“America is willing to sacrifice its young soldiers and national interests and even its economy for Israel,” Gilad Atzmon, who was born in a Jewish family in Israel and grew up in Jerusalem al-Quds, tells the Tehran Times. *
Atzmon, who now lives in
Britain, also says, “Israeli pressure groups seem to believe that they are
actually more powerful and certainly more important than the American
constitution.”
The following is the text of
the interview:
Tehran Times: Numerous rights bodies have slammed Western
countries’ arms trade with Israel. What is your comment?
Gilad Atzmon: For decades, Israel has been selling killing
machines to the most oppressive regimes around the world and this shouldn’t be
surprising, as Israel itself is at the forefront of the list of oppressive
regimes.
Embarrassed by the Israeli government’s current arming of
Azerbaijan in its war with Armenia, Holocaust scholar Israel W. Charny penned
an article for The Times of Israel titled: Would Israel sell a used
drone to a Hitler? Charny
admits in his piece that Israel’s conduct is fundamentally unethical. He ends
his commentary writing, “to my Armenian colleagues and friends, I can only say
that as a Jew and as an Israeli, I am mortified – and angry.”
I would think that if Israel’s leading genocide historian allows
himself to admit in an Israeli nationalist outlet that the Jewish State is
profiting from non-ethical arms trade, the rest of us should be entitled to
engage with this topic freely and to use every possible platform to denounce
Israel or anyone else from profiting from non- ethical practices.
The issues go well beyond Israel’s arms trade. A few days ago we
learned from the Jewish Press about a Bipartisan bill in America
that would give Israel a say on Middle East arms sales. The bill
“would require the President to consult with the Israeli government to ensure
concerns are settled.” If the bill passes, the USA military industrial complex
trade would be dependent on Israeli consent.
Tehran Times: How great is the influence of the Zionist and Jewish
lobbies in the United States and how can this status quo change?
GA: The facts regarding the immense influence of Israel and the
Jewish Lobby in the USA and other Western countries have been established for a
while. One can refer to The Israeli Lobby and U.S.
Foreign Policy, a detailed study by two of the most influential
American social scientists (Prof. John Mersheimer & Prof. Stephen Walt).
Another leading American political scientist admired by a generation of
academics who also covered the topic is, of course, Prof James Petras in his
book The Power of Israel in the
United States.
What can be done about the well documented domination of AIPAC? I
would like to believe that the most effective method to approach this topic
would be to point squarely at The Lobby and its corrosive impact: this entails
pointing the finger at the wars the USA fights on behalf of Israel, the
sanctions that the USA mounts for Israel, the fact that America is willing to
sacrifice its young soldiers and national interests and even its economy for
Israel. Theoretically speaking, American citizens are entitled to voice such
criticisms as freedom of speech is enshrined in the first amendment of their
constitution. Israeli pressure groups seem to believe that they are actually
more powerful and certainly more important than the American constitution. A
few months ago we learned that Right wing activists attempted to spread new
laws across Republican controlled states that would suppress criticism on
public university campuses of Israel and its occupation of Palestinian
territory.
By now, the USA is practically functioning as a remote and
subservient Israeli satellite. I am unable to identify any genuine political
force in the USA that can change this anytime soon. I do not see anyone within
American politics who is willing to tackle the matter. But the American people,
like the Brits and the French are no fools, they see it all.
Tehran Times: Though Israel is violating and defying international
law on a daily basis, its Western supporters and allies continue to support
these actions or at least turn a blind eye to what is taking place. How do you
assess this double standard?
GA: In general, it’s a good practice not to overestimate people’s
intelligence. But Israel and its Lobby make the opposite mistake; they tend to
believe that people are far stupider than they are.
People do see what is going on and the general discomfort with
Israel and its lobby is growing rapidly. People do notice Israeli criminality,
they also notice their politicians on all levels operating as foreign agents
for a criminal state. Israel and The Lobby interpret this rise of awareness as
‘growing anti-Semitism,’ but this is hyperbole. A general mass awareness has
surfaced. The Israelis and The Lobby know that once you see the full picture,
you can’t just un-see it. In that respect, Israel is facing a wall of silent
resistance and the consequences of this reality are unpredictable.
It is fascinating to observe the tsunami of mass protests that we
see within Israel against Netanyahu and
institutional corruption. The Israelis, or at least many of
them, are also tired of themselves being themselves. It is very possible that
in line with Jewish history, it will actually be the Jews who bring their
current empire down. As far as I can tell they are better at that battle than
anyone else.
Tehran Times: How do the Western countries exploit Human Rights as
a tool to apply their policies and how do they politicize Human Rights?
GA: Human rights issues are close to our hearts. We don’t like to
see abuse of others, we hate discrimination, we are appalled by racism of any
kind. Seemingly, some were clever enough to attach barcodes to these genuine
universal and ethical feelings. As things stand, human rights matters have
morphed into a profitable industry. Many human rights campaigns are funded by
elements who are themselves dedicated human rights abusers.
Since the Palestinian struggle is close to my heart it took me
little time to find out that while the BDS movement was receiving money from
George Soros’ Open Society Institute, BDS changed its goal statement and
practically gave up on the Palestinian Right of Return.
In 2012 the BDS National Committee in Ramallah made a crucial change
to its goal statement. It changed the wording of its original (June 2005)
mission statement from “demanding that Israel end its occupation and
colonization of all Arab lands” to demanding that Israel end “its occupation
and colonization of all Arab lands occupied in June 1967*” My attempt to find
out who introduced this change revealed that this new wording first appeared in
Omar Barghouti’s 2011 book, ‘BDS: Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions: the Global
Struggle for Palestinian Rights’ (page 6).
It seems that since 2011, The BDS National Committee basically
abandoned the most precious Palestinian right—it drifted away from the
commitment to land occupied since 1948 and limited its struggle to the
liberation of lands occupied in 1967. Further attempts to clarify who made the
change and by what process revealed that this significant change was made in a
clandestine manner—it appeared only in English. It has never appeared in Arabic
or any other language. It is evident that the change took place behind the backs
of the Palestinian people. Despite BDS’ claim to be a ‘civil society’
representing more than 170 Palestinian organizations, Palestinians were totally
unaware of the BDS National Committee’s compromise of their mission.
Further investigation revealed that BDS—like most Palestinian
NGOs—was funded by George Soros’ Open Society Institute. In 2013 I was asked to
review a book titled Israel/Palestine and the
Queer International, by
Sarah Schulman. It was Schulman who resolved the mysterious change in the BDS
goal statement. In her search for funding for a young Palestinian Queer USA
tour in support of BDS, Schulman wrote that she was advised to approach George
Soros’ Open Society institute. The following account may leave you
flabbergasted, as it did me:
“A former ACT UP staffer who worked for the Open Society
Institute, George Soros’ foundation, suggested that I file an application there
for funding for the tour. When I did so it turned out that the person on the
other end had known me from when we both attended Hunter [College] High School
in New York in the 1970s. He forwarded the application to the institutes’s
office in Amman, Jordan, and I had an amazing one-hour conversation with Hanan
Rabani, its director of the Women’s and Gender program for the Middle East
region. Hanan told me that this tour would give great visibility to autonomous
queer organizations in the region. That it would inspire queer Arabs—especially
in Egypt and Iran…for that reason, she said, funding for the tour should come
from the Amman office” (Israel/Palestine and the Queer International , by Sarah
Schulman p. 108).
Here is clear and embarrassing evidence of a crude intervention
made by George Soros’ institute in an attempt to shape Arab and Islamic culture
and political life. We also learn about the manner in which Soros’ Open Society
Institute introduces gay and queer politics to the region. Apparently money for
a tour promoting Palestine and BDS is traveling from Soros’ Open Society to
Jordan and then back to the USA with the hope that such a manoeuvre would
“inspire” gays in Iran.
This makes it clear why BDS had “good reason” to remain silent
regarding its funding sources. After all, being funded directly or indirectly
by a liberal Zionist philanthropist, a man who also funds the openly Zionist
JStreet and was invested in Israeli companies in the West Bank,
is indeed embarrassing. But the meaning of it is rather devastating. The
discourse of the solidarity of the oppressed is shaped by the sensitivities of
the oppressor who funds the movement of the oppressed. We see this in the
Palestine solidarity movement, we saw the same thing in Occupy Wall Street and
currently in some segments of BLM activity. Instead of genuinely caring for the
oppressed, Human rights and solidarity movements often morph into policing
forces that dedicate themselves to controlling the so-called opposition.
The case of the language of BDS has a good ending. Though Omar
Barghouti didn’t change the words printed in his book where he bluntly
compromised on occupied land demands on behalf of the Palestinian people. The
BDS movement eventually changed its goal statement once again. It now resembles
the original 2005 statement opposing occupation of ALL Arab Land.
Tehran Times: Why doesn’t Israel accept the idea of a nuclear-free
zone in the region?
GA: The real meaning of thinking yourself chosen is in attributing
a unique sense of impunity to yourself and to no one else. In real politics
this means that your Jewish State is the only nuclear power in the region, your
Air Force is the only one to fly F-35s,
your army is not committed to any recognized ethical standards, your military
industry trades with the darkest regimes around. Try to imagine a world where
everyone believes themselves to be chosen.
·
In the Interview the Iranian outlet refers to me as “a Jewish
political activist.” I wrote to the Tehran Times and pointed out that I am
neither an activist nor I am a Jew. However, by the time I posted this article,
my request is yet to make any impact.
https://www.unz.com/gatzmon/israeli-arms-trade-the-lobby-and-the-meaning-of-chosenness/
