The Dying Days of Empire and the Two-Faced Solution
Oh what a tangled web we weave when we first practice to deceive. (Walter Scott)
You can fool some of the people all the time and all of the people some of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time. (Abraham Lincoln)
Israel as a settler colonialist state is dying rapidly, having finally exposed its true character and weakness to the entire world live on television. Less than a century has passed from its inception as a terrorist state (Irgun and Haganah), through its persistent infiltration of governmental and civil institutions of most countries of the world and bullying of critics as anti-Semites, to its inevitable and speedy decline. Fewer and fewer are the voices who insist that a fanatical and murderous rogue state has a right to exist or “defend itself” by any fair or foul means available, even though, like a fish out of water, it still flaps violently.
As Israel is in decline, Palestine is, finally, on the rise. After unspeakable suffering over generations, the indigenous people of the land for whom its occupiers envisaged a mere reservation status, will be masters of their own destiny over all the territory of what once was and will remain Palestine.
The Anglo-American sponsors of Zionism, likewise, are on the wane. Pax Americana, never intended to bring world peace but world dominion, is dying a slow death. Their pronunciations regarding what should or should not be the state of the world are becoming increasingly irrelevant and ignored. That does not mean that they are going quietly. The Zionist and colonising mindset is firmly entrenched in the echelons of power in Washington, London, Sydney and numerous other vassal states. In the face of certain defeat their response will be ever more irrational and paranoid.
Symptomatic of the seismic shift taking place on the globe today are the various international bodies of the post-world order, foremost the UN which David Ben Gurion once called “a Jewish ideal”. This order was imposed by the victors in order to never have to relinquish control. Indeed, Zionism was the net beneficiary of the new world order after the second world war by enshrining in law and through politics their project for which, whilst taking the moral high ground as victims, they had colluded in the sacrifice of their own people, like with the “Haavara” Transfer Agreement signed between the Third Reich and the Zionists in 1933. International peace and development, human rights, prevention of genocide, the right of self-determination of peoples – these were all empty promises to cover up the successive accumulation of power and control via a “rules-based order” in which there was, as the English say: “one rule for one and one rule for another”. Or, in a play of words on the false promise made during the so-called “Middle East Peace Process”, a two-faced solution.
The problem with the post-war arrangement is that in order for other nations to obey the dictates of the “international community”, there had to be at least a pretence of legality and lawfulness. In its wars against Iraq and Libya, the USA removed that fig leaf of legitimacy from its unilateral actions. It also tried to side-line the other powers who had emerged victorious after the carnage of the second world war, in particular the Soviet Union without whom Germany would not have been defeated. The reason the American Zionist establishment hates Putin so much is that he put his nation’s interests first and spoiled the sell-out arranged between the West and Yeltsin, who was too drunk to care.
After over half a year of ethnic cleansing in Gaza, the security council only called for a temporary ceasefire during Ramadan after the month was almost over. It still hasn’t moved to call out or condemn the genocide perpetrated by Israel. Instead, the USA condemned both the International Court of Justice for stating that there was a plausible case of genocide and the International Criminal Court’s Ahmedi chief prosecutor for requesting arrest warrants for the Israeli prime minister and defence minister, in spite of having balanced this request with an equal request against three senior leaders of the Hamas resistance movement. Whether any warrants will actually be issued remains to be seen.
Netanyahu is, of course, entirely right that there can be no equivalence between the state of Israel and Hamas, but for very different reasons than those stated by him. It is true that the resistance killed some civilians and took some prisoners during their prison break out of Gaza when they unexpectedly stumbled upon the Nova festival on that single day of 7 October, but they did not do so on the orders of their leadership. Israel, on the other hand, intentionally targeted civilians and civilian infrastructure during 7 months of unleashing Armageddon on Palestinians both in Gaza and the West Bank. Furthermore, armed resistance is enshrined in international law, belligerent occupation is not.
Yet, Zionist-owned and controlled Western media went into overdrive to explain how the belated request by the ICC prosecutor was unjustified. The ICC should only intervene when a state had failed, whereas Israel had a robust judicial system (so robust indeed that it shields any of its soldiers from the consequences of their actions). But did not Russia also have a robust judicial system? Russia, they retort was an aggressive regime wanting to control Europe and had illegally invaded Ukraine. But is not Israel an aggressive regime wanting to control the Middle East, having illegally occupied most of Palestine?
A key problem for those media apologists is that, partly due to technology, events are unfolding quicker and in plain sight today. Few will have done the research to discover how brutal and illegal the foundations of the “Jewish” state actually were. Ask anybody not directly involved politically about the King David Hotel or the Deir Yassin massacre and they will simply shrug their shoulders. But that was many years ago. The unconditional American and European support for Ukraine, where you could wear the blue and yellow flag during football and cultural events (even the Eurovision song contests), is very recent and contrasts starkly with the bullying of people who wear the Palestinian flag or keffiyeh. The sanctioning of everything Russian contrasts starkly with the financial and military support for genocidal Israel. And the mantra of freedom of speech, used against Muslims in defence of the offence by Rushdie or Charlie Hebdo, disappeared in the face of the censorship of RT, Press TV or recently al-Jazeera. Iran is regularly criticised for legislating against women taking their hijab off, whilst France is applauded for legislating against women putting it on (until everybody was ordered covering their faces during Covid!). Student protests in Iran or China are applauded, whilst in America or Europe they are brutally suppressed. The Arab spring is an expression of democracy when it serves Western interests, but as soon as the people make the wrong choice, such as in Iran when electing Mossadegh, in Gaza when electing Hamas or in Egypt when electing Mursi, dictatorship is the preferred model. Freedom and democracy in words, oppression and demockery in action, the two-faced solution stands exposed as not fit for purpose.
Censorship laws, the outlawing of criticism of the Zionist project, brutal repression of protest, increased militarisation of the state, digital IDs and movement controls are indicators of what is to come as populations grow increasingly dissatisfied with their own governments and aware of the prevailing injustices and endemic corruption. Until just before 7th October, the “free” world was sleep-walking into totalitarianism. State oppression, however, requires state resources which, with the impeding economic collapse are become scarcer. As Ibn Khaldoun put it: at the beginning of a (just) dynasty, small tax levies produce large returns, whereas at the end of a (corrupt) dynasty, large tax levies produce small returns. And in spite of having been fed a diet of consumerism and instant gratification, the new generation brought up on video games and mobile phones, is waking up and not afraid of confronting those in power who look increasingly off guard. It might not have dawned on all of them yet who are still drunk with their own self-importance, but the writing is on the wall (Daniel). And history, for those who do not learn, is repeating itself.