Massive destruction has been exposed to Gaza since the outbreak of the “Al-Aqsa Flood” battle, as the Israeli army launches a war of extermination against civilians (Getty)
Why are the consciences of decision-makers in the capitals of Europe and America reassured as they stand with Israel - hand in hand and shoulder to shoulder - as it wages a merciless crusade of annihilation against the last bastions of Palestinian resistance?
There is nothing new in the war of extermination if we look at it from the European-American perspective or from the perspective of Western civilization from Athens, then Rome, then Spain, then Portugal, then the Netherlands, then France, then Britain, then Germany, then America, then Zionism, a civilization founded on Violence, the superiority of the West, and the low view of everyone who is non-Western or non-white.
In the eyes of the West, he is barbaric, barbaric, backward, or pagan, and these are all justifications that justify the crime of genocide with a reassured heart, whiten its face and remove from it the sinfulness it contains, and then give it the description of a sacred mission or sacred duty.
Violence and arrogance are inherent to Western civilization in all its stages. They accompany it, whether it is pagan, whether it is Christian, or whether it is colonial. Violence has not left it for a moment. If it did not export it outside of it and against the Gentiles, it would practice it against itself among its tribes, then between its religious sects, then between its nationalities, then between its empires. Which struggled and shared influence, plunder and control over six continents.
Physical and moral annihilation
The West cannot live without war, and war is not only limited to breaking the opponent's strength, but it develops into annihilating him, whether in a physical way that means wiping the opponent off the face of the earth and canceling his presence and presence in the books of history, or annihilating him morally.
That is, decisively stripping him of his effectiveness, distorting his identity, making him lose confidence in himself, and pushing him to deny himself, detach himself from his essence, and servilely orbit the victorious West and the leader, from the position of the defeated and subordinate, his crushed psyche, his distorted mentality, and his degenerate spirituality.
The West succeeded in both types of material and moral annihilation in confronting the Arab-Islamic East. It emerged - with the exception of the Palestinian resistance - from the circle of confrontation, and began to revolve - with marginal exceptions - in the orbits of the victorious West, and Zionism is nothing but an exclusive representative of this Western violence, supremacy and arrogance.
The West - in Palestine - is waging its eternal battle, from the Greeks, the Romans, and even the Crusaders, the French, the English, to the Americans.
Zionism - in essence - is waging a battle against the West, or it is a link in the series of Western violence that has never stopped being exported to the East: ancient and modern.
The meaning when we decide that the West is waging the battle of Zionism is equal to the meaning when we decide that Zionism is waging the battle of the West. Zionism - in the form in which we know it - is an important tool of the West in controlling the East. If Zionism had not existed in this place and at this time, it would have been The West has invented - without hesitation - what will replace it, stand in its place, represent it, and perform its role.
There is no life for the West without putting the Arab-Islamic East in a cage, and it performs this mission through two ways: employing Zionism, and employing those who accept employment from some of the rulers of the East, and some of its political, intellectual, and economic elites. Zionism is no longer in service alone, and Zionism is no longer Jewish only. Arab and Islamic tributaries joined forces with it.
This explains to you the major dilemma: why the entire West - led by America - is lining up with Israel, and it also explains to you why the entire Arab-Islamic East is abandoning the Palestinian resistance.
One front
The West - with Zionism, acts as a single front, as a single alliance, linked by agreement on the principle that defeating Israel is inadmissible, that compromising its security is not permissible, and that threatening its existence from its roots is a threat to the West itself, and the climax of this alliance is the consensus on America’s undisputed leadership. No one departs from its umbrella, and it - in and of itself - is loyal to its leadership role as an empire heir to Western violence, supremacy and arrogance.
The American President is an actual global emperor who possesses powers that have never been possessed by an emperor before, neither Alexander, nor Caesar, nor Harun al-Rashid, nor Suleiman the Magnificent, nor Queen Victoria, and despite all that is said about the balance and mutual control between the authorities in the American political system, Holding the president accountable before Congress does not limit his powers, as his political weight in America and the world - in the end - is equal to the weight of the Pentagon, the weight of the Ministry of Defense, and the weight of the unprecedented ability in history to militarize the universe: its land, sea, atmosphere, and outer space.
The empire leads the entire West - including Zionism - to eliminate the last breath of independent identity that is not crushed by the hegemony of the West and Zionism in the East.
The age of Israel is the age of American leadership. Both are signs of the twentieth century, the century in which the last global bond linking Muslims vanished. On this week in 1924 AD, the last Islamic caliphate fell. It fell after living seven centuries, including two centuries of formation and formation, and three. Centuries at the peak of empowerment, and two centuries of gradual decline.
Over the course of three centuries, it provided defensive walls that protected the Islamic East from the Christian West. The actual decline began with Bonaparte’s invasion of Egypt in 1798 AD. It did not repel him from Egypt, but when he moved from Egypt, heading to the Levant and from there Jerusalem, its armies were waiting for him and he turned away, and the first modern Zionism failed. .
Shock and disappointment
Likewise, when the Allied forces moved from Egypt towards the Levant - with Jerusalem at its heart - the Ottoman forces were camped waiting for them on the Sinai front. They were defeated by the forces of General Allenby in the Battle of Beersheba on October 31, 1917 AD, and he left and continued his advance - which he was unable to do. Bonaparte - to Jerusalem.
The Ottoman forces chose to withdraw from the city so that it would not be destroyed if war broke out on its walls. They left it after providing it with protection for 673 years, and General Allenby entered it, so church bells rose in Rome, and from that date on the ninth of December 1917 AD, Jerusalem was in The era of the new Crusade, and the new Crusade is responsible for ensuring the existence, survival and supremacy of Zionism.
There is no difference between the mission of General Allenby and the American president - or the last emperor of the West - Biden, or before him, or after him. Any Christian general would have done what General Allenby did, and any American president would have done what the current president is doing, and say the same about any Western ruler. There is no difference between Peter the Hermit 1050-1115 AD, Louis IX 1212-1270 AD, Napoleon Bonaparte 1769-1821 AD, and the current President Emmanuel Macron, who was born in the year of President Sadat’s visit to Jerusalem in 1977 AD.
Likewise, there is no difference between the German King Frederick II 1194 - 1250 AD, who reclaimed Jerusalem after Saladin liberated it. There is no difference between him and the current German president and his foreign minister except that Frederick II - with all his crusaderism - was more rational and less fanatical than the current German leaders, as he He did not regain Jerusalem into the arms of the Crusaders through war, but rather took advantage of the divisions and bloody conflicts between Saladin's heirs and obtained it - as a peace, a gift, and a token of friendship and alliance - from King Al-Kamil 1177 - 1233 AD.
Historian Dr. Qasim Abdo Qasim, on page 118 of his book “On the History of the Ayyubids and the Mamluks,” describes this incident by saying: “Frederick II came with a meager army, and on his neck was the papal decree of excommunication, but he returned with gains that no other Crusade could achieve since the success of the Crusade.” The first to occupy Jerusalem in the last years of the eleventh century AD.
Then he says on page 119: “The shock was violent to the Islamic world, as the policy of submissiveness and fear that Sultan al-Kamil followed bore its bitter fruits in this scandalous treaty. He surrendered - without a fight - everything that the Muslims had conquered during the days of his grandfather Saladin al-Ayyubi after Long wars of reconquest.”
Corrupt consciousness
The Palestinian resistance, which withstood the winter of 2023 AD - 2024 AD in the face of the Crusader-Zionist alliance, was Saladin’s last breath.
That is, the last correct awareness of the essence of the conflict, the conflict between the entire Islamic East and the entire Christian West, and not internal conflicts between Muslims and Muslims, in contrast to the model of corrupt awareness represented by Al-Malik Al-Kamil - Saladin’s nephew - as his conflicts between his Ayyubid brothers forced him to ally himself with the enemy. Strategically, then handing over Jerusalem to the Crusaders - as a gift - would be the price of this corrupt awareness and wrong alliance.
Look around you in the capitals of Arabism and Islam, and you will see the perfect king alive and not dead.
Corrupt awareness, wrong alliances, a corrupt weapon, a weapon that bounces back to the nation's chest.
The corrupt consciousness, or the model of complete kingship, is behind: the plight of the resistance, the Arab-Islamic disappointment, the silent withdrawal from considering the Palestinian issue as the issue of the entire nation and not just the Palestinian people.
Its burdens must be distributed among all Arabs and Muslims.
More dangerous than all of this is the corrupt consciousness behind the failure to eliminate the resistance in its proper place. It is part of history, as it is part of a project, and it is part of the future.
Or is it - extermination - a mechanism approved by the West to deal with us, or to deal with those it deems a threat to it.
Ian Law is a researcher in ethnic and racial studies, and he is the founder and director of the Center for Ethnic and Racial Studies at the University of Leeds in the United Kingdom. He has an important book that has been translated into Arabic under the title: “Racism and Racial Intolerance from Discrimination to Genocide.” In the first chapter he explains the roots of the idea Racial superiority, as a sense of distinction, results in superiority of oneself and then contempt for others. The combination of superiority and contempt results in violence, and violence leads to extermination, then extermination results in resistance.
On p. 54, he chronicles it - that is, genocide - in the modern world order from the beginning of the fifteenth century onwards, as racism and racial intolerance carved a place for themselves in our memory and understanding of the world through forms of genocide.
Atlantic slavery
These forms include mass killings of indigenous people in the Americas and Australia in the context of settler colonialism;
That is, invasion, occupation, and the replacement of the original people of the place by colonial settlers, as well as genocide through what is called Atlantic slavery, which is bringing slaves - forcibly - to work on the settlers’ farms - by force - and this slavery resulted in the killing of 15 to 20 million people.
In order to understand the ongoing war of extermination against the Palestinians, we need to put it in its correct context: settler colonialism that gets rid of the country’s indigenous people in every possible way.
In order to understand the position of the West participating - with everything it possesses - in genocide, we must understand that genocidal behavior is not incidental, transient, marginal, or alien to the West, but rather it is a renewed, inherent, and continuous historical root.
Without genocide, Western capitalism would not have been established. Without genocide, the nation-state would not have been established in the West. Without genocide, Western colonialism would not have been established. Without it, the democracy and scientific and technological revolutions that resulted from colonialism would not have been established. Without it, the West would not have dominated the modern world and reshaped it according to its whims. The Annihilator is ready to be put into active service whenever necessary now and in the future.
Or what Ian Law calls unilateral mass murder.
(p. 53).
Then he mentions some examples of genocide:
1- In the Caribbean region - in what is now known as Haiti and the Dominican Republic - they were inhabited by eight million people when the Spanish colonizers entered them. Then, within just thirty years, unilateral mass murder succeeded in annihilating the eight million, until only twenty thousand of them remained.
2- Canada and the United States were inhabited by about ten million people, before the French and the English colonized them. Then, over the course of five centuries, they were annihilated, leaving only 237,000 of them remaining. Official killing sponsored by the state itself: direct killing, the spread of epidemics, famines, and the theft of children. Confiscating food and depriving indigenous people of their resources.
3- In 1788 AD, the indigenous population of Australia was seven hundred and fifty thousand (three-quarters of a million). They were exterminated until only thirty-one thousand remained in 1911 AD, using the same methods: organized massacres, extermination campaigns, deadly diseases, famines, theft of children, confiscation. Resources.
4- The island of Tasmania - one of the islands of Australia - in 1804 AD. Four thousand five hundred people lived on it before the entry of the English colonists, and within eighty years - according to the author - everyone who had the blood of the original owners of the land in their veins was exterminated. The last man was killed in 1869 AD. The last woman died in 1876 AD, and only some hybrids, that is, from joint marriages, survived.
The colonists would go on hunting trips by shooting rifle bullets, then firing them into the eyes of the natives. Poisoning flour was a common behavior of the colonists against the natives.
(p. 58)
5- A more modern model, the first genocide that opened the twentieth century, the first acts of the Germans in the record of genocide. In Namibia, the Herero people numbered eighty thousand, and the Germans exterminated them until only sixteen thousand of them remained.
The author concludes this part of the first chapter with two notes of the utmost courage:
The first: Colonial genocide aimed to seize land, natural and human resources, and was therefore the cornerstone of building capitalism.
Second: Democratic development was going hand in hand with the mass killings on which the empires of the Spaniards, Portuguese, Dutch, English, and French were founded.
Added to it were the Americans and the Zionists.
The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial position of Al Jazeera.