Why I’m relieved Netanyahu won

Benjamin Netanyahu speaks to the US Congress on 3 March. (Caleb Smith/Flickr)

Many had hoped that Benjamin Netanyahu would be defeated in yesterday’s Israeli election. I was not one of them.

Many had already written him off – pre-election polls showed his Likud Party lagging behind the allegedly center-left Zionist Union, headed by Isaac Herzog and Tzipi Livni.

But I kept in mind the 1996 election where Netanyahu was universally thought to be the loser well after the votes had been cast.

In the wake of the assassination of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, it had been expected that his “dovish” successor Shimon Peres, who had launched a bloody invasion of Lebanon months earlier in the hope of proving to the electorate his tough “security” credentials, would easily win.

But on that election night, Netanyahu told his supporters, “The hour is still early and the night is long.” As the votes were counted, he pulled ahead beating Peres and securing his first term as prime minister.

Netanyahu did it again on Tuesday. With virtually all the votes counted, Likud has 30 seats, the Zionist Union has 24 and the Joint List of predominantly Arab parties is in third place with 14.

It seems all but certain that Netanyahu will retain his post as Israel’s prime minister and head another fanatically right-wing government.

Truth in labeling

Let me be clear: I am not happy that Netanyahu won, as such. Netanyahu is a blood-soaked killer. He should be put on trial for his many crimes, from the relentless theft of Palestinian land to last summer’s massacre in Gaza – and I yearn to see that day.

But reveling in the murder of Palestinians and calling it “self-defense” barely distinguishes him from his rivals. Livni, a fugitive war crimes suspect, was one of the proud and unrepentant architects of Israel’s massacre in Gaza in 2008-2009, which undoubtedly served as Netanyahu’s model.

Her partner Herzog has faulted Netanyahu for not attacking Gaza viciously enough.

Netanyahu’s ugly election-day incitement that the “Arabs are advancing on the ballot boxes” revealed once again his true feelings that Palestinian citizens of Israel are not legitimate citizens deserving full rights. But Tzipi Livni has frequently expressed the same view.

And while he is absolutely committed to the theft and colonization of occupied Palestinian land, that too does not distinguish Netanyahu from his ostensibly dovish predecessors.

A recent interactive feature published by The New York Times shows that Israeli settlement construction in the occupied West Bank (excluding occupied Jerusalem) was often far higher under the supposed peace-seeking governments of Ehud Barak and Ehud Olmert.

But what has distinguished Netanyahu is that he strips away the opportunities for the so-called “international community” to hide its complicity with Israel’s ugly crimes behind a charade of a “peace process.”

Moreover, Netanyahu’s open alliance with the most racist, white supremacist, Islamophobic and bigoted elements of the North American and European right – his speech to Congress earlier this month was a manifestation of this – place Israel in the correct ideological camp. Israel can no longer practice apartheid at home while falsely presenting itself as a beacon of liberalism around the world.

In short, Netanyahu’s re-election is like the “Nutrition Facts” label on a box of junk food: it tells you about the toxic ingredients inside.

No Palestinian state

Netanyahu’s clear declaration days before the vote that he will not allow a Palestinian state was simply an affirmation of the real policy of every Israeli government since 1967, to which Herzog and Livni would have adhered.

Herzog and Livni would not have permitted a Palestinian state worthy of the name. Rather, with international support, they would have attempted to draw Palestinians back into “negotiations” over what would at most be a ghetto-like bantustan designed to legitimize Israel’s theft of vast tracts of land, its annexation of Jerusalem and its abrogation of the rights of Palestinian refugees. (Ben White’s analysis of this horrifying plan for permanent apartheid is a must read.)

Herzog too had vowed to continue building settlements on stolen Palestinian land. But he would hide this expansionist policy behind one of the cosmetic and fraudulent “freezes” during which colonization continues unabated.

Had the Zionist Union won, there was a very grave danger that the Palestinians would have been dragged back a decade into fruitless Oslo-style “negotiations” that would have served as a cover for continued sugbjugation and colonization.

Such negotiations have provided the principal excuse for the so-called international community to endlessly defer holding Israel even minimally accountable.

The refrain from gutless officials is always some version of “yes, isn’t it terrible what’s going on, but there’s a peace process and we support the peace process.”

The one positive outcome of Israel’s election is that path seems to be closed.

Step up BDS

We should be under no illusion that with Netanyahu’s re-election, European, North American and Arab governments are suddenly going to end their complicity with Israel.

There’s every reason to believe that the Obama administration, for instance, will continue its relentless campaign of opposing Palestinian rights and efforts to hold Israel accountable in any forum.

But the Israeli Jewish public’s choice to re-elect Netanyahu should make it clear to people around the world that Israel does not seek peace and does not seek justice. It will continue to oppress and ethnically cleanse Palestinians until it is stopped.

Negotiating with such a regime is pointless when its power over its victims remains vast and unchecked. The message we should take away is simple: the proper treatment for a polity committed to occupation, apartheid and ethno-racial supremacy is to isolate it until it recognizes that it must abandon those commitments.

Palestinians have asked the world to do that through boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS). Netanyahu makes the case a little easier, so it’s time to step it up.






it called right wingers like Ehud Barak and Ehud Olmert. peace-seeking.
Ehud Olmert came from Netanyahu's party, and Ehud Barak was a minister in Netanyahu's Government. the lust peace-seeking.prime minister in Israel was Rabin.
their was only one true jewish peace-seeking Israeli party this election, it got the least amount of votes. at least the joint jewish Arab party Hadash benefited from these elections as part of the joint least. that the only good thing that came out of these erlections


I think the exact words were supposedly dovish. The article recognizes as anyone with a brain does that neither Barak or Olmert were working for peace and justice.


Hi Ali, I am a resident of Tel Aviv and actually a big fan of yours, e.g. I enjoyed One Country. I certainly did not vote for Bibi - quite the opposite.

However the part of the picture that you are missing, is that most Israelis fear what will happen if the Palestinians achieve a state in the West Bank. This fear is not related to the exact borders of that state, whether it includes part of Jerusalem, and how many settlers are uprooted in order to create it. It is not connected to the fact that achieving such a state (and indeed more) is historically justified by Palestinian history.

It is a simple, rational, act of self preservation, in the light of the intentions as expressed and carried out by many of your people. Not many human beings are willing to do the right thing when they believe it will endanger themselves, their families, and their way of life.

Of course you can say the exact same thing about why Palestinians don't have a more peaceful attitude to Israel, and you'd be exactly tight. My point is simply that, by ignoring this factor, you make it look like most Israelis take pleasure in hte status quo, rather than them simply believing it's the best of a bunch of bad options.


White South Africans tried to justify their behavior the same way. It didn't work for them then, and it won't work for Israelis now.


This "self preservation" argument is an interesting one. Indeed Netanyahu is the man to go to if Israel wishes to continue to deny the Palestinians their right to the land stolen from them.

I see weight in the argument of not wanting criminals and terrorists living on your block even if it was their land first. They might get all uppity and try to take the whole block and if they legally live across the street they have a much better vantage point from which to do so.

See what I did there? I used a codeword from the 1950s and 1960s in the racist arguments against desegregation and integration in the United States. .. UPPITY. It's a word that implies that Palestinians are somehow below Israelis... a word which is bloodied by xenophobia, ignorance and all its ugly conclusions. This serves to extinguish the segregationist argument against a Palestinian State. However on the other hand Israeli people do have plenty of bona fide reasons for fearing angry Palestinians. I'm not sure white South Africans had the same reasons for their fear.

It's a complicated issue. However at the end of the arguments the best first move Israel can make is to grant the Palestinians a legitimate, livable state of their own... even to the point of negotiating some land acquisition from neighboring countries.

How's that for upping the game?


If you call the occupation of the Palestinians a "simple, rational, act of self preservation" of the Israelis, there is something terribly wrong with your perspective which is imho very colonial. It's like 'reasoning' that you have to kill all the bears when you set up camp in bear country, because one of them might empty your refrigitator. It is also not a tit for tat case, in which land and rights can be exchanged and then everybody will live happily ever after. You conveniently omit the fact that Israel is the occupier and the agressor, that is violating the rights of the Palestinians on a 24/7 basis. What you imagine is probably that if I steal your wallet, then everything is hunky dory when I give a little bit of it back to you, which is called a 'consession' on my part, the thief. Don't you see how insane this is? I'd say let there be justice. No justice, no peace. Everybody knows that. Alas Israel is not tired of maiming, killing and looting, we know today. And that means that Israelis are not rational (at all!) and not in a mindset of self-preservation.


That's why I think the people who call for a solution with a single secular and democratic state in Palestine/Israel are correct. It's not a popular idea, but it would undeniably work better than what has been tried. For all the ways in which it is screwed up, and despite the efforts of our right wing knuckle draggers, the United States has managed to evolve into a secular and (de jure) non ethnocentric democracy. In case you haven't noticed, we Americans aren't exactly the smartest people in the world. If we have managed to build such a state, I've no doubt that bright Israeli and Palestinian minds could do better.


To respond to some of the responses to my comment, I am not here as a Zionist apologist - far from it. Zionism was a colonial project whose fruition entailed the dispossession of Palestine's indigenous Arabs. This was considered morally acceptable in the 1940s but would never fly now. Still, now Israel is a successful and prosperous nation state including 6.5 million non-Arabs, the vast majority of whom are locally born, i.e. no less indigenous than you or your ancestors.

The comparison with South Africa cuts both ways. Do you know why Mandela was such a great man? Because he had every reason to despise the whites but he spent his time in prison understanding them, what drove them, and what they most feared. Instead of being consumed by hatred and revenge, he decided what his goal was, and did whatever it took to achieve it. He successfully ushered South Africa out of apartheid by addressing the concerns of its white population, recognizing their important symbols (e.g. rugby) and securing their safety when the black majority took over. Show me the equivalent in Palestine.

If you want to end the occupation, you have to understand what is driving it. Part of course is a fascist sense of religious-nationalist entitlement, but this is only relevant for a minority of Israel's population. Far more dominant is the fear felt by every Israeli, even those who want a Palestinian state, that this state will become a base for attacks against Jewish civilians. You see, around half of the Palestinian population supports Hamas, a political party whose platform is vile and racist on the subject of Jews - far worse than even the far right Bayit Yehudi (Jewish Home) platform is on the subject of Arabs. Show me the equivalent in South Africa.

As a nation the Palestinians need to choose their aim wisely. Full historical justice, with all the Jews "going back to where they came from", means suicide for Israel. And like any nation state, Israel is just not going to do that.


Mandela's ABC was not a purely nonviolent organization. And please show me the Israeli equivalent of Martin Luther King and Mandela. You again put the onus on the colonized and oppressed to be peaceful. Despite the lack of an internationally known leader there has always been nonviolent resistance in Palestine. It is ongoing and constant. Western media has no use for such things though and prefers to keep the world ignorant, preferring to ignore the violent repression of peaceful protest and focus on those who have succumbed to frustration from decades of protest that have accomplished little.


Yes that is true, you are being realistic. But we can't escape the fact that there needs to be mention of peace and real forces to do so. That means denouncing boarders! No to occupation / colonization, this is a passive aggressive (mainly heavily aggressive) answer that has fueled groups like Hamas. No to the creation of separate states because it is the creation of states, such as Israel by the British, that caused this intense alienation in the first place, which would lead to more war and clouded thought.
It may not be realistic, it may be utopian-ism but it is the only stance no one in power has been brave enough to take. Pull down the boarders and create a union, no more us and them. It would take a long time but something in this direction needs to start now. Real peace talks, not the loaded gun of white supremacist distractions.
I am not saying I know the first steps but so far I have seen no evidence towards peace.
There is something wrong when people have to start weighing the odds on a load of evil decisions. It has happened many times in history, i need not divulge. It needs to be stopped.


Well said i totally agree. A drastic change in tactics to achieve peace (internally and from abroad) is well over due. The current and past ways have proven to be a waste of time, effort and lives.


I'm neither Palestinian (nor Muslim) nor Israeli (nor Jewish). From a distance, let me note a few factors. (i) The Zionist colonial project was an injustice perpetrated on the native Arabs, but given what had been going on in Europe, the Jews' desire to build their own country is understandable. (ii) The Zionist project has taken a turn away from socialist-kibbutznik idealism toward a religiously motivated Manifest Destiny-style Eretz Yisrael entitlement ideology. (iii) The West Bank is already too fragmented to make up a coherent state. (iv) The 300,000 or more Jewish settlers on the West Bank will never voluntarily leave, and the Israeli state would face a revolt if it tried to remove them. It won't happen. It's a non-starter. (v) Gaza could become a serviceable city-state if Israel lifted the siege. Alternatively, the USA could pay Egypt to take over Gaza and integrate its population. (vi) Arab Muslim countries control a heck of a lot of land. Israel is tiny, and the West Bank is a small fraction of Israel. (vii) If I were a West Bank Palestinian Arab, I realistically would face a choice between a future of poverty and steady humiliation at the hands of the IDF and arrogant, racist armed settlers, or emigration. (viii) I would feel great anger at the loss of my home, land, and dignity. But if I wanted a decent life, I might want to consider moving to a country where I'm not treated like a dangerous second-class quasi-subhuman. (ix) Palestinian Arabs might want to consider that, yes, they have been colonised and humiliated, and this is indeed unjust, but at the end of the day, this has happened countless times in history to countless peoples. Conquest, ethnic cleansing, displacement (or actual genocide): It's not a unique situation. (x) Israel's colonial project has succeeded, and cannot be reversed without a truly terrible war. For West Bank Palestinians, moving across the river to Jordan may be a smarter move than continuing to fight a lost cause.


I knew u were a zionist troll from the minute you said :


you claim to not be a zionist apologist but still you stand by them and state reasons why palestinians are hard to get along with (over 50% support hamas) you speak as of palestinians have any other choice..like they recieve all the free aid and training israel does. Filthy hasbara trolls I can even smell you all the way over here.


Hard to know how to respond to this except I'm just stating my point of view in the most clear and straightforwards way that I can. How does that make me a troll? If you look at what I wrote, it's hardly the traditional stuff of hasbara.

Anyway, FWIW, yes I think Palestinians have a choice as to whether to support an extremist fundamentalist movement like Hamas. Just like Israelis have a choice as to whether to support a racist nationalist like Netanyahu. There is always a choice.


What Gideon fails to mention is that "the Middle East's only democracy" cannot call itself that while ruling a non-voting race. If Israelis don't want a Palestinian state (and Sharon's "facts on the ground" have long since made it impossible), then to remain a democracy they must grant the vote to everyone in "Judea" and "Samaria" -- not just Jews.


Jeff I agree 100%. First, I think this is the most likely final outcome, comparable to the history of post-colonial nations such as Australia, Canada, Brazil, etc... A Palestinian state in the West Bank now appears to be an impossibility, of course because of Israeli settlement activity (which I deeply oppose) but also because of the outcome in Gaza, why has given all Israelis a reason to fear the same in the West Bank.

Second, the evidence suggests that this will also be the best outcome for the Palestinians, on an individual but not national level of course. Life for Arabs in Israel is far from perfect, and there is some discrimination, but surveys still show a strong majority consistently expressing a preference for remaining in Israel rather than living under Palestinian rule. Why do you think that is? It is because, for all the nationalistic crap, Israel is a safe and prosperous country with a strong rule of law.

I believe that all national identities (including that of the Jews) are fictions, and they can be reshaped in the light of political changes. Israelis and Palestinians are both mentally stuck in the false duality of two states vs apartheid, without seeing the most obvious way forwards in front of their noses. Ali Abunimah wrote a great book about this, and he made me a fan. I might perhaps call this country "Israel" at first and he will likely want to call it something else, but at soon as every adult gets the vote, the democratic process will decide this amongst many other questions.

I am optimistic that the day will come, though perhaps not in my lifetime. If you want a ray of light, follow the words and deeds of Ayman Odeh, the head of the Joint Arab List political party in Israel, who has attracted many Jewish supporters.


Israeli fear is kind of beside the point. There is no way out of the current impasse that does not involve risks to Israel. You can't tell people who are living with constant violence and deprivation "Oh, we'd like to help you, but it would create too many political problems."

Israel needs to come out from behind its mental Maginot Line. Unless you can suggest a permanent solution that doesn't involve a Palestinian state, it's pointless to talk about the risks of creating one. The ship is sinking; stop worrying about the seaworthiness of the lifeboat.


I have suffered greatly at the hands of the Israeli government in most simple things in live such as having normalcy, which I don't. Even with that, I don't hate Jews or wish them bad things. I don't see that as a solution.
Its Israeli Jews the ones, who will bring bad thing to themselves with their own hands.
What is the percentage of Israeli Jews who hold duel citizenship and why is that?
If you think the statuesque will live forever, you are in for a big surprise ahead.
The only constant rule in life is change!!; Russia,Great Britain, Hitler, Ottomans, Romans.Its not if, its when Israel becomes venerable. At that moment, the Palestinian's self preservation will kick in and make the difference for all the injustices they have suffered at the hand of Israeli haters like Netanyahu and his gangs. Then , a Palestinian stands up and say "Self Preservation"



The history of Zionism from the beginning was one of oppression, conquest, racism,
self-proclaimed supremacy. The enterprise was always "murder soaked". And it
was in its execution as well. Israel is not unlike a murderer who after the blood has
been spilt very temporarily recoils at the blood but continues to justify his act with even more murders. (Of course, they are "Jewish" murders, so perhaps any questionning is to be considered simply "anti-Semitic"???)

It gladdens me that Israelis are "fearful" of what they have done and continue doing.
I myself paid perhaps less attention to Mr. Netanyahu's re-appointment as

Perhaps I am odd---you may call it eccentric or "anti-Semitic" ---but I dare to hold even Jews accountable.

----Peter Loeb, Boston, MA USA


Good article Ali, despite the trolls. Keep bringing us the truth, especially here in the states.
Jane Zacher, Jew Against Zionism
Student, Philadelphia, Pa, Turtle Island


still, israelis should be ashamed of their extreme selfishness. they want such an extravagantly higher standard of living at the expense of the palestinians. this is shameful, not understandable.


Had he lost, the U.S. (and other western countries) might have had the illusion that something was going to change. It's very similar to the ways in which Americans who consider themselves "progressives" still imagine that the Democrats here are better than the Republicans, and have cut Obama, with his militarist, racist, colonialist policies, way more slack than they would have cut a Republican. At least with Netanyahu representing the face of Israel, we have to see things for what they are.


Bibi the Bomber, the King of Israel, is too busy inciting more genocide to notice that his grand role in history is the actually the fulfilment of an old wive's tale about a tribal god's promise to Israel. That tale is not the cornerstone but the very foundation of his grotesque little race colony. His mind may be as hollow as a tin can, and have the same hollow ring, but he is truly mighty with his god's sword.

Kitsch for Netanyahu kitsch, Israel is about to meet its destiny crying and kicking. And the only sane thing for the United States and the cowardly West to do is to finish planning how it will liquidate its Frankenstein with one fell swoop. The idea is already in the works inside the mysterious chambers of power, given Israel's spy tentacles around the globe and its veiled reminders to "anti-semitic" Europe of its nuclear arsenal.

We are witnessing--as I have been saying ever since King Bibi chose Iran as his main target--the end-game for Israel. Whatever Israel or the United States chooses to do next, Israel in its present form will not be tolerated and simply has no calculable chance of surviving the next decade.

Sadly, the alternative to decisive action by the West is a future of tears for the world. Too many challenges all around--a waning natural environment, parasitic financial institutions, the dissolution of political order, and bloody fratricide. Everything is inexplicably locking up; misery and social dysfunction are spreading in the most vital regions of the globe.

The Zionist project has to be completely dismantled and Palestine restored to its people. The next time Israel suggests a willingness to deploy nuclear weapons, as it has done on several occasions and just as it contemplated doing during the 1967 and 1973 wars, will probably be its last. It would be its death warrant. Let us hope that death here does not mean the extinction of human lives, but something more constructive for the people of the region.


You are opposed to dismantling palestinian homes, but you would like to deplace 8.3 million people? That sounds a bit incoherent to me.


I fervently hope you are right, Ali, and the US and EU will drop the charade and step up BDS. I remember after the 2008/9 attack, the word was going around that the best outcome was to have Netanyahu win because, then, there would be no doubt about his viscious intentions to complete the take over of Palestine, whereas the opposition was sticking to the moribund 'peace process'. So, that was six years ago and since then there have been two more attacks on Gaza, not to mention a full scale colonization of stolen land. I fear that while the Middle East burns and the 'West' is otherwhere and regime change focused, Israel will commit even more atrocities. Tell me I'm wrong--please.


As Ali argues, that "the greater of two evils" (Bibi) winning this election is actually the lesser of two evils because at least we won't have to witness the charade of a peace process and proposed plan for Palestinian statehood. As Ali pointed out, while "peace talks" go on, settlement expansion continues, sometimes at all-time fast rates. We could expect no more emphasis on Palestinian human rights or adherence to international law. Reading Ben White's article, it looks like more division and more misery.

But what will we see with Bibi? More war, anti-Arab rhetoric and division. Either way, Arabs remain victims of oppression, Israel remains isolated, unpopular and in danger of uprising, resistance and retaliation. Nothing good could have come of this election. It can be argued that this is better than that, but believing this involves a lot of wishful thinking.


Netanyahu's win is the best outcome for Palestinians. Herzog and his Zionist Alliance, as the name implies, would have been no different, except for the fact that they are wolves in sheep's clothing. Netanyahu's declared opposition to a Palestinian state makes it crystal clear to the whole world who the real obstacle to peace is. It puts pressure on the PA to abandon it's failed collaborationist policies. It strengthens the BDS movement. It exposes the complicity of the Arab regimes. It sets the stage for a 3rd intifada. And it makes the one-state solution the only viable option to pursue. Thanks to all the fascist zionist Israelis who voted Netanyahu in again. You made our day!


Now that Netanyahoo has revealed himself for the blatant racist that he is, the international community will now have no excuse and all the more reason to take him down the way we did de Klerk back in the 90s.


Sadly, I have to say I agree with every word of this article - it is concise, precise and deadly accurate. As a (born-again!!) Christian I would have to add that I stand with and agree with those Orthodox Jews who oppose Zionism and the state of Israel as an idol, and see those Christians who support Zionism as misguided at best, medieval-minded bigots at worst - Zionism opposes everything Christ taught, and the precise, concise and specific teachings of the apostle Paul on the issue of Land/Jerusalem/Israel - it is a blatant heresy. Of course,as a human being, I stand with all my brothers & sisters of integrity and goodwill in opposing apartheid, cultural cleansing and incremental genocide. The Zionist dream of a 'Greater Israel' will become the nightmare of a greater Palestine - the land itself will spit out Zionism, as surely as night follows day.


Alan Hart said the very same thing.http://www.alanhart.net/
Just like I believe that Zionism is the worst enemy of the Jewish people ,Nettenyahoo
will only show the world his true colors , and help the world community to see him as who he actually is.
BDS is the way , just like it was in South Africa .And by the way ,Bishop Desmond Tutu ,described the situation in Palestine much worst than it was in the apartheid days in South Africa.


I have to agree. Netanyahu's win is good news. Had he lost, the global community may have taken a wait and see approach to the Israeli political scene, costing the BDS and Palestinian activism momentum.

Now that we see that Zionist extremism is back at the helm, there can be no doubt that reconciliation and peace is well and truly a dried out carcass.

Gideon makes an interesting point about the fears of the Zionists. This is where BDS can play a positive role. If acceptance of Israel as a pariah state becomes mainstream, I suspect that the fear of the Zionists for self preservation would concentrate minds towards a just settlement.

At the moment, while the Zionists can count on the endless flow of American aid and the licence to act with impunity, there is no incentive or stomach for peace from their side.


I am an American Jew and peace and justice activist on many issues which include Israel/Palestine.

I tend to view Herzog and his people the same way I viewed Obama during the 2008 presidential campaign. I knew he was a Trojan horse who would and did indeed put the brakes on the U.S. 'peace movement', anemic though it was, during the Bush years. 'Liberals' were actually talking about him as though he were going to be the 'savior and chief'. I am quite serious. The Great Redeemer. It was nauseating.

It took years for some people to wake up. My guess it that Herzog made himself in Obama's style. And I believe there was at least one former Obama campaign official working for Herzog. In fact, said person, whose name can be found in the news, helped orchestrate the anti Netanyahu rally in Israel the other week.


The entity in Palestine called Israel is a euro-settler colony, pure and simple. It's national identity is called into being by The ACT of displacing and socially suppressing the Indigenous Peoples. Without this ACT, there can be no Israel. The world soundly rejects the settler regime in Palestine as racist and genocidal. The presence of Netanyahu at the helm of the murderous zionist ship of state puts to rest any illusion that there can be a "liberal" solution to the zionist escapade in Palestine. That is a bonanza to all of us who can see the liberation Palestine only in the ashes of the zionist colony.


... for confessing your intention to deny Palestinian statehood. Though this won't bother fanatics like the Tea Party and Canada's Harper regime, it has to shift the ground under Obama and others who pretend to support a negotiated two-state final solution.

Intense spin-doctoring is now needed to cover up the empire's evident nakedness.


Let's get our historical facts straight about apartheid. Unequal treatment, violations of minority rights, discrimination and racism were indeed features of the apartheid system introduced by the National Party that ruled South Africa from the late 1940s until the early 1990s. We also encounter them in Israel and the occupied Palestinian areas. But that is where the similarity with apartheid South Africa ends. The specific and fundamental thing about apartheid was that it was an attempt to remove a large part of the population from South Africa. The ruling white racists tried to make the Blacks foreigners in their own country by pushing them into areas remote from the cities of South and then pushing these so-called homelands into independence. All the while, it continued to use these people as cheap labour, but denied them citizen's rights. This is not only different from Israel's policies in the West Bank and Gaza, it is the precise opposite. Arab citizens of Israel are not being pushed out of the country. They have most of the rights that Jews have. Israel is not shedding parts of its territory and population. It is invading and colonizing foreign land. It is taking the homelands of the Palestinians. While it is true that Palestinians living in the occupied areas used to be used as cheap labour in Israel, this has declined sharply. So that similarity has disappeared. Apartheid is a wrong label to apply to Israel and its policies with regard to the occupied areas and Gaza.

Ali Abunimah

