…by Jonas E. Alexis
When Israeli General Moshe Dayan compared Israeli officials to “mad dog,” perhaps he was onto something. Israeli military historian Martin van Creveld seemed to have indicated way back in 2003 that Israel became a “mad dog” because the United States has been Israel’s bitch since the beginning of time. Creveld declared in the Guardian then:
“With the assault on Iraq, the US was not merely adopting Israel’s long-established methods – of initiative, offence and pre-emption – it was also adopting Israel’s adversaries as its own. Iraq had always ranked high among those; it was one of its so-called ‘faraway’ enemies.”
Creveld moved on to say that “The threatening of wild, irrational violence, in response to political pressure, has been an Israeli impulse from the very earliest days. It was first authoritatively documented, in the 1950s, by Moshe Sharett, the dovish Prime Minister, who wrote of his Defence Minister, Pinhas Lavon, that he ‘constantly preached for acts of madness’ or ‘going crazy’ if ever Israel were crossed.”
In other words, irrationality has been ingrained in the geopolitical ideology of Israeli officials from time immemorial. And that irrationality will continue to set the world ablaze if Israel isn’t challenged to abide by the moral and political order. We have certainly seen Israel in action in Syria, and Israeli officials know that the Syrian government, with the help of Russia and Iran, humiliated them in the region.
But Israeli officials are not ready to give up. They continue to antagonize Syria and violate every possible law that you can imagine in the region. Israeli officials always want to drink the blood of other people, and they seem to enjoy every bit of it. As Gordon Duff and Nahed al Husaini has recently reported, “The mood in Damascus is unsettling. There is no water, no fuel, no electricity in Damascus.”
The average Syrian isn’t benefiting from this. The Syrian government isn’t profiting from the war. After all, the war itself has already devastated families and ruined much of Syria. Who in his right mind would even think about putting more gas into an already burning bush? Who would even remotely suggest that more attack in Syria will bring something good?
Israeli officials. They think that international laws were not made for them. As it was reported last summer: “Defence Minister Avigdor Lieberman said on Thursday that Israel will not be bound by whatever agreements the international community may reach on Syria after its civil war.” Lieberman continued to say unapologetically:
“As far as the state of Israel is concerned, with all respect and appreciation for all agreements and all understandings, they are not binding on us. What obligates us are solely the security interests of the State of Israel. All other understandings and agreements that are reached in all kinds of places are simply irrelevant from our point of view.”
Lieberman again put the issue in proper perspective because he summarized what we have been saying for years: Israel is not and has never been willing to follow international law. The regime wants to abide by a different law which is neither moral nor reasonable. In that sense, the West—or what’s left of it—needs to seriously revise its unconditional support for the state of Israel.
Unless and until Western officials challenge the Israeli regime on moral and political terms, then the regime will continue to set the world on fire. I would hasten to say that it is the responsibility of every Western politician to think deep about these issues, to stop screwing around, to stop playing dice with precious lives in the Middle East, and to approach the Israel/Palestinian issue on universally moral terms.