Seth Mandel: The Age-Old Curse of ‘Israel Has a Right to Defend Itself’
This debate came up again as Israel began taking out loose chemical weapons and conventional arms caches in Syria after the fall of the house of Assad earlier this week. The complaint: This isn’t self-defense! The implication being that Israel has a right to self-defense only.Seth Mandel: Ireland Says the Quiet Part Out Loud
According to this logic, Israel must wait until it is attacked with chemical weapons. Only then may it hit back.
The same, then, I suppose goes for Iranian nukes. Once Israel is destroyed in a nuclear holocaust, it may bomb Iran.
The senselessness of this position is obvious, so why do people still hold it? One answer is that, as many have said throughout the past 76 years, Israel is the Jew of the world. That is, for 2,000 years rights and privileges that were otherwise available to everyone could be withheld at random from Jews. Now that there’s a state of Israel, those exceptions are applied to international laws and norms as well.
Indeed, Jews should bristle at the condescending declarations that we have a right to defend ourselves, just as we do every year on the holiday that marks the introduction of that wretched phrase into our story.
Purim celebrates that the Jews of Persia were saved from destruction. The evil royal adviser Haman convinced the king to seal a decree that on a certain day, Jews should be killed and their property taken. When Queen Esther turns the tables on Haman, the king issues a new decree: The Jews can and should defend themselves against any and all who come to kill them.
The obvious question is asked: Why didn’t the king simply revoke the earlier decree? The answer: Royal decrees could not be revoked, but they could be countered by new decrees. Therefore, rather than prevent the masses from trying to kill the Jews, the king simply responded by saying that the people of Israel have a right to defend themselves.
This is what the Jewish people have been living with ever since. When our fate is left up to the nations of the world who continue to see us as their subjects and not their equals, the best we get is that we may defend ourselves.
Of course Israel has a right to defend itself. It also has a right to defeat its enemies and safeguard the lives of its people. If it were up to others, Hamas would be alive and well, as would Hezbollah. The world is a better place when Jews assert their basic rights and obligations.
Amazing. The Irish government is saying that Israel can’t justly be convicted on a genocide charge as the law stands, so the law should be changed in the middle of the trial in order to achieve a predetermined outcome.Israel does world a service by hitting Assad’s chemical weapons caches
This is surely among the more corrupt statements ever made regarding due process by a high-ranking elected official in a democracy. Vyshinsky worked for Stalin; Martin works for the prime minister of Ireland. Somehow they ended up in the same place. What a proud day for Western Europe.
In fairness to Martin, his terrible idea wasn’t his own. He is simply copying off the recent Amnesty International report on the war, which blew up in the organization’s face. Martin is a guy who sees someone step on a rake and thinks, that looks like fun.
As a refresher, the Amnesty report acknowledged that Israel isn’t guilty of genocide by the traditional understanding of international law, so the organization simply changed the definition of genocide. Problem solved!
Well, not really. Because in the process, Amnesty had torched whatever credibility it had left: Organization insiders leaked the report ahead of time to try to blunt its impact, its Israel chapter disavowed the report, and the whole thing immediately fell to earth with a thud.
But Amnesty isn’t a state; it’s just a pressure group. Its opinion carries influence but not legal weight. Ireland, on the other hand, is a member state of the international “court” currently trying this case. Its intervention is shameless and, if followed, would sink the concept of international law to the bottom of the ocean.
Is it worth all that, just to get the Jews?
There’s a larger question here, of course. And that is the question of what some states of the free world have allowed themselves to become, either out of their own anti-Zionism or their fear of the anti-Zionist masses, or a combination of the two.
Obsessions with Israel are self-defeating, whether or not one cares about the fact that they are also morally deficient. Oct. 7, 2023, seems to have ignited in people throughout the world the belief that Israel really was on the ropes and that this was their chance to contribute to its defeat. Sometimes that contribution was military: Iran activated every one of its proxies and fired at Israel from every front. Sometimes that contribution was diplomatic: Russia notched a win or two at the United Nations by taking Hamas’s side in the war. Sometimes that contribution was mostly symbolic: Britain’s Labour Party, once back in power, announced it was suspending dozens of arms export licenses to Israel.
But now all that seems to be slipping away. Iran had its clock thoroughly cleaned, Russia is floundering, and Western diplomatic antagonism toward Israel is looking downright silly. Rational thinking would suggest Ireland’s leadership accept the fact that Israel is going to survive this particular round. But in the throes of obsession, Dublin is going for broke at the ICJ by throwing its lot in with a discredited Amnesty International.
The only real value here is in Ireland’s transparency. What was left unsaid has now been said: The purpose of the public campaign against Israel is not to defend international law but to contravene it.
In the wake of the Assad regime’s collapse, Israel did the world a major service.
Over the past few days, the Israeli Air Force struck dozens of alleged Syrian chemical weapons sites to prevent these capabilities from falling into the hands of potential terrorists.
Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar announced on Monday, “We attacked strategic weapons, the residual chemical weapons capabilities, long-range missiles and rockets, so they won’t fall into the hands of radicals.”
The United States, apparently content to let Jerusalem handle this critical military task while it struck Islamic State targets in Syria, must now help finish the job.
With a bit of luck, diplomacy will be sufficient, but the effectiveness of talking likely depends on speaking softly while carrying a big stick.
The priority for Washington is to pressure Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) — the power behind Syria’s new governing authority — to let international inspectors in and certify Damascus’ chemical weapons are verifiably eliminated.
HTS is a US- and UN-designated terrorist organization that is an offshoot of al-Qaeda, so more than a little caution is in order.
A US official told Axios on Sunday that Washington believes it has “good fidelity” on Syria’s chemical weapons inventory, and that these capabilities are not currently at risk for acquisition by non-state groups.
Thanks, on the latter, no doubt, goes to Jerusalem.
To the end, the Assad regime possessed a robust stockpile of chemical weapons, along with chemical agents, precursors, and associated research capabilities, munitions, storage, and testing sites.
The US State Department assessed as recently as May 2024 that Syria had an undeclared chemical weapons program, which it used to attack its own people on at least 50 verified occasions between 2012 and 2019. The actual figure is likely far higher.
In 2013, Damascus used the debilitating nerve agent, sarin, to murder 1,400 people in Ghouta.