Germany
How German Isn’t It
To be Jewish in Germany today is to abrogate the possibility of being German and Jewish.
Breaking: ICJ rules that Germany can continue Israel arms sales despite genocide
International Court of Justice reject Germany’s attempts to strike out case but refuses by 15 votes to 1 to issue emergency measures banning weapons sales
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has refused Nicaragua’s request for a provisional order banning Germany from exporting weapons to Israel, despite its earlier ruling that Israel is ‘plausibly’ committing genocide in Gaza. Nicaragua had argued that Germany is enabling genocide. The court rejected Germany’s request to strike out the application.
Germany is Israel’s second-largest arms supplier. The court expressed continued concern about the situation in Gaza but has allowed Germany to continue supplying the slaughter, despite Israel’s complete disregard of the court’s existing orders to protect Palestinian lives and Germany’s repression of pro-Gaza protest. The genocide case continues and is expected to take more than a year to conclude.
SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you’d like to help it keep revealing the news as it is and not what the Establishment wants you to hear – and can afford to without hardship – please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thanks for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep doing its job.
If you wish to republish this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.
Fresh audio product: Yanis Varoufakis on being banned in Germany, and on the rise of technofeudalism
Just added to my radio archive (click on date for link):
April 18, 2024 Yanis Varoufakis talks about being banned in Germany for supporting the Palestinian cause, and then about the transformation he analyzes in his new book, Technofeudalism: What Killed Capitalism
VIDEO: Nicaragua takes on Germany over Gaza genocide- an interview with Carlos Argüello Gómez
Nicaraguan lawyer and diplomat Carlos Argüello Gómez speaks to The Grayzone about his case against the German government for its facilitation of Israel’s genocide in the besieged Gaza Strip, its potentially historic implications, and its similarities to the successful case he argued for the ICJ in 1986 which brought massive penalties against the United States for its illegal dirty war on Nicaragua at the time. A full transcript follows. Max Blumenthal: Why did Nicaragua feel compelled to bring this […]
The post VIDEO: Nicaragua takes on Germany over Gaza genocide- an interview with Carlos Argüello Gómez first appeared on The Grayzone.
The post VIDEO: Nicaragua takes on Germany over Gaza genocide- an interview with Carlos Argüello Gómez appeared first on The Grayzone.
Fresh audio product: the World Court, the secret history of Jelly Roll Morton
Just added to my radio archive (click on date for link):
April 11, 2024 Heidi Matthews on the World Court and the cases against Israel pending there • Elijah Wald, author of Jelly Roll Blues, on Jelly Roll Morton and the hidden history of early blues
Complicit in Genocide: Where Israel Gets Its Weapons
Over 9,000 Palestinian women have been killed since the start of the Israeli war on the Gaza Strip. Mothers have been the largest share of Israeli killings, with an average of 37 mothers per day since October 7.
The numbers above, from the Palestinian Health Ministry in Gaza and the Red Crescent Society, respectively, only convey part of the suffering experienced by 2.3 million Palestinians in the Strip.
There is not a single section of Palestinian society that has not paid a heavy price for the war. However, women and children are the ones who have suffered the most, constituting over 70% of all victims of the ongoing Israeli genocide.
True, these women and their children are killed at the hands of Israeli soldiers, but they are murdered with U.S.-western supplied weapons.
Now, however, we are told that the world is finally turning against Israel and that the West’s nod of approval to Tel Aviv to carry on with its daily massacres may soon turn into a collective snub.
This claim was best expressed in the March 23 cover of the Economist magazine. It showed a tattered Israeli flag attached to a stick and planted in an arid, dusty land accompanied by the headline “Israel Alone.”
The image, undoubtedly expressive, was meant to serve as a sign of the times. Its profundity becomes even more apparent if compared to another cover from the same publication soon after the Israeli military conquered massive Arab territories in the war of June 1967. “They did it,” the headline, back then, read. In the background, an Israeli military tank was pictured, illustrating the west-funded Israeli triumph.
Much has changed Between the two headlines in the world and the Middle East. But to claim that Israel now stands alone is not entirely accurate, at least not yet.
Though many of Israel’s traditional allies in the West are openly disowning its behavior in Gaza, weapons from various Western and non-Western countries continue to flow, feeding the war machine as it, in turn, continues to harvest more Palestinian lives.
This compels the question: Does Israel truly stand alone when its airports and seaports are busier than ever, receiving massive shipments of weapons coming from all directions? Not in the least.
Almost every time a Western country announces its suspension of arms exports to Israel, a news headline appears shortly afterward indicating the opposite. Indeed, this has happened repeatedly.
Last year, Rome had declared that it was blocking all arms sales to Israel, giving false hope that some Western countries are finally experiencing some kind of moral awakening.
Alas, on March 14, Reuters quoted the Italian Defense Minister, Guido Crosetto, as saying that shipments of weapons to Israel are continuing, based on the flimsy logic that previously signed deals would have to be ‘honored.’
Another country that is also ‘honoring’ its previous commitments is Canada, which announced on May 19, following a parliamentary motion that it had suspended arms exports.
The celebration among those advocating an end to the genocide in Gaza was just getting started when, a day later, Ottawa practically reversed the decision by announcing that it, too, would honor previous commitments.
This illustrates that some Western countries, which continue to impart their unsolicited wisdom about human rights, women’s rights and democracy to the rest of the world, have no genuine respect for any of these values.
Canada and Italy are not the most significant military supporters of Israel. The U.S. and Germany are.
According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, in the decade between 2013 and 2022, Israel received 68% of its weapons from the U.S. and 28% from Germany.
The Germans remain unperturbed, even though five percent of the total population of Gaza has been killed, wounded or missing due to the Israeli war.
Yet, the American support for Israel is far greater. However, the Biden Administration is still sending messages to its constituency – the majority of whom want the war to stop – that the president is doing his best to pressure Israel to end the war.
Though only two approved military sales to Israel have been announced publicly since October 7, the two shipments represent only two percent of the total U.S. arms sent to Israel.
The Washington Post revealed the news on March 6. It was published when U.S. media reported a widening rift between U.S. President Joe Biden and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
“That’s an extraordinary number of sales over the course of a pretty short amount of time,” a former senior Biden Administration official told the Post. Jeremy Konyndyk concluded that the “Israeli campaign would not be sustainable without this level of U.S. support.”
For decades, the U.S. military support for Israel has been the highest anywhere in the world. Starting in 2016, this unconditional support exponentially increased during the Obama Administration to reach $3.8 billion per year.
Immediately after October 7, however, the weapons shipments to Israel reached unprecedented levels. They included a 2,000-pound bomb known as 5,000 MK-84 munitions. Israel has used this bomb to kill hundreds of innocent Palestinians.
Though Washington frequently alleges to be looking into Israel’s use of its weapons, it turned out, according to the Washington Post, that Biden knew too well that “Israel was regularly bombing buildings without solid intelligence that they were legitimate military targets.”
In some ways, Israel ‘stands alone,’ but only because most countries and peoples around the world reject its behavior. However, it is hardly alone when its war crimes are being executed with Western support and arms.
For the Israeli genocide in Gaza to end, those who continue to sustain the ongoing bloodbath must also be held accountable.
Feature photo | An Israeli child plays with a heavy machine gun on top of an Israeli Army tank in the West Bank Jewish settlement of Teqoa. Kevin Frayer | AP
Dr. Ramzy Baroud is a journalist, author and the Editor of The Palestine Chronicle. He is the author of six books. His latest book, co-edited with Ilan Pappé, is ‘Our Vision for Liberation: Engaged Palestinian Leaders and Intellectuals Speak Out.’ His other books include ‘My Father Was a Freedom Fighter’ and ‘The Last Earth.’ Baroud is a Non-resident Senior Research Fellow at the Center for Islam and Global Affairs (CIGA). His website is www.ramzybaroud.net
The post Complicit in Genocide: Where Israel Gets Its Weapons appeared first on MintPress News.
War and Peace in Jonathan Glazer’s Zone of Interest
In a way, our memory culture both in Germany and in Israel is an exact reversal of the reality revealed by the film. Perhaps that's why the film seems to annoy many people in Germany, who complain that it shows the "perpetrator's perspective." But memory must also be a memory of perpetration and its normalization; that is the difference between an honest memory and a convenient one....
Sweden closing Nordsteam investigation a shocking coverup -investigator
The Grayzone’s Max Blumenthal interviews Swedish engineer Erik Andersson, who led the first independent investigation to the site of the Nordstream pipelines blast sites, on the Swedish government’s sudden closing of the investigation into the terror attack on the eve of joining NATO. Andersson also addresses US meddling in Swedish politics, and the potential consequences of Stockholm surrendering its traditional neutrality to the anti-Russian alliance.
The post Sweden closing Nordsteam investigation a shocking coverup -investigator first appeared on The Grayzone.
The post Sweden closing Nordsteam investigation a shocking coverup -investigator appeared first on The Grayzone.
Chancellor Scholz Must Change Course and Support Ukraine to Win
Chancellor Olaf Scholz is putting Germans and all Europeans in danger. His current policy seriously risks defeat in Ukraine, which would embolden Moscow and raise the likelihood of a wider war with Russia in which the missiles could be falling on Cologne rather than Kyiv.
Defeating Russia in Ukraine and deterring Moscow from further aggression would remove the single largest threat to European security but, instead of changing course and committing to victory, Mr Scholz is doubling down by positioning himself as a ‘Peace Chancellor’. Ignoring the clear need to win the war, which is openly proclaimed by key allies, he fixates on avoiding necessary steps – including sending Taurus cruise missiles to Ukraine – which he claims could make Germany a ‘war party’.
This is a fiction as previous weapons deliveries (including cruise missiles) have not made Western states war parties under international law; neither have they triggered the ‘escalation’ that advocates of timidity so fear. What is more, the distinction is pointless given that Vladimir Putin already considers Germany a war party, regardless of Mr Scholz’s view – or the law. Mr Putin’s declared goal is domination of Europe and he already sees Russia as being at war with the West, including Germany.
Mr Scholz’s so-called ‘peace’ posture risks becoming appeasement – shying away from necessary actions in the futile hope of placating an aggressive dictator. Even if this is targeted at his (SPD) party’s declining poll ratings, Germans should know that the real effect of playing domestic politics with our security is to harm our collective deterrence.
Deterrence works by having the capabilities to defend yourself and demonstrating the will to use them. This raises the cost of any attack and reduces the chance of the enemy succeeding, which decreases the chance of conflict. Failing to project strength and readiness has the opposite effect which is why Mr Scholz’s ‘peace’ campaign is so damaging: it makes a wider war more likely.
Germany may superficially appear a good ally by mirroring the current US position but, look deeper and this is revealed as folly. Berlin is falsely taking the US line as a boundary for acceptable action, whereas in reality, Washington would be happy for Europeans to push ahead. With main battle tanks as well as cruise missiles, the UK and France have demonstrated that it is not necessary to wait for a US lead to do what is needed to support Ukraine.
More concerningly, this mirroring ignores the fact that Germany is physically closer to the war than America and lacks the US’s nuclear weapons, which makes it more directly exposed and drastically more vulnerable to both military and non-military threats from Russia. German national security therefore demands a different policy.
Europe also now faces uncertainty over the future of the US security guarantee. Yet, while Europeans may currently lack the full range and depth of capabilities to defend ourselves, we are collectively re-arming and have many powerful weapons. We also have the economic might to defeat Russia in Ukraine – if we put it to the right purpose. Combining these capabilities with the right attitude and, crucially, by committing to winning in Ukraine, we could still deter Putin – and buy ourselves time to build our strength.
Instead, Mr Scholz is effectively broadcasting that Germany is afraid, can be bullied and blackmailed, and that it is not willing to stand up for its values and interests via victory in Ukraine. Nor is Germany’s re-armament going anywhere near as far or as fast as it should. Mr Putin is skilled at exploiting uncertainty and is emboldened by weakness, so the Chancellor’s approach both makes Kyiv’s defeat more likely – and makes Germany a more tempting target.
Rather than focusing on doing ‘whatever it takes’ to win in Ukraine, the Chancellor points to how much Germany has already promised to spend in comparison to allies. True, others also need to do more, but Mr Scholz’s excuses help no one. They ignore Germany’s massive economic heft as well as its self-declared ‘special responsibility’ for European security, and belittle the ways other allies have shown leadership: by sending more powerful weapons sooner, committing far higher proportions of their GDP to Ukraine or properly arming themselves.
The tragedy of this is that while Germany is spending a lot of money, Mr Scholz’s approach is the most expensive way to make Europe less safe.
The obvious frustration of key allies at Mr Scholz’s latest refusal to send Taurus missiles, despite the dismantling of his excuses, is part of a long pattern of foot-dragging on weapons Ukraine manifestly needs. Unfortunately, Mr Scholz has shown that he will not shift any other way and so the shaming will continue until policy improves.
Yet, such allied actions can only treat the symptoms (delivery of individual weapons systems), not the cause (Germany’s overall approach). Until sufficient pressure also comes from inside the country, there will not be a solution.
National Security is the irreducible function of the state. Leaders from across Germany’s major political parties – the Greens, Free Democrats, Christian Democratic Union, and Christian Social Union – must now fulfil their responsibility to ensure their country delivers. That starts with backing Ukraine to win, urgently and effectively demanding policy to match, and embracing their power to create the conditions for it to be implemented.
Initial Signatories
Hon Chris Alexander, PC, Distinguished Fellow, Macdonald-Laurier Institute
Diedre Berger, Tikvah Institut gUG, Berlin
Jonathan Berkshire Miller, Director of Foreign Affairs, National Security & National Defence, Macdonald Laurier Institute
Stephen Blank, Senior Fellow, Foreign Policy Research Institute, Washington D.C.
Prof Dr Sören Brinkmann, Willy Brandt Centre for German and European Studies, University of Wroclaw
Aaron Gasch Burnett, Journalist and Analyst, Co-host of BerlinsideOut podcast
Olga Byrska, Sciences Po, Paris and European University Institute, Florence
Edward Hunter Christie, Senior Research Fellow, Finnish Institute of International Affairs
Dr Ariel Cohen, Non-Resident Senior Fellow, Atlantic Council
Dr Franziska Davies, Ludwig-Maximilian-University Munich.
Gordon B Davis Jr, Senior Fellow, Center for European Policy Analysis
Dr Balkan Devlen, Director of the Transatlantic Program, Macdonald Laurier Institute
Dr Thomas Enders, President,German Council on Foreign Relations
Ralf Fücks, Managing Director, Centre for Liberal Modernity, Berlin
Dr Ian Garner, Queens University
Alyona Getmanchuk, Founder and Director, New Europe Center, Kyiv
Keir Giles, Consulting Fellow, Chatham House
Dr Gustav Gressel, Senior Policy Fellow, European Council on Foreign Relations
Dr Olena Halushka, Centre for Ukrainian Victory, Kyiv
Rebecca Harms, Former MEP and President of the Green Group in the European Parliament
Dr Pierre Haroche, Queen Mary University of London
François Heisbourg, European security expert, Paris
Valeriia Hesse, Central European University, Vienna
Fabian Hoffmann, University of Oslo
Toomas Hendrik Ilves, Former President of Estonia
Prof Dr Thomas Jäger, University of Cologne
Prof. Tomas Janeliūnas, Instutute of International Relations and Political Science, University of Vilnius
Jacob Kaarsbo, Senior Fellow, Think Tank Europa, Copenhagen
Dr Jochen Kleinschmidt, TU Dresden
Ambassador Pavlo Klimkin, former Foreign Minister of Ukraine & former Ambassador to Germany
Dr Valeria Korablyova, Ukraine in a Changing Europe Centre, Charles University Prague
Dr Bohdana Kurylo, University College London
Prof David Clay Large, Institute of European Studies, University of California Berkeley
John Lough, Associate Fellow, Russia & Eurasia Programme, Chatham House
Edward Lucas, Senior Advisor, Centre for European Policy Analysis (CEPA)
Paul Mason, London
Hanna Manoilenko, University of Melbourne
Oleksandra Matviichuk, Nobel Peace Prize laureate, Director, Centre for Civil Liberties, Kyiv
Dr Nona Mikhelidze, Senior Fellow, Istituto Affari Internazionali, Rome.
Christoph Moosbauer, former Member of the German Bundestag
Mattia Nelles, German-Ukrainian Bureau, Berlin
Prof Dr Francesco Nicoli, Gent University
James Nixey, Director Russia and Eurasia Programme, Chatham House
Prof Jacob Oberg, Professor of EU Law, University of Southern Denmark
Dr Maciej Olejnik, Willy Brandt Centre for German and European Studies, University of Wroclaw
Alicia Montiel Oliveros, fmr Lecturer for International Relations, University of Caradobo-Valencia
Prof. Phillips P. O’Brien, Head of School of International Relations, University of St Andrews
Dr Artis Pabriks, former Deputy Prime Minister, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Defence Minister of Latvia
Prof Maria Popova, McGill University, Montreal
Dr Kristi Raik, Deputy Director, ICDS, Tallinn
Prof Dr Stephan Stetter, Universität der Bundeswehr, Munich
Julian Stöckle, Danube Youth Council
Alice Stollmayer, Founder and Director, Defend Democracy, Brussels
Edward Stringer, Retired Air Marshal (RAF), London
Dr Benjamin Tallis, Senior Research Fellow, German Council on Foreign Relations
Dr Maximilian Terhalle, Visiting Professor, London School of Economics (LSE IDEAS).
Dr Nathalie Tocci, Director, Istituto Affari Internazionali, Rome.
Dr Andreas Umland, Stockholm Centre for East European Studies
Kataryna Vakarchuk, Odesa I.I. Mechnikov National University
Dr Alexander Vindman, Lieutenant Colonel (Retired),US Army
Ambassador Alexander Vershbow, Former NATO Deputy Secretary General, US Asst Secretary of Defense, US Ambassador to Russia
Dr Alexander Wolf, Hans Seidel Stiftung, Berlin
Marieluise Beck, Director for Eastern Europe, Centre for Liberal Modernity, Berlin