In Britain, Contenders for Boris Johnson’s Crown Stress Fealty to Israel
Following Israel's recent savage attack on Gaza,
the last two Tory candidates for PM are out-competing each other in supporting
it
by Jonathan
Cook Posted on August 12, 2022
As Israel unleashed
a surprise wave of air strikes on Gaza last Friday,
the two remaining Conservative politicians vying to replace disgraced Prime
Minister Boris
Johnson publicized
letters vowing fealty to Israel.
Their timing
underscored the degree to which British politicians on both sides of the aisle
have now joined their American counterparts in making a commitment to Israel a
defining issue in their campaigns for the highest office.
Liz Truss,
the foreign secretary, and Rishi Sunak, the chancellor, trumpeted their
pro-Israel credentials over the weekend, as Israel killed 45 Palestinians,
including 16 children, and injured hundreds more. Israel said several Islamic
Jihad leaders – the intended targets – were among the dead. A ceasefire went into
effect late on Sunday night.
As expected,
western leaders came
out solidly in support of Israel, even though on this occasion there
was not even the pretense that Israel was “retaliating” for rockets fired out
of Gaza. Israel initiated the hostilities, claiming its
strikes were meant to prevent an alleged attack by the Palestinian resistance
group Islamic Jihad with an anti-tank missile.
One can
imagine how politicians in the United States and
Europe would have reacted had a Palestinian faction justified firing rockets
into Israel unprovoked on the basis that it wished to deter future Israeli air
strikes. But in any case, if deterrence really was Israel’s aim, its attack had
precisely the opposite effect. Entirely predictably, Islamic Jihad responded
by firing hundreds of rockets into Israel.
In fact,
though it is never mentioned by western politicians or media, Palestinians,
unlike Israel, actually have a right in international law to resist Israel
militarily – and not only because Israel has been belligerently occupying their
lands for decades.
Israel has
additionally subjected Gaza to a
15-year blockade that has tightly controlled who and what is allowed
in and out of the tiny, heavily overcrowded coastal enclave. Gaza has been left
in ruins by a series of Israeli attacks over a decade – what the
Israeli army calls “mowing
the lawn”. Gaza’s trapped 2.1 million inhabitants suffer
serious shortages of food, clean water, medicines, and electricity.
Malnutrition and poverty are endemic.
Last year,
the head of the United Nations, Antonio Guterres, observed: “If there is
a hell on earth, it is the lives of children in Gaza.” That hell is entirely
manmade – by Israel.
Double
standard
Perhaps the
most flagrantly hypocritical
comment on the weekend’s events came from Yevgen Korniychuk, the
Ukrainian ambassador to Israel. He tweeted out
a message of support for Israel that turned reality on its head.
He expressed
“deep sympathy” for the Israeli public, suggesting that Israel, like Ukraine,
was suffering “a very brutal attack by its neighbor”. He added: “Attacks on
women and children are reprehensible.”
But it was
Israel that initiated the attack, not the Palestinians. And it was women and
children in Gaza, not in Israel, who died under Israeli bombs.
Korniychuk’s
comments served to underscore the wider hypocrisy of western politicians who
have expressed outrage at Russian aggression against Ukraine since its invasion
in late February, but for years have either minimized or supported Israel’s
regular aggression against Gaza.
The double
standard was starkly evident in the case of the two contenders for Johnson’s
crown. At the weekend, Truss and Sunak laid out their unwavering support for
Israel at the very moment it was killing Palestinian civilians in Gaza. They
did so to their party’s main pro-Israel lobby group, the Conservative Friends of Israel (CFI).
Truss averred:
“The UK should stand side by side with Israel, now and well into the future. As
Prime Minister, I would be at the forefront of this mission.” Comments from
Truss, the bookmakers’ favorite, mainly stick in the craw.
As foreign
secretary, she has been outspoken in
condemning Russia’s
invasion, calling it an “illegal occupation”. She has backed Britons going to
fight against Russia. She has loudly supported sending
weapons to help Ukraine defend
itself. And she has suggested that
the assets of Russian nationals frozen by the UK should be transferred to
Ukraine.
Of course,
Truss wishes to extend none of those supposedly principled positions supporting
Ukrainians against Russian aggression to Palestinians facing Israeli
aggression.
It is
inconceivable that she would ever approve of sending arms to Palestinians so
they could defend themselves from Israeli attack. Quite the contrary. Truss’s
government has increased
arms sales to Israel to record levels even as Israel chokes Gaza and
Jewish settlers in the West Bank and East Jerusalem steal ever more Palestinian
land.
It is also
unthinkable that Truss would agree to freeze Israeli assets in the UK and use
them to help reconstruct long-suffering Gaza. Or that she would back Britons
going to fight with the Palestinian resistance against Israel’s suffocating
blockade of Gaza.
Financial
gain
Once again,
what is treated as sacrosanct for Ukraine is denied absolutely to Palestinians,
even though Israel’s crimes against the Palestinian people have been going on
for decades, not months. But it is not just that Truss and Sunak are failing to
uphold the same ethical and legal principles they espouse so vehemently in the
case of Ukraine.
Their
letters to CFI deny Palestinians any right – not just a military one – to
resist their oppression from Israel, while the pair also promises to reward
Israel regardless of how much it oppresses the Palestinians and breaks
international law.
Remember, a
spate of human rights groups recently concluded that
Israel is an apartheid state, in its treatment of both Palestinians under
occupation and those living as a minority inside a professedly “democratic”
Israel.
That is all
swept under the carpet, with neither Tory minister daring to alienate CFI. The
organization’s website revealed in 2014 that four-fifths of
all Conservative MPs were CFI members. Its current website reports that since the 2015 general
election it has taken more than 180 of them on trips to Israel, where they have
been wined and dined by Israeli leaders.
More than a
decade ago, an
investigation by Channel 4 described CFI as “by far Britain’s most
powerful pro-Israel lobbying group”. Its members were reported to have
donated more than £10m ($12m) to the party between 2001 and 2009. This may
explain why Truss wrote in her letter: “CFI members are some of our most
valued, passionate and committed supporters. I have no doubt that the strength
of the Conservative party’s support for the State of Israel stems in large part
from the important role that you all play.”
That sounds
a little too much like an admission that the Tory party’s – and her own –
unconditional backing for Israel derives, at least in part, from the financial
leverage exerted by wealthy pro-Israel donors. It was almost as an afterthought
that Truss noted her commitment to Israel was also “because it is the right
thing to do”.
‘Incentivizing’
apartheid
As Truss and
Sunak face separate hustings organized by CFI over the next few days, the pair
will be encouraged to outcompete each other in demonstrating their loyalty to
Israel.
That said,
it is hard to imagine what more they can offer. Truss strongly hints that she
wants to follow the example set by former US president Donald Trump and move
the British embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, in defiance of international
law.
Peace talks
that Israel has long stymied are premised on
Palestinians receiving occupied East Jerusalem as the capital of a future
Palestinian state. Israel has been actively preempting that possibility by
helping Jewish settlers take
over Palestinian lands in the city and making life ever harder for the
Palestinian population there to drive them out.
Truss said
she had been talking about where the embassy is sited with
Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid. Lapid, who approved the latest attacks on
Gaza, backed Trump’s
relocation of the US embassy to Jerusalem in 2018.
For Trump,
the move was intended to
pander to his electoral base of US evangelicals. They wish to shore up
Jewish control of the region to bring about end times in which Christians
alone rise to be with God.
Now Truss
appears ready to emulate Trump.
In her
letter, the foreign minister also promises to
“cement” Britain’s ties with Israel by expediting a
Free Trade Agreement being drafted by the government. Truss has said
“closer trade” is a priority.
Human rights
groups like Amnesty International have warned against
Britain hastily negotiating such an agreement, warning that it may “incentive
Israel’s system of apartheid”, help Israel expand its illegal settlements, and
give a stamp of approval to Israeli efforts to annex Palestinian land under occupation.
Truss vows
to a further crackdown on the international boycott movement, backing a
US-style bill to prevent public bodies, including local councils,
from joining the BDS
campaign to divest funds from Israel for its illegal activities in the
occupied territories.
She says BDS
causes “needless division”. Presumably, the division that concerns her is
antagonizing Israel’s aggressive lobbyists in the UK, not fueling tensions with
Palestinians, their supporters, and human rights groups.
Given
inaction by western governments, solidarity expressed through boycotts is
effectively the only nonviolent way for individuals and organizations to punish
Israel – whether for its continuing crimes against ordinary Palestinians, its efforts to steal and colonize their land, or its moves to frustrate the
emergence of a Palestinian state.
By outlawing
peaceful resistance to Israel’s belligerent occupation, Truss would leave
Palestinians and their supporters with a stark choice: either promote violent
forms of resistance or sit quietly while Israel inflicts death by a thousand
cuts on Palestinian statehood and any hopes of peace.
Global
power dynamics
Truss makes
clear that she will characterize any effort to hold Israel to account as “antisemitism”.
She intends to silence criticism of Israel for its human rights abuses at the
United Nations, one of the very few international forums where Israel faces
scrutiny.
And she
promises to toughen the UK’s stance towards Iran, the only counterweight to
Israel’s military dominance in the Middle East.
Sunak is
barely less extravagant in his advocacy for Israel. He too extols the Free
Trade Agreement, calls for intensified intelligence cooperation with Israel
against Iran, promises to outlaw boycotts, and grossly mischaracterizes the
Abraham Accords – signed by some Gulf states to further isolate the
Palestinians – as a “new
era of peace”.
Whether it
is Truss or Sunak who replaces Johnson, each is already committed to
championing Israel against the Palestinians and crushing dissent at home.
The
opposition Labour leader Keir Starmer is not offering any
kind of corrective to the Conservatives’ lockstep support for Israel.
His
predecessor, Jeremy
Corbyn, a strong supporter of justice for the Palestinians, faced a
relentless, years-long, evidence-free campaign tarring him as presiding over an
institutionally antisemitic party. Starmer has learned that lesson. During his
campaign for the Labour leadership, he declared himself
a Zionist, subscribing to an ideology that in practice insists Israel has a
right to usurp Palestinian land and colonize it.
Since then,
he has ignored a
vote by his own party conference to declare Israel an apartheid state and deny
it arms to oppress Palestinians. He has also blurred a
long-accepted distinction between anti-Zionism, opposition to Israel’s
oppression of Palestinians, and antisemitism, bigotry towards Jews.
Like Truss
and Sunak, Starmer has unequivocally supported helping
Ukrainians resist Russian aggression while denying that right to Palestinians
under Israeli military occupation.
The truth,
as illustrated by these bipartisan double standards, is that no UK party leader
is prepared to found their foreign policy on genuine ethical principles or
humanitarianism, whatever they claim.
Their
knee-jerk support for Israel follows from a recognition of global power
dynamics. Western neocolonial interests are what sets the agenda in the
oil-rich, conflict-prone Middle East, a region where the super-powerful lobbies
of the fossil fuel industry and the arms manufacturers have so much at stake
financially.
It is those
narrow, cynical, elite interests that British governments serve, not some
notion of the greater public good. This is why Israel knows it is free to
pound Gaza whenever it chooses – with no consequences, except for the
Palestinians facings its bombs.
Jonathan
Cook won the Martha Gellhorn Special Prize for Journalism. His latest books are Israel and the Clash of
Civilizations: Iraq, Iran and the Plan to Remake the Middle East (Pluto
Press) and Disappearing Palestine: Israel’s Experiments in Human
Despair (Zed Books). His website is www.jonathan-cook.net.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario