Skip to content or view screen version

Blair: Sharon's cellmate

Daphna Baram | 11.03.2005 04:17 | Analysis | Anti-militarism | Anti-racism

If my prime minister Sharon is a war criminal, so is Tony Blair



I read Ken Livingstone's article on these pages in which he explained his position on Israel and anti-semitism with great care, and agreed with it. I have always respected his unequivocal stance against racism and I don't believe that he is anti-semitic. And yet I am angry. I am angry with Ken and with the British left generally. Please allow me to explain why.
I agree that my prime minister, Ariel Sharon, is a war criminal. From the intentional killing of 69 civilians in the village of Qibya in 1953, through the invasion of Lebanon in 1982, all the way to the wild bombing of Palestinian cities in the last few years, his career is steeped in vile criminality. I have dedicated my adult life to making this point, not only to my people, but also to yours, and to the rest of the world. I believe that international pressure is vital to change Israel's policies, not only for the sake of the Palestinians, but for Israelis too.

In the little political sub-culture of the non-Zionist left which I come from, calling the prime minister a war criminal is no big deal. Israelis tend to say what they think out loud. The fact that so many on the British left call my prime minister a war criminal too is fine by me.

But if justice is to be dispensed evenly, what about your prime minister? Yes, Tony Blair, the bloke who took the British army into Iraq and butchered tens of thousands of Iraqis in an illegal war and under a false pretext? What is he, exactly? I, for one, think he deserves to share a cell with Ariel Sharon. Indeed, Sharon may reasonably protest: he is yet to be responsible for killings in such numbers.

Yes, I know the British left were against the war in Iraq. But it is rare to hear them refer to Blair as "a murderer", "a butcher", or "a war criminal". Blair is more often presented, even by ardent anti-war commentators, as "misled", "mistaken", "sincere but wrong", "well meaning but cheated by Bush", "acting out of great religious conviction", and so on. Even Ken decided to rejoin Mr Blair's party after the criminal invasion of Iraq, and at a time when sinister hints as to British and American intentions in Iran and Syria were already in the air. This is what makes serious Jews and Israelis sneer at his statements against Sharon.

The way to prove to liberal and left Israelis (they are the only ones in Israel Ken stands a chance of convincing) that he means what he says is to apply the same lofty standards to Blair, and to use the same type of words when describing their very similar activities.

So my message to the British left is: either moderate your language when talking about Sharon, or escalate it when talking about Blair. One way or another, it is time to set equal standards. Occupation, torture, killing and wars of aggression are as bad when committed by Britain as when committed by anybody else.




Daphna Baram
- e-mail: daphnun@yahoo.co.uk

Comments

Hide the following 8 comments

Daphna Baram .....

11.03.2005 09:29

..... clearly hasn't had a lot of dealings with the uk left - Blair is called a war criminal repeatedly ......

ftp


I dunno where you've been listening

11.03.2005 10:35

Everyone I know would just LOVE to see Bliar and his entire corrupt cabinet banged up in the Hague for war crimes, genocide, pillage etc. Or for left wing comments are you only referring to the BBC, Guardian etc?

bliar critic


g wg

11.03.2005 12:48

You are correct to point out Ken’s hypocrisy on this issue but don’t paint the Left with the same brush.

The British Left criticised Ken for re-entering New Labour. And not long after one MP travelled in the exact opposite direction of Ken for saying precisely what you claim we have been silent on.

So my message to you is wake up.

g z


Odd as Ken be.

11.03.2005 14:04

Quite so; Blair is a war criminal, plain as tofu, in my book, and I expect that of a large part of what you call the "left". But there's the rub. What is this "left" that you suggest can be symbolised in the person of Ken? Define your terms. The whole point of your post depends on it.

"War criminal" is a dubious term anyway. One which needs examining closely; I don't personally need some complicated paralegal text to tell me which massacres are criminal and which aren't. Not when that text can just be rewritten for convenience or otherwise generally ignored by the good and righteous killers. To me it's a crime to start a war. Per se.

I won't even get started on Sharon. Why do you want to compare satan's left genital wart with his right one? is there really a moral argument there?

arofish
- Homepage: http://arofish.org.uk


agreed

11.03.2005 14:44

blair, along with other uk government figures, is a war criminal. most people know this but deny it, usually to themselves, because they have so much invested in what he stands for. it's popular complicity. britain can't admit that its government committed war crimes because it's true.

- -


have you been paying attention?

11.03.2005 15:11

ummm...maybe you haven't been awake for the last three years...

 http://www.stopwar.org.uk

stop the war


From Across The Pond

11.03.2005 17:32

Why all of the quibbling? Here in the US, the (non-liberal) Left does not discriminate or mince words over who is and who is not a war criminal. The entire Arbusto Junta qualify as war criminals. And, for that matter, so do all leaders of the countries comprising the "Coalition of the willing." Here's a question to consider, though. Are the soldiers engaged in this "glorious" War Of Terror also war criminals? Or, are they just unwitting dupes dutifully "following orders?" As for Sharon, he has been a charter member of the war criminal club for a long, long time.

Roland


Just common criminals

12.03.2005 09:33

nice to see a article regarding israeli crimes without all the anti semitic hoo haa.
But I don't see that Sharon and blair should be given the grand title of War criminals
they are no better than common crooks . Like the two NY cops in the news today just cos
they bumped off at least 8 people for the mafia.
Well Blair and Sharon's corporate bosses are close relatives of the mafia bosses so whats the
difference. The links between organized crime and big multi national corporations.
Left and Right has to be the biggest piss take since Jesus Christ ( roman version) .
I feel sorry for the sheeple who are believers mostly radical chic types from the dreaded
middle classes -- or wot ?

left puppet