I write this
blog to layout for myself, the antecedents to what many puzzled Israelis and
Jews see as an uncalled-for Irish antipathy to the Jewish state, and to say
again that peace will
only come when the current pro-Palestinian orthodoxy and exhortation to
violence and martyrdom is challenged everywhere and always. I hope you find it
of interest.
“Israel has been demonized by an
Irish media slavishly dancing to the Palestinian drumbeat for decades... -
[yet] Israel has a far better and more
progressive record on human rights than any of its neighbors…The truth must be
told.” Fine Gael chairman Charlie Flanagan, 2014.In his article “Why Are the Irish Increasingly Siding With Palestine Over Israel?” written for the New Republic in May 2014, Jason Walsh recounts the time he wrote a feature article for the Irish Times on Ireland’s Jewry.
He interviewed retired Belfast businessman Adrian Levey, who is Jewish. Levey was “…keen to point out that anti-Semitism as such is not a problem, even on the divided streets of Belfast.
“Northern Protestants support Israel and Catholics support Palestine, it doesn’t really play out on the streets,” he said.
When you understand that Protestant
and Catholic are not actually religious terms, but stand-ins
for pro-British unionists and pro-Irish republicans the statement
makes perfect sense. For Irish republicans have long felt they were, as much as
Palestinians, living in occupied territory. Hearing Northern Ireland
described as the "Occupied Six Counties” was not uncommon in my youth
during the 1990s. “
What Walsh is saying is
embedded in the colonial antecedents of Ireland, Israel, and a would-be
“Palestinian” Muslim state.
He explains that Israel’s
struggle against the British during the Mandate years resonated with an Irish (Roman
Catholic) public subjugated for centuries by brutal British domination of their
national aspirations and what they called “colonisation” and “occupation” of
the six Counties which make up (Protestant) Northern Ireland today.
But as Israel became more
successful, the Irish psyche projected its experience of (essentially
Protestant) Britain onto Israel’s failure to decide the “Palestinian” definitively,
and the narrative of a “dispossessed” and “disenfranchised” “Palestinian”
struggle for “freedom” blossomed. Israel thus began to function as a surrogate
for Britain because it too was “imperial,
imperious and, above all, modern.” This view, together with Brian Hanley’s
exploration of the IRA’s collaboration with Nazi Germany in the Republic’s
struggles against Britain form the core of this piece.
The ongoing support and
collaboration between Hamas and Sinn Fein, Irish Republic politicians and the
Palestinian Authority, and historical ideological and notional links between
the PLO, Arafat and the Republic of Ireland are well documented, if not always
in the public eye.
Sinn Fein, the IRA's political wing, which
has elected representatives in the Irish and British parliaments and shares
power in Northern Ireland, has continued to be a virulent critic of Israel.
In 2006, Aengus Ó Snodaigh, the party's international affairs and human rights spokesperson in the Dublin parliament, described Israel as "one of the most abhorrent and despicable regimes on the planet."
In May 2014, he was one of three Irish politicians prevented by authorities from leaving Cyprus to join the Gaza-bound flotilla headed by the Mavi Marmara….
In 2006, Aengus Ó Snodaigh, the party's international affairs and human rights spokesperson in the Dublin parliament, described Israel as "one of the most abhorrent and despicable regimes on the planet."
In May 2014, he was one of three Irish politicians prevented by authorities from leaving Cyprus to join the Gaza-bound flotilla headed by the Mavi Marmara….
There were similar prejudices commonplace in all the political parties which broke off from his organization, but only the eponymous rump which remained after the splits of 1921 and 1926 habitually preached Jew-hatred, culminating in a demand for an Irish-German alliance in 1939.
The "new" IRA, itself soaked in anti-Semitism, took a similar view and attempted to forge a working relationship with the Germans.
As noted in the republican
newspaper The United Irishman of October 1951, Seán Russell, the then IRA chief
of staff and a registered representative of the Irish Republic, spent the
summer of 1940 in a ‘very large’ villa in the leafy Grunewald, near Berlin,
surrounded by extensive grounds and parks, enjoying all the privileges of a
diplomat with regard to access to food, petrol and other rationed goods.
Russell met leading Nazis
such as Nazi Foreign Minister Ribbentrop. Following the fall of France, Russell
urged that the German high command make use of the IRA to strike at British
forces in Northern Ireland as part of a general attack on Britain. His plans
were accepted and incorporated into Operation Sealion (the plan for the
invasion of Britain) as a mark of the ‘respect and esteem’ in which Russell was
held by the German military leadership.
The IRA’s main publication, War
News, became increasingly pro-Nazi in tone, but more worryingly, it began to
ape anti-Semitic arguments. The paper expressed satisfaction that the
‘cleansing fire’ of the German armies was driving the Jews from Europe. British
war minister Hore Belisha was described as a ‘wealthy Jew’ only interested in
‘profits’. War News condemned the arrival in Ireland of ‘so-called Jewish
refugees’.
Even though pre-war Ireland
was united in its dislike of the British, there were at least four discernible
factions in the IRA.
The majority leadership
grouping was sympathetic to social radicalism but primarily concerned with
developing the IRA as a military force. An important section of the leadership
was socialist, while a third section—of which Russell was probably the best example—were
committed entirely to armed force and uninterested in political debate.
A fourth smaller group was
attracted to Sinn Féin’s espousal of right-wing ‘Christian social’ policies
even as further differences existed over the relationship between the IRA in
Northern Ireland and its much larger and more influential southern counterpart.
Much of the northern IRA,
and Sinn Fein, their political arm, were attracted to Russell’s position, because
they felt marginalised and ignored by their southern comrades, even as
Russell’s own isolation in, and disillusionment with, the Republic led him to
forge now-embarrassing ties with the Nazis.
Putting the efforts of IRA
leaders like Russell into context, Brian Hanley
notes that “…the IRA in 1940 was under severe pressure and in decline. Hundreds of
its members were jailed or interned in the Curragh camp. Undoubtedly a measure
of desperation contributed to its thinking. Similarly, …much of what was
written in the [War News] was fantasy, especially the claims that the IRA was
playing a major role in the German war effort….Furthermore, War News was
illegal and therefore written and distributed surreptitiously. [Only a] small
number of people were responsible for its content and only a few IRA members
could have had any input into it. Despite the violence of some of the
anti-Jewish rhetoric in War News the IRA did not attempt to physically attack
Irish Jews.”
Even so, with the partition
of Ireland by the British in 1921, the Provisional IRA and Sinn Fein in
Northern Ireland imported a deep hostility towards partition as a solution to
territorial conflict.
This in turn led to
consistent support for the Palestinian cause some fifty years later. The
“Provos” received weapons and training from Arafat’s PLO around the early 1970s; today the IRA
allegedly provides sophisticated bomb-making materials and know-how to terror
group Hamas in war-ravaged Gaza.
But, because
the Irish Republican Army made common anti-colonialist cause with the
Palestinian Liberation Organization, with the PLO allegedly providing arms and
training for the IRA as early as the 1970s, Irish Protestant leaders, for their
part, allied themselves with the Israelis and their struggle against a
genocidal Muslim enemy.
Ironically, in March 1945, a
correspondent to The Bell, a leading Irish magazine, raged about current
events in Mandate Palestine: "Never let it be forgotten that the
Irish people ... have experienced all that the Jewish people in Palestine are
suffering from the trained 'thugs' 'gunning tarzans' and British 'terrorists'
that the Mandatory power have imposed upon the country."
But once the
Zionist movement accepted the partition of Palestine, the Irish began to draw
unflattering parallels between Israeli policies and their own divided
existence. To many, the Jewish state
now looked less like a besieged religious-national community struggling
valiantly for its natural rights and more like a colony illegitimately established by British force of arms and
intent on imposing itself on an “indigenous” population.
As a result,
Ireland only extended de jure recognition to Israel in 1963, 15 years after its
declaration of independence.
After
Ireland joined the European Union in 1973, successive governments in Dublin took
the lead in championing the Palestinian cause within Europe.
In February 1980, Ireland was the first EU
member to call for the establishment of a Palestinian state. It was also the
last to allow Israel to open a residential embassy, in December 1993.
Throughout
the Oslo Accords era and the post-Oslo era a decade later, Irish governments
continued to provide the Palestinian cause with valuable, if not unlimited,
support.
Thus, in
June 2003, Brian Cowen, then Ireland's foreign minister, visited Yasir Arafat
during the height of the Second Intifada.
It was during the Second
Intifada that 887 (78%) of the 1,137 Israelis killed in Arab terrorist attacks
from September 2000 – 2005 were civilian casualties. Another 8,341 Israelis
were wounded during this period, of which 5,676 were civilians while 2,665 were
security forces.
The majority of Jewish casualties
during Cowen’s visit and lauding of Arafat were caused by suicide bombings,
bombs, shootings, stonings, stabbings, lynchings, rockets on civilian
population centres, and other methods of attack.
And, inexplicably,
Cowen spoke for many in Ireland when he described Arafat as "the symbol of
the hope of self-determination of the Palestinian people" and praised him
for his "outstanding work ... tenacity, and persistence."
This feting
and legitimising of terror and destruction still continues in an unbroken line
and the words of Sinn Fein president Gerry Adams who, in 1983, laid down a
blueprint which remains the playbook for the PA and Hamas in the international
arena.
Back in a
May 1983 interview with Britain’s Sunday Times, Adams’ stated aim was “…to confront the British with an ongoing armed struggle which is
enjoying popular support and a principled political party which refuses to
compromise on the basic issue of British involvement in Northern Ireland."
The aim of
such a policy of confrontation, he added, was so that the British "…would be unable to govern."
Thus, as
Adams expanded, the political role is merely to "broaden and popularise the struggle. For in the end the movement will
have to depend on whatever armed pressure the IRA can bring."
If that
sounds eerily familiar to Israel watchers today, it is because, if Hamas/PA is substituted for IRA, we have a copybook re-enactment of
Sinn Fein strategy being perniciously played out by Hamas in the Middle East
today.
This ongoing
tacit Irish apologism for Palestinian wrongdoing together with a disdainful
disregard of the Jews’ unbroken connection with the country going back to one
thousand years before the Arab conquest of an indigenous Jewish peoples and
nation, is an inversion of Orwellian proportions, the scale of which the
British author himself could only dream of.
It is,
therefore, this peculiar Irish post-colonialist pathology which continues to nurture
to a recurrent Arab psychology of intransigence, intolerance and a refusal to
take responsibility for actions, which lethally endanger a new generation of
Jew and Arab alike.
And as with all dictatorships of the mind, distrust
and fear of other feed periodic outbursts of pointless violence.
In Israel in 2014, Jews today continue to pay the price, through murder and wanton destruction, for a frightening foreign ideology of hate and segregation whose time we thought had long passed.