Musings per Zainab have been reverberating within me since long that Pakistani journalists are by and large a load of cobblers. Spot on again. While the global media is in the panic business, the craze of the Pak media is to join the bandwagon of turncoats, the slime-bucket Hamid Mir as its 'Czar.'
Check out the article by Farzana Shah titled "Pak-Israel Rapprochement: First Step Towards Betterment of Muslims and Jews." Warning: It's a lot more than just replete with nonsense. It's toxic and not the easiest to digest. However, do go through it to recognize the menace of apathy and the sort of bogeyman tricks that are played, distorting or dismissing hard facts.
Let me start by quoting a bunch of snippets from Shah's article. It might then be simpler for readers to connect my refutations accurately.
"It's time, that Pakistan kept its interest supreme and opted for a rapprochement policy with Israel."
"Pakistan never had a covert or overt confrontation with Israel"
"the irony is some Arab countries have recognized Israel"
"The ardent excuse of some of the parties mainly the religious ones of betraying the Palestinians"
"nuclear Pakistan no threat to Israel"
"only after Pakistan went nuclear that Israel began its quest for ties with Pakistan."
"After all we have full diplomatic ties with India"
"Pakistan and Israel help in resolving this issue."
"all political parties and that of their barometer - the masses, seems to have given consent to the decision"
"Like any other country, Israel too needs to expand its trade, without which she cannot survive. With Pakistan she is cognizant of the trade potential"
"Israel .. can also use Pakistan as a conduit to reach Iran and Saudi Arabia."
"Jews were banished from Palestine by the Christian regimes .. Judea and Samaria in the West Bank of Palestine - the cradle of Judaism."
My perspective ensues from my recognition of justice and egalitarian values. Being neither a politician nor a bureaucrat nor a policy maker, I totally overrule the dogma of trade and commercialization taking precedence over human rights.
As a sensitive observer of the abuse of the weak by the strong, there is no way I can ever agree on anything resembling an establishment of friendly ties with Israel, a nation which is silently recognized even by its traditional allies as a race exterminator, promoter of apartheid and state sponsor of terrorism. "Covert" contact would be still more grotesque than an "overt" one, as it would add gross hypocrisy and double-dealing to an already controversial deal.
Despite the lack of visionaries in the Pakistani society and their denseness, the claim that majority of them would support the idea of Pak-Israel rapprochement or even give a half-hearted nod would be an unfounded presumption with little or no bearing on reality. Such claims can only be confirmed after a free and fair referendum (something next to impossible in Pakistan though) which must be seen as an indispensable step. For a decision as controversial as this, it's mandatory that the representation of the masses must go well beyond the ballot box.
Lack of diplomatic ties with Israel has NO connections with any religious fervor as insinuated by Shah. A combination of fractured education and low self-esteem has established a comically offensive mindset within the Pakistani masses. Interpretation of every aspect of life is profoundly in black and white. I wonder why? With that repugnant disposition, supporting the Palestinian cause is construed as 'religious extremism' and friendly gestures toward Israel - the blue eyed babe of the New World Order - is commonly perceived as "modern & secular." No doubt Islam plays a predominant role in the lives of Muslims and it certainly should .. and Islam upholds justice. However, something which no Pak journalist has focused upon is: Though Israel was the brainchild of the West in post WW2 scenario, decades later today, it's again a particular segment of the West which is loudly and explicitly condemning the illegal creation of Israel and all the violations that go with it. The much larger majority who are presently raising their voices against Israeli occupation comprise of Western observers, Western human rights activists, Western analysts and Western authors. With the 'sell out' culture rampant within the Muslim world, comparatively the number of Muslims playing a public role is support of Palestine are fewer.
Though the cohesion of the pan-Islamic entity is already ailing and fragile, why aggravate the situation by throttling it totally, making filthy politics still filthier? Or, has political correctness gotten that decadent in preference to keeping one's "interest supreme?"
As a sovereign state, does Pakistan desire to define her own moral duties within the pan-Islamic state or is she simply interested in parroting the petro dollar lackeys? Pakistan not being on a collision course with Israel involving military confrontation does not give Pakistan the green light to overlook contraventions that mar principles. Neither must the hobnobbing of countries like Saudi Arabia, UAE, Jordan, India etc. with Israel be taken as a reason to follow suit.
Well, forget about the treachery of the GCC group. The defacto president of Palestine, Mahmoud Abbas, who is currently serving the 10th year of his 4-year-term by illegally occupying the Ramallah compound, has been willingly cooperating with the Zionist regime for perks such as money, comfort and free travels despite its huge price tag requiring him to be complacent over Zionist occupation, land theft and unprecedented suffering/humiliation of his people going on non-stop right under his nose. As a "democracy" perpetually bellowing away on the importance of freedom, human rights and bashing army rule, which of the two would Pakistan champion as an ally of Israel - the cause of the Palestinian people OR the double occupation of the West Bank by Israel and Mahmoud Abbas?
As an “ally,” how would Pakistan react each time Israel builds 25,000 or 50,000 or 100,000 illegal Jewish settlements in the West Bank after demolishing farmlands and homes of the Palestinian people?
Nine years ago the Palestinian civil society began the movement - Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) - targeting Israeli-made products until it complies with international law, quits apartheid and recognizes the rights of the Palestinian people. BDS is now a large global movement joined by many international entities who care to promote justice and make this world a better place to live in. As Israel’s ally, would Pakistan also desire to join the BDS? If not, it will only be assisting an oppressor to promote its tyrannical policies. As transparent as that!
In a situation that is focused on the quest for justice & truth, there can be no middle path. You're either for the oppressors or you wash your hands of them. One may ask, "so GWB was right in his State of the Union address - either you're with us or you're with the terrorists." The statement by itself was logical. But its allusion was deceitful, in that, it wasn't focused on justice nor truth. It was fixated on the occupation of Iraq and the control of its oil wells.
Defining your own moral duties as an independent nation does involve periodical sacrifices but it also assures unadulterated sovereignty. Opting for the Zionist block as a permanent ally would almost certainly get Pakistan swept away by the unstoppable Zionist juggernaut flattening everything on her path, and compelling her to compromise on her sovereignty as in the case of numerous Israeli/US puppets. Pakistan is already a puppet of the US. Having Israel on the other side would make a 'delectable' shawarma sandwich out of that country.
At the moment Pakistan is quite reclusive concerning Israel. It's in an ideal situation to ignore or decry Israel's massive human rights violations which persist systematically on a daily basis in the Holy Land involving bulldozing of Palestinian homes and farms, cold blooded murders of unarmed Palestinian citizens, torture of prisoners, prison sentences for children as young as five or six etc. Kindly do some research on the daily events of the occupied West Bank. If Pakistan is foolish enough to embrace Israel officially as a friend, the slightest of disagreement on Israel's violations could jeopardize Pakistan's security, depending on how the Zionist state interprets their differences. Pre and post revolution Iran is a stark example of that. It's imperative to remember that Israel is a country that takes no shit-fit from its allies, not even from the United States. Establishment of harmonious relations with Israel must be entirely on Israeli terms & conditions, which would mean Pakistan agreeing to give up on her values with unconditional support for unlimited oppression and double-standards, either vocally or through silence .... both being just as deplorable. Concerning the Intellectual, moral and ethical deterioration within the Paksitani society would be even uglier and more distressing than the present.
Using Pakistan's diplomatic ties with India as a reason for having similar ties with Israel is a shaky argument with more holes in it than a bar of Swiss cheese. India just isn't Pakistan's next door neighbor, more importantly it's Pakistan's next door enemy. It has already fought four wars with Pakistan. It's intelligentsia is constantly predating on Pakistan and manipulating her foes within and outside her boundaries with money and weapons. There are many Pakistani families and extended families that are still divided between Pakistan and India. There is a constant flow of visitors between the two countries. This of course includes Kashmir, one of the most sensitive nerves of this episode. Though majority of the Kashmiris might opt for independence, their second best choice is to join Pakistan. One only needs to monitor the events in Kashmir to know the facts in the lives of the Kashmiri people and their unprecedented suffering under Indian occupation. Many of them are family members or close relatives of Pakistanis. Unfortunately since the past three decades or so, the self-serving trend of Pakistani politicians has encouraged them to cave in to Indian obstinacy and Kashmir has taken the back seat in Pakistan-India relations. But it continues to be an unresolved and festering issue that can pop-up for the serious consideration of the Pakistani people and government any time in future. Every aspect viewed together, Pakistan is compelled to keep the doors open for talks with its next door enemy. Fortunately Pakistan's relations with Israel have no such similarities. Thus, when you compare India with Israel from Pakistan's perspective, you're comparing a next door enemy with a far distant one. The former has a greater nuisance value than the latter.
True that Pakistan's nuclear project never posed a threat to any country including Israel. Neither was there any official nor secret Israeli overtures toward post-nuclear Pakistan. When Pakistan went nuclear in 1998, the immediate response from the White House as a punitive measure was "sanctions" that led to much panic and hysteria within the government circles. Four years later when sanctions were lifted, it was not at the behest of Israel. Rather it was to buy Pakistan's cooperation on the so-called 'war on terror.' Some Israeli bigwigs discreetly had close relations with certain Pakistani politicians at a very personal level which never had any bearing on governmental or diplomatic levels.
Approximately five or six years after being in office, Pervez Musharaf began playing the tune on establishing official ties with Israel and a some sycophants chimed in. But the move was short lived. It was apparently a gimmick to get closer to the White House, whipping up some jealousy within Hamid Karzai and India and subsequently boosting Pakistan's foreign reserves. However, it fizzled out before it began and Musharaf had to dismiss the idea to salvage his already falling popularity. There was not a single story of any Pakistani citizen or taxpayer giving ear to it, let alone accepting it. When Musharaf resigned in 2008, popular support for him was at its lowest ebb on account of his cooperation with the United States for seven years of his post-9/11 tenure. One can imagine the depth of public hatred IF he had additionally established diplomatic ties with Israel.
Musharaf's address to the US Jewish community carried no significance on regional politics. Even if he hadn't addressed it, the U.S. would still need Pakistan as an ally rather than an enemy, and Israel already consented to it.
Despite citing the political diversity within the Jews, Farzana Shah seems to be mixing up something relevant. The article writes about Musharaf's speech to America's "Jewish community" but is alluding to its reaction in line with the Jewish lobby. The Jewish lobby aka Zionist lobby is a very powerful coalition of American Ashkenazi Jews who are working to maintain permanent support for Israel within the foreign policy of the United States. The entire Zionist lobby consists of coalitions, the most famous group being the AIPAC, all having the same goal. They are largely secular Jews striving to influence not just American foreign policy but also American public policy in favor of Israel particularly through the field of education, and to reject the recognition of Palestine.
The Jewish community of the United States, on the other hand, consists of simply Jewish citizens living in America, most of whom are non-political who yield no power. Also, several of them (though not all) are non-Zionists who disagree with Israel's brutal occupation of Palestine as already stated in Shah's article. If you recall, Iran's former President, Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, also met with the American Jewish community during his last visit to the United Nations. The meeting was very cordial and much appreciated by lots of humanitarians around the world. However, neither the White House nor Israel nor AIPAC expressed their appreciation.
Israel's trade expansions have never been a serious issue neither for the Zionist state nor its allies, let alone using it as a cause for befriending Pakistan. The hogwash about Israel benefiting from Pakistan as a trade partner is a very discrepant notion, if not a myth altogether. Israel is a tiny country of 7 million covering an area of 20,770 square kilometers. Yet, on average, Israel's trade with the U.S. totals to approximately $40 billion - exports 15 billion and imports 25 billion. Additionally it gets $3 billion every year from the U.S. to upgrade its military hardware.
The EU is Israel's leading partner in trade and tourism despite the BDS movement. Undeterred by Israel's continued periodical attacks on Gaza since 2008 and expansion of illegal Jewish settlements on occupied West Bank, EU's trade with Israel totals to billions of euros every year. In 2011, for instance, it crossed €29.5 billion.
Israel's defense exports to India is approximately $7 billion. Indo-Israel agricultural cooperation involves huge investments. After the official establishment of diplomatic relations between India and Israel in 1992, the bilateral trade between the two countries spiked from $200 million to $4,747 million.
I have defined only three Israeli trade sectors - U.S., E.U. and India - which is the tip of the iceberg compared to Israel's entire trade network around the globe. Gloating in such enormous international cooperation and benevolence, would Israel ever give a rat’s tail whether or not Pakistan traded with it? If at any time in future Israel does show an interest in Pakistan, it will only be for the purpose of 'puppetizing' Pakistan and deepening the divide among the Pakistanis over a highly controversial step which has been the hallmark of Israeli foreign policy throughout the Arab world.
Israel needing Pakistan as a conduit for Iran and Saudi Arabia? Pakistan has no reputation of being a bosom pal of Iran. The two countries have been torn apart from the 1980s as a result of continued sectarian strife in Pakistan, systematically instigated by the enemies outside and within. Secondly, in Iran the Supreme Leader is the man with absolute power who has the final say on all issues. He is an independent minded person with very little trust in neighbors. It’s been over three decades and he has never entertained the idea of “conduits” to carry out his plans. He has his own trusted men and he sends his own deputations. Thirdly, as for Saudi Arabia, it has been one of the closest allies of Israel for decades, both politically and economically. The Saudi local market is infested with products tagged "Made in Israel" in exchange for Saudi oil and oil products entering Israel under cover of Western companies. Rumors abound of Saudi oil tycoons investing heavily in Israeli cities. Jerusalem Post reported on Saudi oil giant Aramco planning a pipeline running through Israel facilitating oil export to Europe as well. Trade through third parties is lucrative between Saudi Arabia and Israel, mainly exports from Israel to Saudi Arabia. Some of the companies export directly and some indirectly. Israel’s ties are closer than ever to Saudi Arabia. The last thing it needs is Pakistan’s assistance to act as a “conduit.”
The 3-year-old Syrian war is being fought with the close coordination of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey and Israel. This is a very old story with many more details that we don't even need to highlight, let alone having a debate. I didn't know that journalists in Pakistan are still painting that old fairy tale about of Israel being surrounded by belligerent Arab nations. How astounding!
I agree Israel's labor pain will begin only when it makes peace with the Arabs. This implies to Palestinians, NOT the Arab leaders .. not even the Arab leaders of Palestine. Israel is NOT interested in making peace in Palestine. The Zionist state was NOT created with the purpose of peacefully co-existing with the Palestinians. It was created with the intent of possession of land and supreme domination of the Ashkenazi Jews establishing their hegemony in the Middle East. This process has been going on systematically from day one to date. Gaza has already been under siege for the last six years. The fact that every "peace talk" starting from the Oslo Accord brokered by the US has ended up in a joke is neither co-incidental nor surprising.
The author of Pak-Israel Rapprochement fervently describes the expulsion of the Jews from Palestine by the Christians. So, who were those Jews who robbed Palestine in the 1940s .. in fact the plan began being executed as early as the 1930s? The common notion, as in Shah's article, is that the Jews from Palestine were kicked out by the Christians or immigrated to different parts of Europe in the medieval era and returned to the land of their forefathers in 1945. Nothing could be farther from the truth. No "Christian regime" ever booted out the Arab Jews from Palestine. I will clarify this misconception shortly.
The massive manipulation of history after the creation of Israel has put too many question marks on the Diaspora. As a standard definition, it's referred to the dispersion of the Jews outside of Israel from 6th century B.C. when they were exiled to Babylon until the present. Thus, it's supposed to begin from prehistoric era, with bulk of the information taken from the heavily altered and tainted Biblical narrations. By the way, the numerous versions of the Bibles are altered every few years to suit the political climate. The same sources that have manipulated the Diaspora are also denying the Exodus. The purpose of all this gerrymandering is to portray the Zionists as the indigenous inhabitants of Palestine, which is not true. Moreover, 6th century B.C. is prehistoric period. No claimed event of that era can be ratified with a shred of evidence. And there was certainly no Diaspora in or after the 6th century A.D. Reliable history only tells us that most Palestinians are in the diaspora .. 60% of them living outside of Palestine.
Moreover, what about the difference between Semite Jews and Ashkenazi Jews? How about the history of the Khazaria Empire, (present-day Ukraine and Crimea)? Briefly put, the Jews who are today occupying Palestine are not the same who lived in the Middle-East during the time of the Prophet (pbuh) nor the ones during the period of the second righteous Caliph, Umar bin Khatab. Those were the indigenous Semite Arab Jews who never left the Arab world. As time went by, many converted to Christianity after the coming of Prophet Essa (son of Virgin Maryam). After the spread of Islam and the Muslim conquest of the Arab world, many Arab Jews converted to Islam. Today the population of the indigenous Arab Jews in the Middle-East is very small. Little pockets of Arab Semites are concentrated in Yemen, Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria, Iran and Ethiopia. A few years ago, Israel took in several thousands of black Ethiopian Jews to Israel as a show of Jewish unity. But the plight of the poor Ethiopians in Israel consisted of little beyond discrimination and racial harassment by the Ashkenazi Zionist Jews .. even though the Ethiopian Jews are indigenous while the Ashkenazis are not. Currently, apartheid policies in Israel against the Ethiopians are so severe that they aren't even permitted to bury the dead in the same cemeteries as those of the Ashkenazi Jews.
The Khazaria ancestors of the Ashkenazis belonged to the region of Ukraine (next door to Europe) from where they immigrated to various parts of Europe and eventually invaded Palestine in the 1940s. The heathen Khazars (known as the Kayzars in the West) began converting to Judasim in late 6th century. Their immigration to southern Europe became rampant around the 8th century. After the Spanish Inquisition with its influence spreading across Spain, Italy and Greece with mass persecution of the Jewish population by the Catholic Church, the Khazars dispersed to western Europe and some to Turkey where they found refuge under the rule of the Ottomans and are still living there with the title of "donems" or the crypto Jews.
To read the history of the European Jews who are today occupying Palestine, please visit the following link where I had articulated the truth a few years ago in this blog.
Are European Jews ethnically Semites?
In conclusion: The purpose of promoting this sickening policy as detailed in Farzana Shah's article originates from negative indoctrination of slavish minds by powerful Pakistani vested interests and their cronies. It's strange that according to this author, a rapprochement shouldn't be rejected without "logic" .. as if the occupation of a land on the basis of 'might is right' and the 66-year-old blood drenched history of mass murder and sowing seeds of discord in the region and beyond isn't enough "logic" to reject diplomatic ties and demand accountability.
Quoting Martin Luther King, "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." The risk of fraternizing with persecutors and slave drivers must never be underestimated. You never know when you might end up finding yourself on the line of fire, even though you might never have expected it.
Furthermore, India continues to maintain extensive relations with the Arab world, and like most parts of the Arab world, India's commitment to the Palestinian cause is little or nothing. India itself is an occupying nation harboring similar guilt as Israel concerning the non-stop unrest in Kashmir. Indian leaders don't even discuss the Palestinian issue with Israel during their meetings. Dialogues between India and Israel are only deepening over issues like fighting "terrorism," security agreements and agricultural projects. With a wave of Indian influence and the frenzy of secularism sweeping across parts of the Pakistani society, India's burgeoning relations with Israel has lured some segments in Pakistan to cross the red line, shamelessly suggesting "rapprochement" with Israel.
God Willing, it will never happen.
As Todd Garlington puts it - "ONCE PEOPLE SAID: GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME DEATH. NOW THEY SAY: MAKE ME A SLAVE, JUST PAY ME ENOUGH."
The 'blue print' of Israeli land theft: No to forget, this is only until 2010. Four years on, a lot more has been stolen by the Zions.