Your Lunatic Lordship

At the time of writing this story, Indian police in three states are looking for the High Court Justice Chinnaswami Swaminathan Karnan (hereafter called “Karnan” to limit the wordcount). Karnan is bald, with a bristled grey moustache, white religious mark on his forehead, and is usually suited and booted except in his sleep.

Karnan has been a HC Judge for eight years, and what an electrifying period of eight years it has been. In 2011, he formally complained against a fellow judge for deliberately touching him by foot, because he is a Dalit, a lower caste person. The upper caste judges always discriminated against him. He would barge into other court rooms where fellow judges were conducting their cases - Karnan suspected other judges (upper caste) were given better cases. Angry at the injustice, he would start shouting and interfering. The upper caste judges smiled and tolerated it all. Complaining against Karnan could stamp you as anti-Dalit.

Sex defines marriage

Karnan’s judgements were innovative. In June 2013, he pronounced an important moral verdict. If a man and a woman, both adult and unmarried, have sex, their act of sexual gratification is a valid marriage under law. Exchanging rings or garlands, registering the marriage and following religious customs were for the satisfaction of society. Consummation constituted marriage. Some sections of media and public, essentially immoral people, protested against the judgement. Karnan then issued a “gag order”, (a Judge’s prerogative), silencing everyone.

In late 2014, twenty Madras (Chennai) HC judges wrote a letter to the Supreme Court. It talked about the anguish and agony suffered by all of them at the hands of this gentleman. Look, they are all discriminating against me, harassing me, said Karnan in response.

Boss is not a superior

In a few months, Karnan started Suo Motu proceedings against his own boss, Justice Sanjay Kaul, the Chief Justice of the Madras HC. (Suo Motu is another privilege of a judge, to begin a case at his own initiative, without a plaintiff or police). Karnan accused his boss of giving him dummy cases. Because of his caste. The SC ordered a stay on those proceedings. Infuriated at the interference, Karnan launched criminal proceedings against the two SC judges who had ordered the stay. Karnan’s order charged them under the SC/ST atrocities act. (An act to protect atrocities against lower castes).

Transfer and cc to all

The SC deliberated Karnan’s matter for months. Finally, on 12 February 2016, the Chief Justice of India ordered his transfer from Chennai to Calcutta. During British days, criminals and political convicts were transferred to the Andaman Islands. In independent India, unruly judges are transferred to the north-east of India.

All hell broke loose when Karnan saw his transfer order. How dare anyone transfer him without his prior consent? Three days later, Karnan issued a judicial order bringing a stay on the transfer. In his order, he said to the SC, “I am apt to constrain Your Lordship’s Order after invoking Article 226 of the Constitution of India, by staying Your Lordship’s tentative recommendation Order dated 12.02.2016... I request Your Lordship not to interfere in my jurisdiction...” He also asked the SC to submit a written statement in two weeks’ time. Karnan sent a copy of his judicial order to the Prime Minister, President, Law Minister, leaders of all opposition parties and the National Commission for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (called “SC/ST Commission” hereafter). He always sent copies of his important orders to prominent politicians and the SC/ST commission. Karnan was perfectly entitled to it; no law prohibited sending copies of the order.

The SC, instead of sending a written explanation as demanded by Karnan’s order, made all his orders, suo motu or otherwise, null and void. Karnan knew they had done it because he belonged to a lower caste. Reluctantly, and after wild protests, he agreed to move to Calcutta. In the Calcutta HC, he became a full-fledged HC Judge again, capable of passing valid orders. The Madras HC – its judges, staff and secretaries – threw a grand party to celebrate Karnan’s departure for Calcutta.

Letter to the Prime Minister

On 23 Jan. 2017, Karnan wrote an open letter to the Prime Minister of India. The letter listed 20 corrupt HC and SC judges. He asked the PM to arrange their interrogation by a central competent agency. For unknown reasons, the PM did nothing. Karnan didn’t issue any order against the Prime Minister; probably he wanted to give him some time.

The SC of India, on the other hand, reacted. It issued a contempt notice against Karnan, for degrading the judiciary and making allegations of corruption against SC Judges. In March, the top court issued a warrant against Karnan, barring him from practicing in the court.

This was outrageous. Instead of investigating the corruption among the judges, the whistleblower was about to be punished. This was unacceptable to Karnan. On 16 March, he issued an order asking the SC judges (issuers of the contempt notice) to pay Rs 14 crore (2 million dollars) for disturbing his mind and normal life. He ordered the Registrar General of the SC to deduct the amount from the salaries of each of the accused.

Two weeks later, the SC wondered, for the first time, if there was something wrong with Karnan’s mental health. By now, Karnan, unable to work from the court, was working from his residence in Calcutta. He issued an order summoning the SC judges to his residence for questioning his mental health.

On 1 May, the SC ordered that a medical team should examine Karnan for any mental illness. The following day, Karnan issued an order to the Air Control Authority of India asking it to prevent any of the SC Judges from travelling abroad, since otherwise they could spread the virus of caste discrimination globally.

On 4 May, the medical team sent by the SC visited Karnan at his Calcutta home (now also an HC office). Karnan offered them tea, talked as politely as he could, and despatched them off. By now India’s most recognised judge; TV channels were vying for his interviews. Karnan soundly argued that the SC erred in sendingthe order to him. If he was mentally ill, (which of course he was not) the order should be sent to his relatives and not him. In any case, mental illness has nothing to do with the soundness of a person’s mind, he added.

A deserving punishment

By now, Karnan had had enough of the unfair SC. He must give them a deserving punishment. This week, on Monday, Karnan sentenced J.S.Khehar, the Chief Justice of India and seven other SC judges to 5 years of Rigorous Imprisonment and a fine of Rs 100,000 each. They are charged under the SC/ST (prevention of atrocities) Act. If the fine is not paid within a week, they will serve another six months of imprisonment.

Karnan directed Delhi’s Director General of Police to arrest the SC judges. (The poor man didn’t know Delhi, unlike other states, has a Commissioner of Police and not DGP, but that didn’t really matter.) As usual, he sent copies of his orders to the SC/ST Commission. 

Oddly enough, the SC judges, instead of surrendering themselves, pronounced a six-month jail for Karnan, and issued a non-bailable warrant. Karnan’s lawyer argued that next month he turns 62 and is obliged to retire. (Sixty-two is the retirement age for judges of all castes). That was a reasonable request. Why send an HC Judge to jail and spoil the reputation of the Indian judiciary, when a month’s wait can send him to retirement? The unreasonable SC disagreed.

For the last three days the police have been looking for Karnan in Bengal, Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh. He is not found. His lawyer, though, has launched a case in the SC to bring a stay on the order sending Karnan to jail. Unless the SC wants to engage in discriminatory practices, it must consider Karnan’s appeal.

*****

Analysis

The inbreeding of Judges

Who appoints judges? In the USA, we recently saw Trump nominating Neil Gorsuch to the SC and the senate somehow confirming it. When politicians appoint judges, can the judges rule against those politicians or their parties? Judges are human, and unfortunately can suffer from the same biases as all of us do. Indian judges retire at 62, American SC judges don’t retire, they are in power until death. The American SC now has 5 conservative and 4 liberal judges. It is expected that borderline cases will, for the foreseeable future, get conservative verdicts by a 5:4 vote.

Judges can also be elected, as in the State Court Judges in 32 out of 50 states of the USA. Like politicians, those judges need campaign money, and it is too much to expect them to rule against the sponsors in court cases. 

In India, the judiciary has for long fought against any politician interfering in the selection process of the judges. India’s finance minister called this ‘the tyranny of the unelected’. In what is called the Collegium system, a judicial inbreeding system, judges select judges. After the Karnan saga, nobody clearly remembered how he was appointed. Karnan was appointed by three judges. Justice P.K.Mishra apologised for appointing him without knowing him. The Chief Justice of India then, justice Balkrishnan said: “Others propose the names, and we go by that. I didn’t make any specific enquiry about him.” Justice A.K. Ganguly who had proposed Karnan’s name said he didn’t remember, it was so long ago. He thought for social justice, a Dalit judge should be part of the HC Judiciary.

India has fewer than 600 High Court judges and only 31 Supreme Court judges. That is half a judge for every million. (Or one HC/SC judge per 2 million Indians). Absolutely no written record is kept of the appointment procedure. Three judges get together over tea and biscuits, discuss a candidate (like Karnan) and appoint him. With no checks and balances, the Indian judiciary is supremely powerful. (Indira Gandhi was convicted by a High Court judge for a minor misfeasance, causing the Emergency of 1975) And if you criticise the judiciary too strongly, you may attract contempt charges and go to jail.

Reservation

An affirmative action (USA) or positive discrimination (UK) is called “reservation” in India. It is essential to support historically oppressed sections of society. In India, schedules (lists) of such people are prepared. Castes and tribes falling into the lists are the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (SC/ST). Many Indian institutions follow reservations by making entry easy for the SC/ST candidate, not exit. In other words, an SC/ST candidate may enter a medical institute with entry standards relaxed. However, he must study, compete with everyone and qualify to become a doctor just like everyone else. In critical areas of life, professionals must be selected on merit. A blind person is handicapped, and deserves sympathy, but he can’t be made a pilot to show positive discrimination. A High Court judge is a serious profession capable of affecting the lives of many people. He must be selected on merit, not on caste. Karnan is not the first or the last SC/ST judge in India. The others, though, were selected despite their caste, and not because of it.

The enigmatic language

Indian judiciary’s argument about keeping the appointments within a family is that the Indian politicians are not yet evolved (meaning they are backward). There is some merit in this argument, since an illiterate Indian can become a member of the Indian parliament (and many do), age and residence being the only qualifications. Judges, on the other hand, have a law degree as a minimum.

Reality, though, shows that the law degree is no evidence of quality education. The legal profession, just like politics, is not the first choice of the brightest Indian minds. Second, many of the judgements are so enigmatically written, one wonders which law colleges teach such creative writing. Look at the following judgement of a High Court:

“(The)...tenant in the demised premises stands aggrieved by the pronouncement made by the learned Executing Court upon his objections constituted therebefore...wherewithin the apposite unfoldments qua his resistance to the execution of the decree stood discountenanced by the learned Executing Court”.

Such abstract language is not exceptional, it’s widespread. The Supreme Court quashed the above verdict, not on any legal grounds, but by saying they didn’t understand what the HC judge wanted to say. (Compare this to a beautiful ruling written in plain English with Emoji, web symbols, so that children affected by the case can read it. http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWFC/HCJ/2016/9.html . This ruling from last year was written by Mr Justice Peter Jackson from an English High Court.)

Karnan’s case makes it imperative to involve people from outside the judiciary in the selection process. Also, as in any corporation, the process must be transparent with records maintained in writing.

Why was Karnan not impeached?

In theory, an Indian judge can be impeached. But the process is so complicated that both the houses of Parliament will need to spend days, possibly months, trying to get the vote through.

In some countries, buffoons become judges. In some countries, buffoons become presidents. Until they can be removed after a long struggle, we simply need to sit back and enjoy the show.

Ravi 

Pokémon-go in the Church-on-Blood

Playing in the virtual world can sometimes have unimaginable consequences in the real world.  Ruslan Sokolovsky, a 22 year old resident of Yekaterinburg, Russia, will have to wait until the coming Thursday to find out what they are in his case.

Ruslan Sokolovsky

Ruslan lost his father at the age of 13. His mother is chronically unwell. Ruslan moved from one faculty to another before settling to study law. At a young age, he decided God didn’t exist, and that religious people are irrational, perhaps psychologically weak. Religious institutions are deplorable, hand-in-glove with the politicians. Ruslan calls himself an atheist, a cosmopolitan and a libertarian. He began recording his thoughts and posting them as a video-blog. He soon developed a fan-base of a few thousands. He was delighted to learn he could monetise his popularity. He badly needed money for his survival and his mother’s care.

Pokémon-Go

In July 2016, the world saw the release of a new virtual reality game, Pokémon-go. Without it, this story would not have happened.  Pokémon-Go, in case you don’t know, is a GPS based game, where you go to public places with your Smartphone trying to catch the Pokémon (Pocket Monsters). As children, we ran after butterflies. After escaping a few times, when the butterfly was finally caught, it was an achievement for us. Catching Pokémon is similar, though much more complicated. The game is hugely addictive. Last summer, you could see Pokemaniacs of different ages running across roads, in parks, on beaches, in public spaces.

In the same month, Ruslan watched a news item on “Rossiya-24”, a TV channel. It warned viewers not to try to catch Pokémon in Russian orthodox churches.

As an atheist-nihilist, Ruslan decided to rebel. He went to the city’s most famous church – Church on Blood. After the 1917 Russian revolution the Tsar, his entire family and entourage were shot, bayoneted, and clubbed to death in this place, hence the name. (The church was built after the collapse of the USSR). Ruslan went around the church with his Smartphone in hand, trying to catch Pokémon. He didn’t say a word, nobody really noticed him. These days a person walking without a Smartphone attracts more attention.

Ruslan then went home, and prepared a video-report of his church visit. His report concluded with a piece of satire. It said he didn’t catch any Pokémon; not even the rarest Pokémon, Jesus. To spice up the video, he added a prayer with maternal insults in the background. The digital generation loves what is profane more than what is profound.

 The video clip spread like wildfire (1.2 million views). A psychiatrist on one TV channel called Sokolovsky mentally ill. Another channel discussed how Pokémon-Go creates hallucinations. The Orthodox Church expressed its displeasure, said it would meet him along with the police to teach him how to respect religion. The Church wanted people to pray, not play, in the church.   

A little before that, a Synagogue in St Petersburg had organised a competition. People were invited to the synagogue to catch Pokémon. The person who caught the maximum was given a bottle of ‘Kosher wine’ as a reward. The synagogue spokeswoman declared the event to be great fun. 

Official reaction

A week after Ruslan’s video, the Ministry of Internal Affairs issued a statement saying the blogger’s video is being investigated by the police centre for combating extremism. Things began moving faster in September. Early morning on 2 September (the police prefer to raid houses when the occupants are sleeping), Ruslan’s apartment was raided. He was arrested and his video equipment confiscated. The judge remanded him to custody for two months. After his appeal, the detention was converted into house arrest.

Ruslan would have been under house arrest until the completion of his trial. However, his girlfriend came to his house to wish him on his birthday. As luck would have it, she bumped into an inspector. A house prisoner meeting anyone without official permission is a breach of regulations. Ruslan was sent back to the detention centre, where he would spend most of the winter. Russian winters can be long and miserable.

A month before his trial, in a form of relief, he was back under house arrest. The trial began on 13 March and would go on for nearly two months.

Ruslan was charged under three sections of Russia’s criminal law.

282: Inciting hatred or enmity and insulting human dignity.

148: Public actions expressing clear disrespect to society with the aim of insulting religious feelings of believers committed in places for religious worship. (This section was added in 2013, following the Pussy Riot case, where a group of young Russian women performed anti-Putin songs in a Moscow church).

138: Violation of the secrecy of conversations of individuals. (During the house raid, the police found a pen with a camera in it. This has been submitted in evidence as a ‘spy pen’).

The Trial

In a spirit of openness, the entire trial was transmitted live, filmed and posted on YouTube. Anyone who knows the Russian language can watch it, and pass his own judgement. The trial was full of a variety of characters.

Socio-psychic-psychiatric-religio-linguistic experts were called in by both sides. They discussed which words may or may not disrespect, hurt, insult. Does a maternal insult humiliate a person or offend him?

Ruslan’s advocate wrote to Patriarch Kirill (Russia’s Pope) asking whether he felt insulted. The Patriarch’s office replied this was a matter for the courts to decide.

The state witnesses said, yes, they were offended. They looked too elderly and too simple to have ever operated the internet. When Ruslan’s advocate probed deeper, a witness admitted she was invited by the police to watch Ruslan’s clip in an auditorium. She watched it and then felt deeply hurt and humiliated. A Muslim witness was added for good measure. He said he felt insulted as well, because Islam and Christianity have the same roots.

Ruslan’s advocate often asked the witnesses to show how they felt hurt. Show me where and how you were hurt, he asked, as if this was an automobile accident. No witness could answer him.

Amnesty International, meanwhile, had issued a statement calling Ruslan Sokolovsky a “prisoner of conscience” and asking the world community to write to Russian prosecutors demanding his immediate release.

The mayor of Yekaterinburg said people were not forced to watch clips on internet. If you don’t like someone or something, don’t watch it. He said Tolstoy and Pushkin had debated similar topics (religion), except they hadn’t used swear words.

The lady prosecutor demanded Ruslan be imprisoned for 3 ½ years.

In his final address, Ruslan refused to accept his guilt. He said he could be an idiot, but not an extremist. He has not disturbed anybody, or caused any violence. He is responsible for his ill mother. He appealed against a prison sentence. He knows what Russian prisons are like, imprisonment would destroy him.

The lady judge will give her verdict on Thursday, 11 May.

*****

Analysis

Salman Rushdie, Charlie Hebdo and Ruslan Sokolovsky

Salman Rushdie had to hide for eleven years after the publication of his Satanic Verses. I don’t think Khomeini ever read the book before issuing the fatwa. (Rushdie writes in a language of magic realism which is hard to understand for those who read Sidney Sheldon or Jeffrey Archer. However, Rushdie’s genius can be seen in Joseph Anton, his memoir written in plain and beautiful English. The basis for Joseph Anton is Rushdie’s period of living in fear for eleven years). With a different title, it’s possible the Muslim world would have ignored the book. If Rushdie knew what was going to happen, I doubt he would have written the book. Writers are revolutionaries in spirit, but they don’t wish to be killed in that revolution. Rushdie had ample freedom of speech in the country he was the citizen of, but his book hurt the feelings of a foreign theocrat.

In January, 2015 twelve people including sub-editors and eminent cartoonists of Charlie Hebdo, a satirical French newspaper were killed by two brothers carrying guns. Charlie Hebdo calls itself secular, anti-religious. It publishes cartoons and articles against Christianity, Islam, Judaism and other religions. The reason for the attack was its publishing of cartoons on Prophet Mohammad. Though attacked in 2011 and 2015, Charlie Hebdo continues to publish satire mocking religions, including Islam.

In Rushdie’s case, the punishment was announced by an extraterritorial religious head. In the case of Charlie Hebdo, two terrorists executed twelve people for the alleged insult.

Sokolovsky’s case, though he is accused of insulting religious feelings as well, is different. It is an official case Sokolovsky vs Russian Orthodox Church which will be decided by the secular Russian state.

Atheism to religion

An obvious irony is that Russia under communism was atheist. Public propagation of religion was a punishable crime. In Brest Border: my open diary in Jan. 2008, I wrote about the persecution and imprisonment of Hare Krishna devotees in the Soviet days. Back then, Amnesty called them the prisoners of conscience. Russians can now be charged for hurting the feelings of the religious people. There doesn’t seem to be any law against hurting the feelings of atheists.

Another curious thing is that Ruslan’s offensive video clips are still in the web. Russian churchgoers, please open the links, watch Sokolovsky, and get insulted and possibly humiliated. Material capable of spreading such hatred and enmity is still accessible to anyone eight months after Sokolovsky’s arrest. Is that not bizarre?  

Sokolovsky would be classified as a dissident, someone strongly opposing established doctrines and practices. The Internet is flooded with hate, swear words, blasphemy. Why Sokolovsky? Because his thinking reached a scale. More than one million people watched his clip. As soon as a provocative thinker or writer reaches large numbers, he becomes a dissident. A dissident’s success or fame can put him in danger.

Amnesty International and others who cry against such processes actually may be doing a disservice to the accused. Russia is a proud nation. It doesn’t want to be perceived as deciding Russian cases under the pressure of human rights or other organisations from the west.

That the trial was transmitted live and the video clips in question are still accessible is a welcome democratic step. The Russian state has run a risk of making Sokolovsky a hero (or a martyr). Though he has used foul language to please his target viewers, Sokolovsky comes across as a rational, articulate, well-read and strong-minded person. The Church offered to withdraw the case if he repented. Sokolovsky refused to accept his guilt or ask the church for forgiveness.

The Verdict

What is the judge supposed to do?

She can dismiss the case and release Sokolovsky. This is nearly impossible. Four investigators were appointed on the case. In a region where 30,000 cases of significant gravity remain pending, much effort has been invested in this case. Special prosecutors were appointed, witnesses for the prosecution invited. One simply can’t dismiss a case after all that. Moreover, dismissing the case would be a victory for Amnesty International and all those western critics. Russia must define its freedom of expression not by the standards of the west.

It would be good if Sokolovsky gets a suspended sentence. As a condition, he may be asked to stop sacrilegious video-blogging. Such a reprieve, though, will offend the Orthodox Church. Sokolovksy has refused to repent. In the absence of repentance, the Church will expect real punishment. Russian Orthodox Church and the Russian state must help one another to keep their respective powers intact.

The most likely outcome is a two-year imprisonment and a fine. That way, future dissidents are deterred as well. Later, once Ruslan has tested enough of prison life, a presidential pardon can be issued. President Putin is likely to be re-elected in March 2018. He can then pardon Ruslan before the start of the 2018 FIFA world cup in Russia. That will stop Amnesty International lobbying for a World Cup boycott from the west.

Ravi 

Select webography

1.       https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PfMn1yahGYk The clip called “Pokemon go prank” with English subtitles. The main reason for the case. Warning: includes swear words.

2.      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfPC-KhPCv4 10-minute concluding speech of Sokolovsky (in Russian).

3.      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hEg0MCSr098 A religious witness explaining how she was insulted and humiliated. (In Russian) Fairly amusing to watch the exchange.

4.      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmRtwopybU0 a variety of insulted witnesses. The priest confirms the clip insulted each and every orthodox Christian. (in Russian)

5.      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yIHqhWogeo Almost a full length film. Interrogation of Sokolovsky. Gives us a good idea about the court process in Russia. (in Russian)

6.      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2QVGM7rGd8o Mayor of Yekaterinburg, a very articulate person,  says this case shouldn’t have come to the court in a secular state. (in Russian)

R.

The Jewish Question: Part Five

The Second World War ended in 1945 with a big bang made by two nuclear bombs. Seventy-two years later we continue to live in the shadow of that war.

World War Victors

United Nations Security Council is the UN arm responsible for world peace and security. It can pass resolutions to condemn the unacceptable behaviour of nations, order UN sanctions, send peacekeeping forces, or announce UN military actions. These resolutions, once passed, are binding on all UN members, and there are 193 of them. However, five members; USA, UK, France, Russia and China enjoy special powers called ‘veto’. A ‘no’ from any one of these countries means the resolution is sent to the dustbin. Why do they have such an extraordinary privilege? Because they won the Second World War.

The Axis powers- Germany (Hitler), Italy (Mussolini) and Japan (Emperor Hirohito) were soundly defeated. USA (Truman), UK (Churchill), USSR (Stalin) and China (Chiang Kai-Shek) declared themselves as the four policemen for future global peace. At Churchill’s insistence, France, a fellow colonial power, was added to this exclusive club. These five countries are the only ones allowed to freely and officially develop, build up, proliferate, test and use nuclear weapons. An equally devastating weapon in their possession is veto power.

The Veto Power

UK and France haven’t used a veto since the end of the Cold War. Before that, UK primarily used it to protect the interests of the ruling Whites in South Africa. Since 1970, China has used it 11 times, USSR/Russia 23 times and the USA 79 times. Veto power makes these countries immune to any UN actions or criticism. When the USA invaded Panama (1989), the USA/UK/France blocked the resolution to condemn the USA and order withdrawal of its forces. Similarly, when Russia attacked Georgia (2009) and took over Crimea (2014), UN could neither condemn nor act because Russia vetoed the resolutions. In theory; USA, Russia, China, UK and France can - with impunity - invade other countries, indulge in war crimes, or commit genocides and the UN Security Council can’t even condemn them.

The great powers, the bullies who won the Second World War, can also protect their “clients” by use of a veto. This month, on 12 April, Russia blocked a UN resolution to condemn Assad over the chemical gas incident, just as it has vetoed every resolution on Syria since 2011. Not surprisingly, the UN can’t condemn, impose sanctions, begin UN military action or punish Assad’s regime in any manner. Syria is Russia’s client.

Since 1982, USA has used its veto power on 32 occasions to block resolutions concerning Israel. All attempts of UN to declare sanctions or initiate action to remove illegal settlements have been frustrated by the USA veto. Not only that, USA has blocked all UN attempts to bring Israel’s nuclear arsenal on the International Atomic Energy Agency’s agenda. Israel is America’s client.

America’s Israel obsession

Since World War II, Israel is the largest recipient of US Aid, having received more than 140 billion USD. Currently, it receives 3 billion USD per annum, equivalent of a 500 USD per year subsidy to each Israeli citizen. (Another 38 billion US Dollars are committed in aid between 2019-2028). In addition, the USA promises to raise 500 million $ per annum for joint US-Israeli missile defense programs.

*****

In May 1998, I was attending an international conference in the UK. At the breakfast table I was surrounded by my colleagues, many of them British and Americans. India’s nuclear tests the previous day were the headlines in the British newspapers. I was the only Indian in that gathering. I remember some of them looking at me with scorn, as if I was responsible for the crime of testing a nuclear weapon. One British guy had the nerve to ask me if I was not ashamed. I said I am a pacifist, and denounce all weapons. However, I denounce discrimination and double standards as well. I’m glad, I said, that India has reduced the possibility of you guys launching a nuclear attack against us.

This hypocrisy continues, as we have seen in the last few years, with Iran and North Korea. One country’s privilege is another country’s crime.

Against this backdrop, is it not strange that we rarely hear about Israel being a nuclear state? Israel has nuclear capacity for more than fifty years, having conducted its first tests in the 1960s. In fact, Iran, over the years, has attempted to develop nuclear capabilities because of the nuclear Israel.

*****

Israel is the USA’s most pampered protégé with financial aid, diplomatic support (veto power) and secret backing for its nuclear programme. What could be the reasons for such an obsession?

During the Cold War, one could argue such support was justified. Syria and Egypt were Soviet clients. To counter that, America thought Israel to be the right base in the Middle East. Israel is modern, fairly prosperous and the only country in the Middle East that may be called a western democracy.

Once the Cold War was over, the War on Terror began. America’s military establishment always needs a long-term enemy for its survival and growth. Islamic terrorism replaced communism as America’s arch-enemy. USA and Israel share that enemy (their combined effort possibly created Islamic terrorism, but that’s another issue). However, this collaboration doesn’t excuse Israel’s occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem, its unstoppable illegal settlements, its inhuman blockade of the Gaza strip. Also, Israel’s actual help in any Middle East war is minimal. It is the USA which has taken upon itself the job of protecting and subsidizing Israel.  That support is vastly disproportionate to what the USA gets out of it.

An obsession practised for a long time turns into an Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD). The OCD patient can’t control the obsession, even when he knows it’s wrong. As I write these words, the American senate has published a letter to the UN secretary-general signed by each of the 100 senators individually. The letter complains about the UN’s anti-Israel bias, agenda, and actions of certain UN bodies reinforcing anti-Semitism. The US Senate urges the UN to improve UN’s treatment of Israel. UN should eliminate or reform funds and committees that criticise Israel. Ask UNESCO to not criticise Israel and stop doubting the Jewish and Christian connection to Jerusalem. UN’s Human Rights Council (UNHRC) targeting Israel must stop. It’s worth reading this letter in its entirety to understand America’s OCD with Israel. Writing a letter to the UN demanding better treatment of Israel was the most important item for one hundred US senators on the 100^th day of Trump in office.

Israel’s position

Israel, full of clever and intelligent people, has conceived a brilliant equation.

Criticism of Israel = Anti-Semitism

This equation has been propagated worldwide, and anybody criticising Israel’s policy or America’s supporting it is reminded of the historical persecution of Jews and the holocaust. The above letter also threatens the UN with this equation.

Israel’s position is very clear and unambiguous. Israel wants for itself every inch of land between the Jordan River and Mediterranean Sea. It would love for all Palestinians from the West Bank and the Gaza Strip to disappear by magic. It’s a difficult task in the 21^st century; earlier they could have been killed or expelled. Israel’s strategy is to keep the Palestinian territories occupied, continue building of settlements, raise Iran as a bogey, lobby the USA for continued support, give lip service to the universal condemnation and in case of a rare US criticism, sulk and build more settlements. Israel prefers to live with a chronic virus rather than go for an unpleasant surgery.  

In February, Donald Trump took a U-turn on the two-state solution, and asked Netanyahu to sort out the issue with the Palestinians. Trump said he likes the solution both parties like. A bully and his victim go to the school director. The school director tells the bully and the victim to sort out the bullying problem themselves.

South Africa and Israel

The reason the US senators united to write a letter to the UN was a UNHRC report applying the word apartheid to Israel. I can imagine Netanyahu, on reading the report, calling Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner angrily. Kushner immediately demanding Nikki Haley (the US ambassador to the UN) write a protest letter, and reminding the senators that not signing such a letter would be tantamount to anti-Semitism.  

Indeed, using the word apartheid to the Israel situation would be a devaluation of that word. Israel, inside its boundaries, has a democratic framework. One fifth of its population is Arabs who mingle with the Israelis and have several legal rights. In the occupied territories, West Bank and Gaza, Israel can be accused of segregation but the intent seems to be land-grabbing rather than racial apartheid.

However, the South African case is important when we talk of a solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict. South African apartheid was so inhuman and blatantly cruel that most of the world had boycotted and isolated them. From 1973 to 1988, for fifteen valuable years, USA and UK (and on some resolutions France) used their veto power to block every UN resolution demanding action against South Africa. USA and UK continued trading with South Africa to preserve their business interests. The White rulers of South Africa needed protection from black masses intent on resisting apartheid. Nelson Mandela was portrayed as a Marxist and imprisoned for 27 years. In the Cold War years, it was important for Reagan and Thatcher to ensure South Africa doesn’t turn communist.

Once America understood the imminent collapse of communism, it lost interest in South Africa. USA’s withdrawal of support spelt an end to the apartheid. Mandela was released and became the first black president.

South Africa’s outgoing president F.W.de Klerk said: “I apologise in my capacity as leader of the NP to the millions who suffered wrenching disruption of forced removals; who suffered the shame of being arrested for pass law offences; who over the decades suffered the indignities and humiliation of racial discrimination.”

Adriaan Vlok, the outgoing law minister, washed the feet of apartheid victim Frank Chikane (whom Vlok had plotted to assassinate earlier) in an act of public apology for the wrongs of the apartheid regime.

Despite the whole world sensing the injustice and cruelty in South African apartheid, it continued from 1948 to 1991- for forty four years, partly due to the diplomatic support of the U.S. through its veto power.

Israel Palestine solution

Israel or Palestinians are incapable of resolving their problems, because one is a settler colonialist and the others are in the occupied territory. The UN is incapable because of the veto power wielded by the World War II victory. United States of America is the only party which can resolve the issue. South Africa is not the only case study. USA (Clinton) withdrew its support for Suharto, the Indonesian dictator, and East Timor became independent quickly.

Though many analysts think the one-state solution as the only possibility, I disagree. If two-state solution is improbable, one-state solution is impossible. For Jews to live as a minority in a Jewish state is an oxymoron. Arabs outnumbering the Jews in a single state is a much bigger existential threat for Israel than a nuclear Iran. In my view, the one-state solution is an impractical fantasy.

If not for the USA veto shield, the two-state solution could have happened long ago. At the end of the Cold War, USA withdrew support for many client states. At some point, USA will realise the folly of continuing the War in the Middle East. Maybe that point will be reached when oil loses its historical importance. When that happens, USA simply needs to withdraw its support to Israel, stop giving aid and stop using its veto protection. Israel will then be forced to abandon all the settlements, accept a new Palestinian State, accept the partition of Jerusalem, free the Gaza strip. If the unimaginable could happen in South Africa, it also can in Israel.

That point, though, is unlikely to be reached while Donald Trump is the president of the USA.

Ravi  

Select Bibliography

1.       http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/

Jewish virtual library: Anything you need to know from Anti-Semitism to Zionism. The Jew perspective. By American-Israeli Cooperative enterprise (AICE)

2.      http://zionism-israel.com/

In defence of Zionism and Israel

3.      http://web.archive.org/web/20070205000955/http://ksgnotes1.harvard.edu:80/Research/wpaper.nsf/rwp/RWP06-011/$File/rwp_06_011_walt.pdf

The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign policy. An interesting document that says how the Jewish lobby in the US has systematically made the two countries the closest friends.

4.      https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/31/opinion/why-israel-is-nothing-like-apartheid-south-africa.html?_r=0

In this New York Times op-ed from last month, Benjamin Portgrud, a black South African who lives in Jerusalem, compares South Africa and Israel and says Israel is no apartheid state.

5.      http://www.alhaq.org/attachments/article/236/Occupation_Colonialism_Apartheid-FullStudy.pdf

Occupation, colonialism, Apartheid? A re-assessment of Israeli practices in the occupied Palestinian territories under international law.

6.      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0kgG1_6Qn0

Noam Chomsky: lecture at the Brown University: US Israeli crimes against Palestinians

7.      https://www.rubio.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/f6c7c142-8655-4c34-907b-ffe91b033f34/83A98BDD8379F7A35D6207DCB0D74B38.4-27-2017-rubio-coons-ltr-to-unsg-re-israel.pdf

A strong-worded letter signed by all 100 senators on 27 April, 2017 asking UN to not criticize Israel.

R.