Gaza-Israel – The Dangerousness of Mr Binyamin, Entity with Incandescent Flames

The Western world’s ineptitude, the outraged reactions of many Diaspora Jews, and the embarrassment of some Arab countries. Palestinians: We are alone in this world

By Glauco D’Agostino

The pursuit of the “final solution”

Genocide? Massacre? Ethnic cleansing? This or that one is just the same for me. While the entire world hypocritically debates the legal nature of the Palestinian Holocaust, the infamous siege of a defenceless population continues without anyone having the courage and honour to stop the scientifically planned extermination of a nation trying to assert its right to exist. The Gaza Strip is now a concentration camp with no way out and no incoming supplies (in the photos below, the damage caused by the bombings since 2023, and Gaza City in 2007).

There is not much use for adjectives to show some sign of closeness to a starving people, given that many institutional and political subjects in the international community are somehow involved with the Israeli business system, first and foremost, the ignominious arms trafficking that defines people’s fate.

By now, the world is so accustomed to the personalised assassination of enemies by advanced technology owners that it deems tolerable and correct what only a few years ago was considered “collateral damage” for which to apologise. Not only the indiscriminate air raids on civilian and health infrastructures, but today the anti-Islamic “pogroms” in Gaza and especially in the West Bank are the norm, which international media networks pay little attention to: Reasons of opportunity, of course.

Thus, while Tel Aviv establishes 22 new settlements in the occupied territories (illegally under international law), Defence Minister Israel Katz brazenly promises “a Jewish-Israeli State” in the West Bank and National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir, regarding Gaza, urges the government “to go in with full force, without blinking.”

The intention of the Zionist aggressor is no longer concealed; it is as explicit as his determination to pursue the “final solution.”

We will continue destroying Gaza’s homes until the Palestinians have no shelter left, and nothing remains but for them to leave. The only problem is finding countries willing to take them.

These are Mr Binyamin’s words, similar to those uttered by various extremist exponents of the government majority, who see nothing as precluded thanks to the exploitation of a memory concerning the Jewish people, not Israel as a state, which is certainly not the holder or the best manifestation of the noble Jewish tradition.

All that is missing is the accusation of a fire in the Knesset to legitimise the malice of a democratic regime that is an expression of Western civilisation, just as happened 92 years ago in Germany. History repeats itself in reverse, and Mr Binyamin knows history well.

The UN Genocide Convention. A Court in Tel Aviv?

What is happening in Palestine is the annexation of Arab-Islamic territories with a tradition that is over a thousand years old, through the use of an unstoppable military force with unmistakable terrorist connotations, which the entire world is careful not to oppose, except for a few voices of verbal condemnation without any concrete actions following, not of an impractical military nature, but not even of a diplomatic nature, limiting the scope of an unauthorised and blasphemous biblical fury.

To corner the Tel Aviv autocratic regime on a diplomatic level, it would be enough to cite the illegitimate occupation of East Jerusalem against international law and the proclamation of that Holy City (photos on the side) as the capital of the Jewish State. But who should do it? Western democratic states complicit in the atrocity by their ally Israel since the days of Sabra and Shatila?

Let’s not make people laugh by resorting to international legality. We are well aware of the noble statements of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, its Article II(c), Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction, and Article III(e), Complicity in genocide. The provisions of the last article cited are enough to induce any representative of a Western democratic state to recognise the Israeli genocides, under penalty, in an indefinite future, of appearing before a Nuremberg-style Tribunal, perhaps a Tel Aviv Court, on charges of complicity in genocide?

The U.S., the E.U., and the Arab countries

Gaza is alone. Of course, at the international institutional level, certainly not in public opinion, attending helplessly to the dominant hegemonies’ cowardice, false expressions of their will. The United States, which understands about massacres because of the “anti-terrorism special operations” of the last two decades, comes 25 years later to seek a mediation that is not too demanding for the aggressors in Gaza, the West Bank, Lebanon, Syria – a just peace, in short.

The European Union, which, commonly passing itself off as the whole of Europe, claims a qualified say as a world economic power rather than as a mere geographical expression, is very measured even in its words. While witnessing the disputes between “willing” countries extended to non-EU countries (but only for the eastern continental border and never for the Mediterranean area), it includes among its members countries with the complex of the losing aggressors of 80 years ago that refuse even to vote for symbolic and inconsequential sanctions against Israel for fear of accusations of anti-Semitism or, worse, divine punishment for having opposed the Chosen People.

What allows for identifying the political-racial radicalisation of Israel with the Chosen People? The Western inefficiency of diplomacy and history schools? That’s for sure. But also the indifference to the fate of defenceless peoples, while the assemblies of the fat political and financial institutions on both North Atlantic shores amuse themselves by checking the financial spread and reaching insider trading the media never talks about, and certainly does not disturb the sleep of state criminals.

Also unsettling is the substantial political silence, beyond the usual declarations of solidarity, of many Arab governments, some of which are enticed by the Abraham Accords’ commercial conveniences, without demanding guarantees from Tel Aviv regarding respect for Palestinian territorial integrity as affirmed by international law, compliance with duties towards subjugated populations, and the halt to the wild colonisation that is now part of the despotic and discriminatory state legislation. This indulgence, especially without the favour of the multinational institutional and religious bodies on which they rely, puts some Arab countries in a position of unacceptable political influence. Perhaps Tel Aviv’s recent refusal to allow the Foreign Ministers of Egypt, Jordan, the UAE, Saudi Arabia and Qatar to visit the West Bank was beneficial, opening their eyes to the unclear political and institutional situation in the Occupied Territories and Israel’s truly impudent nature.

“Rogue state” and regime change

Israel’s aggressive behaviour of conquest on all fronts, from Gaza to the West Bank to the Golan and southern Lebanon, is reintroducing the pattern of the will to power of the most brutal dominators, such as to identify the Tel Aviv regime as the true “rogue state,” the worst vanguard of the Western world. And yet, sooner or later, Mr Binyamin risks the fate that in Mesopotamian mythology befell Humbaba (in the side photo, a terracotta image of him), the monstrous entity with incandescent flames, when fighting the hero Gilgamesh.

The mantra of “two-state solution” for two people, which inspires many of the leaders committed to an acceptable peaceful agreement, has not been feasible for some time, as one of the states lacks now a territory and the economic-financial lobbies plan with no significant reactions that one of the peoples be deported outside the current borders to countries demonstrating a willingness to welcome them. Don’t worry, it’s not about Israel or the Jews, even if some would like to ask Texas or New Mexico to welcome them, given the size of the areas and the possibility of economic exploitation of the territories.

In this situation of a hellish circle for Palestinian prospects and blame for the destructive madness to which Tel Aviv is now prey, the ball is in the Israeli public opinion court. A regime change? A wording reserved for the submissive media controlled by hypocritical Western governments to hope, amid laughter and derisive vaudeville jokes, for the fall of governments unwelcome to the interests of lobbies and businessmen of all kinds. Today, with greater awareness and anxiety, the hope for a regime change is gaining ground as one of the feasible solutions for restoring order to the disastrous Israeli institutions, all under the unspeakable blackmail capacity exercised by some highly radicalised internal fringes. Here is the Mr Binyamin danger, not only for Gaza.

Reactions of the “infuriated Diaspora Jews”

Let us clarify that this now widespread feeling of disapproval concerns the sphere of geopolitical decisions and does not even remotely involve the Jewish people and Judaism. Indeed, among the most intransigent Hebrews are also the “infuriated Diaspora Jews,” as Esther Solomon, editor-in-chief of the English version of Haaretz, the oldest and most influential Israeli daily newspaper, calls them. Many personalities, intellectual advocates of the most varied Jewish diaspora environments, have openly distanced themselves from the self-harming drift of the Israeli leadership, which risks presenting a negative image of a large part of the national society on an ethnic and religious level.

Some opinions presented below, although all critical of the Israeli government, are not aligned with a single thought, nor do they each claim to represent prevailing positions in the Jewish world. However, we need to take note of them, especially if they are discriminated against or in the minority.

Severe criticism of the escalation in the war against Gaza comes from the United Kingdom. The stance is from some members of one of the UK’s oldest Jewish organisations: the Board of Deputies of British Jews, whose leader in the past was the 2^nd Baron Rothschild, the Zionist leader to whom the infamous 1917 Balfour Declaration, the harbinger of Palestine colonisation, was addressed. In the present climate, 36 representatives of their respective synagogues, disapproving of the Israeli government’s actions, essentially point out that the Prime Minister’s claim, according to which criticism of his policies is “anti-Semitic,” is baseless. The Board, even though its Vice Chair of the International Division signed this document, condemned its content, which said, among other things:

Israel’s soul is being ripped out and we, members of the Board of Deputies of British Jews, fear for the future of the Israel we love and have such close ties to.

The Italian historian Anna Foa, coming from a Jewish family and religion, speaks bluntly of Israel’s suicide: “We are moving in the direction of an ethnic cleansing … The statements from Netanyahu and his ministers on the annexation of Gaza, together with the massacres, are a move by the Israeli state towards its suicide.” And in her latest book, the writer is also critical of European Jewry: “Today, European Jewry is devoid of any cultural and political project, of any autonomy from Israel.”

Moni Ovadia, a multifaceted Jewish artist, Italian by adoption, but Bulgarian by birth and of East-European Yiddish culture, rails against Israel and Zionism: “I am among those who think the Israeli government is carrying out a genocidal operation. For years, Israeli governments have been carrying out ethnocide against the Palestinian people, that is, they aim to wipe out the Palestinian people as such … Everyone talks about Zionism as if it were some angelic force. Still, Zionism is a colonialist movement, presented to the world with the slogan «a land without a people for a people without a land.» In that land, there were 1.5 million Palestinian Arabs”.

Among the most inflexible Jewish voices in condemning the aggression policies of the State of Israel, there are various anti-Zionist movements, that is, those who reject the establishment of a Jewish state before the coming of the Messiah, as it is considered a violation of the Three Oaths under the Babylonian Talmud due to the manner of State creation by the use of force. For this reason, for example, the Haredi Community of Jerusalem opposes the Law of Return, which guarantees Israeli citizenship to every person of Jewish descent in the world. The Gaon Moshe Sternbuch, the Head of its Rabbinical Court, maintains the lack of connection between the current existence of a Jewish state and the redemption of the Jewish people in the Land of Israel.

In the same vein, Neturei Karta, officially an International NGO of Haredi affiliation, goes as far as supporting a Palestinian state. Its spokesman, Rabbi Yisroel Dovid Weiss, an American of Polish-Hungarian origins born in New York and living there, proposes a peaceful opposition to the existence of the State of Israel and the restitution of the lands stolen from the Palestinians. And he says: “Zionism is a transformation to nationalism, void of God … They call themselves a democracy … Judaism is not a democracy. It’s a religion.” Is this also anti-Semitism? Too bad the accusation has no basis if most of his family members were massacred in Auschwitz. As Jews, of course.

Despite criticism for his non-conformist behaviour, including his participation in the 5^th Global Convention of Solidarity with Palestine in South Africa, perhaps Rabbi Weiss would not want the Palestinians to suffer the same tragic fate as his ancestors.