The Other Israel Demonstrates that it hasn’t completely forgotten the lessons of the Holocaust and Judaism

We should be clear why the Israeli government and the Zionist parties (Meretz excepted) are so determined to physically expel Israel’s Black African refugees.  It is Zionism.  It is because Israel is a Jewish state.  

This does not mean a state living up to Jewish values as historically understood – the tradition of opposition to racism and fascism, support for trade union struggles and the fight against oppression.  Israel is only a Jewish state in that it is racially defined as an ethnically Jewish state (as pure as possible).  Being Jewish means  having as few non-Jews as possible.  Israel’s Arabs are a barely tolerated fifth column – Black African refugees are neither Jewish or White so they must go.  This is the logic of Zionism.

However not all Israelis are either racists or Zionists.  

I agree.  It is good to know that there are at least some Israelis who understand that the lesson of the Holocaust was that all too few countries took in all too few Jewish refugees in the years before the gates were closed on them. 

There are some 50 references in the Old Testament to befriending the stranger or refugee:  You can see some of them here

Israel is only a ‘Jewish’ state on an ethno-nationalist level.  Zionism dictates the need to create and maintain a Jewish national state which is defined racially.  The 'problem' of the Black African refugees is that they are not Jewish.  In Netanyahu’s words, they undermine the ‘Jewish identity’ of the state.

It was the same reason that led to the ban on a book Borderland from the high school syllabus in Israel because it portrayed a relationship between Arab and Jewish teenagers.  Israel is a deeply racist society because it is a Zionist settler colonial society.

The refugees are not of ‘our’ blood and soil.  Israel doesn’t stand in the long and rich Jewish diaspora traditions but in the tradition of the European fascist states of the 1930’s, Nazi Germany included.  Israel today is a pogrom state, a state that in its overwhelming majority despises the other.

Israel is not Jewish according to any set of values.  Israel is the most racist state in the world.  A state where a plurality of Jews, 48%, want to see the deportation of Israeli Arabs.  75% don’t wish to live with an Arab in their apartment block. Is it any wonder that African refugees are called ‘infiltrators’ a terms used against Palestinian refugees who tried to return after  being expelled in 1948.  Its ‘Culture’ Minister (shades of Goebbels) Miri Regev called the refugees a ‘cancer’ and when there were protests apologised to cancer patients for comparing them to refugees.

It is heartwarming to know that the Israeli state, which has traded on the Holocaust ever since its inception, has at least some people in it who understand that one of the lessons of the Holocaust is that we should not turn away the refugee who is seeking shelter from death and torture.  Already refugees deported from Israel have met their deaths at the hands of ISIS. 

It is completely predictable that the Israeli Labour Party so-called ‘Opposition’ in Israel has come out in full support of Netanyahu’s proposed deportation of Black African refugees from Eritrea and Sudan for the ‘crime’ of having fled from their countries.  Netanyahu has reached a corrupt and criminal deal with the dictator of Rwanda, Paul Ngame although they are denying it now.  The actions of Rwanda are particularly shameful, hence the denials, since they were set up as a result of the genocide of the Tsutsis.

What is essential though is that we should call out the racists in the British Labour Party who are driving the anti-Semitism witch hunt.  I have tweeted to both Jeremy Newmark and Rhea Wolfson today asking them to dissociate themselves from the Israeli Labour Party.  I have been met with silence.  It is unacceptable that we have a Zionist member of Labour's National Executive Committee representing the left who refuses to condemn the racist sister party of the group of which she is a member.  

Tony Greenstein

Zvi Bar'el  Jan 24, 2018 9:45 AM

We can breathe a little more easily due to the refusal of several El Al pilots to fly asylum seekers living in Israel to Uganda. And the signatures of several hundred professors and intellectuals to a letter calling on the prime minister to put a halt to expulsions of asylum seekers from Eritrea and 

Sudan are also a breath of fresh air.

At least from the reaction on social media, it can be assumed that there are thousands of other Israelis who are nauseated by the cabinet’s cruel decision to expel about 35,000 asylum seekers from the country, even if some of them are “no more than” people who came here seeking work, and who, as the cabinet resolution would have it, are therefore not worthy of compassion. These voices of protest can’t cleanse the national conscience, however, and it’s doubtful that they will steal the limelight from the cries of victory being uttered by members of the cabinet, including the prime minister, for having finally found the final, perfect solution.

No, we are not Nazis. After all, we aren’t exterminating these blacks, haven’t housed them in concentration camps and haven’t performed medical experiments on them – even if they do apparently provide a field for extensive research on treatment for that disease known as “a cancer in the body of the nation.” We also haven’t required them to wear black Stars of David to identify themselves. For the most part, we’re good people who have fallen in the hands of a bad government. At least that’s the way we think of ourselves.

But that’s where our cognitive mistake lies, turning good citizens into cruel ones. It begins with that same self-righteous pretense of innocence that explains that we, the citizenry, aren’t bad and that it’s our government, which we would like to rid ourselves of, that’s evil. There’s nothing we can do. That’s the nature of democracy. Sometimes it’s a success and sometimes not.

If that’s the nature of the government, why take it to task? Do we seek — through this government — to be a symbol of morality, compassion and humanity? A government, after all, that is disgusted by minorities, foreigners, women, the disabled, which preaches national and racial-religious purity and is headed by a man who would love to also expel Israelis and Jews who are not committed to his political outlook.

The prime minister is surrounded by a defensive wall of unenlightened rabbis and miscreant cabinet members who have not forgotten what it means to be Jews. On the contrary, all they remember is a vindictive, murderous Judaism that in ancient times destroyed the non-Jews, avenging the rape of Leah and Jacob’s daughter, Dinah, even though Shechem, the rapist, agreed to convert to Judaism to marry her. But they don’t remember what it is to be humane. They are a light unto the gentiles, but without gentiles, please. Such a malicious government can’t grant what it doesn’t have.

Neither pleas nor court petitions nor demonstrations nor a refusal to fly asylum seekers out of the country will help in the face of this granite wall. At this time what is needed is personal, individual action on the part of Israelis. Now is the time to be Otto and Elise Hampel, the heroes of Hans Fallada’s “Alone in Berlin.” Not heaven forbid, as they did, leaving postcards in public calling for anti-government sabotage, but rather working as individuals to save lives. Refusing to turn the asylum seekers in and refraining from joining their captors rather than simply pointing an accusing finger at the government. Now is the time to take action rather than just issuing condemnations. Food manufacturers, banks, high-tech firms, organized labor, school principals, zoos, media outlets, drug companies, beverage manufacturers, the owners of assisted living facilities, condo associations, taxi companies and trucking firms. In short, anyone responsible for the standard of living in Israel needs to adopt a black worker. Just one Eritrean or Sudanese. No more than that.

None of these businesses or firms will earn recognition as the Righteous Among the Nations and some will certainly be denounced. On the social networks, there will be calls for a boycott of them. The government will roundly condemn them and fine them, but they could proudly recall where they were when the government wanted to expel the foreigners. They refused to obey a patently illegal order. That is the only vaccination that can work against the collapse of the national immune system.

David SheenThe Electronic Intifada 22 January 2018

In the coming weeks, the Israeli government will begin issuing ultimatums to thousands of African refugees, informing them that they have 90 days to leave the country, or be jailed indefinitely.

If Israeli government officials get their way, this will be the final installment of the annual racist ringleaders series, where I call out the figures and institutions that have spearheaded the state’s efforts to rid the country of refugees from Africa.

If their plans come to fruition, there will no longer be a need to document Israel’s ongoing war on African refugees, because this war will already have been “won” – at great human cost.

In Israeli society, where political power is not only dependent upon socio-economic status, but also upon one’s racial designation and religious identity, marginalized groups often rely upon whatever leverage they are left with to try to improve their lot.

Some marginalized Jews blame their hardships on Israeli governments past and present, and on the economic elites they serve. They see other disadvantaged groups in Israeli society not as rivals scrambling for scraps in a zero-sum battle royale, but as allies-in-waiting in the struggle for equity and increased prosperity for everyone living in the land.

But others have resorted to expressing resentment towards those even worse off than themselves.

Ophir Toubul belongs in this latter category.

In 2016, Toubul founded Golden Age, an organization which aims to advance the interests of Mizrahi Jews in Israel, a historically marginalized group which traces its origins to Arab lands.

Instead of fighting for better living conditions for all, however, Toubul has found common cause with an Israeli government that seeks to cleanse the country of refugees.

Before Israel built a border fence cutting off the flow of African refugees into the country, it sent arriving asylum seekers to the central bus station in southern Tel Aviv, without increasing services to the long-neglected neighborhoods around it with large Mizrahi populations.

The government pitted the two communities against one another, then reaped the rage of the Jewish residents as ammunition in its war on African refugees. Right-wing legislators regularly visited South Tel Aviv, assuring veteran Israeli residents that the recent African arrivals were to blame for their problems. The lawmakers then claimed that the anti-African sentiment of veteran Israelis, which they themselves had stoked, justified expelling the refugees from the country.

Toubul is determined to drive the wedge further. He argued in a Facebook post last February that “It’s time to dismantle the African ghetto created in South Tel Aviv.”

He added: “It’s time to end the carnival of refugee aid groups and demand that they vacate South Tel Aviv.”

Palestinian rapper and community activist Tamer Nafar slammed Toubul and Miri Regev, the Israeli minister who incited a 2012 South Tel Aviv pogrom against African refugees, in an opinion piece published in the daily newspaper Haaretz:

Street gangs patrol Israeli cities, violently harassing non-Jews in an attempt to drive them out altogether.

The anti-miscegenation group Lehava, primarily active in Jerusalem, directs its racism primarily towards Palestinians. The South Tel Aviv Liberation Front headed by Sheffi Paz, meanwhile, focuses its efforts on expelling African refugees.

Paz and her allies regularly badger black people in public places and demand that they leave the country immediately. The group’s targets realize that if they respond in any way, Paz could call the police and have them arrested on bogus charges. So aggrieved asylum seekers, already leading a precarious existence, generally suffer these slings in silence, powerless to protect themselves.

South Tel Aviv Liberation Front activists approach African men and women on the street and try to foist condoms onto them to publicly proclaim, without any sense of shame, that the African birth rate in Israel should be nil.

Not even children are spared from South Tel Aviv Liberation Front’s hate. Visit one of the few public parks in downtown Tel Aviv, and you may come face to face with Paz and her posse taunting black boys and girls – because they can.

Paz has parlayed her street-level leadership into financial gain and political influence. This year, she appealed to Israelis over the Internet, asking for funds to ramp up her racist provocations. Within weeks, Paz had managed to crowdsource cash donations well in excess of the approximately $122,500 goal she gave herself.

In November 2016, Israeli teenagers lynched Babikir Adham-Uvdo, an African refugee, in the Tel Aviv suburb of Petah Tikva.

Adham-Uvdo’s face was mercilessly pummeled to the point that his own brother was unable to recognize him. His body was identified by the missing fingers he had lost back in Darfur, from where he had fled to Israel.

Adham-Uvdo was lynched right outside Petah Tikva city hall. Instead of trying to reassure African refugees in the city, in the months following the murder mayor Itzik Braverman made efforts to expel them. His municipality began to cut off electricity and drinking water to subdivided apartments housing African refugees, who face housing discrimination.

The municipality has claimed that it was not targeting refugees, but cracking down on building violations.

ACRI, the civil rights organization which represented the asylum seekers in the case, said that 80 percent of the residents of the targeted apartments were Eritreans and Sudanese.

A court ruled in August last that Braverman could continue cutting off basic services to African refugees.

In 2015, Braverman wrote a letter to Silvan Shalom, interior minister at the time, to say that forbidding refugees from living in Tel Aviv and Eilat but not Petah Tikva had “caused great disappointment amongst city residents and fears that their personal security will be harmed.”

But in February, Braverman publicly admitted that the refugees conduct themselves lawfully.

“Most of them are here legally and do no harm,” Braverman told city residents. “Their share of Petah Tikva’s crime is small.”

So what’s Braverman’s true motivation for driving them out?

“You walk through Founder’s Square, you see blacks drinking beer. It’s not nice,” he told constituents.

In other words, the real crime of these African refugees – their only crime – is the color of their skin.

Avi Dichter, a former head of the Shin Bet, Israel’s secret police, has worked for more than a decade to expel African refugees from Israel. Ten years ago, while minister of internal security, Dichter determined that African refugees who are caught crossing into Israel would be returned to Egypt.

Though more subtle, Dichter’s current efforts to furnish Israeli authorities with tools to drive out African refugees may prove no less effective.

Since 2011, he has promoted a bill which would ensure that the government’s efforts to expel all African refugees cannot be impeded, even temporarily, by the Israeli high court. The bill, which would have the power of a constitutional amendment, would subordinate democracy and individual civil rights to the interests of a Jewish state.

In recent years, Israel’s high court has rejectedammendments to the country’s anti-refugee legislation because they violate the principles of democracy.

Once Dichter’s new law is passed, however, those considerations will be automatically superseded by so-called “Jewish interests.”

In the opinion of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, these Jewish interests include minimizing the number of non-Jews in the country.

When African refugees were just beginning to arrive in Israel a decade ago, Dichter did not make much effort to hide his disdain for them.

In July 2007, in Hadera, a town in northern Israel, a “security patrol’ established by the mayor raided an orchard and detained a group of African refugees, physically forced them onto buses, drove them out of town, and dumped them in a public park more than 100 kilometers away.

In 2011, an Israeli magistrate’s court fined Hadera’s mayor and city council approximately $80,000 over the unlawful incident.

But Hadera’s mayor and “security patrol” won Dichter’s praise. Dichter, then the minister for internal security, urged that these squadrons be established all across Israel.

Like Avi Dichter, Moti Yogev is an Israeli lawmaker sponsoring a bill which would block the high court from overturning, or even watering down, any legislation passed by Israel’s parliament, the Knesset.

But Yogev’s proposed law is even more draconian than Dichter’s.

If Dichter’s “nation state” bill would bar the Israeli high court from overturning laws that contravene principles of democracy, Yogev’s proposed legislation would strip the high court’s ability to overturn any law passed by the legislature, regardless of the reason.

If the aim of the “nation state” bill is to promote Jewish sectarian interests, the aim of the Yogav’s proposed legislation is to promote Jewish religious interests. While Yogev champions the bill in Israel’s parliament, it is the Derech Chaim movement, and its leader Rabbi Yitzchak Ginsburgh, who actually initiated it.

Derech Chaim aims to turn Israel’s ethnocracy – a semi-secular state that favors ethnic Jews – into a theocracy, a state whose laws are the Torah and Talmud, with no separation between synagogue and state. Ginsburgh is a guru of the Israeli far-right who wrote the introduction to The King’s Torah,a religious tract that sanctions the murder of non-Jewish babies, on the premise that they could pose a threat if allowed to grow to adulthood.

In trumpeting his bill’s supposed merits, Yogev has taken to signing off with “Restore our judges as in former times, and our counsellors as of yore; remove from us sorrow and sighing, and reign over us, you alone,” which is understood in religious circles as a call for the Jewish people to be ruled by unelected kings and clerics.

Yogev has made the racist rationale behind his new bill very explicit.

In March 2013, Yogev cofounded an Israeli parliamentary lobby that aimed to return African asylum seekers to their home countries. In October that same year, Yogev uploaded a video of himself walking around Ashdod, describing African refugees as “infesting” the city. This turn of phrase, which posits African refugees as subhuman insects that must be expelled or exterminated, is sadly a familiar trope in Israeli society.

In July 2015, Yogev said that “A D-9 [heavy bulldozer] should be raised at the high court.” A month later, he stated that his outburst was prompted by a high court ruling forbidding Israel from jailing African refugees indefinitely, in order to force them to leave of their own accord, rather than being deported by the state.

Under extreme pressure from Israel’s far-right government, however, that ruling would not protect refugees for long.

For years, the pattern was the same: the Israeli government would pass a draconian anti-African measure in the Knesset, local human rights groups would challenge it, and the high court would strike it down.

Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked has taken a series of actions to alter the balance of power between the legislative, executive and judicial wings of the government – or strip the court’s powers altogether.

Miriam Naor, the outgoing president of Israel’s high court, resisted some of Shaked’s efforts to strong-arm the judiciary, describing her efforts to stack the high court with right-wing jurists as “bringing a gun to the table.” But Naor has since retired from the bench, and the rest of the court’s chief justices seem to have internalized Shaked’s message.

In August, Naor began referring to African refugees in court using only the government’s preferred slur for them: “infiltrators.”

The following month, the court ruled that the government is forbidden from employing asylum seekers from Eritrea and Sudan, putting thousands of refugees at risk of losing their jobs in cleaning and maintenance for municipalities.

The court also ruled that the state can withhold 20 percent of the wages asylum seekers earn from private employers, as employers are required to with foreign workers, even though doing so puts impoverished refugees in an even more precarious position.

Israel’s chief justices have also shown leniency towards the government when it has not fulfilled its commitments to the court regarding the status of asylum seekers, allowing the state to buy more time despite consistently acting in bad faith.

With the government ramping up its efforts to expel refugees, the justices know their demands will soon be moot.

The court ruled last year that Israel could now deport refugees back to Africa without their consent, as long as the countries they were being deported to agreed to take them against their will. Shaked’s pressure had paid off.

The government renegotiated its agreement with Rwanda to comply with the high court’s dictates, paving the way for mass deportations.

In December, the government told the court that it planned to begin mass deportations within weeks.

Once Israel’s high court cleared the way for the government to expel African refugees, the next step was to ratify the plan in the Knesset.

Newly elected Labor party chief Avi Gabbay justified his support for the proposal by saying, “We don’t have to be more righteous than the High Court of Justice.”

Prior to his leadership run, Gabbay had no affiliation with the Labor party. Even now, he is not a member of the Israeli parliament, and cannot become one until the next national election, currently scheduled for 2019.

The deportation plan does not need Labor’s support as all parties in the governing coalition agreed to support its passage.

But Gabbay urged Labor lawmakers to champion it, saying that failing to do so would cost the party votes in the next general election.

“We would pay a heavy price for opposing the bill,” he said.

In the first Knesset vote on the bill, 11 lawmakers in Labor’s coalition voted in favor of it.

By the time the bill was brought to the Knesset for a final vote, pressure from anti-racist activists convinced some Labor party backbenchers to reverse their votes and oppose the measure.

But this last minute resistance was ineffectual on all counts: Labor was unable to peel away any parliamentary seats from its more openly racist rivals; Gabbay demonstrated that he can’t effectively lead his own party, much less a whole country; the anti-refugee bill easily passed in the parliament, regardless.

Like Gabbay and the leaders of several other Knesset factions, Moshe Kahlon came to head his 

Kulanu party after working under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his ruling Likud party.

In early July, the Israeli government was determining which converts to Judaism would be recognized by the state. Hoping to head off a high court decision ordering the state to recognize conversions performed by more liberal streams of Judaism, ultra-Orthodox factions of the government proposed a new bill that would maintain their own hardline rabbis’ exclusive control over conversions.

Under the new proposal, conversion to Judaism via its liberal streams would not be sufficient to earn a person Israeli citizenship. This would leave vulnerable American Jews, a plurality of whom are affiliated with those liberal streams.

Why did the ordinarily pragmatic Kahlon side with the ultra-Orthodox on this issue, angering American Jews?

According to Kahlon, if Israel recognizes conversions to liberal streams of Judaism, “There will be a flood here of groups from Eritrea.”

Over the last decade, a relatively small but significant number of African refugees – including those in romantic relationships with Jewish Israeli citizens – have asked the state for permission to convert to Judaism. Their requests have been rejected outright.

Back in 2004, before the vast majority of African refugees arrived, Kahlon proposed a law, never enacted, that would have punished anyone who enters Israel without a permit by not allowing them to acquire legal status until after a period of 10 years outside the country.

So Aryeh Deri told the Knesset’s Interior and Environment Committee, which oversees the state’s treatment of African refugees, in July.

For two full years now, Deri has presided over what one researcher called“the most effective anti-irregular migration mechanism in the world.”

In April last year the liberal Haaretznewspaper excoriated the Israeli government for this mechanism.

“The ways Israel has of making life difficult for asylum seekers, and in so doing avoiding its legal and humanitarian obligations toward them, are proliferating,” the editorial, published on Israel’s 

Holocaust Remembrance Day, stated.

Months later, the paper published interviews with African refugees whom Israel had coerced to “voluntarily” deport. They confirmed what earlier investigations had also revealed: The African refugees Israel sends to Rwanda do not receive state protection there, but instead have their documents taken away, and are forced to begin their search for asylum all over again.

According to those who survived the renewed ordeal and managed to make it to Europe, many of their fellow refugees pushed out by Israel ended up dead in Libyan torture camps, or drowned at the bottom of the Mediterranean.

Upon publication of these reports, Haaretzpublisher Amos Schocken tweeted a list of top Israeli ministers who have led Israel’s war on Africans, calling them “murderers in suits.”

All of those listed have been included in previous editions of this annual racist ringleaders roundup.

Two of them top the lists for both 2016 and 2017: Aryeh Deri and Benjamin Netanyahu.

The only real difference between the two top Israeli leaders is that Deri will still only flaunt his anti-blackness in Hebrew, playing to hometown hatred. Netanyahu, by contrast, is now brazen enough to boast about it English as well.

In January, Netanyahu tweeted in English his support for Donald Trump’s plan to build a wall between the US and Mexico, touting his own anti-African border fence as a “great success.”

When Netanyahu’s statement caused friction with Mexico, and Mexican Jews broke the Jewish Sabbath to protest the anti-immigrant invective, Deri begged the prime minister to take back his words. Netanyahu refused.

Benjamin Netanyahu – and a majority of the 120-member Knesset – signed their names onto this text a decade ago, when Netanyahu was leader of the opposition in parliament.

Just a few years later, once Netanyahu had returned to the prime minister’s office, his government began to persecute African refugees in earnest, starting to stamp their visas with clauses stating they were forbidden to work.

How could Netanyahu – or anyone for that matter – express their support for these refugees, and then retract that support as soon as they were in a position to enforce it?

Twelve years ago, dozens of mainstream US Jewish groups published a full-page adin The New York Times invoking Jewish suffering in the Nazi Holocaust, and calling upon then US president George 

W. Bush to take action to end the atrocities in Darfur.

Many, but not all, of those same Jewish groups have maintained a deafening silence about Israel’s war on African refugees. Why did their so-called solidarity disappear?

A recent Gallup index on the treatment of migrants around the world ranked Israel as sixth from the bottom.

During a tour of Tel Aviv in August, Netanyahu made a point of including in his entourage Sheffi Paz and other South Tel Aviv Liberation Front activists, walking with them hand in hand, and posing for photographs.

These calculated photo-ops sent the Israeli public a clear message: that Netanyahu gives his full-throated support to racist street gangs who aim to cleanse the country of all African refugees.

Barring any unforeseen intervention, Netanyahu and the rest of Israel’s racist ringleaders will soon see their wishes fulfilled.

So now, Israel wants to extend this obscurity to the refugees themselves, in not even naming the third country to which they would be ‘voluntarily deported’ (or else!). Despite the massive reporting of horror potentially awaiting them, they are supposed to feel comfortable with this.

In the New Testament, Luke 22, we are told how Judas arranged his betrayal of Jesus by kissing him on the cheek (that’s how the capturers would know who Jesus was). “Judas, are you betraying the Son of Man with a kiss?”, Jesus asked.

And so the African refugees are being betrayed – with a kiss, a smile, and a “best of luck” wish.