ANTIZIONISM IS ANTISEMITISM

 

Douglas Murray was asked about his thoughts after the June 17, 2024 Munk Debate on antiZionism. 

Imagine living in a glass cocoon, a protective device. You’re just fine. Then one day, the glass shatters. That’s the reality Israel is facing. It’s living in the aftermath of that shattering. This is when the worst human evils confront you, and unimaginable acts occur right before your eyes. Facing an army of barbaric, torturous rapists and sadists is a horrifying reality. This is the reality that Hamas has created. On October 7th, they rampaged, committing acts beyond imagination.

Gideon Levy criticized me for not discussing the Palestinians in my opening speech. The reason was a lack of time. However, we did address the issue later, including the situation of Gaza’s citizens. They represent a significant and seemingly insurmountable challenge for both Israel and the region. My initial focus was on Hamas's invasion of Israel. Wars have consequences. You cannot start a war and then complain about losing it.

It is possible to support Israel and still hope for a peaceful Palestinian state in the future. A state that desires to coexist peacefully with Israel. However, that possibility does not currently exist. The opposing side proposes unfeasible solutions, like abolishing the Jewish state. What would replace it? This is merely a fantasy fueled by antisemitism.

There is a conceivable plan for a Palestinian state, particularly in the West Bank. Yet, the situation in Gaza is extremely complex. This territory was once under Egyptian control, and they have no desire to reclaim it. They, like Israel, recognize the extreme radicalization of Gaza’s population. This radicalization is the result of 18 years of Hamas's influence, during which they have also misappropriated international aid for personal gain and constructed extensive terror tunnels.

This situation is a tragedy that has extinguished the hope of peace for many Israelis and others. The suffering in Gaza can be directly attributed to Hamas. This includes the initiation of the war and the desires of Hamas leadership, as revealed in intercepted messages. Yahya Sinwar, a leader of Hamas, expressed a belief that their victory would come through the deaths and suffering of Gaza's civilians.

Opinions on the war's conduct are widespread. In Israel, everyone has a viewpoint, and it seems the same is true globally. The delay in advancing into Rafah was frustrating and, to me, inexplicable. However, caution is necessary in ongoing situations due to unknown factors. It's possible that military actions were delayed due to unseen negotiations or other reasons. Like everyone, I desire a swift end to the war. Yet, without a complete understanding of the political and intelligence context, it's difficult to grasp the full situation.

I am not using quotation marks because I am not arrogant to think I can take stenographer like notes. Let’s leave it at paraphrasing as best I can of words I believe all should hear before deciding what to believe. I have fact checked Natasha’s words as best I could and have not found a flaw. That is why I post them here for your perusal. I should add that none of Natasha’s words are new to me. They represent the history and current events I have learned my entire life and the basis of my opinions. How about you?

17 June 2024, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Munk Debate

Rudyard Griffiths, Moderator: Natasha Hausdorff, let's have your opening statement now.

Natasha Hausdorff:  Well, thank you and good evening. What a privilege it is to be here, stood on this stage on what I consider to be the most important topic of our age. I have to begin with a debating tip, coming from a land with a culture of a rich history of debate, and that is that in debates it is for the proposition to define the motion. Douglas (Murray) did that for you, loud and clear. Mehdi (Hasan) seems to think that he can redefine anti-Zionism without you noticing, but the proposition is not going to allow him to pull the wool over your eyes and conflate Zionism with politics. Who has the right to define Zionism? Well, apart from the proposition in this debate, because that's how the rules work, would you ask a misogynist to define misogyny? You wouldn't ask a sex offender to define rape. You wouldn't ask the KKK to define anti-black racism. So why, when it comes to the Jews, would you let the anti-Zionists define anti-Zionism? No, ladies and gentlemen, no minority should have its identity dictated to it, and we have defined Zionism. It concerns the right of the Jewish people to self-determination in their ancient homeland. Zionism is not a political ideology. Zionism does not stipulate how the Jewish state should be governed, which is what a political ideology does. It simply says it should exist. It doesn't dictate borders or the makeup of the population. It does not say that Israel should be socialist kibbutzim or capitalist startup nation. Israel has exemplified both of those and everything in between. This is not about political ideology; this debate is about racism and creating a double standard where you make an exception for the Jews. Now, you don't have to support Zionism, but if you are anti-Zionist, if you are against the Jews having a state, you are against the Jews. Mehdi is lying about what Zionism is in an attempt to win this debate and to provide cover for his own anti-Semitism. We usually hear a series of lies spewed by anti-Semites and anti-Zionists in an attempt to justify their anti-Zionism, and these are the modern blood libels. They are widely believed, as widely believed as the ancient blood libel that Jews killed Christian children to use their blood for religious rituals, as widely believed and as false. I'm going to take you through four blood libels that anti-Zionists rely on: Number one, the libel of colonialism. Israel is the ultimate decolonization success story. Against all odds, after Arab imperialism, Islamic conquest, and British colonialism, the Jews indigenous to Judea reestablished themselves in Israel. My family lived under Ottoman and then British colonialism in Jerusalem long before Yasser Arafat, who was born in Cairo, created the Palestinian national identity in the 60s. Number two, the libel of ethnic cleansing. In 1948, when five Arab armies and the local Arab population attacked the fledgling state of Israel with the stated intention of annihilating its people, 700,000 Arabs fled the fighting. Those that remained became Israeli citizens. The Arab population of Israel has increased tenfold. This is ethnic cleansing? No, ethnic cleansing was what happened to the Jews in 1948 when Jordan occupied the West Bank. Ethnic cleansing was what happened to 850,000 Jews expelled from Yemen, Algeria, Egypt, Morocco, Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq, where they had lived for thousands of years. Ethnic cleansing left Arab countries Jew-free, while 2 million Arabs live in Israel today. Number three, the libel of apartheid. Those Arabs that remained in Israel are now 20% of its population, the only free Arabs in the Middle East. They are represented in every area of Israeli society as mayors, army officers, police commanders, members of parliament, and the Supreme Court. I served under Salim Joubran, who put both an Israeli Prime Minister and a president in jail. Those who propagate the lie of apartheid seek to conflate Arab citizens of Israel with Arabs living under the Palestinian Authority, who have autonomy and should be voting for their leadership. But President Mahmoud Abbas is now in his 19th year of his four-year term. Number four, the libel of genocide. The reprehensible smear that maliciously accuses the Jews of perpetrating the very crimes committed against them. October 7 was the latest in a long history of genocidal acts by Arabs against Jews in the Middle East. The genocide libel inverts reality. Hamas has spent 16 years embedding its terror infrastructure in mosques, schools, hospitals, and every second house. Its central military tactic is to use civilians as human shields. In the face of these unprecedented challenges, the IDF has taken greater measures to prevent civilian casualties than any other army in history, far exceeding the requirements of international law. Genocide is the latest modern blood libel that anti-Semites use to justify their anti-Zionism, and it is central to Hamas's war strategy today. Its only aim is to survive and to achieve this with international pressure on the Jews to cease their self-defense. Voting for the opposition supports Hamas in this endeavor by legitimizing, aiding, and abetting their anti-Zionist aim to wipe out the Jews from the river to the sea. Don't stand with the terrorists and anti-Semites. Stand on the side of moral integrity. Stand with the proposition.

“Natasha Hausdorff is a Barrister and expert commentator on international law, including the law of armed conflict, foreign affairs and national security policy. She holds law degrees from Oxford and Tel Aviv Universities and was a Fellow in the National Security Law Programme at Columbia Law School in New York. Natasha previously worked for American law firm Skadden Arps, in London and Brussels, and clerked for the President of the Israeli Supreme Court, Chief Justice Miriam Naor, in Jerusalem. In a voluntary capacity she serves as legal director of UK Lawyers for Israel Charitable Trust.”

https://vimeo.com/961602232?share=copy