FREE hit counter and Internet traffic statistics from
(DV) Petersen: Anti-Israel?







by Kim Petersen
October 27, 2005

Send this page to a friend! (click here)


 “Has any People ever been seen to give up their territory of their own free will? In the same way, the Arabs of Palestine will not renounce their sovereignty without violence.”

-- Vladimir Jabotinsky, early-20th Century Zionist

The western corporate media is apoplectic over remarks made by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to students attending a conference in Tehran called “The World without Zionism.”

Ahmadinejad rejects Iran granting recognition to Israel or normalizing relations with the Jewish state. And why should Iran?

The geographical territory on which Israel is demarcated is land that was stolen from the indigenous Palestinians in a most violent manner, nowadays referred to as ethnic cleansing.

Ahmadinejad did not mince words when he said: “Anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation's fury, [while] any [Islamic leader] who recognizes the Zionist regime means he is acknowledging the surrender and defeat of the Islamic world.”

The New York Times and Associated Press both characterized Ahmadinejad’s statements as anti-Israel. [1] In other words, Ahmadinejad is accused of being opposed to something that he doesn’t even recognize as existing -- an absurd accusation.

Israeli Deputy Prime Minister Shimon Peres declared Ahmadinejad’s comments “tantamount to a crime against humanity” and he called for the expulsion of Iran from the UN -- a rather hypocritical ploy.

In June 1967, then Israeli Foreign Minister Abba Eban revealed Israel’s contempt for the UN: “If the General Assembly were to vote by 121 votes to 1 in favor of ‘Israel’ returning to the armistice lines [pre-June 1967 borders], ‘Israel’ would refuse to comply with the decision.”

There is nothing unusual in this statement. Israel, after all, by its own reckoning points out that from 1967 to 1988 the UN Security Council passed 88 resolutions against it. The UN General Assembly passed 429 resolutions against Israel during that time. This makes Israel the most flagrant violator of international law. [2]

That the UN agreed to a partitioning of Palestine in 1947 was treasonous. It was a sop to imperialism, racism, ethnic cleansing, and human decency.

Nonetheless, in 1950, the UN General Assembly granted membership to Israel but under certain conditions. UN General Assembly Resolution 273 decreed that Israel must implement UN General Assembly Resolution 181 that defines the borders of Israel and Palestine and Resolution 194 that recognizes the right of return for Palestinian refugees. Israel has so far refused. UN General Assembly Resolutions, however, are not binding under international law.

Ahmadinejad has a violent solution. He cited the late Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini: “Israel must be wiped off the map.”

Here Ahmadinejad words accord completely with the expectations of Israel’s first Prime Minister, David Ben Gurion:

Why should the Arabs make peace? If I was an Arab leader, I would never make terms with Israel. That is natural: we have taken their country. Sure, God promised it to us, but what does that matter to them? Our God is not theirs. We come from Israel, it’s true, but two thousand years ago, and what is that to them? There has been anti-Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They only see one thing: we came here and stole their country. Why should they accept that? [3]

Was Ben Gurion therefore anti-Israel?

As for Iran, how can it be anti-something that it doesn’t even recognize? For Arabs and Muslims to recognize Israel means a surrender of their legitimate sovereignty. Contradictorily, this could be construed as being anti-Arab.

Kim Petersen, Co-Editor of Dissident Voice, lives in the traditional Mi'kmaq homeland colonially designated Nova Scotia, Canada. He can be reached at:

View this feed in your browser


[1] Nazila Fathi, “Iran’s New President Says Israel ‘Must Be Wiped Off the Map,’” New York Times, 27 October 2005

[2] Reference Desk, “The U.N.'s Record Vis a Vis Israel,” Arutz Sheva.

[3] Quoted in Nathan Goldman, “The Jewish Paradox” in Tony Seed and Gary Zatzman (Eds.) Dossier on Palestine (Shunpiking, 2002), p 72. The dossier is a most informative compendium on Palestine.

Other Recent Articles by Kim Petersen

* Syria in the Imperialist Crosshairs 

* The Struggle to Restore the Dignity of Labor
* Gizen: Perverted Principle in Japan
* The Need to Speak Out: Canada’s Governor Generalship
* Antithetical Heroism
* Progressives and the Imperialist Line
* Whose Salmon?

* American Violence in Iraq: Necrophilia or Savagery? Part Five
* American Violence in Iraq: Necrophilia or Savagery? Part Four
* American Violence in Iraq: Necrophilia or Savagery? Part Three
* American Violence in Iraq: Necrophilia or Savagery? Part Two
* American Violence in Iraq: Necrophilia or Savagery? Part One
* Darwinian Survival of the Fittest Meets Wal-Mart and Hiroshima
* Making Sense of Terrorism
* The Message from the London Bombings
* Face to Face with the Absurd
* The Counterrevolution: Capitalism’s Ugly Head in China
* Damage Control Over the Downing Street Memo
* Rivaling Pax Americana
* Angels of Death
* Hating the Bible
* Canada’s Oil Invasion
* Eating Profit: Frustrations of the Salmon-Farming Industry
* Hypocrisy Abounding
* Fueling Imperialism: It’s the Crude, Dude
* Progressivism and Free Speech for All
* Objectivity in Independent Media, Part 4
* Objectivity in Independent Media, Part 3
* Objectivity in Independent Media, Part 2
* Objectivity in Independent Media, Part One
* The Never Again Mantra
* The Rationale of Suicide Bombing
* Gauging the Worth of US Troops in Neocon Eyes
* A Sporting Revolution: The Parecon Hockey League
* A Stain Upon the Sea: Profit Over Wild Salmon
* Zionist Propaganda in Progressive Wool
* Securing Canadian Political Obeisance: Halifax Greets Bush
* The Footprint of an Out-of-Control Behemoth Leaving a Trail of Bodies in its Wake

* Progressive Efflux
* Bamboozling Morality
* A Pretext for War
* Chomsky and the Hopelessness of Lesser Evilism