|Yair Auron – Professor of Holocaust Studies at Israel’s Open University|
According to the Chakrabarti Inquiry Report on Racism and Anti-Semitism comparisons between the actions of Israel and Zionism with those of Hitler, the Nazis or the Holocaust. ‘can only be intended to be incendiary rather than persuasive.’
In fact Chakrabarti uses the term ‘Jewish people or institutions anywhere in the world’ when referring to Zionism and Israel. The Chakrabarti Report, which sections of the liberal left have abandoned all sense of critical judgement over, conflates Jewish’ with Zionist, itself an example of its political and terminological confusion over this subject. It is one of my major disagreements with the group Free Speech on Israel, where I held a minority position. See A marred report.
What therefore would the liberal apostles of Chakrabarti, FSOI and other well meaning people have to say to Yair Auron, Professor of Holocaust Studies at Israel’s Open University, who has just brought a failed action at Israel’s Supreme Court to try and have the files at Israel’s state archives opened in respect of the arms trade conducted with the perpetrators of the genocide in Bosnia?
Do they think Auron is an anti-Semite for comparing Israel’s actions to those who supplied help and weapons to the Nazis during WW2? Or is he just being ‘incendiary’? Certainly in the Labour Party comparisons between Israel and the Nazis is considered a prime example of ‘anti-Semitism’. This is why Ken Livingstone has been suspended.
Perhaps because he lives in Israel, a state which is moving so far to the Right that many people identify with the actions of the Nazis even whilst wishing that they had targeted someone else other than the Jews, it is permissible to make such comments. Auron was quite clear about why he and fellow petitioner Itay Mack had brought the action:
“We betrayed the legacy of the Holocaust
when we’re committing acts like this,” Professor Yair Auron said. “To sell
weapons to Serbia or to Rwanda during the genocide is similar to selling
weapons to Nazi Germany during the Second World War. No country has the right
to do it and especially not Israel.”
No one should think just because the Palestinians are the primary victims of the most
moral army in the world and the large Israeli arms industry, that they are the
South America, from the 1970’s onwards, Israeli democracy ensure that the death
squad regimes of El Salvador, Guatemala and other countries received the
training and armaments that they required.
largest supplier of arms to Latin America and sub-Saharan Africa. But Israel’s
activities in Third World countries are in fact far more wide-ranging than just
military sales. Israel has become active in all the dimensions of the global
counterinsurgency business. Thus, for example, in Guatemala, “Hit lists
used by the death squads have been computerized. Technologically sophisticated
murder is coordinated by a Regional Telecommunications Center built and managed
by Israeli Army experts.”
relations with Guatemala include the following items: Since 1976, Israel has been the main provider
of arms, aircraft, and military training to Guatemala. It has trained 800 Guatemalan air force
pilots to fly Israeli-supplied Kfir fighters and Arava transport planes. It has supplied radar systems throughout the
country. It has trained the military and
G-2 police units in the use of interrogation techniques, modern intelligence
methods, psychological warfare, and terror.
Electronics and Transmission School in Guatemala which opened in November 1981. The 300 Israeli advisers present in Guatemala
assisted in the coup of March 1982 that brought General Rios Montt to power,
and trained officers backing him. These
Israeli advisers assisted in the design of the Program of Assistance to
Conflict Areas (PAAC), put into effect from August 1982; developed jointly with
advisers from South Africa and Taiwan, the program involves the creation of
“model villages” that combine features of the “strategic
hamlets” implanted in Vietnam and Israeli kibbutzim.
contras, and also serve El Salvador, Honduras, Haiti, Chile, and Bolivia and
Argentina (at least before their return to civilian government) at a training
camp in Guatemala. In the northern
province of Alta Verapaz, Israel constructed a factory which produces 5.56
caliber munitions and Uzi machine guns that is to supply all of Central
America. Israel is in the special
position of having recent combat experience as well as current
counterinsurgency experience (in the West Bank and Gaza). The lessons of the
Middle East, as a testing ground for Western military equipment against
Soviet-supplied armies, are disseminated through the world via Israel. Especially during the past decade, Israel has
come to specialize as a strong arm of the Pax Americana, and it has been
performing this role not simply regionally but also on a global scale.
world, where atrocities and mass murder is being committed, you can be sure to
find the Israeli state providing state-of-the art weaponry. This was also true in Bosnia and the former
Yugoslavia. Here is an article from Israel’s
+972 magazine we see how Israel’s Supreme Court helps in covering up the
details of what Israel during the time when concentration camps renewed their
acquaintance with Europe.
potential damage to Israel’s foreign relations, the Supreme Court rejects a
petition calling to reveal details of the government’s arms exports to the
Serbian army during the Bosnian genocide.
Brown* (Translated by Tal Haran)
|A mass grave in Bosnia. (ICTY)|
Supreme Court last month rejected a petition to reveal details of Israeli defense
exports to the former Yugoslavia during the genocide in Bosnia in the 1990s.
The court ruled that exposing Israeli involvement in genocide would damage the
country’s foreign relations to such an extent that it would outweigh the public
interest in knowing that information, and the possible prosecution of
petitioners, Attorney Itay Mack and Professor Yair Oron, presented the court
with concrete evidence of Israeli defense exports to Serbian forces at the
time, including training as well as ammunition and rifles. Among other things,
they presented the personal journal of General Ratko Mladić, currently on trial
at the International Court of Justice for committing war crimes, crimes against
humanity, and genocide. Mladić’s journal explicitly mentions Serbia’s
ample arms ties with Israel at the time.
exports took place long after the UN Security Council placed an arms embargo on
various parts of the former Yugoslavia, and after the publication of a series
of testimonies exposing genocide and the creation of concentration camps.
Israeli State Attorney’s reply and the court’s rejection of the petition are a
de facto admission by Israel that it cooperated with the Bosnian genocide: if
the government had nothing to hide, the documents under discussion would not
pose any threat to foreign relations.
1991 and 1995 the former Yugoslavia shattered, going from a multi-national
republic to an assemblage of nations fighting each other in a bloody civil war
that included massacres and ultimately genocide.
waged war against Croatia from 1991-1992, and against Bosnia from 1992-1995. In
both wars the Serbs committed genocide and ethnic cleansing of Muslims in the
areas they occupied, leading to the deaths of 250,000 people. Tens of thousands
of others were wounded and starved, a multitude of women were raped, and many
people were incarcerated in concentration camps. Other parties to the conflict
also committed war crimes, but the petition focuses on Israel’s collaboration
with the Serbian forces. The horrendously cruel acts in Yugoslavia were the
worst Europe had seen since the Holocaust.
|Ratko Mladić. Evidence of Israeli arms deals was found in his journal. (Mikhail Estefayev)|
the most notorious massacres was perpetrated by soldiers serving under Serbian
General Ratko Mladić around the city of Srebrenica in July 1995. Serbian forces
commanded by the general murdered about 8,000 Bosnians and buried them in mass
graves in the course of a campaign of ethnic cleansing they were waging against
Muslims in the area. Although the city was supposed to be under UN protection,
when the massacre began UN troops did not intervene. Mladić was extradited to
the International Court of Justice at The Hague in 2012, and is still on trial.
time, prominent Jewish organizations were calling for an immediate end to the
genocide and shutting down the death camps. Not so the State of Israel.
Outwardly it condemned the massacre, but behind the scenes was supplying
weapons to the perpetrators and training their troops.
Mack and Professor Oron have gathered numerous testimonies about the Israeli
arms supply to Serbia, which they presented in their petition. They provided
evidence of such exports taking place long after the UN Security Council
embargo went into effect in September 1991. The testimonies have been
crossed-checked and are brought here as they were presented in the petition,
with necessary abbreviations.
former senior official of the Serb Ministry of Defense published a
book, The Serbian Army, in which she wrote about the arms deal
between Israel and Serbia, signed about a month after the embargo: “One of the
largest deals was made in October 1991. For obvious reasons, the deal with the
Jews was not made public at the time.”
Israeli who volunteered in a humanitarian organization in Bosnia at the time
testified that in 1994 a UN officer asked him to look at the remains of 120 mm
shell — with Hebrew writing on it — that exploded on the landing strip of the
Sarajevo airfield. He also testified that he saw Serbs moving around in Bosnia
carrying Uzi guns made in Israel.
|A concentration camp in Bosnia. (ITN)|
it was reported that Israeli arms dealers in collaboration with the French
closed a deal to supply Serbia with LAW missiles. According to reports from
1992, a delegation of the Israeli Ministry of Defense came to Belgrade and
signed an agreement to supply shells.
General Mladić who is now being prosecuted for war crimes and genocide, wrote
in his journal that “from Israel — they proposed joint struggle against
Islamist extremists. They offered to train our men in Greece and a free supply
of sniper rifles.” A report prepared at the request of the Dutch government on
the investigation of the Srebrenica events contains the following: “Belgrade
considered Israel, Russia and Greece its best friends. In autumn 1991 Serbia
closed a secret arms deal with Israel.”
it was reported that Israeli arms dealers supplied weapons to VRS — the army of
Republika Srpska, the Bosnian Serb Army. This supply must have been made with
the knowledge of the Israeli government.
were not the only party in this war to which the Israeli arms dealers tried to
sell weapons. According to reports, there was also an attempt to make a deal
with the anti-Semitic Croatian regime, which eventually fell through. The
petition also presented reports by human rights activists about Israelis
training the Serb army, and that the arms deal with the Serbs enabled Jews to
leave Sarajevo, which was under siege.
of this was taking place in relative secrecy, at the public level the
government of Israel lamely expressed its misgivings about the situation, as if
this were some force majeure and not a manmade slaughter. In July 1994,
then-Chairman of the Israeli Knesset’s Foreign Relations and Defense Committee
MK Ori Or visited Belgrade and said: “Our memory is alive. We know what it
means to live with boycotts. Every UN resolution against us has been taken with
a two-thirds majority.” That year, Vice President of the US at the time, Al
Gore, summoned the Israeli ambassador and warned Israel to desist from this
in 2013 Israel had no problem extraditing to Bosnia-Herzegovina a citizen who
immigrated to Israel seven years earlier and was wanted for suspicion of
involvement in a massacre in Bosnia in 1995. In other words, at some point the
state itself recognized the severity of the issue.
Supreme Court session on the state’s reply to the petition was held ex parte,
i.e. the petitioners weren’t allowed to hear it. Justices Danziger, Mazouz and
Fogelman rejected the petition and accepted the state’s position that revealing
the details of Israeli defense exports to Serbia during the genocide would
damage Israel’s foreign relations and security, and that this potential damage
exceeds the public’s interest in exposing what happened.
|A mass grave at Srebrenica, where Serbian forces massacred around 8,000 Bosnian Muslims in 1995. (Adam Jones)|
ruling is dangerous for several reasons. Firstly, the court’s acceptance of the
state’s certainty in how much damage would be caused to Israel’s foreign
relations is perplexing. Earlier this year, the same Supreme Court rejected a
similar claim regarding defense exports during the Rwandan genocide, yet a month
later the state itself declared that the exports were halted six days after the
killing started. If even the state does not see any harm in revealing — at
least partially — this information regarding Rwanda, why was a sweeping gag
imposed on the subject a month prior? Why did the Supreme Court justices
overlook this deception, even refusing to accept it as evidence as the
petitioners requested? After all, the state has obviously exaggerated in its
claim that this information would be damaging to foreign relations.
it is very much in the public’s interest to expose the state’s involvement in
genocide, including through arms dealers, particularly as a state that was
founded upon the devastation of its people following the Holocaust. It was for
this reason that Israel was, for example, willing to disregard Argentina’s
sovereignty when it kidnapped Eichmann and brought him to trial on its own
soil. It is in the interest not only of Israelis, but also of those who were
victims of the Holocaust. When the court considers war crimes, it is only
proper for it to consider their interest as well.
court rules in cases of genocide that damage to state security — which remains
entirely unproven — overrides the pursuit of justice for the victims of such
crimes, it is sending a clear message: that the state’s right to security,
whether real or imaginary, is absolute, and takes precedence over the
rights of its citizens and others.
Supreme Court’s ruling might lead one to conclude that the greater the crime,
the easier it is to conceal. The more arms sold and the more genocide
perpetrators trained, the greater the damage to the state’s foreign relations
and security should such crimes be exposed, and the weight of such supposed
damage will necessarily override the public interest. This is unacceptable. It
turns the judges — as the petitioners have put it — into accomplices. The
justices thus also make an unwitting Israeli public complicit in war
crimes, and deny them the democratic right to conduct the relevant discussion.
faces a series of similar requests regarding its collaboration with the
murderers of the Argentinian Junta, Pinochet’s regime in Chile, and Sri Lanka.
Attorney Mack intends to present additional cases by the end of this year. Even
if it is in the state’s interest to reject these petitions, the Supreme Court
must stop helping to conceal these crimes — if not for the sake of prosecuting
perpetrators of past atrocities, at least in order to put a stop to them in our
Brown is the pseudonym of an Israeli academic and a blogger. This story
first appeared in Hebrew on Local Call, where he is a blogger. Read