International Court of Justice and the Global court of Public Opinion

South Africa has presented an overwhelming brief to the international Court of Justice, accusing Israel of genocidal motivation and demanding immediate cessation of such activity. The decision of the court will soon be known, but the opinion of millions, probably billons of the worlds citizens is known.  Israel has crossed an uncrossable line.

A community of Ethiopian nomads are gathered for their evening meal. The mood is melancholy. Ironically the conversation is not about their shortage of food, the malnutrition that stalks their children, the outbreaks of cholera, or the impact of on-going tribal rivalry and civil war.  The conversation is about Gaza.

A mixed group of middle class, mostly Caucasian Australians gather in a hall on the NSW South Coast.   They have not gathered to talk about the housing crisis, or the escalating cost of living, or a creaking health system, they have gathered to talk about Gaza and their concern about unspeakable suffering of the Gazan people.

In Sydney and Melbourne groups of progressive young Jews gather, not to talk about escalating antisemitism from which many have suffered, but to talk about Gaza.  Their overriding anxiety is that the government of Israel is doing immense harm to Judaism, to what it means to be a Jew, to the holding of humanitarian values and what it means to be a Jewish global citizen.

These conversations and thousands like them need be borne in mind by those tempted to dismiss criticism of Israel as uninformed predictability from Islamic or Arab sources alone. All Christians, all Churches, should be deeply alarmed.

In Australia, as in many other places of the world, governments that supposedly represent the mind of people, do not. Empathy for the plight of Palestinians runs at least two-thirds of the Australian population. That Australia has not supported South Africa’s case at the ICJ is utterly predictable, given a history of partisan Israeli support.  Nor is it surprising that South Africa has stood tall.  Both Nelson Mandela and Desmond Tutu held the view that apartheid in Palestine/Israel was every bit as serious as that which had prevailed in South Africa.

What happened on October 7 was shocking and the perpetrators should be brought to account. At that point virtually the whole world was, or should have been, with Israel.  What has happened since has not been about a calling to account, but an irrational, unrequited and out of control rage. Perhaps some of it fuelled by Netanyahu’s failure to admit his, utter incompetence, even face the almost impossible admission that the IDF’s contribution at the eleventh hour contributed to terrible suffering in the kibbutz.

Since then:

It is not ok to reference Amalek and include all Gazans as a terrorist collective.

It is not ok for IDF members to chant racist slogans against all Palestinians.

It is not ok for Israel’s president to sign a missile as a Christmas gift to the people of Gaza.

It is not ok for Hamas’ statement on Israel’s illegitimacy to be given more weight than the Israeli government’s statement that not one inch of land will ever be ceded to Palestinians. Hamas has zero capacity to seriously threaten Israel, Israel has total capacity to erase the name of Palestine.

It is not ok for hundreds probably thousands of non-precision missiles to have been launched against Gazans and Gazan infrastructure, falling indiscriminately, causing mayhem.

It is not ok for thousands and thousands of Gazans to be herded into so called safe zones and then still to have lost their lives.

It is not ok for West Bank illegal settlers to be armed and for many hundreds of West Bank Palestinian residents to have been killed since October 7.

It is not ok for the IDF to indiscriminately shoot anyone carrying a white flag, even if they speak Hebrew.

It is not ok for Israel’s defence Minister to call for the death and or forced migration of Palestinians.

It is not ok for members of the Knesset to claim there is no such place as Palestine and there are no Palestinians.

It is not ok for an Israeli developer to advertise land in Gaza as a future leisure development.
It is not ok for 25,000+ people to have lost their lives, a high percentage being women and children.

It is not ok for aid to have been restricted, and for countless thousands to be on the edge of starvation.

It is not ok for the children of Gaza, in unconfirmed numbers, to have faced amputations without anaesthetic to save their lives.

Israel has crossed an uncrossable line. The Israel of 1947/48 was born out of the need to give Jewish people a safe place not just in the aftermath of the holocaust but in the aftermath of decades/centuries of discrimination and antisemitism. The world rightly saw many, but not all Jews as victims of unspeakable suffering. (Many love, and are loved members of the societies to which they belong and will always remain.)

If there was any residual reason to perceive Israel as a victim, that has been completely erased. Through its Zionistic expansionist policies and through military support from the US, Israel has been making victims of Palestinians and causing terrible suffering. Now in Gaza, this victimisation has reached a terrible threshold.

Of course, the Court of Justice must decree that Israel desist and make reparation.
There can be no going back.  Palestinians must receive the independence that most countries in the world recognise as their right.

Israelis must remove the immoral crusader-like leadership with which they are blighted, and they must demand full disclosure of what has been done to others in their name.
​
We do not need the whole human history to be reminded that victory is never won through military conflict. Conflicts in our life-time are enough for that truth to sink in. Triumph is won through higher, not lower standards of morality and decency. It is won with the establishment of freedoms, justice, restoration, accords, treaties, respect and good will. When Israel awakens to the reality that Palestinians are a necessary part of their salvation, not their enemy, or simply a stumbling block to their colonial ambition, a path to lasting peace will have been forged.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 Christmas 2023: Why is Peace so elusive?
 
With apologies to Charles Dickens and a Christmas Carol

Christmas is an idea, a very large idea, it is captured in stories that shape our imagination and in consequence – the way we live.  Sadly, the original idea is proving too big for the reductionist world most of us inhabit.  Yes, we live reduced lives. Why, because we primarily measure worth by what can be bought and sold, and by its usefulness to ourselves. Hence, for most, Christmas is a commercial experience, rather than a festival of life and its connectedness.

The American president, Calvin Coolidge, said: Christmas is not a time or season but a state of mind. Clearly most of the world has had something else on its mind in 2023, nothing to do with living the spirit of Christmas. 2023 can hardly go down in history as humanity at it best.

The original ‘idea’ embedded in Christmas is that the divine inhabits human space and living.  Christ was born. Sacred is all around. We encounter angels unaware. We look in the face of another and are in awe of their spirit which enriches our own. We walk in the forest, climb a mountain, swim in the ocean, dig in the garden and know there is a connectedness we must embrace.  We all have the capacity to encounter the human face of God if only we have the eyes to see and desire to know. Can we see differently?

Ebenezer Scrooge infamously saw differently after he had encountered the ghosts of his deceased, equally miserable, business partner, Jacob Marley.  Dickens, distressed with the direction society was taking, played with the story of Dives and Lazarus. Let us do the same, albeit in the context of 2023.

The ghost of Christmas past.

One hundred years ago the “Little Town of Bethlehem” experienced no walls and no separation. Boys and girls played happily in the streets, and shepherds cared for their flocks on the hills surrounding the town.  The boys and girls were Jewish, Muslim, and Christian.  They were Arabs and Semites. Their differences enriched one another.  They honoured each other’s sacred places and traditions.  Then from afar came an ‘idea’ of separation, of exclusivity, of particularity, that preferenced one over the other.  This preferencing soon meant the ‘others’ were squeezed out.  The others were Arabs, both Christian and Muslim. The newcomers, mainly from Europe, Russia and the US brought with them biases, prejudices, and wounds from their immediate and distant past, and inflicted them on the indigenous people of the land.

Unsurprisingly, the indigenous people, the Palestinians, were forced into an ‘idea’ they had not needed before - resistance. This idea caused them further grief, walls fenced them in, and foreign military controlled every aspect of their lives. As they increasingly felt unable to breathe, resistance grew into violence and the idea became Hamas.

The newcomers, the illegal settlers, seek to wipe ‘Hamas’ from the face of the earth. They simply do not get it.  The more Palestinians are crushed, the more the idea of violent resistance becomes inevitable. October 7 was contemptible, But the contemptible killing of thousands of Gazans is not crushing the idea known as ‘Hamas’, the ‘Hamas’ idea is now even more popular amongst Palestinians, the Israeli defence forces are cutting off its visible branches, while ensuring the roots grow stronger, wider, and more embittered. Netanyahu says peace can only come when Hamas is crushed. The truth is: peace can only come when the reason for Hamas, - occupation – is no more.

It is never too late to revisit the past and make it the present. When the walls disappear, respect and dignity is given and received, peace will once more be experienced for Muslim, for Jew and for Christian.

The Ghost of Christmas Present

The three Kings, or three Sages of Christmas are well known in every city, town, village and hamlet across Russia and Ukraine. This is the territory of Orthodox Christianity.  Orthodox Christmas celebrates the coming of the Wise Men, the feast of Epiphany, January 6.  It is also St Nicholas country where gifts are generously shared; red hats, sleighs, singing, and snow abound.

There were three very special gifts in the saddle bags of the original travellers to Bethlehem.
In reverse order, the first gift was myrrh.  The gift indicated the Bethlehem baby would suffer greatly on behalf of others.  In today’s Russia and Ukraine, the suffering is not of this kind, it is largely self-inflicted. It need not be.  Both sides have suffered unbearably. A way should have been found to safeguard Ukrainian identity and sovereignty, while recognising and valuing its Russian links.

We are all children of our past. The conflict was started by Russia.  However, Russians are justified in remembering assaults on their territory from Europe – Napoleon and Hitler to name the most obvious. The West (NATO) has not done enough to recognise Russia’s sense of threat.  Because NATO sees itself as a defensive collaboration, it does not mean the other side sees it the same way,
The second gift was frankincense, indicating the divine nature of the Christ child. In his presence all divides are bridged: male and female, West and East, Russian and Ukrainian. But divides remain stubbornly embraced. Sadly, we live in a dangerous world of nationalism. National identities are competitive. Nationalism as distinct from patriotism will be the cause of most violence and conflict in the 21st century.

The third gift was gold.  The Bethlehem recipient turned the idea of kingship or sovereignty on its head, from power and control to servanthood and hospitality. Zelensky, and Putin must give up ideas of military triumph and devote attention to a peaceful, free, and prosperous solution for battle-weary peoples.

The Ghost of Christmases to come.

Britain’s favourite hymn is William Blake’s Jerusalem.  Aghast by the dirt and poverty of Britain’s industrialisation, Blake pondered whether the feet of Jesus had ever traversed those green and pleasant lands. Industrialization made the few rich on the labours of the many: it forged national identities.  Its benefits required cooperation beyond tribal rivalries. This cooperation was based on the rule of law.

Now, we might say that industrialisation has been too successful. Cooperation, necessary to safeguard peace, justice, and a sustainable planet urgently requires international cooperation, (not national ambition) enforceable by international law. So far there is little sign that rampant nationalism on the part of major and middle powers is going to permit such cooperation.
​
The birth of Jesus signals a new world order.  Unless nations grasp there is only one world, one earth, and that we must all serve it rather than seek to control it, the future is bleak. And yet…and yet
 
How silently, how silently
The wondrous Gift is given!
So God imparts to human hearts
The blessings of His heaven
No ear may hear His coming
But in this world of sin
Where meek souls will receive Him still
The dear Christ enters in
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 The Future for Palestinians, Israelis, and Peace in the Middle East

Following the Hamas attack of October 7 and the subsequent Israeli response, the ground has irrevocably shifted.  There can be no going back to the previously prevailing status quo in which the Palestinians of Gaza suffer an endless blockade, the Palestinians of the West Bank face on-going rule through military occupation, and the people of East Jerusalem suffer continuing restriction and loss of identity.

It is clear Israel no longer wishes this situation to continue either.  What is their solution?  It has not been stated.  But if intention can be interpreted from action, the solution will be devastating for Palestinians, a genocidal solution that must be totally rejected and resisted by an international community committed to the rule of law.

It is reasonably clear that without strong international diplomacy, it is Israel’s intention to force Palestinians in Gaza who survive the military onslaught, and death through sickness, out to the Egyptian held Sinai Peninsula.

In addition, many hundreds of Palestinians have been killed on the West Bank since October 7 either by armed settlers opportunistically seeking to push Palestinians off Palestinian land, or by Israeli military personnel who defend the actions of the illegal settlers.   Thousands have become victims of ‘administrative detention’ facing incarceration without legal representation or hope of release.  The situation is so bad that Palestinian mothers consider the death of their sons because of resistance, a matter of pride. Of course, occupation and denial of rights is going to be resisted. It is mealy mouthed of international leaders, including our own, to use Israel’s language, calling all Palestinian youngsters terrorists.  You are not a terrorist for refusing to accept injustice. The real terrorists are Israeli settlers who flaunt their lifestyle on hills above impoverished Palestinians who face continued loss of land and property.

It is clear Israel intends to annex at least the whole of area C, having first removed Palestinians for whom this is their home.

Finally, it is clear Israel intends to integrate East Jerusalem with West Jerusalem, and systematically weaken and ultimately destroy the four distinct quarters of the Old City.
It is not sufficient simply to mouth support for a “Two-State solution”, it is necessary, through diplomacy, and if necessary economic sanction, to insist on an outcome that gives peace and hope to Israelis and Palestinians alike.

The international community, inclusive of Australia must make up its mind. It is meaningless to mouth support for a ‘two-state solution’ and do absolutely nothing about it.  In fact, it is worse than meaningless.  It is to “tut tut” and continue walking by on the other side of the road.  It is in fact to be complicit in the misplacement of five million+ people (genocide) and to excuse the blatant flaunting of international law by a regime that makes no secret of its contempt for law and contempt for the human rights of a people whose only crime is to live in towns and villages they seek to occupy.

What was done on the 7th October was unconscionable.  However, Hamas has won, they have achieved their objective, the world is now aware of the plight of Palestinians. The genie cannot be put back in the bottle.

Prime Minister Albanese and his government must find some backbone. It is not a matter of choosing between Palestinians and Israelis, it is a matter of choosing between light and darkness. At this midway point of his first term in office Albanese must find backbone in a range of fields, the Gaza crisis would be a good place to start.

There must be an immediate and unequivocal call for a permanent ceasefire. Hamas militants have presumably moved to the south of the strip where Palestinians have fled. 14,000 have already lost their lives. The world cannot allow another Rwanda and simply watch more untold loss of life.  
An international peace keeping force must immediately move into the Gaza strip and be responsible for its further demilitarisation.  A civilian contingent must supervise the distribution of aid, and over time, oversee the rebuilding of Gaza.  

The Palestinian Authority, distrusted, even hated by most Palestinians, must be dismantled.  For a short period of time a UN led authority must take care of the Palestinian territories.  When stability and direction allows, Palestinians must be afforded free and fair elections.

The international community must force Israel to choose.  Either it must agree to some form of federation in which all citizens of the region enjoy the same rights and freedoms, or it agrees to the establishment of a viable Palestinian State. One or the other must prevail. The international community possesses enough cards in its pack to force such an outcome. It is only a matter of will.  Biden and Albanese cannot continue to sit on the fence, saying they support Israel, and they support a two-state solution, but do absolutely nothing to achieve it.

As I have already said, it is not a matter of choosing between peoples.  It is a matter of choosing what is right.  It is a matter of choosing a path that can lead to mutual peace and prosperity.  It is a matter of choosing a path that does not accept one people to be more worthy than another.

During WW1 the allies sold the same camel three times.  In the Balfour declaration they notionally sold Palestine to the Jewish community. In the Sykes/Picot agreement they divided the whole of the Middle East between Britain and France and in the MacMahon/Hussein correspondence which led to the Arab revolt against the Ottomans, they sold the land to the Arabs. 

Following WW2, the newly created UN partitioned Palestine. Israel was created.  Palestine awaits its recognition.  That Australia has so far refused to grant such recognition while more than 140 nations have, is to fly in the face of the partition that Australia so warmly supported.   In both the Balfour declaration and the partition, the creation of Israel was conditional on Palestinians being accorded freedom and respect of their culture and way of life.
​
Hey, it is well past time to choose.  Albanese find your backbone. Stand up.
 

Apartheid and Antisemitism
 
An open letter to the Hon Julian Lesser MP.
 
First may I express my sincere condolence for Israeli lives lost in the shocking and brutal events of October 7 and express hope that Israeli hostages will soon return home safely. The attack by Hamas was inhumane and without warrant.

I write however to respond to your recent statements about antisemitism published in the weekend SMH, particularly linking antisemitism to criticism of Israel.  I wrote to you recently to thank you from the bottom of my heart for your principled stand in promoting a Yes vote to the recent failed referendum.  It was the right thing to do, but it took considerable courage and in the political field you have borne a heavy price. Amongst those of us who value integrity, you stood tall.

It is therefore with mixed feelings I respond to you. You quote one of my theological heroes, the late Chief Rabbi of Britain, Lord Jonathan Sacks, who is reported to have said “Jews used to be hated for their religion, then they were hated for their race and now they are hated for their state”.  You apparently went on to say: ‘Antisemitism is the hatred that never dies – it just mutates over different generations”.

With the profoundest of respect, both you and Lord Sacks suffer from a blindness that seems also incapable of dying. Shocking discrimination suffered by Jews in the past does not give Israel a warrant to perpetually play the victim card or make victims of others. I wrote to Lord Sacks following the release of his otherwise excellent book – Not in God’s Name in which he asserted violence should never be exercised in the name of religion.  He appropriately named violence perpetrated by most world religions, including shameful violence perpetrated by Christians, but failed to mention the violence perpetrated by Israel against Palestinians since 1948.

If you consider this statement to be provocative, unbalanced, or ‘antisemitic’ I can only assume you have never walked down the makeshift shopping street in Hebron, protected by pathetic hessian which catches hard refuse, but allows urine tossed from settlers above to fall on Palestinian produce, while Israeli soldiers laugh. I assume you have never been to the children’s military courts at which shackled young Palestinian, some still in primary school, are paraded in front of lawyers who provide them with a document in Hebrew, which they cannot read and expect them to sign. I asked the parents of one of these young boys what they would like me to tell Australia, they said “tell them we cannot breathe”. Most are there for throwing stones.  Why do they throw stones?  Because of the continued harassment they and their parents experience.  I can only assume you have not attempted to negotiate the humiliating checkpoints the Palestinians have to negotiate every day. 

I assume you have not been to the village of Nabi Saleh in Area C of the West Bank where one branch of the Tamimi family lives. This family have been designated terrorists, many have spent time in jail, including young Ahed.  Why, because they object to their homes being destroyed and land confiscated. In return do they hate Jews or even the state of Israel, no, they simply want the opportunity to live as everyone else lives, not be forced to live under suppression where rights are not equal and lives constantly tormented.

Under these circumstances why is the word apartheid ‘antisemitic’?  The word accurately describes the situation where one group of people have adequate water and others don’t: where one group is allowed to travel as they wish and the others can’t: where one group lives under civil law and the other under military law: where on Palestinian lands roads are built for illegal settlers that cannot be used by local Palestinians, where one group is referred to by members of the Knesset as animals, and the others are encouraged to believe it is their right to assume property that does not belong to them: where one group builds houses and lives in them and others live constantly under the threat of demolition.

You say anti-Zionism is a cover for antisemitism. Let me tell you why your view is wrong. The constant desire for Israel to expand beyond its accepted 1967 borders appears to be driven by a political, nationalistic ideology which the perpetrators describe as Zionism.  Yasser Arafat agreed to the State of Israel based on the 1967 borders.  The current Netanyahu government makes no secret of the fact that their version of Zionism forbids them to cede Palestinians the right to one inch of land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean.  If the nationalistic, colonialist ideology of Zionism cannot be singled out, the alternative is quite damning. The only other conclusion is that the state of Israel cannot exist without the continued suppression and ultimate annihilation of the Palestinian people.  That is not a conclusion I personally wish to draw. I want to believe the state of Israel is at heart a genuine democracy with liberal values and commitment to live under international law. It is my contention that the State of Israel is corrupted by Zionism and is in the process of making itself a pariah state.

Israel has every right to defend its internationally recognized 1967 borders, but it has no right to defend the annexation of other lands or the perpetual siege of 2.3 million people.
This brings us to the current situation in Gaza.

Israel has essentially told Gazans to get out or die, a choice between expulsion and extermination, between ethnic cleansing and genocide – and while doing so has obliterated exit routes and fired on escaping convoys, leaving Gazans trapped.   That the UN Health authority should speculate starvation is an immanent possibility speaks to this shocking inhumanity. The Israeli president along with previous Israeli prime ministers have said there are no civilians in Gaza.
​
There is much more that could and should be said. Hamas was guilty of appalling inhumanity, but these shocking crimes seem overtaken by the deaths of 10,000 Palestinians and counting.  The State of Israel’s greatest challenge is to demonstrate to the world that its existence is not dependent upon crushing Palestinians and that the State of Israel wishes all Palestinians to have the same rights of religion, culture, employment, travel etc. that are enjoyed by Israeli citizens.
 
 
 
 

​Massacre of the Innocents
 
The UN is calling the Israel-Hamas war a ‘graveyard of children’…. an adult conflict, in which the young are suffering most. What we see on our TV screens every night is impossible to watch. Did Netanyahu see the young lad who had just carried the decapitated body of his friend from the rubble. If so, what did he think? He almost certainly thought the same as Natali Bennet the former Israeli prime minister who said to a reporter on Sky News: “Are you seriously asking me about Palestinian civilians? What is wrong with you? We’re fighting Nazis”. 
In other words, there are no civilians, there are no innocents, all Palestinians, including children, are the antithesis of us, all deserve and need to be exterminated. In fact, in this logic, there is no entity that can be called Palestine, there are no peoples to be called Palestinians. This is not just the slaughter of innocents, it is the annihilation of innocence, it is the breeding ground of the next generation of retributive violence and of lives lived out of pure hatred.
It is past time that truths were stated with utmost clarity.

1. Violence accomplishes nothing other than cementing hatred and vengeance for another generation. The children who have not been slaughtered will have been unbearably traumatised. Their anger and hatred will fester until it breaks forth again. Israel is in the process of training another generation capable of October 7 atrocities. The late Rabbi Sir Jonathan Sacks penned Not in God’s Name. He argued violence can and should never be perpetrated in the name of religion. Using sacred text as motivation for the slaughter in Gaza is exactly what Israeli leadership and their rightwing Christian supporters are doing.
2. Boris Johnston and Scott Morrison, you are wrong, you are so wrong, this ghastly suffering and violence did not start on October 7, 2023. Its context began with the Balfour declaration of 1917, while the wheels of dislocation and forced removal were set in concrete with the UN partition of 1948. Half the partition was delivered, after 70 years, the Palestinian half still awaits delivery. Since then, Palestinians have lost 78% of their land, those forced out have become refugees, many of them living in forced isolation in Gaza. These refugees, and children of refugees, are now being mercilessly bombed in Gaza City. If you are forced to live as a refugee (for many in view of their ancestral home on the other side of the fence) in an overpopulated open prison, with no capacity to care for yourself, and no hope for the future, would you not be angry?
3. Hamas does not control Gaza, Israel does. Israel determines who can move and who must stay. Israel determines what provisions are allowed in, or out. Israel controls energy and telecommunications. Israel controls the water. Israel determines fishing rights, etc. Within these impossibly restricted circumstances Hamas is the body citizens rely on for medicine, education, and other humanitarian needs. Do citizens of Gaza support Hamas? They probably do, why would they not? Who else is going to speak for them or act for them? The media and western politics are too lazy, or too beholden to Zionist interests, to distinguish between Hamas’ military and civilian wings.
4. Israel does not have the right to defend itself in lands it illegally occupies or in relation to people it illegally controls through siege. In the last few days, a member of the Knesset has suggested that illegal Settlers, together with the Israeli military disrupt or destroy the Palestinian olive harvest, while another member of the Knesset suggests Netanyahu ‘nuk’ Gaza. Should it not be the other way around? Palestinians have every right to defend themselves against forced removal from their land and livelihoods. Remember, Palestinians are defending their right to remain on 22% of original Palestine. They are not threatening one inch of the 78% now called ‘Israel’. Yes, Netanyahu, Natali Benett, and your erstwhile supporters, the land’s name was Palestine, the Jerusalem Post was originally called the Palestine Post and before that the Palestine Bulletin.
5. “Terrorist” has become an anti-Palestinian racial slur. Its use deserves the same condemnation as antisemitic slurs. I know members of Australian Federal and State parliaments who have spoken in support of Palestinian rights have been accused of being terrorist supporters by fellow parliamentarians. This is outrageous. Palestinians are not terrorists for objecting to their homes being bulldozed and their lands confiscated, or to being generationally traumatised in an open gaol.
6. Antisemitism is weaponised, while discrimination and diminution of Palestinians is ignored, even applauded.
7. Boris Johnson, Palestinian supporters have fallen into foggy morality. Morality was never your strong suit, nor indeed was it yours Scott Morrison. No, we have not forgotten the unspeakable horrors of the holocaust. However, we insist it is morally reprehensible to relieve collective European guilt, by expecting Palestinians to pay the full cost.
8. Netanyahu must go.
9. He must go because he has sought to control his own judiciary, ignore democratic separation of powers, and has put any remaining semblance of democratic identity in question.
10. He must go because the loss of intelligence and security on October 7 happened on his watch.
11. He must go because of his callous attitude to the lives of Israeli hostages.
12. He must go because he apparently lacks any semblance of genuine humanity.
13. And above all else he must go because his mindset will block any chance of an acceptable future for Palestinians and Israelis alike.

The inescapable truth is that Israel cannot extinguish Palestinian resistance by violence, any more than the Palestinians can win an Algerian-style liberation war: Israeli Jews and Palestinian Arabs are stuck with each other. The only thing that can save the people of Israel and Palestine is a political solution that recognises both as equal citizens, and allows them to live in peace and freedom, whether in a single democratic state, two states, or a federation. So long as this solution is avoided, a continuing degradation, and an even greater catastrophe, are all but guaranteed.
It is this solution that the US, Australia and all Israel’s ‘friends’ must insist on, and if refused, must activate all economic and diplomatic levers at their disposal to achieve.
 
 

Netanyahu invokes Genocide.

Prime Minsters Howard, Rudd, Gillard, Abbott, Turnbull, and Morrison have signed a statement drafted for them by the Zionist Federation of Australia in support of Israel.  In doing so, were they aware that on Sunday, in launching the ground offensive into Gaza, Netanyahu invoked a genocidal precedent for his war on Gaza?

In describing this stage of Israel’s war, a “holy mission” he said: “You must remember what Amalek has done to you, says our Holy Bible”. His words reference a text which goes on to read: "Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass," (1 Samuel 15:3).

This statement frighteningly tells you all you need to know about the mindset and intention of Israel’s vengeful Prime Minister, and of the future that lies ahead for all Palestinians in the lands of their birth.  What on earth possessed these six former prime ministers to lend support in terms drafted by the Zionist Federation of Australia. This is the political and nationalistic advocacy group that seeks possession of all these ancient lands. It is tragically consistent with their stated goals, not religiously, but politically and nationalistically driven.  It is amongst the most aggressive and war like of all Hebrew sacred texts.  They would do well to dwell on the writings of their ancient prophets who, in consistently condemning the words and actions of ancient Israel’s political leaders, call for peace, justice, and mercy;  but no, these modern-day political power players seek justification in historical behaviours that their prophets condemn.

A little more about the Amalekites.  According to Hebrew scripture and genealogy, they are descendants of Esau, the elder son of Isaac who had his birthright stolen by the younger, Jacob. So, they are genealogically related to Hebrews, to use contemporary language, they were Semites, like their Hebrew cousins.  The similarities with today are obvious. Palestinians are also Semites. Language used by members of the Knesset who have referred to Palestinians as animals, dogs, less than human, is on the extreme end of ‘antisemitism’.  Palestinians suffer cruelly from ‘antisemitic’ language uttered by Israeli leadership, which in turn encourages violence against them by the wider Israeli population. Most particularly this violence emanates from Israeli zealots who occupy the illegal settlements on the West Bank. Many Palestinians on the West Bank have lost their lives since October 7. Let there be consistency in the West’s condemnation of real antisemitism, not use it as a weapon to protect racist Israeli action from criticism.

There is another similarity.  Amalekites appear not to have been a settled people such as the Edomites or even Canaanites, but nomads who grazed across lands, giving the impression the lands were not occupied.  Although skirmishes with the Amalekites apparently occurred in the Negeb under Moses’ leadership prior to the occupation of Canaan, major confrontation occurred following Israel’s settlement. The catalyst would almost certainly have been loss of their grazing lands. You see the picture, in similar vein, Palestinian lands were never ‘unoccupied’ as the Israeli narrative claims; they were home to a living, thriving culture and people.

Amongst all Semitic peoples there is a strong sense of clean and unclean, what is permitted or not permitted. We understand these ideas through the words Kosher and Halal. In biblical Hebrew what is kosher, or clean, must be protected from what is unclean or foreign. Something unclean soils what is clean. What is unclean is not redeemed by what is clean.  In the confrontation between Saul and the Amalekites, the Amalekites are declared ‘haram’ and must be destroyed, not simply as pay back for past incursions, but because their very presence is a threat. Saul is commanded to destroy them completely. On his return, he is asked by Samuel if he has completed the task.  He claimed he has.  Samuel asks: “what then is the bleating of sheep I hear in my ears?” In other words, the spoils Saul brought back, have the capacity to despoil the Hebrew kingdom. The text suggests this oversight, in not completing the full extent of genocide, was the reason he lost the kingship.

Netanyahu has invoked this narrative to justify his ‘mission’. But he is not alone in claiming authority from this and similar narratives. The settlers who in their hundreds of thousands illegally occupy Palestinian territories treat this ‘historical’ narrative as the foundation for their actions. The new speaker of the US congress, a right-wing evangelical, Christian gives unconditional support for Israel because he sees in this narrative the working of God. Does one group’s sacred text override international law, and international compacts of acceptable behaviour? Does Israel have the right to occupy land, drive out those who have lived there for generations, keep 2.2 million Gazans in an open prison, many in view of the land and homes they used to occupy, and refuse to give Palestinians the same rights as other citizens, because of a 3000-year-old narrative?

Christians also need to answer an equally important question.  Do we believe ‘biblical’ text in its minutiae wields such power and authority, because it is biblical text, that it overrides contemporary understandings of truth and moral judgement.

Modern day Israel is not a continuation of the northern nation state of the same name that disappeared and was absorbed into the Assyrian Empire in 720 BC.  Nor is it a continuation of the southern State called Judah which disappeared in 586 BC absorbed into the Babylonian Empire.   On the other hand, it is true that Jewish people have cultural, religious, and ancestral ties, along with many other peoples, with this land for 3000 years.

Modern Day Israel was not created by fiat of the Divine. It was created through an act of partition by the United Nations in 1948.  This partition was infamously preceded by the Balfour Declaration of 1917. That Palestinians were not jumping for joy in being told from afar they were about to lose 50% of their ancestral lands, is not surprising. In fact, they have lost 78%. Apparently, Israel considers 78% to be insufficient.

You six prime minsters who have signed a statement prepared for you by those who demand not 78% but 100%, will you issue another statement which clearly articulates the state of play which you believe should exist post the ‘war’, setting out your moral and legal arguments to support what you think should be the ‘new normal’?

Albanese must deliver a strong Message to Biden
 
Prime Minister Albanese has an obligation to engage President Biden in a conversation on Gaza. Australia cannot and must not stay in lock step with Israel. If US support for Israel is written in concrete, no matter how Israel behaves, or what inhumanity it inflicts on an imprisoned people, it is Australia’s duty to deliver a message of dire warning to the US on what this will lead to.

On the surface, the Prime Minister’s visit to Washington, contains few challenges. The AUKUS deal is touted as the most significant. (Bizarre, especially for baby boomers or older Australians, most of whom will be dead before the then redundant submarines arrive). Of greater importance should be a conversation about war and what ‘winning it’ might look like. When Rishi Sunak, the British Prime Minister visited Netanyahu, he expressed the hope Israel would ‘win’ the war.

There are currently two wars being waged in the Middle East, both focused on the outcome of conflict between Israel and the Palestinians of the Gaza strip. The first and most shocking is military conflict. The second, less obvious, but far more significant in long-term outcomes, is the war for moral ascendancy upon which trust, respect, honour, and future alliances will be built. That Israel will win the first is guaranteed, it is backed and armed by the US and has its own nuclear arsenal. But it is far from guaranteed that it will win the second. Indeed, current indications are that it will lose this, the more important contest.

Prime Minister Albanese has an obligation to engage President Biden in this conversation. Australia cannot and must not stay in lock step with Israel, if US support for Israel is written in concrete, no matter how Israel behaves, or what inhumanity it inflicts on an imprisoned people.

There can be no sugar-coating the barbaric atrocities committed against Israeli civilians on 7th October. However, by continuing to prosecute the politics of the conflict through the question; “what do you expect Israel to do, what alternative does it have”, is to condemn barbarism on one side and excuse it on another. More than half the 2+ million Palestinians in Gaza have lived under a total blockade, in the most crowded and impoverished conditions on earth for their entire life. If it is right to ask; what is Israel supposed to do, is it not equally appropriate to ask, “what are the Gazans supposed to do?” Or equally, Palestinians on the West Bank, inclusive of East Jerusalem, have endured brutality and dehumanising activity from colonialist occupiers for decades, (dozens have been killed or arrested since October 7), is it not also appropriate to ask: “what are they supposed to do?”

There are no winners in war, only losers, as Afghanistan, Vietnam, Iraq, and the Gulf amply illustrate. Before engaging in war, the responder to a bloodied nose must ask, what do we envisage the landscape to be like post the conflict? The US and its allies clearly did not ask this question in Iraq or Afghanistan. Albanese needs to put pressure on Biden to make Israel answer this question, prior to giving unconditional support. Even then, support should be tempered by the likelihood, or not, of the stated outcome being a reality.

We know a power vacuum is the worst possible outcome. Killing the Palestinian equivalent of Osama Bin Laden is doable, but removing the reason for Hamas from a people given no hope, no future, no humanity is the task that Israel clearly has no stomach to undertake. But it is the task that Biden and Albanese should be committed to, and which they should talk about in Washington.
Does Israel think it is going to run Gaza indefinitely with military oversight when it completes its military ambitions, as it does the West Bank? Or does it think it can push 2+ million people across the border into Egypt, living in a huge Sinai situated artificial tent city with little hope, meaning, or future?

Albanese needs to tell Biden to tell Israel that if it genuinely wants peace for its people and respect in the international community it must choose between two options. Either it must immediately agree to and deliver a meaningful two-state solution with illegal Israeli settlers in Palestine provided the option of staying in Palestine or returning to Israel; or under UN supervision, the whole area must become integrated, walls and barriers must come down, and equal rights afforded to all regardless of religion, ethnicity, or culture. There is no other just alternative to these choices.
It is irresponsible and cowardly for Albanese or Biden to support the superior power with blooded nose, and not address the rapidly increasing injustices suffered by 5+ million people since 1948. The arrangements that have given rise to these injustices were made by US and European powers for reasons of their own self-interest; in the process they have failed to deliver or enforce an acceptable outcome for Palestinians. Australia was amongst the first to recognise Israel. Palestinians have been waiting 70 years.
​
Joe Biden and Anthony Albanese, you have plenty to talk about, that is if you are genuinely interested in peace with justice and if you seek to lead nations that aspire to civility. As history demonstrates ‘civilisation’, like love in personal affairs can never to be taken for granted, but should receive fresh commitment every day.
 

​

Shocking attack on Anglican owned hospital in Gaza
“I don’t believe in the God you don’t believe in either”
 
The explosion on Tuesday at the al-Ahli al-Arabi hospital, also known as the Baptist hospital, which killed hundreds of already traumatized civilians must be investigated as a war crime. While Israel claims, as it has in similar circumstance in the past, that Hamas was responsible through a misfunctioning rocket, there is no evidence that this is the case.  It is almost certainly the result of an Israeli strike, intended or not.

I want to respond to this outrage through the words of a weeping Israeli citizen who lost his child in the brutal Hamas attack on a kibbutz “I am sorry, I can no longer believe in God anymore”.
This is the hub of the matter. While this is not in the traditional sense a religious conflict, the facts of the matter are that when an illegal settler is asked by what authority he dares to push Palestinians off their land and resume it for himself, he holds up a Bible and says: “this is the authority”.

There would be no conflict if the illegal assumption of Palestinian land, property and rights was not occurring.

There would be no conflict if Gaza was not permanently and crushingly blockaded.

There would be no conflict if the most right-wing government in Israel’s history was not in provocative and suppressive power.

There would be no conflict if the promise of the Oslo agreement of Palestinian nationhood on 22 percent of original Palestine with East Jerusalem as its capital had been delivered within the promised five-year time frame.

There would be no conflict if the UN sponsored partition of Palestine on a roughly 50/50 percentage basis was enforced in the years following 1945.

There would be no conflict if the conservative/religious right which dominates American politics did not back Israel on the basis that God gave Israel all the land and that Jesus will return when they control it all from the river to the sea.

Hamas’ attack on October 7 was barbaric and must be unconditionally condemned.  But it is simply untrue that it was without provocation.

I weep equally for Jews and Palestinians who have lost the lives of their loved ones. I support entirely the kibbutz citizen who poured out his disbelief. I absolutely do not believe in the God you no longer believe in.

Let us assume for a moment there is God, I fervently believe this to be the case. This God must surely behave consistently and equally, not simply with all humans, but with the whole created order. If any have a particular place, it can only be in service of the order that this God intends for the whole created order. It is simply not credible to believe that one group of people is given divine right to a piece of land that allows them through acts of apartheid, even genocide, to exclude others.

The Bible is reasonably clear about the order that God intends. Justice, mercy, righteousness, humility, hospitality, care of the vulnerable, treating the stranger in your midst as one of your own, are all clearly set out, not simply in the New Testament, but throughout the writings of the Old Testament prophets.   To paraphrase Amos: “I hate I despise your religious practice, but let justice roll down like a river and righteousness like an everlasting stream”. Or Micah: “What does the lord your God require of you, but to do justice love mercy and walk humbly with your God”.

Zionism, Israeli government policy, is a political movement, but it is a political movement that relies on a quasi-religious historical assumption.  Zionism is not the same as Judaism.  The world at large has been immensely blessed by Judaism and by Jewish people. Jewish people have, and do, push well above their weight in many fields of human endeavour, including humanitarian fields.

Zionism and Zionistic propositions do not represent Judaism. I am proud that Judaism lies at the very foundation of Christianity. But I abhor activity in the name of religion which brings pain and suffering through injustice and oppression.
​
Will this article be called antisemitic – of course it will. Should it be? Of course not.   I hope with some humility this article is being written and read in the spirit of the prophets we Christians and Jews share, again paraphrasing “I care nothing for any of your religions, but let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like an everlasting stream”.
 
 

Conservative Christians say No to Indigenous Voice
​
“Christians for Equality has been launched to promote reconciliation and recognition and to prevent Australia’s constitution from being used as a lever for anti-Christian ideology.”
The Shelton-led group has urged Christians to vote against the voice, alleging it would enshrine Indigenous Australians as “forever victims”.
In an online pamphlet, it claims voting yes would instead “embed Indigenous spirituality into the constitution”.
“It will create an ‘us’ versus ‘them’ mentality leading to resentment,” the group’s pamphlet reads.

Lyle Shelton, previous leader of the Australian Christian Lobby and now a politician aspirant on the extreme right, heads Christians for Equality – a new network that seems to be more about politics than faith.

It is hard not to despair when such ignorance and stupidity is voiced by a person who seeks respect, even authority, as a Christian spokesperson.

First, Mr Shelton is ignorant of the faith he claims to espouse. The earliest biblical name for God is the ‘God who listens’, words uttered by Hagar. Hagar, Sarah’s handmaid, went on to name her son Ismael which is a combination of the Hebrew words for ‘God’ and ‘listen’. Prayer has at its roots belief that God listens, a truth that is reinforced both in the words and rhythms of Jesus’ life. We Christians believe the nature of God is to be imaged and followed in what it means to be human.  We are to respect one another through listening. Those who are strong are called upon to listen to those who are weak. Those who have authority are called upon to listen to those who are affected by that authority. It is sadly the case that very few Australians know an indigenous person, their views about First Nations people being second hand and coloured by the prejudice of the person providing the insight. The voice is a generous invitation to recent comers to hear indigenous people with no requirement or obligation, other than to respond with common humanity.  In being the human face of God, Christ shows us what it is to be human.

Second, Mr Shelton and presumably those who rally around him, show total ignorance of indigenous spirituality and culture. Therse is nothing in indigenous spirituality that threatens Christianity.  Unlike Mr Shelton’s Christianity, indigenous spirituality is not best understood through dogma. It is best understood through relationships.  Relationship with the land.   Relationship with language group. Relationship with elders. Relationship through songlines. Relationship with the past, present and future through story telling.  Mr Shelton’s spirituality leads to ownership, individual rights and possession. Indigenous spirituality leads its people to understand what it means to be owned – by the land and the obligations and responsibilities that flow from it.  Indigenous spirituality leads their people away from individual rights and privileges to communal responsibility and belonging.  Rather than indigenous spirituality being somehow in conflict with Christian belief, there is much within indigenous understanding that will enhance and deepen Christian belief.

Third, Mr Shelton is ignorant of the Australian constitution. The Constitution was founded on racist attitudes, reflecting the prevailing views of the time. If it were being written today it would reflect very different views and address different concerns. It is simply nonsense to suggest embedding the proposed voice in the constitution will give one group of people an advantage over other Australians or cause division.  It will do what should have been done 100+ years ago, acknowledge the pre-existence of peoples and cultures on this land. Such recognition assumes a voice needs to be heard, not only for the sake of First Nations peoples but for the sake of all who have since arrived.

It needs to be said that opposition to the referendum at its most base, is fear that somehow the voice will cost other Australians. Rather like opposition to action on climate change, failure to respond with good because it might cost something is hardly a trait that someone who espouses Christianity should be proud of. 

The Conflict
 
What is playing out on the border of Gaza and Israel is awful.  Loss of civilian life is inexcusable and must be condemned.

Unsurprisingly, and understandably, Biden, Albanese, Trudeau and other Western leaders have condemned the Hamas attack in the strongest possible terms.  But is that all they are going to do  – double down behind Israel in responding to Palestinians as vicious terrorists who need to be taught a lesson, or worse, eliminated?

My question to Biden, Albanese Trudeau and others is what do you want Palestinians to do?  For those who live in the Gaza strip do you want them to be for ever caged animals; living in the most incarcerated and impoverished conditions in the world with no hope for countless generations of what we consider to be normal life? Are they to live forever with no employment for their children?  What do you expect those young adults to do, behave meekly with no anger? 

And those on the West Bank, what do you want them to do?  Do you want them to meekly accept their lot. What is their lot? It is to have their land arbitrarily confiscated to serve illegal settlements of armed migrants with ideological views that exclude Palestinians from ordinary human rights. It is to be corralled into smaller and smaller areas.  It is to be systematically removed from area C, approximately 70 percent of the West Bank.  It is to live forever in a cramped refugee camp called Jenin.  It is to live in Hebron and be daily intimidated by illegal settlers and permanently blocked from the main shopping street.   It is to negotiate endless security checks for no reason other than to be humiliated. It is to access below standard water supplies while illegal settlers water their lawns and wash their cars.  It is to have identity papers that restrict access even to parts of their own Palestinian Territories.  It is to have no access to Jews only roads that crisscross Palestinian Territories.

And if you live in East Jerusalem, it is to be constantly harassed, intimidated and to live under the threat of your home being confiscated.

Biden, Albanese Trudeau and others, you are partly responsible for this outrage of violence by not doing your duty in holding Israel to account.  Peace is never possible while gross injustice prevails. Peace flows from justice, not the other way around. You find it easy to hold Palestinians to account and no doubt you will continue to do so.  But what are you going to do in holding Israel to account?
We can only tremble as we await the dreadful revenge Israel will inflict upon the Palestinian people. It will be swift, and it will be unremittingly merciless.   What will you all do in response to this?

The only redeeming feature possible is that Israel will take direct control of Gaza and in turn the international community will treat the whole area from the river to the sea as a single unit demanding a form of governance that gives equal respect and opportunity to all its citizens in mattes of religion, language, culture, economic opportunity and human rights. If this were to happen, then yes there would be peace.
​
Biden, Albanese and Trudeau, you have the honour of leading nations that were all founded on a Christian tradition of respect, inclusiveness, and a bias towards support and advocacy for the weak and vulnerable. You will negate that tradition if you give unquestioned support to the strong and their suppression of the weak.