicizing of the strengthening of our ties with Greece during this particular period,” the deputy head of the Israeli delegation in Brussels wrote to the director of the European division at the foreign ministry in 1969. “Last night, two friends told me that they understand the need for realpolitik in the special situation that Israel is in, and especially in what concerns our economic relations, but they wondered if it is not possible to prevent, or at least to moderate, the publicizing of this matter.” 

 

Demonstration against the Greek military junta in front of the White House, April 21, 1974. (Reading/Simpson/CC BY-NC 2.0)

In a telegram sent by the head of the office of the director general of the Foreign Ministry, Hanan Bar-On, to the leadership of the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs a short time later, he asked to “try as much as possible to be modest in publicizing the progress of our practical relations with Greece, be they in commerce or in other areas.” In accordance with this request, the members of the junta’s air force delegation, who visited Israel for negotiations on the renovation and maintenance of aircrafts, arrived in civilian clothes.

According to a report prepared by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in 1972, Israel sold parachutes worth approximately $250,000 to the Greek military, and they conducted negotiations regarding the sale of searchlights to the Air Force and the Armored Corps. But the junta wanted more. “The Greek army is interested in buying other military equipment in Israel, but we do not have political approval for this,” Dr. Yitzhak Azouri, an Israeli diplomat stationed in Greece, wrote in 1972, “for example, rockets.”

The following year, Israel went so far as to assist Greece in one of the most sensitive areas of Israeli international relations. On Jan. 17, 1973, Azouri reported that an agreement was signed with the junta to transport crude oil from the Persian Gulf through the Eilat-Ashkelon oil pipeline, and from there on to Piraeus, Greece. “A transport of about 250,000 tons (in the amount of about $1.5 million) has already been carried out,” Azouri reported. “It was agreed in principle to transport around 1.5 million tons, that is, in the amount of about $9 million.” 

Azouri was reprimanded for his reports on a sensitive issue like oil. “In your review of Israel-Greece economic relations, you mentioned the matter of the oil pipeline, which is considered a top secret issue,” he was told in a telegram sent by the economic department of the Foreign Ministry on April 6 of that year. “Please inform the recipients about the secret classification of the telegram.”

Undeterred by escalating brutality

As its relations with Israel grew increasingly warm, Greece was becoming ever more oppressive inside its borders. On Nov. 17, 1973, in response to a student strike, junta forces raided the premises of the National Technical University of Athens with tanks, killing dozens of civilians. Although news of the atrocity was reported all over the world, including in Israeli newspapers, the State of Israel did not waver in its support of the junta or take a step back in its economic relationship. 

 

Thousands march outside the Athens Polytechnic against the military junta, November 1973. (Unknown/CC BY-SA 4.0)

On March 12, 1974, Azouri reported that “according to the estimate, the payments of Greece for transporting crude oil from the Persian Gulf through the oil pipeline will amount to about $8 million.” According to the same report, two Greek military delegations visited Israel in 1973, with the junta’s air force signing an arms deal with Israel Aerospace Industries for hundreds of weapons and other military technology, including 466 units of Uzi submachine guns, worth well over $1 million, with other deals in the works worth millions more.

Azouri also noted that after a visit to Israel by the Greek Air Force delegation, the Greeks decided to purchase bombs from Israel, subject to budgetary approval. Israel won a tender worth approximately $750,000 for the supply of 81 mm mortars, submitted proposals for the supply of hand grenades and the establishment of a factory for the production of hand grenades in Greece, and Tadiran signed an agreement for the supply of communications equipment worth $300,000. 

Azouri did not raise the possibility of canceling or freezing these deals in light of the massacre in Athens and other human rights violations. It seems, in fact, that Israel doubled down on its military relations with Greece: Azouri, alongside another Israeli diplomat named Yael Vered, negotiated a deal in which the junta’s air force decided to purchase bombs and aircraft armament accessories worth $4–5 million dollars. It was also agreed that within a month bomb models would be transferred to the junta for testing in their planes, pending budgetary approval.

At the time these deals were being negotiated, the junta was involved in the violent destabilization of Cyprus and supported the Greek nationalists who wanted the island to be annexed to Greece –– in opposition to the wishes of the elected government in Cyprus and the Turkish minority on the island. According to documents from the Israeli Foreign Ministry, Israel was aware that the junta was transferring military equipment to the forces it had stationed illegally on Cypriot soil. For example, in discussing one of the recent arms deals between Greece and Israel, Azouri said: “The problem is more political, as some of the mortars are intended for the Greek army in Cyprus.” 

His solution to the bad optics was to propose handing over the mortars without marking, and he added that the Foreign Ministry “has no objection to the Greek army in Cyprus receiving the mortars, and over time this can be brought to the attention of [Cypriot President and Archbishop] Makarios III, who has an interest in the Greek army’s activities on the island.”  

 

President Makarios of Cyprus in Bonn during a state visit to West Germany, May 22, 1962. (Bundesarchiv, B 145 Bild-F012969-0006/Patzek, Renate/CC-BY-SA 3.0)

Learning the wrong lessons

It was the junta’s intervention in Cyprus — supporting a military coup that took place on July 15, 1974 — that ultimately led to its downfall. The leaders of the coup deposed Makarios, and announced their intention to annex the island to Greece. Five days later, Turkey invaded the island in the name of protecting its Turkish minority and occupied the northeast. Two hundred thousand Greek Cypriots living in this area were deported or fled from the Turks, leading the island to be divided along ethnic lines, which has lasted to this day. 

Israel was well aware of the junta’s involvement in what was happening. According to a situation assessment prepared by the Israeli ambassador in Nicosia on July 18, three days after the military coup on the island:

“There is no dispute that the coup was carried out by the Greek officers of the Cypriot National Guard, in accordance with instructions from Athens. The assessment is that the ruling sect in Athens acted out of a lack of understanding of international affairs and from a provincial perspective.”

On July 22, a week after the coup, the exiled president of Cyprus, Makarios, asked Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin for assistance in preserving the island’s independence. Instead of providing aid, however, the Rabin government simply decided to send Makarios a nonchalant greeting from the former Israeli ambassador to the island, Rachamim Timur, in which he hoped for his well-being, wishing him health and all the best. Rage at the military junta’s intervention in Cyprus led to its collapse, and Greece began the process of becoming a democracy once again. 

Yael Vered, the Israeli diplomat, prepared a summary of the lessons to be learned from the recent Cyprus crisis. “Israeli conclusions: a. A minority of 18 percent can win full political rights if it has military and political support fighting on its behalf; b. 200,000 people can become refugees without the world being shocked; c. The nullity of the guarantees of ‘world powers’ has been proven … d. The impotence of the UN in finding an actual solution to crises has been proven once again (if indeed this even needs to be proven).” In another telegram, Vered wrote that “the Cyprus affair has so far demonstrated the impotence of the UN and its inability to solve complex problems such as the Cyprus problem (or, in the past, Vietnam, the Israeli-Arab conflict, Kashmir, etc).”

Apparently, Israel did not learn to be wary of future cooperation with other oppressive military regimes, did not learn that using excessive force can cause a regime’s downfall, and did not learn that upholding violent military rule is perhaps not worth the devastation it inflicted on innumerable citizens. Israel did, however, learn that refugees can be easily deported and that the UN is powerless — though Israel likely knew this already.

2 February 2020

Zionism's Holocaust Hypocrisy - Netanyahu uses Holocaust Memorial Day to call for a War on Iran and the International Criminal Court

In 1988 Auschwitz Survivor, Yehuda Elkana, wrote that it was better to forget the Holocaust than to allow it to be used to strengthen Israel's virulent anti-Arab racism and nationalism

When BBC reporter Olga Guerin, in a report from Jerusalem, stated that
“In Yad Vashem’s Hall of Names, images of the dead. Young soldiers troop in to share in the binding tragedy of the Jewish people. The state of Israel is now a regional power. For decades, it has occupied Palestinian territories. But some here will always see their nation through the prism of persecution and survival.”
all the guns in the Zionist armoury let fire. By stating the obvious, that Israeli identity is bound up with the Holocaust even whilst it is oppressing the Palestinian people, the Zionist guns began firing. Shh, you mustn’t mention the Holocaust in the same breath as the Palestinians.
Danny Cohen, the BBC's former Director of Television whinging about mentioning Palestinians and the Holocaust in the same breath
Even more absurdly, despite the BBC’s cameras filming Israeli soldiers filing into Yad Vashem, the Zionist Holocaust Propaganda Museum, Danny Cohen, a  former Director of BBC Television, said:
“The attempt to link the horrors of the Holocaust to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is deeply offensive and upsetting.  
I guess it would probably offend, and possibly upset too, those war criminals who think it is acceptable to seize a 12 year old child from her bed in the early hours of the morning before blindfolding, beating and throwing her into a freezing, bug infested cell without food or water for sexually abusing her. Indeed it would be nice to think that they are offended, although I doubt it.
The Campaign Against Anti-Semitism, which only exists to defame supporters of the Palestinians and anti-Zionists, was the first to splutter its outrage.
“drawing comparisons between Israeli policy and the Nazis” is against what it called ‘the international definition of antisemitism’.
As far as I know there is no such definition. Perhaps they were referring to the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance which gives as an illustration of anti-Semitism ‘Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.’ The CAA omit however the qualifying clause which says that this could be anti-Semitic ‘taking into account the overall context’. Strange that!
Professor Yehuda Elkana - author of 'Time to Forget'
The IHRA itself is a good example of the Zionists’ hypocrisy. This ‘definition’ of anti-Semitism mentions Israel, which is a state not a person, in 7 of its 11 illustrations. Clearly it is the Zionists who use the Holocaust in order to protect Israel!
The Board of Deputies also complained and the far-Right Editor of the Jewish Chronicle, Stephen Pollard, screeched that he could not
‘recall a more foul – sickening, indeed – report by any journalist, either in print or broadcast.’
Pollard is not one to understate his case. However I can think of far more sickening reports such as the BBC interview with Benjamin Jones of the neo-Nazi Generation Identity when reporting on the murder of 50 Muslims in New Zealand last year. However racism from the neo-Nazi Right does not concern Pollard. His only worry is with ‘left anti-Semitism’.
The pretence that the Holocaust has nothing to do with Israeli Jewish identity and its treatment of the Palestinians is the purest hypocrisy. The Holocaust is the dominant metaphor in Israel and among Zionists. How many times have Zionist ideologues, like Trump’s Ambassador to Israel, David Friedman, called their opponents ‘kapos’ or ‘self-haters’. Kapos were the coerced orderlies of the Nazi camps. ‘Self hater’ is a term of abuse that the Nazis aimed at German anti-fascists.
As Daniel Blatman, the Chief Historian at the Warsaw Ghetto Museum, a Holocaust researcher at the Hebrew University wrote:
The Holocaust is a large component of Jewish Israelis’ national identity. It serves the right’s proto-fascist, racist, victim-centered discourse, meant to whitewash the ongoing crime against the Palestinians and to put the Christian world in a position of eternal apology.
If Danny Cohen and Pollard are correct then this is beyond foul or offensive. It is positively criminal!
The Holocaust – using memory as a political weapon
When Western leaders commemorate the liberation of Auschwitz 75 years ago we can be sure that their purpose is not preventing another Holocaust. Their aim is to incorporate the Holocaust into an ideology of racism and exclusion. The Holocaust is the ideal reason to go to war these days as the lessons of appeasement are wrongly applied to every act of aggression. Memory of the Holocaust has become an integral component of western imperialism. Every victim of imperialism has become another ‘new Hitler’.
Today even the far-Right pays homage to the Holocaust and Zionism, from Tommy Robinson to neo-Nazi Richard Spencer (Spencer favours ‘de-Judifying’ the Holocaust)!
Eitay Mack, an Israeli human rights attorney, compared Yad Vashem, to a ‘Laundromat, washing out the sins of the various dictators and anti-Semites who pass through its doors these days’. Blatman also made the same comparison writing that Yad Vashem
has functioned as a hard-working laundromat, striving to bleach out the sins of every anti-Semitic, fascist, racist or simply murderously thuggish leader or politician like Hungary’s Viktor Orban, the Philippines’ Rodrigo Duterte and Italy’s Matteo Salvini.
My heart breaks when I see my colleagues, honest and faithful researchers of the Holocaust, giving tours of this historic museum, apparently under compulsion, to the evildoers the Israeli government sends to Yad Vashem to receive absolution in the name of Holocaust victims in exchange for adding a pro-Israel vote at international institutions.
Holocaust Memorial Day
In 2001, 56 years after Auschwitz, war criminal Tony Blair, instituted Holocaust Memorial Day. New Labour had at the same time been waging war against ‘bogus asylum seekers’. 80 years earlier, the Daily Mail was also campaigning against the admittance of ‘bogus’ refugees, Jews from Nazi Germany. None of which prevented it from launching the ‘anti-Semitism’ campaign against Jeremy Corbyn.
‘I have yet to hear a single teenager come back from Auschwitz and say that we mustn’t abuse others the way we were abused.... The message is always the opposite. Gaza is permitted because of Auschwitz.’ Gideon Levy
Blair’s friend Bill Clinton was another hypocrite. On a visit to Rwanda in March 1998, Clinton expressed regret for failing to
fully appreciate the depth and the speed with which [Rwandans] were being engulfed by this unimaginable terror.
Joyce Leader, the U.S. Embassy’s deputy chief of mission in Kigali at the time, told a meeting in 2014 that
“We had a very good sense of what was taking place. It was clear that a systematic killing of Tutsi was taking place in neighborhoods.”
Timothy Longman, associate professor of political science at Boston University, remarked that:
When President Bill Clinton flew to Rwanda in 1998 (in a trip in which he never left the airfield), he claimed that he simply didn’t know what was happening in Rwanda. We now have further evidence that Clinton’s claims were false. It is not that the U.S. government didn’t know what was happening in Rwanda. The truth is that we didn’t care.
Which was the British government’s position during the WW2. Anthony Eden, Britain’s Foreign Secretary, opposed issuing a warning to the Germans in 1944 as to the consequences of continuing the extermination of the Jews. Eden told the Americans that such a declaration would be to the Jews’ disadvantage but like Blair and Clinton, he too was lying. The real reason Eden told the War Cabinet’s Refugee Committee, was that such a declaration ‘is likely to be redoubled pressure upon us for measures of rescue.’ [Meier Sompolinsky,   The British Government and the Holocaust, pp. 128-129]
In other words Eden feared the consequences of the Nazis not murdering their victims.
On April 22nd, 1993, one year prior to the Rwandan genocide, Clinton opened the Washington Holocaust Museum with these words:
this museum is not for the dead alone, nor even for the survivors... it is perhaps most of all for those of us who were not there at all. To learn the lessons, to deepen our memories and our humanity, and to transmit these lessons from generation to generation....
The evil represented in this museum is incontestable.... So we must stop the fabricators of history and the bullies as well. Left unchallenged, they would still prey upon the powerless; and we must not permit that to happen again.
Which demonstrates not only that words are cheap but that establishing Holocaust museums has nothing to do with preventing genocide.
What happened in the Nazi Holocaust was repeated in Rwanda and Cambodia and the West’s response was identical each time. Not only did the USA do nothing to halt the genocide but French troops actively aided them. Chris McGreal recalled:
The French army turned its back on many others, including the French embassy's Tutsi staff, who were mostly abandoned to their deaths despite desperate pleas to diplomats they had worked with for years. The French soldiers did rescue some Rwandans. They took the assassinated president's wife (a notorious anti-Tutsi extremist in her own right), and various Hutu politicians who helped organise the genocide. They also remembered the French embassy dog, which was carefully loaded on to an army lorry while a Tutsi man who ran up to beg for help was turned away.
SUTR Brighton Holocaust Memorial Day meeting with Gaby Weiner author of 'Tales of Loving and Leaving' and Jason Porter, 'Hidden from History: The Nazi persecution of homosexuals' - 
None of this stopped the French government from trying to blame the victims of the Rwandan genocide for their own deaths, despite the fact that France was the only state which had troops on the ground during the genocide. Far from trying to halt the genocide, French troops actively protected the Interahamwe murderers.
None of this has prevented President Macron from declaring that anti-Zionism is a form of anti-Semitism. A decision endorsed by the French parliament. Every racist and reactionary politician now opposes ‘anti-Semitism’ when Israel is the issue.
But if the hypocrisy and deceit of Western leaders is their trade mark then today in Israel and elsewhere the dead of the past have become the ideal cover for the West’s war mongering
The Need to Forget
In 1988 Professor Yehuda Elkana, Rector of the Central University of Europe in Budapest, (which Hungary’s anti-Semitic Prime Minister Orban forced out of the country) issued a famous Declaration in Ha’aretz ‘The Need to Forget’. Elkana was not only a distinguished academic he was one of the few child survivors of Auschwitz. He had been abandoned in November 1944 with his parents in one of the last transports. As his obituary noted:
‘In today's Labour Party Elkana would be expelled for antisemitism’
Elkana experienced profound unease with the way in which the Holocaust was being manipulated by governments of Right and Left to craft an atavistic Jewish national identity.
It is a measure of the poverty of intellect. the intimidation and contempt for freedom of speech in the Labour Party today that anyone saying such a thing would be expelled for ‘anti-Semitism’. Elkana spoke of
a particular interpretation of the lessons of the Holocaust and the readiness to believe that the whole world is against us, and that we are the eternal victim. In this ancient belief,... I see the tragic and paradoxical victory of Hitler. Two nations, metaphorically speaking, emerged from the ashes of Auschwitz: a minority who assert, "this must never happen again," and a frightened and haunted majority who assert, "this must never happen to us again."
Elkana described how
The very existence of democracy is endangered when the memory of the dead participates actively in the democratic process. Fascist regimes understood this very well and acted on it.
I was always opposed to Holocaust Memorial Day because the idea of the State commemorating the victims of the Holocaust or any other act of genocide strikes me as obscene. It is inevitably going to end up using the Holocaust as an ideological prop for its own racism.
The British state that deports Black British citizens to the Caribbean and which wages a colonial war in Iraq considers itself fit to commemorate the dead of the Holocaust and pronounce on anti-Semitism. Elkana quoted Thomas Jefferson, who wrote that democracy and worship of the past are incompatible.
Is it seriously suggested that the Israeli state, which armed and trained the death squads of Guatemala as they murdered up to 200,000 Mayan Indians, is fit to commemorate the Jewish dead of the Holocaust? Why does a state which has armed and equipped the death squads of El Salvador, the Argentinian Junta (which murdered up to 3,000 Jews) and Pinochet, to say nothing about Apartheid South Africa, have anything to say about the lessons of the Holocaust?
Would we accept lessons on anti-racism from the BNP? Or take guidance on care for the elderly from Dr Harold Shipman? Perhaps we should employ the Yorkshire Ripper to advise on tackling domestic violence? Israel may call itself the Jewish state but if it can’t even support the Holocaust survivors who it has exploited since the beginning of the State what it says about the Holocaust should be ignored.
How can the Israeli state, which today arms the Burmese Junta as it commits genocide against the Rohinga people have any right to lecture other people on the lessons of the Holocaust?
It is hard to think of a state that abuses, tortures and massacres its own people (bar Syria and Iran) that doesn’t receive help from Israel.
When Israel allowed Vladimir Putin to speak at its World Holocaust Forum propaganda event on January 23rd at Yad Vashem whilst refusing to allow Poland’s President Andrzej Duda to speak, the whole ceremony became embroiled in a war about which country was the worst collaborator with Nazi Germany – Russia for signing a pact with Hitler in August 1939 or Poland for the anti-Semitism of much of its population before and during the war.
Netanyahu used the Forum, which was supposedly about the Jewish Holocaust dead, to urge the world to wage war against Iran. Can one think of any greater desecration of the memory of the Holocaust victims than to use them as the pretext for another war?
Netanyahu also called for ‘concrete actions, sanctions against the international court, its officials, its prosecutors, everyone.” Their crime? Having the temerity to consider investigating Israel for war crimes! Netanyahu called it “pure anti-Semitism”
As even the legal advisor to Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs noted, the idea for the Court arose over 50 years ago in the wake of the Nazi atrocities in the Second World War. It speaks volumes that Israel is now proposing sanctions against the ICC.
The commemorations in Jerusalem are only part of a wider Holocaust cult which sees thousands of young Israelis travel every year to Auschwitz. Of course it is a good idea for people to see and learn from the horrors of Auschwitz and the other Nazi camps. However the purpose of sending Israeli youngsters to see Auschwitz is not in order to instil anti-racism, quite the contrary. As Elkana wrote:
What is the child supposed to do with these memories? Many of the pictures of those horrors are apt to be interpreted as a call to hate.
And in Israel today it is amongst the young that one finds the most virulent expressions of hatred. In 2007, the Association for Civil Rights in Israel reported that 75% of Jewish youths said Arabs were less intelligent and less clean than Jews. All the old anti-Semitic stereotypes. Hitler refered to the Jews’ lack of cleanliness, ‘water shy’ in Mein Kampf, p.42).
Almost half of young Israelis (48%) said Israeli Arabs should not have Knesset representation or the right to vote. This is why Elkana concluded that:
For our part, we must learn to forget! Today I see no more important political and educational task for the leaders of this nation than to take their stand on the side of life, to dedicate themselves to creating our future, and not to be preoccupied from morning tonight, with symbols, ceremonies, and lessons of the Holocaust. They must uproot the domination of that historical "remember!" over our lives
What is the purpose of remembering the dead of the Holocaust if not to warn future generations of the evils of racism? Yet in Israel Holocaust memory does the exact opposite. It reinforces the most ugly forms of racism. The same is true of Western states who on the one hand are content to penalise those who rescue refugees from the waters of the Mediterranean and yet shed crocodile tears over Jews who perished in the Holocaust because they could not find refuge.
Ha’aretz’s Gideon Levy best summed up why State Holocaust Worship can only reinforces racism. In an article On This Holocaust Remembrance Day, Let Us Forget Levy wrote:
I have yet to hear a single teenager come back from Auschwitz and say that we mustn’t abuse others the way we were abused. There has yet to be a school whose pupils came back from Birkenau straight to the Gaza border, saw the barbed-wire fence and said, Never again. The message is always the opposite. Gaza is permitted because of Auschwitz.
That is why the more liberal Israeli high schools are ending trips to Auschwitz because they recognise that they are fuelling the rise of racist nationalism.
As Israeli historian, Professor Edith Zertal noted in Israel’s Holocaust and the Politics of Nationhood, whilst Zionism nationalised the Holocaust, ‘it excluded the direct bearers of this memory – some quarter of a million Holocaust survivors who had immigrated to Israel.’ The impoverishment of the Holocaust survivors who live in Israel, one-third of whom live in poverty despite the billions of dollars Israel received from Germany in reparations, is a scandal. (Israel Is Waiting for Its Holocaust Survivors to Die.) Israel is devoted to exploiting the memory of the Holocaust  but ignores its victims.
It is inevitable that Israel, an ethno-nationalist for whom racism is part of its DNA, will use the Holocaust to justify its present practices. This is equally true of those western states who use the Holocaust as part of their own ideological legitimation.
If the Holocaust is to be remembered it should be by those who were affected or their relatives. It is absurd for the State to commemorate victims of racism given that western states are, without exception, racist themselves.