Category Archives: Uncategorized

Support Morocco’s Offer to the Sahrawi People

By Lasse Wilhelmson

Westernsaharamap-300x292Updated 

The Sahrawi national resistance movement Polisario was founded in 1973 and fought French and Spanish colonialism alongside Morocco and Algeria.

Many Sahrawis fled during the armed conflict between Polisario and Morocco over Western Sahara in the mid seventies, and now live in refugee camps in Tindouf in Algeria. Morocco believes that Western Sahara has historical and cultural links with Morocco, while Polisario claims the right to self-determination in Western Sahara, quoting a 1975 decision made by The International Court of Justice in Haag concerning their right to self-determination after a referendum. Morocco and Polisario could not agree as to who might take part in a referendum so it has never been held. Subsequent to 1975, many Moroccans also live in the southern provinces (Western Sahara).

Morocco tried to solve the conflict in 2007 by giving the Sahrawis who still live in refugee camps the opportunity to return as Moroccan citizens with extra resources for education and housing, and offering all Sahrawis in the southern provinces partial self-determination under the kingdom. Algeria controls the refugee camps, and blocked Morocco’s offer because it wants access to the Atlantic coast.

sahara-300x190Marxists and various other anti-imperialistic solidarity movements support Polisario’s struggle for self-determination and claim that Morocco is now a colonial power. A common argument is to compare the Sahrawis’ struggle with that of the Palestinians. However, this is very misleading because the Palestinians’ main problem – the right to return – would be solved if they received an offer similar to the Sahrawis’. Swedish Sami people have a solution that is similar, and a more relevant comparison, to the one Morocco is offering the Sahrawis. Two nomadic people who inhabit several national states.samir-300x168

A few questions to this ”left”:

1. Why not get involved in the situation of the Sami people in Sweden?

2. Why not help Morocco get rid of the remains of Spanish colonialism in Mellilla and Ceuta?

3. Why not criticise Algeria for blocking Morocco’s offer in 2007?

Many of Polisario’s leaders have changed their minds since 2007. As did the legendary Jewish Marxist, Abraham Sefarty, one of Polisario’s founders. He became advisor to King Hassan when he returned to Morocco from exile.

There is strong interest in keeping the Western Sahara issue unresolved, because it is being used by the former colonial powers and USrael as a hold over both Algeria and Morocco. They have not yet become involved in the neo-colonial ”Arab Springs”, with rampaging and weakening of existing national states, a prerequisite for the New World Order.

Why would the ”left” take part in that?

 

Updated:

A grossly biased article from June 21, 2014, Western Sahara Criticised for Oil Transports, describes Western Sahara as if it were a country occupied by Morocco with a population ( the Sahrawis) partly banished. The most spectacular thing about SVT’s (Swedish Broadcasting Company) article is that this view is said to be shared by the UN and the International Court of Justice in Haag. A truce has been in place since 1991 between the Moroccan army and Polisario, the Sahrawis’ liberation movement.

The facts of the case are that UN views Western Sahara as a ”non de-colonised territory” (included in the United Nations List of Non-Self-Governing Territories), that both the Sahrawis and the area are historically linked to Morocco, and that the issue of the area’s status should be decided by a referendum. Thus, there is no support from the UN for the article’s description of these facts.

Moreover, it should be said that nomadic tribes called Sahrawi have inhabited lands that include several nation states. In this respect they are similar to the Sami people who are scattered mainly around The Cap of the North but nevertheless have no state of their own.

But the Sahrawis are different from the Sami because they have ethnic connections with Morocco, while the Sami have their own strong ethnicity. It is easier to argue that the Sami are a people than it is regarding the Sahrawis. Indeed, the fact that a group is seen as a people does not alone give it the legal right to have its own state, but it is entitled to self-determination.

Morocco’s offer to the Sahrawis who still live in refugee camps in Algeria, entails returning with full citizen rights, extra resources for housing and education, and partial self-determination. It is a solution that is equally as generous as the one concerning the Nordic Sami.

Why are these circumstances kept silent in the Swedish debate?

 

 

 

 

Kommer Irak att befrias nu? – Intervju med Dr. Al-Faidhy (AMSI), 29 april 2014

aafaydy1-150x150

In English

Dr. Muhammed Bashir Al-Faidhy, talesman för  the Association of Muslim Scholars in Iraq (AMSI).

Intervjuare: Snorre Lindquist och Lasse Wilhelmson, vilka nyligen blev intervjuade av ArabNyheter om situationen i Irak.

De åkte till Amman i Jordanien och träffade Dr. Muhammed Bashir Al-Faidhy. Mats Gabrielsson, en svensk dokumentärfilmare, deltog också. Intervjun tolkades mellan arabiska och engelska av fru Al-Haidari från AMSI.

Inledning

En blodig kraftmätning pågår sedan årsskiftet 2013-2014 i Irak som radikalt kan vända skeendet i Mellanöstern. Ytterst få ägnade saken någon uppmärksamhet före invasionen av Mosul den 10 juni 2014 och i västmedia rådde en talande tystnad. Och ändå befann sig halva Irak redan då i ett kaotiskt krigstillstånd. Staden Falluja belägrades och bombades för tredje gången på ett årtionde, denna gång av delar av den nya irakiska miljonarmèn med färsk vapenarsenal från USA. Trots att nu sju månader har gått och leveranser till staden hindras vägrar försvararna fortfarande att ge upp.

Omedelbart när krigshandlingarna startade slog västmedia fast att den irakiska armén heroiskt bekämpade Al-Qaida-gruppen ISIS/ISIL som från Syrien tagit sig över gränsen för att ta kontrollen över städerna. Man hade anammat USA:s och den irakiske premiärministern Nouri Al-Malkis beskrivning till hundra procent, trots att faktaunderlaget var ytterst magert och rapporterna motsägelsefulla. Fortfarande är denna uppfattning totalt dominerande.

Märkligt nog hakade några inflytelserika och vanligtvis kritiska skribenter på nätet från vänsterkanten på, som Jason Ditz på Antiwar, Cristof Lehmann på nsnbc ìnternational, samt från Sverige journalisten Stefan Lindgren på sin blogg. Den senare är en ledande solidaritetsaktivist med erfarenheter från Vietnam- och Afghanistanrörelserna. Han ansåg till och med att det var fel att ge medicinsk assistans till de upproriska på annat sätt än genom Röda Korset, uppenbarligen därför att detta skulle innebära att ta parti i ett internt uppror mot en legitim regim i en suverän stat, vilket är emot folkrätten.

Å andra sidan påstod skribenter på Brussels Tribunal som står den irakiska verkligheten närmare att Al-Maliki bekämpar sitt eget folk vilket efter tre års fruktlösa fredliga demonstationer bemötta med massakrer gör väpnat uppror mot regimens förtryck, rättsröta och vanskötsel av landet. Al-Qaida är syndabocken som användes som för att förblinda Väst menade man.

AMSI verkar inne i Irak för humanitära ändamål och har betytt mycket för det moraliska motståndet och sammanhållningen i landet. Så mycket att dess ledare Dr. Hareth Al-Dhari förlänades ansvaret att vara talesman och internationell representant för några av de väpnade motståndsgrupper som kämpade hårdast och mest principfast för att driva ut USA:s ockupationsarmè. AMSI är länkad till Brussels Tribunal och Dr. Al-Faidhy deltog som talare i dess senaste konferens i april 2014.

——————————————————

Fråga: Den irakiske premiärministern Al-Malikis stöd till Syriens Assad-regim ses av många i Väst som det definitiva beviset för att Irak har återvunnit oberoende och suveränitet efter att USA:s armè lämnat landet. Hur kommenterar ni påståendet?

- USA:s hållning vis à vi ”den arabiska våren” skiljer sig från land till land. Till exempel Syrien jämfört med Yemen. USA:s hållning till upproret i Irak skiljer sig totalt från hållningen till andra arabländers folkuppror. Vi såg hur USA stödde Libyens rebeller och involverade sig militärt. I Syrien har USA ända tills nu vägrat gå in militärt, trots det faktum att mängden dödade är många gånger fler än de i Libyen. Situationen i Syrien är annorlunda för att landet är uppbundet till Iran. Ryssland stöder Syrien därför att det är lierat med Iran. Men i det långa loppet har USA:s hållning till rebellerna i Syrien i praktiken utvecklats till ett stöd åt Malikis regim i Irak.

Jag skall ge ett exempel: Det är ett faktum att Iran sänder trupper och vapen till Syrien genom Irak. USA känner väl till detta och har upprepade gånger bett Al-Maliki att stoppa sändningarna. Al-Maliki ignorerar USA:s begäran, något som bekräftats officiellt. Trots detta stöder USA Maliki, därför att USA har ett projekt i Irak och vill upprätthålla och skydda sin ställning. USA har inte råd att orsaka en kris med Maliki och måste därför finna sig i att inte få igenom alla sina krav. Kort sagt: Villkoren för Irak är helt annorlunda jämförda med de villkor som gäller i resten av arabvärlden. USA är inte intresserat av demokrati; enbart dess egna intressen gäller.

Jag vill påminna om de enorma fredliga demonstrationer i Irak som genomfördes i 16 av dess 18 provinser åren 2011-2013. När Tunisien och Egypten gjorde motsvarande uppror ville USA ge sken av sitt stöd. Läs Obamas kommentarer vid den tiden! Men han hade inte ett ord till stöd för den stora demokratiska revolutionen i Irak! USA gav inget stöd, för Maliki var ju där! Det var ett uppror där både sunniter, shiiter och kurder deltog.

Al-Maliki representerar USA:s intressen i Irak, och samtidigt Irans intressen i Irak. Dessa intressen är sammanbundna och relaterade till varandra, vilket gör situationen komplicerad och svår att förstå för utomstående.

Konspirerade USA och Iran i hemlighet redan i början av ockupationen av Irak? Och har situationen nu ändrats i Syrien? En internationell diskussion pågår om detta. Vilka är de Syriska rebellerna, och vilka betalar dem?

- Saken är komplicerad. Stormakterna blandar sig i och en del ställer sig faktiskt och principiellt på de syriska rebellernas sida. På Syriens sida står Ryssland, Iran och Al-Malikis Irak. På Irans sida står också Ryssland och Kina. På den andra sidan står USA och Europa. Upproret i Syrien startades av folket, och hade faktiskt stora framgångar i början. Men det fastnade i Damaskus. Sedan drogs Hizbollah in för att slåss och Iran och Ryssland började förse Syrien med vapen och manskap. Detta förändrade läget.

Det finns en viktig händelse som man inte talar och om som gjorde att upproret förlorade stöd i världen. Iran beordrade Maliki att släppa mängder av tillfångatagna Al-Qaida för att ta dem till Syrien att slåss och skapa en organisation som skulle sätta skräck i världen. Avsikten var att få världsopinionen att ändra inställning till upproret och stödja Assad i hans kamp mot den nya organisationen. Detta är ingen anklagelse, det är inte något man kan påstå utan argument. Vi har bevis i form av en digital inspelning av Irans nuvarande justitieminister där han bekräftar detta. Han sade att smugglingen av Al-Qaida-medlemmar skedde under översyn av höga tjänstemän i Irak. Dessa element i Al-Qaida är de farligaste av de farliga. Amerikanerna arresterade dem och lämnade över dem till sin irakiska vasallregim. Nu skall historien från Syrien upprepas i Irak.

Är Syrienkriget ett ”proxy war”? Att stödja ett störtande av Syriens Assad men fördöma störtandet av Iraks Saddam Hussein kan synas inkonsekvent sett ur folkrättens perspektiv. Skall inte suveränitetsprincipen gälla universellt?

- Ja, detta är ett krig är ett ”proxy war”, ett krig fört av ombud. Detta är ett spel mellan stormakter där Assad enligt folkrättens definition försvarar sitt land. I början talade det internationella samfundet om att regimen måste bytas ut. Och nu, som resultat av det som hänt sägs det att man måste samarbeta med Assadregimen för att stoppa striderna. Detta är ett smutsigt spel där alla betalar Al-Qaida för en agenda i sitt eget intresse – USA, vissa arabstater och Iran – i slutändan är det folken som betalar.

Även Assadregimen betalar Al-Qaida. Det finns en överenskommelse mellan Assad och Al-Qaida. För två dagar sedan berättade The Times att Assad beslutat med om köp av olja som kommer från det territorium Al-Qaida behärskar i Syrien. Detta är en indirekt bekräftelse att oljan kontrolleras och säljs av Al-Qaida. Detta visste vi sen tidigare. Ni kommer att bli förvånade när jag nu berättar att när USA var en fysisk ockupant av Irak betalade USA Al-Qaida. De Al-Qaida-medlemmar som USA arresterade i Irak släpptes redan efter sex månader. Al-Qaida är ett redskap. Olika länder betalar Al-Qaida för att utföra illdåd som tjänar respektive lands egna intressen.

Hur är förhållandet mellan motståndet i Irak och Assadregimen?

- Vi stöder Syriens folk mot förtryckaren Assad och mot Al-Qaida. Motståndet i Irak sympatiserar stolt och starkt med syriska folket i dess kamp mot Assadregimen, men det har inte blandat sig i och sänder inga trupper. Stödet är på ett ideologiskt plan. De ser på Assadregimen som en diktatur och förtryckare och den måste bekämpas som sådan.

Assadregimen får stöd av shia-miliser som är tränade i Irak och dessa är några av det irakiska motståndets värsta fiender. I området finns två mot varandra tävlande projekt:

1) Det iranska projektet som sträcker sig från Teheran till Beirut. Projektets hörnstenar är Khamanei, Al-Maliki, Assad och Hassan Nasrallah. De spelar i samma orkester.

2) Det arabiska projektet som består av det syriska upproret och det irakiska motståndet.

På grund av att USA just nu är uppbundet vid Iran i den irakiska situationen verkar det uppenbart att USA har svårt att lösa det syriska problemet därför att USA inte vill störa Iran.

Det som nu händer i Mellanöstern och dess närområden, framstår som ett fullföljande av ”Den sionistiska planen för Mellanöstern”, som 1982 översattes från hebreiska av Israel Shahak. Den innebär förstörelse av existerande stater i regionen genom uppdelning i mindre enheter som skulle bekämpa varandra – inte den traditionellt imperialistiska för åtkomst av råvaror och billig arbetskraft. Håller ni med om det?

- Beklagligt nog är det detta ni beskriver som pågår. Det finns de som säger att USA skapade dessa uppror. Och det finns folk som säger att upproren i Mellanöstern är ett naturligt resultat av diktaturernas förtryck. Jag vill inte diskutera några av dessa möjligheter. Är detta planerat i förväg eller har de olika parterna agerat så att det blev så? Resultatet är ändå detsamma, både i Tunisien, Libyen, Yemen, Somalia och i Irak. Hur brillianta planerna än är så har resultatet blivit implodering, inte explodering. Det är makterna bakom detta som skapat diktaturerna.

En ny plan har skapats som bryter ner de diktaturer som är lierade men inte är ändamålsenliga för USA. Ta Khadaffi, han ville behålla och skydda Libyen. Ta Saddam Hussein, som ville detsamma med Irak. Började dessa diktatorer bli alltför oberoende? Nej, de såg sina länder som sin egendom. Men folkens uppror var äkta.

Därför stödde USA i början revolutionen. Detsamma som hänt i Irak hände nu i Syrien. Om Assad störtades skulle Rysslands intressen krossas. Av detta skäl ingrep Ryssland. Konflikten i Syrien är nu internationell. Men i Irak har stormakterna kommit överens. Nära 2.5 miljoner irakier har dödats eller skadats. Var är Ban Ki Moon. Var är Europa? Europas folk ser hundratals irakier dödas varje dag, men de är tysta.

Hur ser ni på den judiska statens och Palestinas roll i detta spel?

- Israels syfte är att hålla hela regionen instabil. Israels och USA:s syften är utbytbara. Israel agerar som ett bortskämt barn för USA och dess allierade. Kriget förs främst i Israels intresse, därefter i Irans intresse och i tredje hand i USA:s. År 2004 uttalade jag mig i en tysk TV-satelitkanal: Jag sa att Israel har nu ridit på den amerikanska åsnan. Hur? I Irak förlorar USA tusentals soldater och miljarder dollar och ödelägger sitt internationella rykte och vinnaren är Israel. Därför sade jag att Israel rider den amerikanska åsnan.

För vår del har vi inga problem med judarna. Vi ser judendomen som en religion given av Gud. Vi tror på deras heliga skrifter och på profeterna. Vi är beredda att leva i evig fred med judarna. Problemet är sionismen och ockupationen av Palestina.

Israel kontrollerar USA genom sin kontroll över ekonomin, finanserna, media och kultur. Israel har inflytande över besluten i USA. Kommer ni ihåg historien när israelerna sköt mot den lille pojken? Bilden av hur han sökte skydd hos sin far? Fotografen var en fransman och bilden gick ut över hela världen och skapade en ny anti-israelisk opinion. Vad gjorde Israel? Man sökte i arkiven, fann en bild av palestinier som fått tag i några bosättare, dödade dem och kastade liken ut genom fönstren. De är mycket skickliga i denna konst.

Varför talar ni och andra ledare i Mellanöstern inte öppet om den som rider åsnan?

- Enligt min mening är det klokt att inte öppet tala om dessa saker. Det kan orsaka ännu mer fiendskap mot oss hos amerikanerna. Det kan orsaka ännu mer komplikationer i regionen, och även från Israel som faktiskt orsakar problemen. Vi skyller inte på Israel. USA bär skulden.

Detta är en plikt för den amerikanska upplysta eliten. Min plikt är att upplysa mitt eget folk. Jag är irakier, har inget ansvar för det som händer i USA. Om jag gavs chansen att göra det ni föreslår i USA skulle jag göra det. Jag är säker på att detta inte ens skulle uppröra Israel. Den som följt hur dessa i Israels elit uttalar sig vet hur stolta de är över att de styr världen. Så när jag skulle sagt detta avslöjade jag inga hemligheter.

Är ockupationen över nu?

- Den militära amerikanska ockupationen är över, i den mening media lägger i den; den stora massan USA-militär är borta. Likaså tanks och stridsflygplan. Nu är vi istället i skuggan av en annan slags ockupation, en där ockupationsmakten finns överallt där den vill se till sina intressen. Detta är inte nytt. När tyskarna ockuperade Frankrike och fransmännen gjorde motstånd lämnade tyskarna över administrationen till Vichy-regeringen, medan själva makten låg kvar hos Tyskland. Fransmännen ansåg sig inte befriade förrän Vichy-regimen var borta och Tysklands makt med den. Detsamma gäller situationen i Irak. Maliki-regeringen är en amerikansk regering och representerar USA:s intressen i Irak och genomför USA:s planer. Vi anser inte att vi är befriade förrän den regim de lämnade över till oss försvunnit liksom också hela det system USA tog med sig.

Det rätta svaret svaret på frågan ”Är ockupationen över?” är detta: ”Ja, ockupationen är borta – men nej, den är kvar.”

Anser ni att Iran bör betraktas som en ockupationsmakt vid sidan av USA?

- Samarbetet och alliansen mellan USA och Iran är mycket omfattande i Irak. Iran kallar USA ”den store Satan”. Men fråga vilken irakier som helst om vem som är USA:s store vän så blir svaret ”Iran är USA:s store vän”. Iran har visat USA sin stora vänskap vid ockupationen av Afghanistan och Irak.

Det följande har sagts av Abtahi , rådgivare till Khatami och f.d. premiärminister i Iran:   ”Om det inte varit för Iran hade varken Kabul eller Bagdad ockuperats”. Och detta är korrekt. Men Iran vill inte ha USA som vän – enbart. Därför att Iran har intressen och kan dra fördel av ockupationen för förverkligandet av sina intressen. Vem red åsnan? Var där någon annan också? Iran red också åsnan!

Hur många militärer har USA idag i Irak? Reguljära sådana och legosoldater?  

- Detta svårt säga exakt därför att amerikanerna håller det strikt hemligt. Vi har informationer att det finns mer än 13000 tjänstemän. De har baser, men vi vet inte antalet militärer på dem: Bagdad International Airport, baser i Bagdad, Nazeriya, Balad och Mosel. De attackerar inte några. Antalet legosoldater har minskat. Amerikanerna deltar inte offentligt i striderna, men av videoinspelningar från operationer i Anbar nyligen framgår att amerikansk accent förekommer bland soldaterna. Vi anser det fullt möjligt att amerikanska officerare används som rådgivare, men har inga bevis.

Hur ser ni på Al-Maliki-regimens legitimitet ur folkrättens perspektiv?

- Folkrätten smutsas ned av USA. Ban Ki Moon talar om massakrer i Syrien men inte om massakrerna i Irak. T.ex. ”vattenkriget” där Maliki beordrat översvämningar vid Fallujah. Hitler gjorde så också. USA lät skriva Iraks konstitution på vilken valet av Maliki vilar. En konstitution får inte skrivas under ockupation enligt folkrätten. Alltså är den nuvarande regimen i Irak att anse som illegitim. Sex provinser revolterar nu. I fyra av dessa existerar ingen som helst kontroll av Malikis regim, detta enligt ett antal ledamöter i parlamentet. Hundratusen irakier har flytt till öknen. Att hålla val under dessa förhållanden måste anses som löjeväckande. Ban Ki Moon struntar i att reglerna i folkrätten inte följs.

För tre dagar sedan kallade USA:s talesman i State Department valet i Syrien för ”farsartat”. Varför är Syriens val en ”fars” medan valet i Irak ett uttryck för demokrati? Valet i Irak tjänar USA:s intressen, men inte valet i Syrien. Om världen inte stoppar USA går den mot en ny medeltid, den där djungelns lag råder.

Hur många iranier finns idag inne i Irak som arbetar för Iran?

- Iran blandar sig inte i Iraks inre angelägenheter genom utifrån kommande iranier men genom den politiska klass som finns inne Irak.

Al-Maliki är överbefälhavare över armèn och fösvarsminister och samtidigt chef för alla säkerhetsministerier med totalt cirka 1.250 miljoner man och över miliserna med cirka 1 miljon man. Han får sina order från Kasem Suleimany som är direkt knuten till Khameyni. Suleimany är en av de generaler som är ansvariga för Irans Al-Quds-armè. Man kan säga att Irak nu är en provins i Iran. Och USA vet om det. Obama är kritiserad för detta av några kongressmedlemmar. De sade att han lämnat över Irak till Iran.

Av detta skäl har USA hittills undvikit att förarga Iran, därför att USA har intressen i Irak och Irak finns i Irans händer. Kanske ni minns talet som Saudiarabiens ambassadör höll i Washington? ”Det är inte logiskt av USA att erbjuda Irak på ett guldfat till Iran.” Irak regeras av Khameyni och Al-Maliki är bara en tjänsteman.

Det ni nu säger är att fastän USA är världens starkaste militärmakt i dag så regeras USA av andra och är de facto svagt!

- Absolut, åtminstone när det gäller Irak! USA:s ambassadör i Bagdad kan inte göra något utan att rådfråga Irans ambassad i Bagdad. Men jag försäkrar er, Irans makt i Irak kommer upphöra mycket snart. Irans projekt i Irak tjänar USA när det gäller förstörelsen av Irak. State Department sände 2006 ett memorandum till Bush att Israels Mossad skulle likvidera 300 av Iraks mest framstående akademiker och vetenskapsmän med hjälp av USA-trupper. USA är ju en stormakt. Historiskt sett är landet huvudansvarigt för dödandet av dessa. Dokumentet är ett bevis och erkännande. Nu utför Iranierna dåden. Varför skulle Mossad och CIA döda när Iran finns? Detta är ett exempel på det komplicerade förhållandet mellan USA och Iran.

Hur mycket pengar och vapen sänder Saudiarabien respektive Qatar till ISIS och Al-Qaida i Irak?

- Det arabiska stödet är helt och hållet riktat till Syriens rebeller, därför att detta tillåts av USA. Stöd riktat till Irak tillåts ej. Dessa arabstater vill inte ha svårigheter med USA. Om de inte tillåts stödja irakierna – hur skall de då kunna stödja Al-Qaida i Irak?

Blandar sig Muslimska Brödraskapet (MB) på något sätt i Iraks inre angelägenheter?

- MB hör till USA:s gäng. I det provisoriska rådet i Irak som bildades år 2003 var MB en av hörnstenarna genom det islamiska partiet och fortfarande är de med i regeringen. Men de har ingen position bland irakierna. Vi ser dem som en del i ockupationsprojektet.

Hur har motståndet utvecklats?

- Det som händer i Irak är en folkets revolution mot det system som USA tog med sig med sin ockupation av Irak. En revolution handlar om människor. Där revolutioner händer i världen är det av en mängd orsaker. Det finns uppror mot fattigdom, förtryck, diktatur, korruption och för identitet. Alla dessa orsaker finns i Irak. Det som Iraks folk nu utsätts för är en förlängning av den amerikanska ockupationen som avsåg att tvätta bort den irakiska civilisationen. Irakier dödas, sätts i fängelse och plundras på sin nations rikedomar och deras nationella identitet berövas dem. Kanske är denna revolution lite försenad, men folket har varit upptaget av att kampen för sin överlevnad. Motståndet orsakade USA stora förluster men det irakiska folket led också stora förluster.

USA bombade städerna från luften, dock tvangs USA dra sig ur och tillsatte Al-Maliki som fortsatte på samma sätt. Al-Maliki representerar Irans projekt. Därför införde han, förutom metoder som USA har lärt ut, också metoder som Iran lärt ut, nya metoder som var värre än t.o.m. USA:s. Under hela denna period var folket mot USA och mot förtrycket. Tidigare var metoderna USA-style, nu blev det Iran-style. Under hela denna tid när nationen/folket utsattes för hårt förtryck hade vi brevväxling med motståndsrörelsen.

Efter att USA verkställde sitt stopp för militära aktiviteter fortsatte Iraks armé arbetet med en offensiv, men motståndet såg dem som irakier. Det kändes svårt att vända vapnen mot dem, för de var ju irakier. Så under hela denna period (2011-2013) var motståndsmännen lugna och tysta, för att i stället utnyttja tiden till att organisera en kraftfull och bred rörelse med hundratusentals nya aktivister i Diyala, södra Irak och områdena runt Bagdad.

Al-Maliki använde tiden till att låta sina miliser fördriva sunnier från deras områden. Det finns statistik som visar att rensningen var framgångsrik, och det var miliser som gjorde det. Irans projekt baseras på etnisk rensning. På ett år drevs 20 000 sunnier ut ur områden runt Bagdad. Viktigt att påpeka är att alla irakier var utsatta för förtryck, inte bara sunnier. Mord, tortyr etc. mot oppositionella. Sex provinser var särskilt utsatta. Att det är frågan om en etnisk rensning har bekräftats av internationella NGO:s samt EU-parlamentsledamoten Struan Stevenson i en inlaga i EU-parlamentet. USA och all västmedia reagerade med total tystnad.

Revolutionen startade 25 februari 20011 som en följd av förtrycket med enorma demonstrationer i 16 av Iraks 18 provinser. Kurder, sunnier och shiiter deltog. Al-Maliki svarade med mord, arresteringar och slog ner upproret efter sex månader.

Tahrir-torget i Bagdad fylldes av tiotusentals demonstrerande människor. De krävde att regeringen Maliki avgick. Vi har bildbevis på att Iranska ledare var närvarande som inspektörer och beskådade det hela från höga byggnader. De bar militär uniform och hade skägg som är vanligt i Irans armé. Alla vi irakier vet att skägg inte är tillåtet i Iraks armé. Även deras ansikten och kläder avslöjade dem. Irans inblandning var uppenbar.

USA hade inga problem, de vill bara bli av med demonstrationerna. Men som det irakiska ordstävet säger: ”Så länge det finns eld under grytan fortsätter den koka”. Så länge det finns perser (i Irak) fortsätter revolutionen. Jag sade i ett uttalande att revolutionen kommer igen. Nu kom den igen, men inte i de 16 provinser jag talade om, bara i de 6 provinser där majoriteten av invånarna är sunnier; Anbar, Bagdad, Salahuddin, Diyala, Tàmim och Nineveh. Ni har absolut rätt att fråga varför inte i alla? Orsakerna är två:

1) I dessa sex provinser är förtrycket som hårdast, Maliki koncentrerar alla sina trupper där.

2) I de södra provinserna kan Iranlojala styrkor kontrollera befolkningen genom sina alltomfattande säkerhetstjänster där. Ett antal mord skedde på oppositionella, och de lyckades sätta skräck i befolkningen. I norra Irak kunde de två kurdpartierna stoppa folk från att gå ut och demonstrera.

Vill det irakiska folket en delning av landet, eller kommer det att enas?

- Irakierna vägrar en delning – både sunni, shia, kurder och araber. En del hävdar att en delning skulle minska förtrycket. Gjorde man idag en vetenskaplig opinionsundersökning skulle man troligen finna att en stor majoritet av folket är emot en delning av landet. USA är inte heller längre övertygat om en delning. En delning skulle betyda att södra delen blir Iransk. Och en kurdisk separation i norr skulle uppröra Turkiet. Iran som tidigare ville ha en delning, är inte heller intresserat längre, därför att nu vill de ha allt.

Hur organiserar motståndet sin väpnade kamp i dag? Vad hände med Al-Rashedeen-armén och alla de andra fraktionerna?

När amerikanerna gav sig av, avbröt motståndsgrupperna sina strider. Men när striderna började igen i Anbar i december 2013 gick kloka människor in i diskussionerna mellan fraktionernas ledare. De övertygade revolutionärerna om att inrätta ett antal militära råd ledda av äldre och erfarna officerare från Iraks gamla armè. Dessa militära råd fick benämningen ”The Military Councils for the Revolutionary Tribes”. Det finns nio stycken; i Anbar, Bagdad, Mosul, etc. Dessa råd organiserar rörelsen och operationerna. De gamla fraktionerna The Mujahedeen-army, Al-Rashedeen-army, 1920 Revolution Brigades arbetar nu under nya paraplyn och man ser inte deras gamla namn längre. Därför är organisationen nu mycket effektivare.

Amerikanerna arbetar dygnet runt för att de skall misslyckas. De gör allt för att hjälpa Maliki med vapen. De hindrar världens araber från att ge någon hjälp och likaledes internationella organisationer från sympatihandlingar.

Av samma orsaker som motståndet mot USA ockupation lyckades när vi gick genom svåra tider, av samma orsak kommer denna revolution trots oerhörda svårigheter att lyckas. Vi får inga finanser, inga leveranser av förnödenheter och ingen politisk uppbackning från något håll. Amerika försöker skapa samma situation nu som då. Nu finansierar de så kallade Al-Qaidagrupper, dessa betalda yrkesmördare, som vi tidigare lyckade bli av med, för att dölja och misskreditera den folkliga revolutionen. Och nu växer de igen upp som svampar ur jorden. Det blir som i Syrien, det finns bara Dàash (irakiernas namn på Al-Qaida). Samma gäng som i Syrien upprepar nu sina dåd i Irak.

Så ni menar att det är det traditionella uråldriga stamsystemet som enar folket i Irak, genom att länka samman sunniter, shiiter och kurder? Stamlojaliteten enar motståndet och besegrar ockupantens ”demokrati”?

- Stammarna tillkännager att de vill ha oberoende och demokrati. Men USA vägrar. Om man frågar en irakier vad folket vill ha, är svaret: Vi vill ha en demokrati! Jag måste vara optimist. Jag hoppas Amerika blir mer rättvist. Nu behandlar de oss som icke-människor och virus som måste förstöras.

 

 

  

Will Irak be liberated now? – Interview with Dr. Al-Faidhy (AMSI), April 29, 2014

aafaydy1-150x150

På svenska

Dr. Muhammed Bashir Al-Faidhy, spokesperson for the Association of Muslim Scholars in Iraq (AMSI).

By Snorre Lindquist and Lasse Wilhelmson who recently were interviewed by ArabNyheter about the situation in Irak.

They went to Amman in Jordan to meet Dr. Muhammed Bashir Al-Faidhy. Mats Gabrielsson, a Swedish film maker documented the interview. It was interpreted from Arabic to English by Mrs. Al-Haidari from AMSI.

Introduction

Since the end of 2013 there is a bloody battle of wills going on in Iraq that could change the course of history in the Middle East. Few took notice until the invasion of Mosul on June 10, 2014, and western media said nothing. And this when half of Iraq was already in a chaotic war situation. The town of Faludja was under siege and being bombed for the third time in a decade, this time by parts of Iraq’s new army of millions with a new stockpile of weapons supplied by the US. Nevertheless, though seven months have passed and deliveries to the town are waylaid, the defenders still refuse to give up.

As soon as the acts of war started, western media established that Iraq’s army was heroically fighting the Al-Qaida group ISIS/ISIL that had crossed the border from Syria to take control of the towns. The media had completely adopted the version given by the US and the Iraqi prime minister Nouri Al-Maki, although there were few facts to support it and reports were contradictory. This is still the all-dominating view.

Oddly, a few influential and usually critical leftist writers on the internet, such as Jason Ditz at Antiwar, Christof Lehmann at NSNBC International and the Swedish journalist Stefan Lindgren on his blog, followed suit. Lindgren is a prominent activist with a background in the solidarity movements for Vietnam and Afghanistan. He went as far as to say that giving medical assistance to the up-risers was wrong, other than through the Red Cross, obviously because this would mean taking sides in an internal conflict against a legitimate regime in a sovereign state, which is against international law.

On the other hand, writers at the Brussels Tribunal who are closer to reality in Iraq said that Al-Maliki is fighting his own people who after three years of fruitless peace demonstrations that were met with massacres, are engaged in an armed uprising against oppression, a corrupt legal system and mismanagement of the country. Al-Qaida is a scapegoat, used to blind the West, they said.

AMSI works inside Iraq for humanitarian aims and has boosted moral opposition and cohesion in the country. So much so that its leader, Sheikh Dr. Harith Al-Dhari, was given the responsibility of being spokesperson and international representative for some of the armed resistance groups that fought hardest and were most determined to drive out the US occupation army. AMSI is linked with the Brussels Tribunal and Dr. Al-Faidhy was a speaker at the conference in April 2014.

——————————————-

Question: The Iraqi prime minister Al-Maliki’s support of the Assad regime in Syria is seen by many in the West as definite proof that Iraq has won back its independence and sovereignty after the US army left the country. Could you comment on this?

- The US views the ”Arab Spring” differently from country to country. For example Syria compared to Yemen. Its view of the uprising in Iraq is totally different from its  view of popular uprisings in other Arab countries. We saw how the US supported the rebels in Libya and involved itself militarily. Up until now the US has refused to involve its military in Syria, despite many more deaths there than in Libya. Syria is different because it is bound to Iran. Russia supports Syria because of its liaison with Iran. But at the end of the day, the way the US sees the rebels in Syria has in fact become support for Maliki’s regime in Iraq.

I can give you an example: It is a fact that Iran sends troops and weapons to Syria through Iraq. The US knows this well and has repeatedly asked Al-Maliki to stop the consignments. It has been officially confirmed that Al-Maliki ignores the US requests. Despite this, the US still supports Al-Maliki because it has a  project in Iraq and it wishes to maintain and to protect its position. The US cannot afford to cause a crisis with Maliki and must therefore accept that it does not get everything it wants. In short: Conditions in Iraq are very different compared to those of the rest of the Arab world. The US is not interested in democracy, only in its own interests.

Remember the huge peaceful demonstrations that took place in 16 of Iraq’s 18 provinces from 2011 to 2013. When there were similar uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt, the US seemed to support them. Read Obama’s comments at this time! But there was no word of support for the great democratic revolution in Iraq! There was no support from the US because, of course, Maliki was there! Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds took part in the uprising.

Al-Maliki represents US interests in Iraq and also Iran’s interests in Iraq. These interests are linked and tied up with each other, which makes the situation complicated and difficult to understand for outsiders.

Did the US and Iran conspire in secret from the very start of the occupation in Iraq? And has the situation now changed in Syria? There is an ongoing international discussion about this. Who are the Syrian rebels and who is paying them?

- It is complicated. The super powers interfere and some of them actually, and in principal, take the side of the Syrian rebels. On Syria’s side there is Russia, Iran and Al-Maliki’s Iraq. On Iran’s side we have Russia and China too. On the opposite side are the US and Europe. The uprising in Syria was started by the people, and in fact was very successful to begin with. But it got stuck in Damascus. Hezbollah was drawn in to fight and Iran and Russia started supplying Syria with weapons and troops. This changed the situation.

There is an important factor that nobody speaks about, and that caused the loss of international support for the uprising. Iran ordered Maliki to release a substantial number of imprisoned Al-Qaida, in order to take them to Syria to fight and create an organisation that would terrify the world. The aim was to alter world opinion of the uprising and support Assad in his struggle against the new organisation. This is not an accusation, not something that can be said without argument. We have evidence in the shape of a digital recording by Iran’s current minister of justice where he confirms it. He said that the smuggling out of the Al-Qaida members was done under the supervision of senior civil servants in Iraq. These elements of Al-Qaida are the most dangerous of the dangerous. The Americans arrested them and turned them over to their Iraqi vassal regime. Time to repeat the happenings from Syria in Iraq.

Is the war in Syria a proxy war? Supporting the downfall of Syrian’s Assad but condemning the downfall of Iraq’s Saddam Hussein seems inconsistent from the perspective of international law. Is not the principle of sovereignty universal?

- Yes, this is a proxy war, a war waged by agents. This is a game played by the super powers where Assad according to international law is defending his country. Initially, the international community said that the regime had to be changed. And now, as a result of what has happened, it is said that it is necessary to work together with Assad in order to stop the fighting. This is a dirty game where everyone pays Al-Qaida for an agenda in their own interests – the US, some Arab states and Iran – and in the end it is the people who pay.

The Assad regime pays Al-Qaida too. There is an agreement between Assad and Al-Qaida. Two days ago, The Times reported that Assad had decided to buy oil from land controlled by Al-Qaida in Syria. This confirms, indirectly, that oil is controlled and sold by Al-Qaida. We knew this before. You will be surprised when I now tell you that when the US was physically occupying Iraq, they paid Al-Qaida. The members of Al Qaida that were arrested by the US in Iraq were set free after only six months. Al Qaida is a tool. Different countries pay Al-Qaida to carry out atrocities that serve the interests of their respective countries.

What is the relationship between the opposition in Iraq and the Assad regime?

We support the people of Syria against the oppressor Assad and against Al-Qaida. The opposition in Iraq proudly and strongly sympathises with the Syrian people and their struggle against the Assad regime, but it has not intervened and does not send troops. The support is ideological. It sees the Assad regime as a dictatorship and an oppressor, and as such it must be combated.

The Assad regime receives the support of Shiite militias who have been trained in Iraq and who are some of the Iraqi opposition’s worst enemies. There are two rivalling projects in the area:

1) The Iranian project that runs from Tehran to Beirut. It is underpinned by Khameni, Al-Maliki, Assad and Hassan Nasrallah. They play in the same orchestra.

2) The Arab project which consists of the Syrian uprising and the Iraqi opposition.

As the US at the moment is linked with Iran in the Iraqi situation, it seems obvious that it  will have difficulties solving the Syrian problem, because it does not wish to disturb Iran.

What is happening in the Middle East and thereabouts seems like the fullfilment of ”The Zionist plan for the Middle East”, translated in 1982 from Hebrew by Israel Shahak. It entails the destruction of existing states in the region by dividing them up into smaller units which would fight each other – not the traditional imperialist model for gaining access to commodities and cheap labour. Do you agree?

Unfortunately, what you describe is now taking place. There are those who say that the US created these uprisings. And there are those who say that the uprisings in the Middle East are a natural result of oppressive dictatorships. I do not wish to discuss any of these possibilities. Is it all planned ahead or have the various sides acted in order for it to happen thus? The outcome is the same whatever happens, in Tunisia, Libya, Somalia and in Iraq. However brilliant the plans are, the outcome has seen countries implode, not explode. It is the powers behind this that created the dictatorships.

There is a new plan that causes those dictatorships that are allied, but not useful to the US, to fall apart. Take Gaddafi, he wanted to keep and protect Libya. Take Saddam Hussein who wished the same for Iraq. Did these dictators start to become too independent? No, they saw their countries as possessions. But the people’s uprisings were genuine.

This is why the US initially supported the revolution. What had happened in Iraq now happened in Syria. If Assad were overthrown, Russia’s interests would be destroyed. So Russia became involved. The conflict in Syria has become international. But in Iraq the super-powers have reached an agreement. Almost 2.5 million Iraqis have been killed or wounded. Where is Ban Ki Moon? Where is Europe? The people of Europe see hundreds of Iraqis being killed every day, but they are silent.

What is your view of the role played by the Jewish state and Palestine in these games?

- Israel’s goal is to keep the entire region unstable. Israel’s and the US goals are interchangeable. Israel acts like the US and its allies’ spoilt child. The war is waged primarily for the interests of Israel, then those of Iran and lastly of the US. In 2004 I said on a German satellite TV channel: Israel has now ridden the American donkey. How? The US loses thousands of soldiers and billions of dollars in Iraq and its international reputation is shattered, and the winner is Israel. That is why I said that Israel rides the American donkey.

We have no problem with the Jews. We see Judaism as a religion given by God. We believe in their holy scriptures and in the prophets. We are prepared to live in eternal peace with the Jews. The problem is Zionism and the occupation of Palestine.

Israel controls the US through its control of the economy, the finances, media and culture. Israel influences decisions made in the US. Do you remember the time when the Israelis shot at a small boy? The picture of how he sought protection with his father? The photographer was French and the picture was shown all over the world and created an anti-Israel opinion. What did Israel do? Archives were searched, a picture was found of Palestinians who had got hold of some settlers, killed them and thrown the bodies out of the window. They are very good at this.

Why do you and other leaders in the Middle East not speak openly about who rides the donkey?

- I do not believe it is wise to speak openly of these things. The outcome could be even more enmity against us from the Americans.  It could cause more complications in the region, from the Israelis too, who actually cause the problems. We do not blame Israel. It is the fault of the US.

This is the duty of the enlightened American elite. My duty is to enlighten my own people. I am an Iraqi, I have no responsibility for what happens in the US. If I were given the chance to do what you suggest in the US, I would do it. I am quite sure that this would not bother Israel at all. Those who are familiar with how Israel’s elite issue statements know how proud they are of ruling the world. So if I said this, I would not have been revealing any secrets.

Is the occupation over now?

- The military American occupation is over in the way the media means; most of the huge mass of US soldiers have gone. Likewise the tanks and the attack planes. We are now under the shadow of a different kind of occupation, one where the the occupation powers are everywhere, looking after their interests. This is not new. When the Germans invaded France and the French resisted, the Germans handed over administration of the country to the Vichy government while the real power remained in Germany. The French did not consider themselves liberated until the Vichy government had gone and Germany’s power with it. The situation is similar in Iraq. The Maliki government is an American government and represents US interests in Iraq and implements US plans. We do not consider ourselves liberated until the government they left to us has gone and the entire system they brought with them has disappeared.

The correct answer to the question ”Is the occupation over?” is this: ”Yes the occupation has gone – but no, it is still here.”

Is Iran to be seen as an occupation power along side the US do you think?

- The US and Iran are strong allies and work extensively together in Iraq. Iran calls the US ”the big Satan”. But ask any Iranian who is the US’ great friend and the answer will be ”Iran is the US’ great friend”. Iran has shown the US great friendship during the occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq.

Abtahi, adviser to Khatami, former president of Iran has said: ”If it had not been for Iran, neither Kabul or Baghdad would have been occupied”. And this is correct. But Iran did not want the US just as a friend. Iran has interests and the occupation can be advantageous in realising these interests.  Who rode the donkey? Was there someone else? Iran rode the donkey too!

How much US military personnel is there today in Iraq? Regulars and mercenaries?

- It is difficult to say exactly, the Americans keep it strictly secret. We have information of more than 13.000 public officials. They have bases, but we do not know how much military personnel they have on them: bases in Baghdad, Nazeriya, Bala and Mosul. The do not launch attacks. The number of mercenaries has decreased. The Americans do not officially take part in the fighting, but there is video coverage from operations in Anbar recently where American accents are heard among the soldiers. We believe that it is entirely possible that American officers are being used as advisers, but we have no evidence.

How do you view the legitimacy of the Al-Maliki regime from the perspective of international law?

- International law is defiled by the US. Ban Ki Moon talks of massacres in Syria but not of those in Iraq. For example using water as a weapon when Maliki ordered floods in Fallujah. Hitler did the same thing. The US had a new constitution written for Iraq , on which rests the choice of Maliki. According to international law, a constitution cannot be written under occupation. This renders the present regime in Iraq illegitimate. There are currently uprisings in six provinces. In four of these Maliki’s regime totally lacks control according to a number of members of parliament. Hundreds and thousands of Iraqis have fled to the desert. It seems ridiculous to carry out an election in these circumstances. Ban Ki Moon does not care that the rule of international law is ignored.

Three days ago a US spokesperson from the State Department called the election in Syria ”a disgrace”. Why is Syria’s election ”a disgrace” while the election in Iraq is a sign of democracy? Iraq’s election serves US interests, the election in Syria does not. If the world does not stop the US it is on the way to new mediaeval times, where the law of the jungle rules.

How many Iranians working for Iran are there inside Iraq today?

- Iran does not interfere in Iraq’s domestic affairs by sending in Iranians, but through the political class that exists inside Iraq.

Al-Maliki is commander-in-chief of the army and defence minister, and at the same time head of all security ministries, with a total of 1.250 million men, and the militia with circa 1 million men. He takes his orders from Kasem Suleimany who is directly linked to Khameyni. Suleimany is one of the generals who are responsible for Iran’s Al-Quds army. One can say that Iraq is now a province in Iran. And the US knows this. Obama has been criticised for it by some members of Congress. The said that he has handed over Iraq to Iran.

This is the reason why, up until now, the US has avoided angering Iran, because it has interests in Iraq and Iraq is in the hands of Iran. Perhaps you will recall the speech given by the ambassador to Saudi Arabia in Washington? ”It is not logical for the US to present Iraq on a golden platter to Iran”. Iraq is governed by Khameyni and Al-Maliki is merely a public official.

What you are saying is that although the US is the world’s greatest military power today, it, and others, are de facto weak!

- Absolutely, anyway as far as Iraq is concerned. The US ambassador in Baghdad cannot do anything without first consulting Iran’s embassy in Baghdad. But I can assure you, the power Iran has in Iraq will soon cease to exist. Iran’s project in Iraq serves the interests of the US when it comes to the destruction of Iraq. In 2006, the State Department sent a memorandum to Bush noting that Israel’s Mossad was going to liquidate 300 of Iraq’s foremost academics and scientists, assisted by US troops.  The US is a super power. In a historic perspective, the US is mainly responsible for these deaths. The document is proof and a confession. Now the Iranians are doing the deeds. Why should Mossad and the CIA do the killings when Iran is there? This is an example of the complicated relationship between the US and Iran.

How much money and weapons do Saudi Arabia and Qatar send ISIS and Al-Qaida in Iraq?

- The Arab support is aimed completely at the rebels in Syria because this is what the US allows. Support for Iraq is not allowed. These Arab states do not want difficulties with the US. If they are not permitted to support the Iraqis – how would they then be able to support Al-Qaida in Iraq?

Does the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) get involved in any way in Iraq’s domestic affairs?

- MB belongs to the US gang. MB was a cornerstone of the provisional council set up in Iraq in 2003 through the Islamic party and is still part of the government. But they have no credit with the Iraqi people. We see them as part of the occupation project.

How has the opposition evolved?

- In Iraq there is a people’s revolution against the system brought to the country by the US through the occupation of Iraq. A revolution is about people. Around the world, revolutions take place for many reasons. There are uprisings against poverty, oppression, dictatorship, corruption and for identity. All these reasons exist in Iraq. The people of Iraq are now being subjected to a prolongation of the American occupation that aimed to wash away Iraqi civilisation. Iraqis are being killed and put into prison, their nation´s riches are being plundered and their national identity taken away. Perhaps this revolution is a little late, but people have been busy fighting to survive. The US suffered substantial losses at the hands of the opposition, but the Iraqi people also suffered great losses.

The US bombed towns from the air, but was forced to retire and appointed Al-Maliki, who carried on in the same way. Al-Maliki represents Iran’s project. And he introduced methods he had learned from the US and from Iran, new methods that were even worse than those under the US. The people were against the US and against the persecution during this entire period.  Earlier on, the methods were ”US style”, now they became ”Iran style”. We exchanged letters with the resistance movement during this whole time when the nation/people were suffering such persecution.

When the US implemented its stop for military activities, the Iraqi army continued the work with an onslaught, but the resistance saw them as Iraqis. It was difficult to point weapons at them, at the end of the day, they were Iraqis. The whole time, from 2011 to 2013, the resistance men were calm and silent, using the time to organise a movement of great strength and breadth with hundreds of thousands of new activists in Diyala, south Iraq, and the areas around Baghdad.

Al-Maliki used the time to allow his military to drive Sunnis from their lands. There are statistics to show that the clear-out was successful, and that it was undertaken by soldiers. Iran’s project is based on ethnic cleansing. In one year, 20000 Sunnis were driven out of the areas surrounding Baghdad. It is important to note that all Iraqis were subjected to persecution, not just Sunnis. Murder, torture etc against the opposition. Six provinces were particularly exposed. That it is a matter of ethnic cleansing has been confirmed by international NGOs and the MEP Struan Stevenson in an appeal to the European parliament. The US and western media reacted with total silence. The revolution started on the February 25, 2011 as a result of the oppression, with huge demonstrations in 16 of Iraq’s 18 provinces. Kurds, Sunnis and Shiites took part. Al-Maliki’s retaliated with murder and arrests, striking down the uprising after six months.

Tahrir Square in Baghdad filled with tens of thousands of demonstrators. They demanded the resignation of Maliki’s government. We have proof in pictures of Iranian leaders being there, as inspectors, watching it all from high buildings. They are wearing military uniforms and have beards, a common practice in Iran’s army. We Iraqis know that beards are not allowed in Iraq’s army. Their clothes and faces give them away too. Iran’s interference was obvious.

The US had no problems, all they wanted was the demonstrators to go away. But as the old Iraqi saying goes: ”As long as there is fire under the pot it will keep on cooking”. As long as there are Persians (in Iraq) the revolution keeps on going. I said in a statement that the revolution will be back. Now it is back, but not in the 16 provinces I spoke of, but in just 6 provinces where Sunnis are in the majority: Anbar, Baghdad, Salahuddin, Diyala, Tàmim and Nineveh. And why not in all provinces? There are two reasons:

1) The oppression is fiercest in these six provinces, Maliki concentrates all his troops there.

2) In the southern provinces, forces loyal to Iran can control the population through their comprehensive security services there. There have been several murders of members of the opposition, and they have managed to terrify the population. In the north of Iraq, the two Kurdish parties have managed to stop people from demonstrating.

Do the Iraqi people want a division of the country, or will it be united?

- The Iraqis oppose division – the Sunnis, Shiites , Kurds and Arabs. Some say that a division would lead to less oppression. An opinion poll today would probably show that a substantial majority of people do not wish for a division of the country. The US also is no longer convinced that division is the answer. A divided country would mean that the south became Iranian. And Kurdish separation in the north would offend Turkey. Iran, previously in favour of division, is no longer interested because they want it all.

How does the opposition organise its armed struggle today? What happened to the Al-Rashedeen army and all the other fractions?

- When the Americans left, the resistance movements stopped fighting. But when the fighting began again in Anbar in December 20013, wise people started a discussion between the leaders of the fractions. They convinced the revolutionaries to set up a number of military councils headed by senior and experienced officers from Iraq’s old army. They were called ”The Military Councils for the Revolutionary Tribes”. There are nine; in Anbar, Bagdad, Mosul etc. These councils organise movements and operations. The old fractions, the Mujahedeen army, Al-Rashedeen army, 1920 Revolution Bridges now work under the new umbrella and their previous names are no longer seen. Because of this the organisation is now more efficient.

The Americans work day and night in order to see that they do not succeed. The do everything they can to help Maliki with weapons. They stop the world’s Arabs from giving any help and likewise international organisations from performing acts sympathy.

For the same reasons that our opposition against the US was successful when we went through bad times, for the same reasons this revolution, despite huge difficulties, will be successful. We receive no funds, no deliveries of goods and no political support from anywhere. America is trying to create the same situation now as they did then. They are now funding so-called Al-Qaida groups, those paid mercenaries that we managed to get rid of previously, to hide and discredit the popular revolution. Now they are mushrooming again. It will be like in Syria, there is only Dàash (the Iraqi name for Al-Qaida). The gangs from Syria are now re-enacting their crimes in Iraq.

You mean that the traditional, ancient tribal system unites people in Iraq by linking together Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds? Tribal loyalty unites the opposition and defeats the occupier’s ”democracy”?

 - The tribes say that they wish for independence and democracy. But the US refuses. If you ask an Iraqi what people want, the answer will be: We want a democracy! I have to be an optimist. I hope America will become more just. At the moment they treat us like non-persons and viruses that have to be destroyed.

Stöd Marockos erbjudande till saharierna

Skrivet av Lasse Wilhelmson

Westernsaharamap-300x292

Uppdaterad den 30 Juni.

Den sahariska motståndsrörelsen Polisario grundades 1973 och kämpade mot den franska och den spanska kolonialismen tillsammans med Marocko och Algeriet.

I den påföljande väpnade konflikten om Västsahara mellan Polisario och Marocko i mitten av 1970-talet flydde många saharier och bor sedan dess i flyktingläger i Tindouf i Algeriet. Marocko anser att Västsahara ingår i Marocko både historiskt och kulturellt, medan Polisario hävdar sin rätt till en egen stat i Västsahara bland annat med stöd av ett beslut i Hagdomstolen 1975 om deras rätt till självbestämmande efter en folkomröstning. Då Marocko och Polisario inte kunnat enas om vilka som skall ha rätt att delta i denna har den hittills inte hållits. Sedan 1975 bor även många marockaner i de södra provinserna (Västsahara).

2007 försökte Marocko lösa konflikten med Polisario genom att erbjuda de saharier som fortfarande bor i flyktingläger i Algeriet att återvända som fullvärdiga medborgare med extra resurser för utbildning och bostäder, samt att alla saharier i de södra provinserna skall få partiellt självstyre under kungadömet. Algeriet som kontrollerar flyktinglägren blockerar Marockos erbjudande, eftersom de vill ha tillgång till den atlantiska kusten.

sahara-300x190Marxister och olika anti-imperialistiska solidaritetsorganisationer stödjer Polisarios kamp för en egen stat och hävdar att Marocko nu är en kolonialmakt. Ett vanligt argument är att jämföra sahariernas kamp med palestiniernas. Detta är dock mycket missvisande, eftersom palestiniernas grundproblem, som är rätten till återvändande, skulle vara löst om de fick samma erbjudande som saharierna. De svenska samerna har fått en lösning som liknar den som Marocko erbjuder saharierna i en mer relevant jämförelse. Två nomadfolk som finns i flera nationalstater.samir-300x168

Några frågor kan man ställa till denna ”vänster”.

1. Varför inte engagera sig i samernas situation i Sverige?

2. Varför inte hjälpa Marocko att bli av med den kvarvarande spanska kolonisationen av städerna Mellilla och Ceuta?

3. Varför inte kritisera Algeriet som blockerar Marockos erbjudande från 2007?

Många ledande personer inom Polisario har ändrat uppfattning sedan 2007. Det gjorde även den legendariske judiska marxisten Abraham Sefarty som var en av grundarna av Polisario. Han blev rådgivare åt kung Hassan när han återvände till Marocko från landsflykten.

Det finns starka intressen för att Västsaharafrågan skall förbli olöst, eftersom den används av de tidigare kolonialmakterna och USrael som hållhake på både Algeriet och Marocko. Dessa har ännu inte nåtts av den nykoloniala ”arabiska våren”, med sönderslagning och försvagning av existerande nationalstater som en förutsättning för den nya världsordningen.

Varför skall ”vänstern” medverka i det?

Uppdaterad:

I en artikel den 21 juni 2014, Oljetransporter till Västsahara kritiseras, beskrivs Västsahara grovt vinklat som om det vore ett land med ett delvis fördrivet folk (saharier) som är ockuperat av Marocko. Det mest uppseendeväckande i SVT:s artikel är uppgiften att denna uppfattning skulle delas av FN och internationella domstolen i Haag. Det råder sedan 1991 vapenvila mellan den Marockanska armén och Polisario, som är sahariernas befrielseorganisation.

Fakta i målet är att FN anser att Västsahara är ett ”icke självstyrande område”, samt att både saharierna och detta område har historisk anknytning till Marocko och att frågan om områdets status bör avgöras genom en folkomröstning. Det saknas alltså stöd i FN för artikelns beskrivning i ovan nämnda delar.

Därutöver bör tilläggas att de nomadstammar som benämns saharier har haft områden som omfattar flera nationalstater som sin ”hemvist”. I detta avseende kan de jämföras med samerna, som är spridda i huvudsak över hela nordkalotten, utan att därför ha en egen stat.

Däremot skiljer sig saharierna från samerna genom att de har etnisk anknytning till Marocko, medan samerna har en markant egen etnicitet. Det är därför lättare att argumentera för att samerna är ett eget folk än att saharierna är detsamma. Det förtjänar även att påpekas att enbart det faktum att en grupp kan betraktas som ett folk inte enligt internationell lag ger rätt till en egen stat, men väl till självbestämmande.

Marockos erbjudande till de saharier som fortfarande finns i flyktingläger i Algeriet innebär återvändande med fullständiga medborgerliga rättigheter, extra resurser för bostäder och utbildning, samt partiellt självbestämmande. Det är en lösning som är väl så generös som den som gäller för de nordiska samerna.

Varför förtigs dessa omständigheter i den svenska debatten?

Se även

Regeringskansliet om Västsahara

The Jewish state’s Jewishness reflected in a return visit

by Lasse Wilhelmson

Shrinking-Palestine-1024x724-640x452Bethlehem

I arrive at Bethlehem along the same motorway as all tourists, in a taxi from the Ben Gurion airport. They arrive in coaches with their Jewish guides. Pilgrims from all over the world crowd into the Nativity Church on Manger Square. Perhaps the holiest place in the world for Christians? They buy souvenirs and go back home again as if the Palestinians do not exist. Opposite the Church, lies the prestigious Peace Centre, funded by the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency, SIDA.

The town is situated just south of Jerusalem and surrounded by The Wall and by fences. Check-points further limit people’s access and they are resigned to finding inconvenient diversions. Arbitrary travel permits for areas outside the town tear apart families that have lived in and around Bethlehem for thousands of years.

10310095_10152399604478664_4686487637002099084_nOn my first evening in Bethlehem I experienced music of a rare and emotional kind. A Palestinian violinist, Lamar Elias, only 14 years old, was the main attraction and there were many children in the audience. She played sonatas by Dvorak and Vivaldi and ended up, with a trio, playing a piece typical of Arabic music, with its billowing, endless rhythmic melodies. It was quite astounding how this young woman presented and played her pieces to a large audience with such ease and grace.

I was reminded of my own father who, a hundred years ago, was a promising young violinist. He could not pursue a career because he had to work for a living. This was not uncommon for a working class child. He took up the violin again when he retired and played for his children and grandchildren, his favourite was Bach’s sonata for solo violin.

My thoughts went to my Swedish father and my Jewish mother, whose family I visited in Israel 53 years ago, and the kibbutz where I worked, and the Israeli family there who came to mean so much to me and my parents. There was much mutual travel between Israel and Sweden during the 1960s.

The young Palestinian violinist appears like a flower in the ruins of the Palestinian villages that I did not even know existed when I was young. I think it was these mixed feelings that brought a tear to my eye and not just the sentimentality that comes with age or that a violin sonata can set off.

Peace center 300x181Peace Centre and the second intifada

Two years after its millennium inauguration in 2000, The Peace Centre, funded by SIDA, was used by the Israeli army as a headquarters during the second intifada. The building served as protection for snipers, as a prison camp, a canteen, a rubbish dump and so on. The soldiers did not always use the existing toilets. An eye witness of the 40-day-long, violent siege and the attacks on, and damage done to the Nativity Church, described 10 years later in detail what happened in an article in the webpaper Countercurrents.

The Peace Centre’s Swedish architect, Snorre Lindquist, also mentions these occurrences in his fantastic account of the construction of the Peace Centre and how it changed his outlook on life and he became a staunch friend of the Palestinians. The Israeli army shot their way in instead of using the keys they had. How could it be that the international community, the Christian church and the Swedish government turned a blind eye and hardly reacted?

Abu Ghneim 1Jabal Abu Ghneim and Har Homa

From my hotel window I can see the remains of what was the townspeople of Bethlehem’s nicest and most loved place for outings. This is Jabal Abu Ghneim, a hill previously covered with woods. Now it is contained by the Wall and almost completely covered with the Jewish settlement Har Homa.

The theft of the hill and the subsequent buildings together with the theft of Rachel’s grave, were noted early on as crimes against the Oslo Agreement. Carefully chosen and with considerable symbolic value they confirmed the intentions of the Jewish state. And the whole world let it happen, just like the ongoing situation, which now points towards a final expulsion of remaining Palestinians to Jordan and a transfer of responsibility for the Gaza Strip to Egypt.

Rachel’s grave in northern Bethlehem, worshipped by Christians and Muslims alike, can no longer be reached because of the Wall.  It lies quite close to the Palestinian refugee camp Aida on the other side of the Wall.

Aida campAida Camp

Aida is a result of the ethnic cleansing 1948 – Al Nakba – and has become impoverished tenements, 4 to 5 floors high. I visit Aida a few weeks after the Israeli army’s occupation of the camp due to protests there. The Israeli writer Gideon Levi’s moving description of this in Haaretz is food for thought.  I first read it when I got back to Sweden.

I speak to the head of the camp’s Palestinian youth organisation. We go to the place in the Wall where people blasted a symbolic hole towards the ruins of the villages from which they were expelled in 1948 when the Jewish state was unilaterally declared. He tells of tear gas, of paralysing sound bombs and of how the army went from house to house from the inside, through walls, instead of using the doors. He tells of the young Palestinian woman who died because of tear gas, the young man who broke his leg, and of all the wounds caused by rubber-coated projectiles and about the girl who refuses to go to school, traumatised by fear.

I visit the house that was most destroyed, up partly damaged stairs, and speak to a man who lives there. Many Palestinian children surround us, curious to know what’s going on. I can see a lot of mattresses hanging out to dry on the roof and there is a strong smell of urine, last night’s crop from traumatised children, many with psychiatric problems, not unusual in any refugee camp.

The young man tells how Israeli recruits walked down the alley to his house while receiving instructions from their officers as to how they should advance and aim tear-gas grenades and shoot their rubber-coated bullets. It was part of their training, as he put it. The Israeli army thus uses this impoverished refugee camp from 1948, which advocates non-violent methods, as a training camp for its recruits, in an obvious attempt to break down any moral barriers the trainees might have about attacking defenceless civilians.

The account I have of the events and how they effect the townspeople is different from that presented in the article in Haaretz. But after all, criticism of the Jewish occupation of Palestine is tolerated to a much greater extent in Israel than it is in the West, Sweden included.

The noose tightens year by year on Bethlehem and one of the holiest towns in the world is looking more and more like a prison, as are all the other Palestinian Bantustans, which together make up less than 10% of original Palestine. The Jewish state now controls life between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River. In retrospect it becomes all too clear that the Oslo Agreement was just a trick to create breathing space for more theft of land and that the so-called one state solution is a fact since the1967 war.

JesusDeir Yassin and Yad Vashem

Yad Vashem is a museum that tells of Jewish suffering under the Holocaust. Over the years I have come to embrace a revised picture of the official one. I have not been able to find any credible evidence that gas chambers were used in Germany to kill masses of Jews and others, and that the number of Jews killed in World War II is decidedly overrated.

I believe that Jewish suffering is wrongly portrayed as being exclusive compared with, for example, that of the people of Ukraine, Germany and Russia. I am also very critical of the fact that the Holocaust is used politically to motivate new wars in The Middle East. But most of all I am against the use of the Holocaust to vindicate the Jewish state’s genocide, according to the UN definition, against the Palestinians who had nothing at all to do with World War II in Europe.

For holding these and other opinions I have been subjected to a witch hunt by the Swedish media which treat the Holocaust as though it were a religion and not an event in history. In many countries in the West these my opinions would render me a prison sentence.

Is it not, however, strange that as soon as someone points out that Jewish suffering during World War II was not as substantial as claimed, all Jews protest? Should they not instead be happy about it?

Yad Vashem just happens to sit on a hill outside Jerusalem, close to Deir Yassin, further down the valley. This was the Palestinian village that came to symbolise Al Nakba – the great catastrophe – when almost 800.000 Palestinians were expelled from their homes and their villages were razed to the ground. In Deir Yassin, most people were killed, among them women, children and old people and their corpses were shown to other Palestinians in order to make them leave their homes. Most of Israel is, in fact, built on the ruins of Palestinian villages. The victims turned into executioners only a few years after the Holocaust.

The central part of the ruined village of Deir Yassin is fenced in and the site has a bar and a guard. The guard denied all knowledge of the village and barked that Deir Yassin is a public hospital for the mentally ill and that there was no access unless visiting a patient.

Deir YassinHowever, from the rear end of the area, it is possible to get a limited view. Clearly, many of the houses are built on the old stones/ruins of Deir Yassin that form the lowest level of many of the stone houses. I must confess that I found it hard to control my feelings when directly confronted with it. There were no words for the desecration in this manner of the Palestinian symbol of Al Nakba – I was quite dumbfounded. What sort of mentality would produce this absurd project?

My thoughts went to a person I know in London. He has since long worked with the organisation Deir Yassin Remembered. His name is Paul Eisen and he still identifies himself as a Jew, unlike myself. Our efforts to criticize Jewish identity have lead to us becoming personae non gratae in our countries and in the solidarity movements there that claim to promote the Palestinians’ cause. Today, these organisations are in fact controlled by Jewish Marxists and do not support exiled Palestinians’ inalienable right to return to their homes. Simply because this would threaten Jewish hegemony over Palestine.

Damaskusporten-1The Old City of Jerusalem

The Damascus Gate is a powerful entrance to the market in the old city where Palestinians are still permitted to live and they dominate the area. It is Saturday and the place is full of tourists. An Israeli flag marks the house across the alleyway where Israel’s prime minister Netanyahu has bought a house incognito. One or two other houses along the Via Dolorosa, where Jesus bore the cross, have been bought by Jews. I cannot help thinking about how Jesus was sentenced to death by Romans, led by Pontius Pilate, after pressure from the Jewish rabbis – whose power Jesus challenged – and who the Romans were forced to humour in order to entrench their colonisation.

al aqsaThis Saturday, the Al Aqsa mosque was open only to Muslims and Israeli soldiers stood on guard. Israel does”archaeological” excavations under the mosque. Will this cause it to fall down and be replaced by the Jewish Temple? If I asked this question in Sweden the media would consider it ”anti-Semitic” and it could lead to legal sanctions for ”hate speech”.

Today a group of about 30 Jewish young men in plain clothes are sauntering along the Via Dolorosa. Each one has a machine gun slung over the shoulder. They stop and block the square on Via Dolorosa. It is Shabbat and their day off. They probably come from settlements outside Jerusalem. The message to all the tourists and the Arabs is patently clear: We are in charge here and are taking over. You can see how the Palestinians feel about this by the look on their faces but the tourists do not react. I wonder what they are thinking.

judisk k-pist

 

Epilogue

What have I seen and learnt? Maybe more of what I already knew? But not about religions, ideologies and human rights, or colonialism and apartheid. All this gets in the way and hides the meaning and understanding of this unique project – The Jewish state – in Palestine. An ever-expanding entity on stolen ground, built after ethnic cleansing of its population. A ”cancer” in the Middle East and more.

What I have described here is also an expression of Jewish mentality, seeing one’s group as chosen, above all others and realize this mentality at the expense of others – or simply Jewish ideology. It is about the meaning of the Jewish state’s Jewishness, as I understand it.

Lastly, it is significant to the answer of the question why I no longer identify myself with this state and, partly, why I have chosen to no longer be a Jew.

Relating articles:

A Portrait that Tells Many Tales

What is Zionism?

My story of Deir Yassin, by Paul Eisen

 

Den Judiska statens judiskhet speglad i ett återbesök

Skrivet av Lasse Wilhelmson

Shrinking-Palestine-1024x724-640x452

Bethlehem

Jag anländer till Bethlehem från Ben Gurions flygplats med taxi på samma motorväg som alla turister. De färdas i bussar med sina judiska guider. Mängder av pilgrimer från hela världen väller in i Födelsekyrkan vid torget Manger Square. Kanske den heligaste platsen för kristna i hela världen? De köper souvenirer och åker hem igen som om palestinier inte existerar. Det prestigefyllda Peace Center, finansierat av svenska SIDA, ligger mittemot.

Staden är belägen strax söder om Jerusalem och är omgärdad av Muren och stängsel. Invånarnas rörelsefrihet begränsas därutöver av check-points och de hänvisas till krokiga omvägar. Godtyckliga resetillstånd till områden utanför staden splittrar familjer och släkter som levt i Bethlehem med omgivningar i flera tusen år.

10310095_10152399604478664_4686487637002099084_nFörsta kvällen i Bethlehem blev en säregen och känslosam musikupplevelse under en dryg timme. En endast 14 år gammal palestinsk kvinnlig violinist – Lamar Elias – stod för merparten och i publiken fanns även många små barn. Hon spelade sonater av Dvorak, Vivaldi med mera och avslutade i en trio med ett stycke av böljande ändlösa melodislingor som är så typiskt för arabisk musik. Den lätthet, avspändhet och självklara naturlighet med vilken denna unga kvinna spelade och presenterade sina stycken inför en stor publik var förbluffande.

Det fick mig att minnas min egen far som för 100 år sedan var en lovande violinist i unga år. Han fick inte fullfölja sin karriär, då han redan som barn var tvungen att arbeta för sin försörjning. Något som då var vanligt för arbetarklassen barn. Först som pensionär återupptog han sitt fiolspel och spelade för sina barn och barnbarn, helst Bach´s sonata för solo violin.

Mina tankar for mellan min svenske far, min judiska mor vars släktingar jag besökte i Israel för 53 år sedan och den kibbutz jag då arbetade i, samt den israeliska familj där som kom att betyda mycket för mig och mina föräldrar. Det blev många ömsesidiga resor mellan Israel och Sverige under 1960-talet.

Den unga palestinska violinisten framtonar som en blomma i ruinerna av de palestinska byar vars existens jag i min ungdom var helt ovetande om. Det var nog dessa blandade känslor som fick mina ögon att tåras och inte bara den sentimentalitet som ofta kommer med åldern, eller lätt frambringas av violinsonater.

Peace center 300x181Peace Center och andra intifadan

Peace Center, som finansierades av svenska SIDA, användes som högkvarter av den israeliska armén under den andra intifadan drygt två år efter dess invigning vid milleniumskiftet år 2000. Byggnaden blev skydd för krypskyttar, fångläger, matsal, avskrädesplats med mera. Soldaterna använde inte enbart de befintliga toaletterna. Ett ögonvittne till den 40 dagar långa våldsamma belägringen och attacken med skador på Födelsekyrkan, beskrev 10 år senare det som hände i en detaljerar artikel i webbtidningen Countercurrents

Den svenske arkitekten till Peace Center, Snorre Linquist, summerar också händelserna i sin fantastiska berättelse om tillkomsten av Peace Center, som kom att förvandla hans världsbild och bli en principfast palestinavän. Den israeliska armén sköt sig in i stället för att använda nycklarna de hade. Man kan undra varför det internationella samfundet, de kristna kyrkorna och den svenska regeringen såg mellan fingrarna och reagerade så svagt.

Abu Ghneim 1Jabal Abu Ghneim och Har Homa

Från mitt hotellfönster kan jag se resterna av det som var bethlehemsbornas finaste och mest älskade utflyktsmål. Det är den tidigare skogsbekläda kullen Jabal Abu Ghneim. Nu är den avgränsad av Muren och nästan helt överbyggd av den judiska bosättningen Har Homa. Stölden och bebyggelsen av kullen blev tillsammans med stölden av Rachels grav tidiga och uppmärksammade brott mot Oslo-överenskommelsen. Noga utvalda och med stort symbolvärde, bekräftades på så sätt den Judiska statens intentioner. Och hela världen lät det ske, liksom den fortsättning som nu kanske pekar mot en slutgiltig fördrivning av resterande palestinier till Jordanien och en överföring av ansvaret för Gaza-remsan till Egypten?

Rachels grav i norra Bethlehem, dyrkad av såväl kristna som muslimer, kan ej heller nås av dem på grund av Muren.  Den ligger helt nära det palestinska flyktinglägret Aida på andra sidan Muren.

Aida campAida Camp

Aida är ett resultat av den etniska rensningen 1948 – Al Nakba – och har nu växt till en fattig kåkstad i 4-5 våningar. Jag besöker Aida några veckor efter det att israeliska armén ockuperade lägret på grund av protester där. Den israeliske författaren Gideon Levi har gett en gripande och tänkvärd skildring av detta i Haaretz som jag läste först hemkommen till Sverige.

Jag pratar med chefen för den palestinska ungdomsorganisationen i lägret. Vi går till den plats vid Muren där invånarna sprängde ett symboliskt hål mot ruinerna till de byar de fördrivits från 1948, då den Judiska staten ensidigt utropades. Han berättar om tårgasen, de paralyserande ljudbomberna och hur armén gick från hus till hus inifrån, genom väggarna, i stället för genom dörrarna. Han berättar om den unga palestinska kvinnan som avled på grund av tårgasen, den unge mannen som bröt benet och alla skador från de gummimantlade stålkulorna, samt flickan som vägrar gå till skolan traumatiserad av skräck.

Jag besöker det hus som förstördes mest, uppför en delvis skadad trappa och pratar med en man som bor där. Många palestinska barn svärmar omkring oss av nyfikenhet. Jag noterar att många madrasser hänger på tork på taket där lukten av urin är stark. Det är nattens skörd från traumatiserade barn, många med psykiska problem, något som är vanligt i alla flyktingläger.

Den unge mannen berättar hur israeliska rekryter gick in i gränden till hans hus och hela tiden fick instruktioner av sina officerare bakom om hur de skulle avancera och rikta tårgasgranaterna och skjuta sina gummimantlade kulor. De var under utbildning, som han sa. Den israeliska armén använder alltså detta fattiga palestinska flyktingläger från 1948, som förordar icke-vålds metoder, som träningsläger för sina rekryter, i uppenbar avsikt att även bryta ner moraliska spärrar mot att angripa försvarslösa civila.

Den bild jag får av händelserna och hur de påverkar invånarna är annorlunda än den som ges i nämnda artikel i Haaretz. Trots allt är det betydligt högre i tak för kritik av den judiska ockupationen av Palestina i israelisk media än media i Väst, inte minst i Sverige.

Snaran dras åt runt Bethlehem för varje år som går och en av världens heligaste städer börjar alltmer likna ett fängelse, liksom alla andra palestinska bantustans som tillsammans utgör mindre än 10 procent av ursprungliga Palestina. Allt liv mellan Medelhavet och Jordanfloden kontrolleras nu av den Judiska staten. I backspegeln blir det övertydligt att Oslo-överenskommelsen bara var ett trick för att skapa andrum för mera landstöld och att den så kallade enstats-lösningen sedan 1967 års krig är ett faktum.

JesusDeir Yassin och Yad Vashem

Yad Vashem är ett museum som handlar om det judiska lidandet under Holocaust. Jag har med åren kommit att omfatta en reviderad bild av den officiella. Jag har inte kunnat finna att det finns några trovärdiga belägg för att gaskamrar användes i Tyskland för massavrättning av bland annat judar och att antalet dödade judar i Andra världskriget är kraftigt överdrivet.

Enligt min mening framställs det judiska lidandet på ett felaktigt sätt som exklusivt jämfört med till exempel det ukrainska, tyska och ryska folken. Jag är också starkt kritisk till hur Holocaust används politiskt för att motivera nya krig i Mellanöstern. Men främst av allt vänder jag mig emot att Holocaust används för att rättfärdiga den Judiska statens folkmord, enligt FN:s definition, på palestinierna som inte hade någonting överhuvudtaget med Andra världskriget i Europa att göra.

För bland annat dessa åsikter har jag blivit utsatt för häxjakt i svensk media, som behandlar Holocaust som om den vore en religion och inte en historisk händelse. I många länder i Väst leder mina ovan redovisade åsikter till fängelsestraff.

Och visst är det konstigt att så snart någon påvisar att det judiska lidandet inte var så omfattande under Andra världskriget som påstås, så protesterar alla judar. Borde de inte i stället vara glada över det?

Som av en händelse ligger Yad Vashem på en kulle strax utanför Jerusalem helt nära Deir Yassin, lite längre ner i dalen. Det var den palestinska by som kom att symbolisera Al Nakba – den stora katastrofen – när uppemot 800 000 palestinier fördrevs från sina hem och deras byar raserades. I Deir Yassin dödades de flesta även kvinnor, barn och gamla och deras lik exponerades för andra palestinier för få att dem att lämna sina hem. I själva verket är större delen av Israel byggt på ruinerna av Palestinska byar. Offren blev själva bödlar endast några år efter Holocaust.

Den centrala delen av ruinstaden Deir Yassin är omgärdad av ett staket och det finns en bom till området med en vakt. Vakten förnekade all kännedom om ruinstaden och meddelade barskt att Deir Yassin är ett statligt mentalsjukhus och att man inte kunde komma in annat än för att besöka en patient.

Deir YassinFrån baksidan av området går det dock att få en begränsad inblick. Man kan tydligt se att många av husen är byggda på de gamla stenarna/ruinerna av Deir Yassin, som bildar de understa varven i många av stenhusen. Jag måste erkänna att jag hade svårt att hantera mina känslor vid den direkta åsynen. Detta sätt att skända den palestinska symbolen för Al Nakba blev omöjlig att sätta ord på – det gjorde mig stum. Vad är det för mentalitet som förmått producera detta absurda projekt?

Mina tankar gick till en person jag känner i London. Han har länge arbetat med organisationen Deir Yassin Remembered. Hans namn är Paul Eisen och han identifierar sig fortfarande som jude, till skillnad från mig själv. Både hans och min egen kritik av judisk identitet har gjort oss till persona non grata i våra länder och i de solidaritetsrörelser där som säger sig stödja palestiniernas sak. I dag är dessa i praktiken kontrollerade av judiska marxister och stödjer inte de fördrivna palestiniernas oförytterliga rätt att återvända till sina hemtrakter. Helt enkelt därför att detta skulle hota den judiska hegemonin över Palestina.

Damaskusporten-1Den gamla staden i Jerusalem

Damaskusporten är en mäktig entré till marknaden i den gamla staden, där palestinier ännu får bo och dominerar stort. Det är lördag och fullt av turister. En israelisk flagga markerar det hus över gränden som Israels premiärminister Netanyahu köpt genom bulvaner. Enstaka andra hus längs Via Dolorosa, där Jesus vandrade med korset, har också köpts upp av judar. Oundvikligen kommer jag att tänka på Jesus dödsdom, som utfärdades av romarna under ledning av Pontus Pilatus, efter påtryckningar från de judiska rabbinerna – vars makt Jesus utmanade – som de måste hålla sig väl med för att befästa sin kolonisering.

al aqsaAl Aqsa moskén var denna dag enbart öppen för muslimer och israeliska soldater var vaktposter. Israel gör ”arkeologiska” utgrävningar under moskén. Kommer den därför att rasa ihop för att därefter ersättas med det judiska templet? I Sverige skulle det av media anses vara ”anti-semitiskt” att ställa en sådan fråga och kunna leda till rättsliga påföljder för ”hets mot folkgrupp”.

Längs Via Dolorosa släntrar denna dag en grupp civilklädda judiska unga män, cirka 30 stycken. De har alla ett maskingevär nonchalant slängt över axeln. De stannar upp och blockerar torget på Via Dolorosa. Det är Shabbat och deras lediga dag. Troligen är de från bosättningar utanför Jerusalem. Budskapet till alla turister och araber framstår övertydligt: Här är det vi som bestämmer och skall ta över. Vad palestinierna tänker framgår av deras ansiktsuttryck, men turisterna reagerar inte. Jag undrar vad de tänker.

judisk k-pist

Epilog

Vad har jag sett och lärt? Kanske mer av det jag redan visste? Men inte om religioner, ideologier och mänskliga rättigheter, eller kolonialism och apartheid. Allt detta, som bara skymmer sikten och fördunklar innebörden och förståelsen av detta unika projekt – Den judiska staten – i landet Palestina. En ständigt expanderande entitet på stulet land, upprättad efter etnisk rensning av dess invånare. En ”cancer” i Mellanöstern och mer därtill.

Det jag har beskrivit är också ett uttryck för judisk mentalitet, att se sin grupp som utvald och stå över alla andra, samt att praktisera denna mentalitet på andras bekostnad – eller helt enkelt judisk ideologi. Det handlar om innebörden av den Judiska statens judiskhet, som jag förstår den.

Det är slutligen en viktig del av svaret på frågan, varför jag inte längre identifierar mig med denna stat och bland annat därför valt att inte längre vara jude.

Relaterat

Ett porträtt med många historier.

Vad är sionismen?

Lasse Wilhelmsons blogg och artikelarkiv

My story of Deir Yassin, by Paul Eisen

Jewish identity politics & the hidden history of Bolshevism and Zionism – Brandon Marinez talk with Lasse Wilhelmson

Source

The Martinez Perspective Ep. 6: Jewish identity politics & the hidden history of Bolshevism and Zionism

On this episode of The Martinez Perspective, host Brandon Martinez is joined by independent writer and researcher from Sweden, Lasse Wilhelmson.

Why do so few people know about the true histories of Bolshevism and Zionism? Why is there so little discussion of these movements, despite their integral role in shaping the 20th and 21st centuries?

Could it be that both movements have Jewish origins and therefore receive soft treatment from historians, academics and the media?

The destructive and murderous legacy of Bolshevism in Russia is seldom brought to the fore in mainstream discourse, yet we are fed a constant stream of messages and images about what happened to Jews during the Second World War.

Marxists and communists today have an extreme intolerance towards WW2 and holocaust revisionism. “How dare you question what the winners have told us about WW2″ the communists say. Yet, these same ideologues are extreme revisionists when it comes to the history of the Soviet Union and other communist states. Most of them openly deny the millions of victims of Lenin, Stalin and Mao. Some even deny the Gulag existed in the USSR and call the Holodomor — Stalin’s engineered Ukrainian famine genocide — a myth!

Wilhelmson discusses all of these issues from a unique insider’s perspective. In his youth he was an avowed Marxist and comes from a Jewish background. He was a political activist for years and took part in various left-wing causes. After doing his own research, Wilhelmson abandoned both Marxism and Jewish identity, and has become an outspoken critic of Israel and Zionist power.

Martinez and Wilhelmson delve into the hypocrisies of left-wing ideologues and much more on the show.

Varför ”lynchas” Hanne Kjöller? – en kommentar

Hanne+Kjöllerjan_guillou_whiteI sin AB- kolumn den 5 oktober 2013, ”Lynchningen omöjliggör en seriös diskussion”, diskuterar Jan Guillou bemötandet av Hanne Kjöllers bok ”En halv sanning är också en lögn”. Det är Jan Guillou när han är som bäst. Då kan han också se och erkänna det som är bäst hos sina politiska motståndare – utan tjuvnyp.

Och han har säkert rätt när han konstaterar

Huvudintrycket är att boken är en förödande vidräkning med slapp offerjournalistik. Men lynchningen har alltså effektivt omöjliggjort varje seriös diskussion kring detta högst påtagliga och problematiska fel i modern svensk journalistik.

Guillou avslutar sin ridderliga, i ordrät mening, insats till stöd för Kjöller och hennes budskap

Slutsatsen kan bara bli dyster. Mediekritik är fullt möjlig från höger till vänster, eller omvänt. Aftonblad­et kan kritisera Expressen och tvärtom.

Men den som försök­er sig på ett helhetsgrepp, som Hanne Kjöller, får löpa gatlopp. Som tur är, är hon en hårding.

För oss som inte längre sitter fast i det tankebegränsande ”höger/vänster” perspektivet, infinner sig den enkla frågan: Voffor gör ho på detta viset?

Kan det bero på att de som diskuterar dessa frågor inom den svenska kultur- och journalistnomenklaturan tror att allting i denna värld enbart kan förklaras i detta perspektiv? Och visst kan vi i detta fall ha överseende med att Guillou undviker frågan om att mediakritik även bara bör vara intern för att gå an.

Det nyttjar här knappast att alltför mycket spekulera om vilka innersta tankar de som ingår i lynchmobben har. Men knappast kan alla vara övertygade att alla sanningar bara finns i ”höger/vänster” perspektivet. Och både Guillou och Kjöller har ju faktiskt nu skrivit som om de inte tror det.

De har ställt sig intill och synliggjort den gräns – vilket vi tackar för – som den nomenklatura de själva tillhör vet att de inte kan överskrida, men ändå inte överskridit den, genom att även svara på rumpnissarna i Astrid Lindgrens Ronja Rövardotter:

Voffor gör ho på detta viset?

Och voffor tar inte Jan nästa steg?

Täby den 7 oktober 2013

Lasse Wilhelmson

Is the World or Lasse Wilhelmson Upside Down? – Interview by Jan Milld in March 2013

Introduction by Lasse Wilhelmson

Since long Jan Milld is a very important and respected person among Swedish nationals. He was earlier a Social Democrat, later a Swedish Democrat (se more in the interview), but he is now independent. In his writings he was advocating a 2-state solution in Palestine, but I always respected him beeing honest to the bone. The questions and the answers, should be red with this in mind. It was a challenge for me, and I hope it ended in a good way.

Introduction by Jan Milld

Here is the promised interview with Lasse Wilhelmson (LW). I have never met LW, our contact has been through emails as is this interview. This has of course its limitations. And LW has given many interviews in different circumstances. Many of the questions I would like to have asked have already been answered in them and in the about 80-odd articles he has written. But several new questions evolve in this interview.

1. Why did you publish the book ”Is the World Upside Down?”?

images-9The book covers a limited time span, that of Bush junior’s two periods of presidency, eight years, when the terror attack on the World Trade Center 2001 (911) became a turning-point for USrael’s foreign policy and the beginning of the neocolonial wars in western Asia. These are signs that Jewish power, through ownership of the economy and the production of ideology, with Zionism as ideology, has definitely established itself ”on the top of the food chain” in today’s world. In my opinion, 911 was an ”outside/inside job” and Israeli involvement with leading neoconservatives in Bush’s administration is obvious.

The book evolves around Zionism as the foremost expression of Anglo-American imperialism.

It was also the period I started to write about these questions and it ended with a manifest for Palestine in 2009, where as one of the speakers I was physically attacked. My account of this has since been a major feature of my blog, and it is the last article in my book, before the epilogue.

I decided to publish the book because I was not allowed to respond anywhere to the continuous media attacks on me. But the book also tells implicitly of my own personal journey and development during this period. Thus the book is typical of its time, with its merits and limitations.

2. Four years have passed since then, what would you have added had you published it today?

DownloadedFileI never really had time to write enough about the role of banks in world economy, and take a closer look at ”The King of the Jews” – the Rothschild Group – and its connection.

The central bank of America, The Federal Reserve (Fed) is not owned by the American State but by a number of banks or groups of banks. This is inconsistent with the constitution in US. These banks are dominated by the Rothschild concern and based in the City of London, the financial free zone in the heart of London. Most of the owners are European banks. I told this to a friend who was a senior consultant at one of Sweden’s largest banks, and he didn’t believe me. But it’s all on the internet for anyone who is curious.

Many years ago I looked at the Fed’s website to find out who was on the board and I, of all people, was amazed. All except one were Jews. I was just as amazed when I started to look into how Jews were represented in all the leading institutions after the Bolsheviks’ coup d’etat in 1917. Life always exceeds fiction.

I would also have written more about the official picture of the Holocaust and its political role in the support of the neo-colonial wars. Furthermore, I rather neglected the subject of nationalism in the book. Likewise the significance of migration in this context. The book reflects my thinking at the time I wrote the articles.

3. Why are you accused of being ”antisemitic”?

startbig.aspx_”Antisemitism” used to mean hatred of Jews as a group. It was occasionally based on racism. However, I have never said or written anything like that. These days, ”antisemite” is used by Jews to define those they do not like. Israel huggers and philo-semites also use the epithet and it has come to lack any other meaning than the violation of their opponents’ reputation. Something similar has happened to the word ”racist” and to some extent ”Nazi”.

It is usually about how those who consider they have the right, interpret as they think fit. I have never seen an example or an explanation of why something is thought to be ”antisemitic” or ”racist”. Hence there is always speculation concerning the innermost thoughts of the targeted object of hatred. The same applies to the epithets ”Holocaust-denier” and ”conspiracy-theorists”.

The reason why I get accused of being ”antisemite”, ”Holocaust-denier” and ”conspiracy-theorist” is because those who defend a world they consider to be upright wish to silence me and anyone else who holds a different view. That I seem to be the main target for these accusations might be due to the fact that I have written quite a lot that it is close to the truth.

Indeed, there is a hatred of Jews that is political. It is based on certain Jews’ behaviour, the policies of the Jewish state and the Jewish power through ownership over economy and media. I have written much about this, including my responses to Expo and Åsa Linderborg in connection with the latest witch-hunt aimed at me.

4. Would you say that you are today a nationalist and critical of immigration?

imgresNationalism can be very different things. I have always been a nationalist in the sense that I have been ready to defend Sweden’s national independence and Swedish cultural traditions of which I am an organic part. I eventually decided to do my military service for this reason, changing from my previous pacifism.

The Swedish Vietnam movement and parts of the political left of -68 that I images-5belonged to, believed that ”Vietnam’s Cause is Ours”, meaning that our support for their national liberation struggle was also support for our own national independence from the two super powers, USA and the Soviet Union.

I have always supported limited immigration of skilled and unskilled labour, and I still do. Sweden of today is to some degree a result of immigration from different countries. Commerce, ship-building, the production of iron-ore and the car industry to name just a few. I also think that Sweden to a limited extent, should offer asylum to political refugees. I believe that solidarity of this kind is part of Swedish mentality.

But how do you view today’s situation?

The situation today is totally different with the neocolonial wars forcing migration and immigration to an extent that is unmanageable and that creates conflict in our country, and destroys things we previously protected. Furthermore, those who come here are not the poorest, but mainly people who have money and who can bribe their way about, or those who are already reasonably well-off. What is left of our welfare-state, and all its institutions, hard-won and built up by our parents and grand-parents is falling apart. It was intended for a very different situation.

Picture: We like differences.

images-9Discussions about these questions have completely gone off the rails. Those who say ”we like diversity” are wrongly set against those who say ”we like uniformity”. I am all for different cultures and ethnicities, they are like flowers in a summer meadow, they enrich humanity. All cultures and nations tolerate – even thrive on – some elements of other cultures for their development. But it becomes destructive if cultures are mixed so that they are destroyed. And I mean here, that this applies to all parts of the world.

So where does this leave you?images-10

I am definitely against the current mass-immigration. Swedish policy should be to stop it and refrain from taking part in, or supporting, the wars that contravene international rights that cause it. I believe that a discussion about race and racism in this context leads up a blind alley.

Picture: We like similarities

I support ”we like diversity” and I want to stop mass-immigration. I believe that the latter is the power elite’s deliberate strategy to tear apart national states, their culture and values, making way for a new world order.

These are all questions that I have worked on since I published the book. The way in which the media have handled these matters has added freedom of expression to the political agenda. In Sweden of today it is becoming increasingly difficult to make one’s voice heard – darkness is nigh.

5. What is your opinion of the Swedish ”left”? Does it need inverted commas?

voltaireYes, for two reasons. Firstly, both the left and the nationalists in their respective organisations are not in agreement about what a socialist actually is. Secondly, both the left and the nationalists include people and organisations that call themselves socialists and who I believe actually are, but who have different opinions about how the state should be run and who should rule over it. I support neither corporative dictatorship nor the dictatorship of the proletariat. In Sweden today we have a dictatorship of minorities and special interest groups.

Politically, the Marxist left is in the process of de-intellectualising the media and culture. It is the main gate-keeper guarding against opinions that do not fit into the left/right perspective, hence also for Zionism.

A good example of this is when I myself was recently appointed ”national antisemite” after a witch-hunt the magazine Expo (Swedish Serchlight) started at the end of November 2012, and when editor Åsa Lindeborg of the tabloid Aftonbladet subsequently launched an appalling campaign entitled ”Let’s take a look at this shit” in her newspaper. My response to her was denied publication which clarifies this rather well, along with other articles I have written. This time it was the nationalists that defended freedom of expression and were critical of the system. A role previously played by the left.

But some nationalists seem to have fallen into the Zionist trap; they see the Jews as a people, a homogeneous ethnic group, or a ”race” that should have its own country like any other people. The Jewish state is Zionist’s short-term goal. Moreover, such a claim would divide several national states which is one of the main purposes of the ongoing neocolonial wars.

Today’s national movement is in the process of making the same mistakes as did the left I belonged to in 1968. It spends too much time looking for role models outside of Sweden instead of connecting with our own history and cultural inheritance. By this I mean primarily how the Rus/Vikings traded in distant lands and returned with new experiences that benefited Sweden. Rebellious Swedish farmers enjoyed unusual liberty and later on we have the popular movements and the workers’ movements. The diligent consistency, the commitment and the love of nature, a man’s ambition to ”stand on his own two feet” and a woman’s to care for her family.

6. You are critical of Zionism, but are your views still the same?

Dees-cartoon-—-Tentacles-of-power1-300x266Yes, this is quite obvious in my book and everything else I have written. My focus has been to de-construct Zionism. But my view of Zionism has moved on and I now see it more as the ideology used by today’s power-elite and that incorporates both left and right in politics. Hence, I have begun to separate Jewish power’s interest in ownership on the one side, from Zionism on the other.

I have also come to realise how tribal mentality, religious and secular, in Muslim countries and at home, has begun to poison universal human solidarity and love of our neighbours, and I have become more aware of the traditional values of Swedish democracy and Christianity – which we don’t see much of today.

In short: I have become more interested in caring for Sweden, our national independence and our cultural heritage and how they are affected by Jewish ideology, Zionism and mass-immigration. Having said that, I realise that my values have actually become more conservative. They say this comes with age, but it might also come with insight.

7. ”A People without Land to a Land without People” – this is obviously how the Zionists imagined their Israel project. In fact the country was already inhabited, whether the people there are called ”Arabs” or ”Palestinians”.

Which causes a dilemma for anyone who respects the human dignity of Arabs/Palestinians.

Here we have two alternatives:

•  A two-state solution

•  A shared, democratic state as much for Palestinians as for Jews

You favour the latter?

de_fyra_kartornaYes, basically, in the book, but more so in my earliest articles. My speech on Al-Qud’s day 2009 went further. I said then that the Jewish settlers who do not wish to live alongside Palestinians in peace, including those who will return, should go back to the countries they came from. That is, to the US, Europe, Russia and other places. After all, the settlers have stolen the land from those who lived there, thus I believe they lack the moral right to decide on its future.

The ”State” of Israel was proclaimed unilaterally by the Jews and was not a UN decision as many wrongly believe. Israel lacks a constitution and internationally recognised boarders – both necessary when countries recognise one another. This whole process is well-documented in Göran Burén’s new book ”The Murder of Folke Bernadotte”. Also, my book deals with all the fundamental issues.

What, then, is your answer to these three objections?

a) The demographics of Palestinians; they are many more now than when they were driven out in 1948. Jews would be clearly in the minority would they not?

Absolutely, but this was already a problem in the UN proposal for partition in 1948, for which negotiator Folke Bernadotte lost his life when he was murdered by Jewish extremists. The shooter later became bodyguard to Ben Gurion, Israel’s Father of the Nation, when he retired to his home kibbutz. Few experts imagined at that time, that a two-state solution would work, primarily because of the demographics. The partition plan proposal was a result of Jews lobbying amongst UN countries.

However, the Arab states did not accept the plan but the Jews did; they saw it as way of obtaining some legitimacy for their right to large areas in the country of Palestine. But officially that was not so. Immediately following their acceptance of the plan, the Jews expelled about 800.000 Palestinians from what is today considered Israel, unilaterally proclaimed. The genocide, defined in the UN Convention, that is still ongoing, is well-documented by Ilan Pappe in his book ”The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine”. Because a Jewish state in Palestine is Zionism’s short-term goal, the politics of genocide are thus an integral part of Zionism.

The notion of a two-state solution was unrealistic even before it became a UN proposal and since then has been used by various shades of Zionism to defend and expand the Jewish state and complete the expulsion of Palestinians. The notion allows everyone to look away from the fundamental problem: the expulsion of Palestinians and their inalienable right to return. Every single Palestinian owns this right and it cannot be negotiated away. It is a legally conclusive element of the UN resolutions.

b) South Africa is a discouraging example, surely, bearing in mind the criminal violence there – especially racism aimed at white people?

The comparison with South Africa is inappropriate and leads in the wrong direction, apart from the fact that the Jewish state and, previously, South Africa have/had racist laws that separate. The former Jews from non-Jews, the latter white from coloured.

Israel is a settler state, without a traditional mother-country, typical of traditional colonialism. Expulsion of the original population is a prerequisite for its existence. It is built on the ruins of Palestinian villages on stolen land. The Boers did not evict black Africans from their homeland, South Africa, nor did they use fighter aircraft and forbidden phosphorous bombs against civilians. Nor tear down their houses on a massive scale with bulldozers. All comparisons with South Africa or Nazi Germany are detrimental to the Jewish state; it is one of a kind.

250px-ChasarenNeither are the Jews an ethnic, homogeneous group, nor a people as normally defined. There are said to be two large groups. Askenazi, mainly from AD 740, who are converted Khazars (northern Turks and Mongolians). They are estimated to make up 80 percent of Jews in the world. The other group are Sephardi who are mostly converted Berbers and make up the remaining 20 percent.

But there are many who consider the Jews to be a people, not least themselves?

This has been well-researched and rejected, primarily by Shlomo Sand in the book The Invention of the Jewish People. I myself am descended from these Khazars and both my older brother and my youngest son have typically Mongolian skin-folds at the root of the nose and width between their almond-shaped eyes. That most Jews are said to be Semite, or have some kind of historic homeland-right to Palestine, is due to religious myths.

Israel of today consists of 25 percent non-Jews without equal rights, and most of them are Palestinians/Arabs. But there are also many Arabic Jews who are Israeli citizens and who are not Palestinians. They come from other Arab countries like Iraq and North Africa. Those from Yemen look like everyone else in Yemen and are very different from those who come from Europe, the US and Russia.

There is also a small group of Arabic Jews who have always lived in Palestine (now on the West Bank). They have always lived together in peace with their Palestinian neighbours, and mixed marriages are quite common. In fact, this small group consists of Palestinians whose religion is Judaism. Other Palestinians are Christians or Muslims. My article What is Zionism? looks closer at the question of who is a ”Jew”.

When Israel implodes/ceases to be a ”state”, many Arabic Jews will probably choose to stay, while most of the others will choose to return to their homelands. Jewish racism towards Palestinians and Arabs is universal and well-documented. It is, indeed, fundamental to the Jewish state, to its laws and administrative decisions that separate Jews from non-Jews. Furthermore, there is an informal racist ”caste system” in Israel where white Askenazim are top rank and Arabic and coloured Jews are at the bottom.

c) There are about 20.000 Jews in Sweden, enough though to dominate the media and greatly influence public life. Would not this be the case in a joint Palestinian state?

Hardly. Jews who wish to live in a Jewish state will leave. The future Palestinian state will be largely Arabic and Palestinian and, I hope, will have a constitution that allows different religions to get on well together. The significant number of Christian Palestinians in the diaspora will want to return home to Palestine. It is a common mistake that all Palestinians must be Muslims.

A Palestinian state between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River will certainly have its own contradictions between classes, religions and ethnic groups. How they solve these problems must be up to them.

8. The arguments against becoming involved in the Palestinian conflict are a) it does not concern us Swedes, b) it is a hopeless cause and will never be resolved, c) if one wishes to become involved, there are other international conflicts where far more people die.

a) It does not concern us Swedes – your thoughts on that?

DownloadedFile-1All international issues and the neocolonial wars in western Asia and North Africa concern us in Sweden too. Sweden still takes part in NATO’s illegal war in Afghanistan, likewise in the equally illegal attack on Libya. Northern Sweden has for many years been a practice area for NATO’s air force. And Sweden is not even a member of NATO. Moreover, being a member of the EU has reduced our national independence and now the government is secretly in the process of affiliating us to the economic collaboration surrounding the Euro.

Thus it is important to work towards bilateral collaboration between all small and middling national states on the issue of national independence from USrael, EU and NATO, but also China and Russia. Disintegration of national states is a prerequisite for the new world order that the world’s power elite works towards. We should support all who are against this. Especially those who actively struggle against this power elite, its economies, wars and occupations.

The Palestinian issue is pivotal because the power elite of today uses Zionism to control people in the West, so that they do not oppose the wars. Zionism’s short-term goal is a Jewish state in Palestine, hence the Palestinians’ struggle for their country is pivotal and special. Their struggle becomes a symbol for the liberty of all people.

But surely it is not all about Palestine?

The Jewish state and its lobby have great influence over US foreign policy, nowadays quite overt and relatively uncontested. The power elite which includes other than Jews, however, is dominated by the Jewish Mafia, particularly the economy and the production of ideology. It exploits the Jewish group and its identification with the Jewish state, the bond that holds it tightly together. Zionism is the main reason for political Jew-hatred, hence also the Jews’ worst enemy.

Zionist ideology also includes the holocaust religion and it is used to legitimise everything done in the interests of the Jewish state, likewise the unfathomable notion that ”antisemitism” lies at the heart of every non-Jew. Nowadays, all heads of countries that are targeted to be deposed, or murdered, or waged war against, are called Hitler. In Sweden we witness how this picture of the world is continually thrown at us by a nomenklatura of journalists and culture personalities who work within the framework dictated by the owners of the media.

When did we last hear anyone connected with this establishment ask the question why the Jews, immediately after the ”Holocaust”, subjected the Palestinians to the same treatment they had themselves endured? Or whether their regular conflicts with their surroundings could be due to the Jews’ own behaviour throughout history? And why are the members of the power elite never accused of crimes, exposed with their names and pictures?

b) The Palestinian conflict is a hopeless cause and will never be resolved?

Those who think that are only those who have not understood the connotation of the Jewish state and its significance for Zionism and Jewish power and the special destiny of the Palestinians. The Jewish state does not have a future. The very nature of it is incompatible with peace and coexistence within its boundaries and with its neighbours.

c) If one wishes to become involved, there are other international conflicts where far more people die, for example Congo.

I am involved in other conflicts when in these contexts I try to bring to light the Jewish state’s, Zionism’s and Jewish power’s role. The question must always be asked: Cui Bono? To whose benefit?

The Sweden Democrats (SD) are an interesting case as they are nearly always accused of racism because they want to limit mass-immigration, probably along with the majority of the Swedish people. This is not why they are racists. They are racists because they are the most Israel-friendly/Zionist party in parliament. Wishing to limit mass-immigration is not racist as opposed to advocating a Jewish state in Palestine. Leading Zionists of course, try to do all they can to detract attention from this, pointing at Islam instead. Mass-immigration, however, is neither the fault of Islam or of immigrants, but of immigration policy. SD is thus an ideal opponent for the other parties in parliament, who share SD’s views concerning Israel and Zionism. Instead of appearing racists or Zionists themselves, they can accuse SD of being Islamaphobic and racist.

Do you see any positive side to the Sweden Democrats?

Perhaps that at last, we have a discussion about mass-immigration. But it might not be thanks to them. Today, the party is rooting out critics and sliding into the safe slot occupied by the other seven parties in parliament. They are welcomed there as the ideal scapegoat.

300px-Trojan_horse_in_Canakkale,_TurkeySD to me, is a symptom of the situation where immigration policy for many years has been impossible to discuss. They are, in fact, a Trojan Horse in Swedish politics, through which Zionism and Jewish power in Sweden are rendered invisible. Another Trojan Horse is Expo (Swedish Searchlight) which dresses up in anti-racist left-wing garments, but never criticises the Jewish state’s racist foundations, nor its supporters in Sweden.

Here, we can clearly see how ”left” and ”right” are both immersed in Zionist ideology. And what could be better for Zionism and its Jewish interests in Sweden than SD and Expo completely pitched against each other on everything else?

9) How would you sum up your views on the left and the nationalists in Sweden?

Today’s left, especially the Jewish Marxists, are essentially the foremost gate-keepers for Jewish power, but to a certain degree, the left are not in agreement about how to view Zionism and mass-immigration. Nationalists today are all for what is ”Swedish”, and critical of mass-immigration and Islam, but disagree about most other things.

Particularly the left, but the nationalists as well, are not deeply rooted in Swedish cultural heritage, nor our own history. Today’s nationalists have largely adopted the critical role played by the left 45 years ago, including the struggle for freedom of expression and the search for foreign, not Swedish, models. However, there is a strong common denominator amongst parts of the left and parts of the nationalists, about the significance of national independence, and criticism of how the economy is run. Something to build on?

We get the following four categories when analysing the variables Zionism and Jewish power in the table below:

fyrfaltsj

1. Those who are positive to Zionism and Jewish power

2. Those who are negative to Zionism and positive to Jewish power

3. Those who are negative to Zionism and Jewish power

4. Those who are positive to Zionism and negative to Jewish power

Note 1: By Zionism I mean the affirmation of a Jewish state in Palestine. By ”Jewish power”, I mean Jewish/Israeli-friendly associations and Jewish ownership. Which individuals or groups/ organisations belong where in the four categories I leave to the reader to work out. I myself am probably a 3 and both SD and Expo are 1. But that isn’t difficult to work out.

Note 2: If you wish to increase the number of variables, or make combinations – feel free, but may I suggest that you do not keep to the traditional left/right perspective.

I’ll step into the same box as you Lasse.

Well, that’s all for now. Thank you Jan for having the patience to interview me.

Thank you Lasse. This has been an interesting conversation.

————————–

Some related articles by Lasse Wilhelmson:

What is Zionism?

We Who Knew it all – Comments on a Book About the ´68 Movement

Paideia for All or just for ”The Chosen”?

Jan Guillou, ethic Swedes and realated questions

Comments on Rehmat´s World blog

A Portrait that Tells Many Tales

By Lasse Wilhelmson

photoPicture: writer Lasse Wilhelmson

This is a portrait of me in my writing corner with some of the many books I have bought over the past ten years, mainly off the internet; books that are about history, but not the history told by the victors of Europe’s two world wars. A portrait of a blue-eyed, curly-haired little boy can be seen too, along with an old Swedish country sideboard.

Four Books

You can identify them in the bookcase in the picture. The Jewish Century (2004) by Juri Slezkine, a Jewish-born American professor of history with roots in Russia. It is probably one of the most important books ever written, as he himself says, if you wish to understand 20th century history. According to Slezkine, this is impossible unless you comprehend the Jewish influence. Everything from the Russian ”revolution” to European education, culture and science is dealt with in this book which also includes many statistics.

The next book is The Israel Lobby, and US Foreign Policy (2007) by two of America’s most prestigious academics, John J Mearsheimer, professor of political science and Stephen M Walt, professor of international politics. It came to be the classic that broke the official silence surrounding all discussions concerning Israeli and Jewish influence on US foreign policy.

Between these two, is my own book  Is the World Upside Down? (2009). It contains a selection of my articles about the Palestinian issue, Zionism and the neocolonial wars waged in the first decades of the 21st century. They are arranged in order by time which makes it possible to follow how my earlier opinions, partly Jewish-Marxist, have changed as a result of a changing world and my in-depth studies.

The red book, The Wandering Who? (2011), is by Gilad Atzmon. He grew up in a rightwing Zionist home in Israel, where he did his military service; twenty years ago he chose exile in London where he now lives with his family. He has, perhaps like no other, deconstructed Jewish mentality which he sometimes calls Jewishness or Jewish ideology. Atzmon is also an informed philosopher and one of the world’s best jazz musicians, his favourite instrument is the saxophone.

Atzmon’s upbringing and experiences are very different from mine. I found him on the internet twelve years ago. I read one of his early articles and was astonished to find that I had a soul-mate, albeit several sizes larger than myself, apart from our ages. This was when I had just written my first long essay, perhaps my most significant, dealing among other things with Moses Hess and Karl Marx: Zionism – More than Traditional Colonialism and Apartheid.

The Swedish marxist Jan Myrdal had always been my intellectual role-model up until then. Now Gilad Atzmon replaced him.

Boy in picture laden with symbols

The portrait of the little boy is my older brother Börje who died tragically in an accident when he was only four years old. He was the first child of the marriage between my Jewish mother and my Swedish father, a marriage that had to wait many years due to the Jewish family’s reluctance to accept marriage to a non-Jew for a daughter. Hence, in many ways Börje became a heavily laden symbol for my own family line. The portrait is painted by Jewish artist Lotte Lazerstein who fled from Germany before the onset of the Second World War. She was given refuge and assistance by my parents in our home and initially supported herself as a portrait painter.

The portrait of me and Börje also symbolises the beginning of the end of my mother’s Jewish family line in Sweden. Neither of my sisters, nor our children and grand-children are Jews. We are all secular Swedes, many traditionally confirmed in the Christian church. As the oldest child, I was the only one that worried about my Jewishness, and this led to me spending several years in Israel at the beginning of the sixties, but also to my involvement in the Palestinian question later in life. Due to my experiences, I eventually chose not to identify myself as a Jew at all. I was also liberated from a mind encumbered with Marxist thinking as the two are linked. I now had the opportunity to view religions and ideologies in a more independent and traditionally humanitarian way.

Börje has also played a very different part in my life. I inherited his portrait because I was the only sibling who knew him when he was alive, and as a child had prayed to God many times to bring him back to life. He has always had a special place in my heart, in my own life, and I have had his portrait on the wall for all my descendants to see. I have always said to them: Look at Börje, he is our Jewish inheritance, especially his eyes that are typically Semitic.

Or so I thought, until one summer I read Arthur Koestler’s book The Thirteenth Tribe. I realised that my Jewish inheritance was not Semitic, nor was its historic homeland in Palestine, but in Khazaria where the north Turkish population converted to Judaism in AD 740. At that time, Khazaria was a super power situated between the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea along the Silk Road, and its people had clear Mongolian features. This was the summer of 2001, just before the terror attack on World Trade Center, 911.

The eyes of Börje and of the beholder

When I returned to my home in Täby from our summer house, I looked with new eyes at the portrait of Börje and suddenly saw the width between his almond-shaped eyes with the special fold of skin towards the nose. What I thought I had seen all my life was not Semitic at all but Mongolian – that is to say Khazaric. And indeed my grandmother came from Grodnow, a town in what was then southern Poland, now Belarus, and had a majority population of Jews. Her ancestors had migrated from Khazaria to southern Russia and eastern Europe when the super power disintegrated sometime during the 11th century. Does anyone wonder where all Europe’s Jews came from?

Koestler’s book and how it changed my perception of Börje’s eyes was probably one of the most significant occurrences for my decision to abandon my Jewish identification – one of many I have always had throughout my life. Realising the crucial role that ”the eye of the beholder” can play for someone who believes they can see, affected me greatly.

The country sideboard

The brown sideboard seen in the background of the picture comes from my father’s Swedish family. I know little about them other than that the family was small and that my paternal grandfather worked as a farmhand in Nynäshamn and started a family in Stockholm where he worked as a turner. One day I hope to have the time to look more closely at my father’s side of the family.

180px-Markus_Andersson_SjalvportrattPicture: The Artist Markus Andersson

Markus is one of the few well-schooled painters of oils in Sweden today, but he also paints watercolours. Like many artists from all over the world, he has visited the well-known Norwegian painter Odd Nerdrum many times to learn his craft and exchange ideas. Personally, I am not a great fan of Nerdrum’s occasionally necrophobic imagery. Markus paints portraits, but also in the romantic landscape style and is deeply rooted in his Swedish heritage as told in traditional Tales of Gods and Viking legends. Markus is also inspired by Anders Zorn’s pictures of women. Many of his works have a special, warm, aching and down-to-earth tone that captures the Swedish soul. His brush also forms gossamer-light Nordic landscapes.

How we found each other

Markus and I both love the simple and earthbound life, nature, animals and wooden houses heated with logs, and carpentry. These are things that create quick friendships. And we soon realised that both of us had been appointed ideological pariahs by the Swedish so-called journalist and culture elite. Markus had been the target of a campaign that dismissed him as a dark-brown racist, almost a Nazi. Mainly because of the portrait of Christer Pettersson, but also his overall choice of subjects.

His most ”spectacular” work is a series of Swedish scapegoats, the paintings that attracted me. Especially the one of Christer Pettersson, the alleged assassin of prime minister Olof Palme who was acquitted. The painting is a masterpiece and one he has been well-paid for. Probably far too little which certainly remains to be seen.

An oil painter who paints realistic romantic landscapes and rune stones instead of modernist and abstract motifs… he must be slightly dubious? His work was dismissed as simple kitsch by Katrine Kielos in the tabloid Expressen. As far as I know the first time she has acted as an art critic. She now writes leading articles in the tabloid Aftonbladet, spreading politically correct opinions to the people. For my part, it has always been about accusations of ”antisemitism” and suchlike. But I have responded to this elsewhere.

I knew nothing of Markus’s background as ideological pariah before our paths crossed. We talked a lot when he was painting me. I did most of the talking, Markus is a quiet and unassuming person, and moreover he was busy trying to catch his model’s personal features. We spoke of art, painting, politics and ideologies, money and economy, exercise and physical training and last but not least poultry keeping.

I went to art school myself as a small child. I had forgotten all about it, but the smell of turpentine in Markus’s studio jogged my memory. My ambitious mother wanted me to become an artist or an architect. But I studied and worked with psychology and pedagogy in various environments. I never managed to explain this “occupation” to my paternal grandfather who was an illiterate pedlar.

The painting without a name

Markus usually gives his paintings names and we discussed this occasionally. Our hilarious suggestion of a title for my portrait was: ”Nazi” paints ”Antisemite”, or ”Nazi kitsch painter paints Holocaust- denying antisemite”. But that can wait. We both agreed – or perhaps quietly hoped – that this picture in the light of history, would eventually become a treasure. Although neither of us thought it likely in our lifetimes.

Chickens and ”clucking”

In the aftermath of Åsa Linderborg’s hysterical naming and shaming of me as ”Jew-hater” and ”Holocaust-denier” in Aftonbladet at the end of November 2012, I wrote a small story. Åsa’s outburst was triggered by the fact that young TV presenter of the European Song Contest, Gina Dirawi who is of Palestinian origin, had mentioned my book Is the World Upside Down? on her popular blog and suggested it was suitable ”for evening reading”.

The title of my story was ”Åsa’s clucking and Gina’s ”antisemitic” chickens”. Eventually Gina, after suffering many attacks, defended her terrible deed by saying that she had only read the first nine pages of my book. So, she hadn’t even finished the first article about my struggle with municipal red-tape in order to keep my chickens. Probably the most readable article I have ever written …

Of course Markus and Anna will buy a brood of Hedemora chickens once the chicks have grown a bit. To replace the ”multicultural” brood they have at the moment. Oddly enough, I have recently got to know two more people who keep Hedemora chickens. I like them very much too, even in other ways.

These stories were written the evening after I had fetched the painting from the glazier, framed and ready.

Täby on the 3rd of June 2013.

Se also deLiberation, The Rebel, Gilad Atzmon

and

Swedens ´National Antisemite`

My comment (scroll to the bottom) on ”The Wandering Jew” was inspired by Mearsheimers article.