Archives: Articles

By Larry C Johnson

5 May 2025 – Gaslighting the North American public about the military threat posed by Russia, especially during the 20 years following the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, proved to be an effective piece of propaganda. Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama should be required to answer one simple question: Why did each of you expand NATO while the Russian military decreased in size? Between 1991 and 2011, the size of the Russian military underwent a dramatic reduction, reflecting the collapse of the Soviet Union, economic turmoil, and subsequent reforms aimed at creating a more modern and sustainable force.

Bill Clinton initiated the expansion of NATO in 1999, adding Hungary, the Czech Republic and Poland. According to an article published in the LA Times in October 1996, the push was underway early on in his administration, to manufacture a narrative justifying adding more members to NATO:

Clinton built his case for expanding the nation’s oldest, most successful military alliance by evoking the memory of generations of Americans who fought in two world wars in Europe, helped build the peace there with the Marshall Plan and the Atlantic alliance and helped win the freedom of millions in Central and Eastern Europe with the end of the Cold War.

“But now that that freedom has been won, it is this generation’s responsibility to ensure that it will not be lost again, not ever,” he said.

Russia, however, was cutting its military:

1991–Early 1990s: Post-Soviet Inheritance and Rapid Downsizing:

• At the time of the Soviet Union’s dissolution in December 1991, the Soviet armed forces comprised nearly 4 million personnel. When Russia formally established its own armed forces in May 1992, it inherited a force of approximately 2.73 million servicemen.
• Throughout the early 1990s, Russia faced severe economic constraints, leading to drastic cuts in defense spending and personnel. By 1997, defense spending had fallen by a factor of eight in real terms compared to 1991.
• The number of active-duty personnel fell sharply as Russia withdrew troops from former Soviet republics and Eastern Europe, and as the government attempted to adapt to new economic and strategic realities.

Enter George W. Bush. He put NATO on steroids in terms of growth. In the 1990s, the Russian military suffered from undermanning, poor training, low morale, corruption, and widespread draft evasion, further reducing its effective size and readiness. The number of active-duty personnel continued to decline, reaching about 1.9 million in 1992, and then dropping steadily throughout the decade. By January 2004, the authorized strength of the Russian military had dropped to about 1.13 million personnel.

And what did George W. Bush do in response to the dramatic decline in Russian military manpower? He launched the largest single expansion in NATO’s history in 2004, when seven countries from Eastern Europe formally joined the alliance on March 29, 2004. This expansion was significant both in size and in geopolitical implications, as it extended NATO’s reach deep into the former Soviet sphere of influence. Bush welcomed Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia.

Naturally, the Russians were outraged. Understandably so. They were not building up their military forces… the Russian military was shrinking. Vladimir Putin gave a landmark speech on February 10, 2007, at the Munich Security Conference, in which he strongly criticized NATO expansion and U.S. foreign policy. This speech is widely seen as a turning point in Russia’s post–Cold War relations with the West and a clear signal of Putin’s growing assertiveness. Putin argued that NATO’s eastward expansion violated earlier assurances made to Russia after the Cold War. He described the expansion as a “provocation” and said:

NATO expansion does not have any relation with the modernization of the Alliance itself or with ensuring security in Europe. On the contrary, it represents a serious provocation that reduces the level of mutual trust.

Ignoring this warning, the Bush administration pushed ahead with its plan to add Georgia and Ukraine as new NATO members. Putin attend the 2008 NATO summit in Bucharest in April and issued direct warnings to the West about their planned expansion. Putin firmly opposed the potential accession of Ukraine and Georgia to NATO. He warned that bringing these countries into NATO would be viewed by Russia as a direct threat to its security:

If Ukraine joins NATO, Russia may feel compelled to recognize the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia.

Just a reminder… it was around this same time that former CIA Director, Bill Burns, who was then US Ambassador to Russia, wrote his now famous cable — Nyet, means Nyet.

Following the NATO summit in Bucharest, Putin ordered major reforms in the Russian military, which culminated in a modernization program, launched in 2011, aimed at creating a smaller, more professional, and more capable force, moving away from the mass-mobilization model of the Soviet era. These reforms included reductions in officer numbers, restructuring of units, and efforts to improve training and equipment, but, and here is a critical fact, the total number of personnel had remained relatively stable — i.e., around 1.3 to 1.4 million through the late 2000s into 2011.

Why am I pounding on this fact? Western leaders persist in pushing the fallacious narrative that Russia posed a military threat to the West and that NATO had no choice but to expand to stave off Russia reestablishing the Soviet Empire. What a load of crap!!

I recorded a podcast with someone new last week… Sabrina aka Sabby Sabs. A delightful lady. She grew up in Germany as a US military brat and has been hosting her own podcast for several years:

Larry C. Johnson: CIA, Ukraine, Trump and More!

12 May 2025

Source: transcend.org

By Quds News Network

Gaza (Quds News Network)- About 1,500 people have lost their vision due to injuries sustained during the Israeli assault, while an additional 4,000 are at imminent risk of blindness as a result of a severe shortage of essential medications and surgical supplies as Israel continues bombing Gaza and blocking the flow of humanitarian aid.

The Palestinian Ministry of Health in Gaza issued a statement on Sunday, warning of a severe escalation in the public health crisis affecting ophthalmic services due to the ongoing war.

Dr. Abdel-Salam Sabah, Director of the Gaza Eye Hospital, issued the following urgent updates:

• The healthcare sector is experiencing a critical shortage of ophthalmic surgical supplies and equipment, placing eye surgery services on the brink of collapse—particularly procedures related to retinal conditions, diabetic retinopathy, and internal eye hemorrhages.
• The Eye Hospital currently has only three heavily worn surgical scissors, which are being reused multiple times. This severely compromises patient safety and hinders the provision of safe and effective medical care.
• A significant number of blast-related eye injuries require specialized medical materials—such as Healon and microsurgical sutures—which are now nearly depleted.

Without immediate international assistance, the hospital may be forced to announce a total suspension of surgical services, Dr. Sabah said, emphasizing the urgent need for intervention from relevant authorities and humanitarian organizations.

Since March 2, Israel has closed Gaza’s main crossings, halting the flow of food, medical aid, and other humanitarian supplies. This blockade has caused a severe and unprecedented decline in living conditions, with human rights organizations accusing Israel of using starvation as a weapon of war against Palestinians.

Israel has also resumed its assault on Gaza on March 18, killing over 2,700 and wounding at least 7,400 people, raising the death toll from the genocide since October 2023 to more than 52,800.

11 May 2025

Source: countercurrents.org

By Arundhati Dhuru, Saeeda Diep and Sandeep Pandey

On 22 April attack on Pahalgam tourists was carried out by the terrorist organisation The Resistance Front. The Indian security forces carried out attacks on nine sites on 7 May early hours which are believed to be camps of Lashkar-e-Taiba, Hizbul Mujahiddin and Jaish-e-Mohammad. Defence Minister Rajnath Singh has claimed that at least 100 terrorists have been killed. These strikes have been followed by counter offensives and attempted/foiled attacks from both sides. Number of civilians now getting killed are adding to the 26 killed on 22 April. It remains to be seen when this chain reaction would end. By that time many more civilian lives would be lost on both sides.

India wanted initially to precision target only terrorist camps. But Pakistani strike on a Gurudwara and Masjid in Poonch has expanded the domain of attacks. A fight against terrorism is now converted into two countries fighting each other. Terrorists have achieved their objective.

Hopefully, the war will stop before it reaches a point where one of the sides will get desperate and think of using the nuclear weapons option.

The objective of eliminating terrorism will remain a distant dream. Most likely more ‘jihadists’ are going to be provoked to take up arms to avenge the killing of their brethren. It has been proved from the destruction of Babri Masjid, which resulted in the first terrorist attack in India in the form of serial bomb blasts in Mumbai in early 1993, that act of destruction will result in reaction.

Dr. Manmohan Singh was not tempted to attack Pakistan after the much bigger Mumbai attack in 2008. His government pursued the legal course against the accused as a result of which some were punished and some are waiting to be punished. After a hiatus of more than a year Kuldeep Nayyar took the first delegation of Indian civil society to Pakistan and the peace process adopted by the government subsequently delivered dividends which at least ensured that there was no repeat incident in the remaining 6 years of Manmohan Singh. India Pakistan relations had shown visible signs of improvement when he quit as Prime Minister.

The wisdom of using peace as a tool for solving entangled relationship between the countries is not lost. But the incumbent government of India, instead of insisting on a joint enquiry, if necessary with the involvement of a third or more parties, to identify the culprits and then prosecute them has chosen a populist method, for political expediency, of unilaterally launching an attack on Pakistan. If just means are not followed it is unlikely that the stated objective would be achieved.

At the end of the war we’ll be left with more bitterness. Communal hated on both sides has already taken the form of madness. The narrative built by the frenzied media would destroy whatever possibilities of rapprochement that existed. Trust has been completely lost. And, lastly there would be no guarantee that several years down the line another terrorist attack would not take place.

A possible solution to the problem is friendly relations with Pakistan. Somewhere, the beginning would have to be made by somebody. A dialogue between the two countries followed by putting into place confidence building measures should ultimately lead to both governments working in tandem to eliminate the threat of terrorism. We must remember that Pakistan has paid heavier price as a result of terrorist incidents. As late as in March a train from Quetta to Peshawar with 380 passengers was hijacked by Balochistan Liberation Army, an incident in which many people got killed in the subsequent shoot-out. So, we have to start with the basic premise that everybody cannot be a sympathiser of terrorism in Pakistan. Hence India’s priority should have been to see that saner voices in Pakistan are strengthened so that democratically elected government is in control of things and the military or the ISI don’t play a determining role. The support extended by the people of Pakistan to Imran Khan’s party during the last elections is ample proof that people desire an independent democratic rule. Imran Khan will always be remembered for having opened the Kartarpur Sahib corridor for Indian pilgrims, an act which was praised even by Narendra Modi on the day of its inauguration. As a confidence building measure India could have opened a corridor to the Ajmar Sharif dargah for Pakistani pilgrims. This one act could have generated enormous good will for India inside Pakistan. Strong ties between the two countries at the people to people level are the only way to wean away  whatever support exists among people for terrorist organisations inside Pakistan.

How long are we going to keep looking at Pakistan as an enemy? It was part of India till 1947. Many Indians have gone and settled there. Many in India still have family ties. How can you expect a husband-wife married across the border to pledge their loyalty to only one of the countries? If the reality is a shared history, customs, culture, families, languages, etc. India and Pakistan have been artificially divided. India is a living proof that Hindus and Muslims can co-exist even after more than ten years of a sustained effort to divide the communities by various governmental and non-governmental acts. The political division has been imposed on a social unity at the grassroots. Hindus and Muslims can never be divided in the way Meiteis and Kukis have been divided in Manipur. Hence, if Hindus and Muslims can co-exist why can India and Paksitan not? Going forward there are only two ways. Either we exist as good neighbours or perish together by dropping nuclear weapons on each other.

If the former chiefs of RAW and ISI, A.S. Dulat and Asad Durrani, respectively, can write a book together, if Narendra Modi can make a surprise visit to Lahore to attend a family function of Nawaz Sharif and present a shawl to his mother, why shouldn’t common Indians and Paksitanis be not allowed to live in an atmosphere of trust, peace and friendship.

We hope wisdom will prevail among the civilian population and good sense will guide the political ideologies on both sides and visionary leadership will take the step in right direction to solve the problem of terrorism once and forever.

Arundhati Dhuru is with National Alliance of People’s Movements in India

Saeeda Diep is with Centre for Peace and Secular Studies in Lahore, Pakistan

Sandeep Pandey is General Secretary of Socialist Party (India).

11 May 2025

Source: countercurrents.org

By Robert Hunziker

“A few years ago, no one would have imagined that one of the biggest democracies in the world would cancel research programs under the pretext that the word ‘diversity’ was in this program.” (French President Emmanuel Macron, Choose Europe for Science Event/Paris, May 5, 2025)

America’s shores are experiencing a huge sucking sound as one of the biggest brain drains of modern history hits the country’s best, smartest, heading for Europe on grants, as smiles abound across the pond. European leaders are pinching themselves, unable to believe such good fortune falling into their laps, thanks to the Trump administration “freezing” government funding linked to “diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives.”

The EU has officially launched a drive to attract scientists and researchers that America is discarding by the bucketful, see:  Europe Launches a Drive to Attract Scientists and Researchers After Trump Freezes US Funding, AP News, May 5, 2025.

This is an extraordinary shrinking of America’s IQ in so many ways that a full understanding is nearly impossible, but it is only too obvious that deliberate destruction of science is the product of a bruised/intimidated mentality that’s seeking payback. There is no other logical explanation.

The EU is licking its chops over this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. According to EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, while on stage at Sorbonne University, the EU Executive Branch has already decided to set up a “super grant” program, aimed at “longer-term perspective to the very best in the field.”

Essentially, the EU is cherry-picking some of America’s best brain power. To accomplish this phenomenal opportunity, the Commission is authorizing additional funding of $566 million in 2025-2027, making Europe “a magnet for researchers.” This funding is in addition to the European Research Council’s budget of $18 billion for 2021-2027. Moreover, the EU will “enshrine freedom of scientific research into law” via a new enactment. Europe will not compromise on its long-standing principles of academic freedom.

Above and beyond the EU, according to President Macron, France has also beefed-up commitments to science and research to capitalize on America’s ‘fired’ scientists. France has launched a platform for reception of international researchers: Choose France for Science. President Macron officially christened the platform: “Here in France, research is a priority, innovation a culture, science a limitless horizon. Men and women researchers from all over the world, choose France, choose Europe.”

So far, the US has cut 380 grant projects and thousands of university researchers have been notified that their National Science Foundation funding is canceled, but they know where to turn. Backlash has resulted as doctors, scientists, and researchers hit the streets in “Stand Up for Science” rallies across the country. Astronomy Professor Phil Platt, addressing a crowd, said: “We’re looking at the most aggressively anti-science government the United States has ever had.” UPenn climate scientists Michael Mann: “Science is under siege.” Bill Nye the Science Guy hit the bull’s eye, rhetorically challenging the forces of government: “What are you afraid of?” which may become the rallying cry of opposition throughout the land.

Professionals agree that science has been in the midst of enormous achievements to make lives better than ever, but according to senior staff members of the National Institutes of Health, funding cuts will seriously damage or eliminate major progress on key, very significant, programs for Alzheimer’s, diabetes, and cancer, as examples. Unfortunately, this will negatively impact tens of millions of Americans for years to come.

Since World War II, the US has been recognized as a world leader in science and technology. Now, that enviable position is swirling around the drain. According to several key federal workers who spoke at a recent MIT Technology Review, America’s world leadership is literally being dismantled before our eyes. These are research programs that backstop American life. “The US took nearly a century to craft its rich scientific ecosystem; if the unraveling that has taken place over the past month continues, Americans will feel the effects for decades to come. “ (The Foundations of America’s Prosperity Are Being Dismantled, MIT Technology Review, Feb. 21, 2025)

According to a recent article in The Hill, March 2, 2025: “The administration has issued a multi-pronged, anti-science attack on the health sciences. Possibly the most destructive is the recent slashing of research funding for both NIH and the National Science Foundation.” Here’s what’s at stake: “In 2024, NIH provided more than $37 billion in funding across every state, creating more than 400,000 jobs and generating $92 billion in economic activity. This funding is used for laboratory research, research centers and, most importantly, the education of trainees, the next generation of scientists. Trainees greatly contribute to the research and discoveries even while they are in training.”

If $37 billion in funding produces $92 billion “in economic activity” and “supports 400.000 jobs,” what’s up with destroying a greater than 2-for-1 return on investment? What’s missing from this equation, or is it simply a matter of looney-tunes, not knowing which way is up? Study after study after study, and more studies, prove that governmental funding of science generates returns in-excess of what private enterprise achieves. For example, governmental science funding played the crucial leading role in creation of the internet. What’s that worth?

It should be widely recognized and brought to the public’s attention that so much is wrong, so much at stake with anti-science rhetoric, recklessly cutting science budgets, elimination of entire programs, and loud-mouthed threats, demoralizing the public about science. It’s difficult to know how to respond, and of course, this is the intention behind the rapidity of a well-orchestrated blind-siding all parties, unable to collect ones’ thoughts type of assault on major, hugely productive governmental programs that protect life. This type of assault is comparable to a Panzer Division Blitzkrieg. Nobody has enough time to react.

What’s the impact of Blitzkriegs demolishing science? According to an article in Science d/d May 2, 2025: Trump’s Proposed Budget Would Mean ‘Disastrous’ Cuts to Science.” For those interested, this article delineates agencies subject to cuts. Meanwhile, the brain drain is in full throttle motion. Of interest, an article in the prestigious science journal Nature, March 25, 2025: A poll found that 75% of 1,600 respondents, including 1,200 US scientists said: “Yes, they are looking for jobs in Europe and Canada.” And there’s considerable anecdotal evidence that current post-graduates are looking overseas.

And there’s this: Trump Proposed Unprecedented Budget Cuts to US Science, Nature, May 2, 2025: “Huge reductions, if enacted, could have ‘catastrophic’ effects on US competitiveness and scientific pipeline… The message that this sends to young scientists is that this country is not a place for you,’ says Michael Lubell, a physicist who tracks science policy at the City University of New York in New York City. ‘If I were starting my career, I would be out of here in a heartbeat.”

The word is out. Scientists will find opportunities galore. Science has never been more sought after in Europe and Canada and Australia, which ranks 5^th in the world for trust in science. After all, the world is experiencing the most exciting era of scientific achievement of all time, and the EU intends to take over leadership, stripping the US of its 75-year crown. It’s been laid in their lap.

Moreover, according to the National Science Foundation, China has already overtaken America in several key scientific metrics. Going forward, the EU has America to thank for reinvigorating its science and technology effort more so than ever before, as they challenge China with much more enthusiasm for top billing. The U.S. lit their fuse, making EU science and technology great again!

Robert Hunziker is a journalist from Los Angeles

10 May 2025

Source: countercurrents.org

By Eloise Goldsmith

United Nations aid officials have rejected a U.S. and Israel-backed plan for aid delivery in Gaza that reportedly involves the use of a private foundation and U.S. military security contractors to deliver far less humanitarian assistance than the besieged enclave needs.

Jens Laerke, a spokesperson for the U.N.’s Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), warned Friday that the agency “will not participate.”

“There is no reason to put in place a system that is at odds with the DNA of any principled humanitarian organization,” Laerke told the BBC.

Since early March, Israel has blocked aid from entering Gaza, compounding widespread misery and hunger in the besieged enclave as Israel continues to mount a deadly military campaign there. U.N. officials have decried the fact that aid is close at hand but is not being allowed in.

Speaking in Jerusalem on Friday, U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee said that the plan involves a private U.S.-backed foundation, which will distribute aid from a set number of distribution sites, according to CNN. Huckabee said the idea is to create a system that prevents Hamas from obtaining the aid.

The private entity, called the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, would administer those distribution sites using private U.S. military contractors and aid workers, according to CNN.

The plan reportedly entails only allowing 60 aid trucks a day, a sliver of what was allowed to enter the enclave during the two-month cease-fire that Israel ended in March. A document from the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation states that there will initially be four distribution sites aimed at providing 1.2 million Palestinians in its first phase, or 60% of Gaza’s population.

According to the The New YorkTimes, under the current aid distribution system, the U.N. says there are 400 distribution points.

Huckabee said that Israel would not be involved in delivering aid, but that Israeli forces would handle security around the distribution sites.

The Times of Israel, citing officials familiar with the plan, reported that the Israeli government and military have been involved in putting the plan together, even if the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation is the entity that is slated to distribute the aid.

Reporting from The Washington Postpublished Monday, which cited unnamed Israeli officials and aid workers, framed the emerging plan as an Israeli initiative to take control of aid distribution in Gaza. The Post‘s reporting also stated that the distribution centers would be all be located in the south of Gaza.

The Post spoke with officials from a dozen international aid groups working in Gaza, who expressed concerns that restricting aid to a few locations would force more displacement and be discriminatory.

James Elder, spokesperson for the U.N.’s children’s agency UNICEF, echoed this, according to the BBC, saying on Friday that the proposed plan would lead to more children suffering and that the decision to locate all the distribution centers in the south appeared designed to weaponize aid as “bait” to force Palestinians to be displaced once again.

The plan “contravenes basic humanitarian principles” and appears designed to “reinforce control over life-sustaining items as a pressure tactic,” Elder said, according to U.N. News.

Eloise Goldsmith is a staff writer for Common Dreams.

10 May 2025

Source: countercurrents.org

By Quds News Network

Gaza (Quds News Network)- The true death toll in Gaza may be far higher than what officials have reported, according to a new study by The Economist. Since the genocide began in October 2023, experts have struggled to count the dead. But recent research shows the real number of deaths could be between 77,000 and 109,000—far more than the official count.

The Ministry of Health in Gaza provides detailed daily updates. These lists are based on hospital records and online death reports. But many hospitals have been destroyed, and many people killed by Israel remain under the rubble in areas rescue teams can’t reach or are not sent to hospitals.

Researchers analyzed three separate lists of the dead. Two came from the health ministry. A third was compiled from social media obituaries. All three included names, ages, and sometimes ID numbers. The overlap between the lists was very small.

Experts say that small overlap suggests the official count is far too low. The study, published in The Lancet, estimates that the real death toll could be 46–107% higher than reported. Based on current numbers, that means between 4% and 5% of Gaza’s pre-war population may have died.

The latest figures by the Ministry of Health stated that Israel has killed 52,787 Palestinians in Gaza, stressing that it could not reach or register many victims, who are either under the rubble or in areas that Israel’s military continues to target.

Meanwhile, Israel describes all those killed in Gaza as “terrorists” even as most of them are women and children.

10 May 2025

Source: countercurrents.org

By Dr Ram Puniyani

In the run up to 2024 elections Rahul Gandhi in particular talked of the need for caste census. This was supported by many opposition leaders. Congress ruled states and NDA ruled Bihar also carried out the census. This caste census issue was one of the major planks of the opposition’s slight revival from being in the dumps in that election.

Modi opposed caste census tooth and nail stating that this is part of Urban Naxal thinking. Its parent organization RSS said that it is a ploy to divide Hindu society. In this background when on 30^th April  2025 the Modi Cabinet took the decision to include caste as a part of the forthcoming census. As such the census which was due in 2021 has been pushed forward so far. There are many guesses as to why at this point of time BJP has decided to get this done.

There is a view that this is being done keeping in mind the forthcoming elections in Bihar in particular. As such the timeline for this caste census and conversion of the findings into policy has not been outlined. The most likely reason may be the electoral compulsions in Bihar and in other elections in future. It is clear that the plank of Rahul Gandhi in particular has been caste census and lifting of the ceiling of 50% on reservations. This got a positive response from substantial sections of the electorate and so RSS-BJP might be venturing on this step for social justice to which they are opposed to the core.

It can be unhesitatingly said that the emergence, foundation of RSS was mainly to oppose the rising awareness of Dalits for social justice, particularly after the efforts of Jotirao Phule and later by Bhimrao Ambedkar, the pioneers of social justice in the last two centuries. As dalit awareness started rising the upper caste started feeling the discomfort and came with the concept of Hindu nation. It goes without saying that Manusmriti was the core principle guiding their social values.

The second Sarsanghchalak of RSS, M.S. Golwalkar eulogized the laws of Manu as being most ancient and needed to be emulated in the present times. As Gandhi, particularly after 1932 began his yeoman efforts to work against caste system, going from village to village ensuring that dalits can enter the public places, temples and water sources, the RSS kept totally aloof from any such effort and kept training its swayamsevaks and Pracharaks in the values of caste and gender hierarchy.

Savarkar, whom RSS regards greatly did make some efforts against the caste system, but they were hardly deep set and in due course were eclipsed by his politics of loyalty to British rule. While opposing the Indian Constitution he articulated that Manusmriti is the Law today. In opposing the Constitution, RSS mouthpiece Organizer said there is hardly anything Indian in the Indian Constitution, as it ignores the great values of their holy tome, Manusmiriti.

Its major base initially was upper caste Brahmin-Baniya in particular. Other upper castes rooted in values of caste and gender hierarchy also backed the RSS.

In due course as electoral compulsions dawned upon the Hindutva forces they consciously worked for co-opting dailts, advasis and OBC into their vortex. They floated ‘Samajik Samrasta Manch’ (Social Harmony Forum) to work among dalits to win them over the politics of Hindu Nationalism. They praised different jatis, caste as great contributors to Hindu Samaj. Their publication of books in history and ‘greatness’ of various jatis was a statement to cajole the low caste into their net. Hindu Charmakar Jati, Hindu Valmiki Jati and Hindu Khatik jati were three major volumes which were released by RSS Chief Mohan Bhagawat who stated that all castes were equal.

They also identified icons from these castes and presented them as great heroes of Hindu society and gave an anti Muslim slant to them. Raja Suhel Dev is an example of this strategy, where Suhel Dev of Pasi community was projected for wooing dalits. Eating with them was undertaken and this fed into the process of Sanskritization, gradually winning sections of dalits as their foot soldiers.

Various other strategies like campaigning among dalits that BJP is the only party not appeasing Muslims, who are the enemies of Hindu society. They started being drawn to RSS shakhas and many of them were given some important positions. A section of dalit leaders were wooed with power and resources, like Ram Vilas Paswan and Ramdas Athawale. Chirag Paswan declared that he is Hanuman for Modi.

The testing time for RSS-BJP and social justice was the implementation of the Mandal Commission. The upper caste responded to this in a very hostile manner, to the extent of self immolation by one of them. RSS-BJP knew that opposing it openly will be detrimental to their electoral interests. So they did not verbally oppose it but drew a bigger line in response to Mandal in the form of Kamandal. They intensified the Babri demolition campaign with full gusto and succeeded in polarizing the upper caste. This opened the path to electoral power for them and the electoral support for this sectarian politics zoomed up quickly.

This time around it will be interesting to observe as to how they will handle the caste census to circumvent the interests of uppercase. The uppercase are aghast with the idea of caste census by the party of their choice, the party which has been nurturing their interests. One knows that RSS is deeply entrenched in the social and political system of the country. It is already said that the OBC census should not be used for political purposes. It is capable of devising new language to halt the march of social justice while paying lip service to caste census.

It is time that all political parties having deeper commitment to the Indian Constitution come on the same platform to stand with the agenda of social justice. Honest implementation of the results of caste census needs to be taken up on a priority basis for having a just and humane society.

9 May 2025

Source: countercurrents.org

By Shamsul Islam

LET NOT THE HINDUTVA RULERS UNDO THE GREAT HERITAGE OF JOINT SACRIFICES

Large sections of Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs unitedly challenged the greatest imperialist power, Britain, during India’s First War of Independence which began on May 10, 1857; the day being Sunday. It was on May 11^th that revolutionaries declared India free of the British East India Company’s rule announced Bahadur Shah Zafar as the real Mughal Emporer. This extraordinary unity, naturally, unnerved the Firangees and made them realize that if their rule was to continue in India, it could happen only when Hindus and Muslims, the largest two religious communities were divided on communal lines. Urgent steps were taken to create enmity between these two. This was the reason, that immediately after crushing militarily this liberation war the then minister of Indian Affairs Lord Wood, sitting in London confessed:

“We have maintained our power in India by playing off one part against the other and we must continue to do so. Do all we can, therefore, to prevent all having a common feeling.”

In order to put this strategy in operation, the White rulers in league with their Indian stooges came out with the two-nation theory implying that Hindus and Muslims belonged to two separate nations. The birth of the two-nation theory was no accident, in fact, it was specifically created to help the British rulers in creating communal divide and fragmentize the Indian society on the basis of religions as unity of Hindus and Muslims could prove to be the death knell of their rule.

One truth, never to be missed, about this Struggle is that it was jointly led by leaders like Nana Sahib, Bahadur Shah Zafar, Maulvi Ahmed Shah, Tantya Tope, Khan Bahadur Khan, Rani Laxmibai, Hazrat Mahal, Azimullah Khan and Ferozshah, a galaxy of revolutionaries who belonged to different religions. It was a liberation struggle in which Maulvis, Pandits, granthis, zamindars, peasants, traders, lawyers, servants, women, students and people from different castes, creeds and regions rose in revolt against the dehumanized rule of the East India Company and laid their lives.

On the eve of 163rd anniversary of War of Independence we need to tell the present flag bearers of Hindu-Muslim brands of communal politics that the revolutionary army which declared the Mughal King Bahadur Shah Zafar, a Muslim, India’s Independent ruler on 11^th May 1857 comprised of more than seventy percent Hindu soldiers, all armed. These were Nana Sahib, Tantya Tope and Laxmibai, all Hindus, played vital role in making Zafar, Badshah; the King once again.

The contemporary documents of the period which are available even today are replete with instances, not confined to one particular area, in which Hindus and Muslims could be seen making supreme sacrifices unitedly. The War of Independence categorically presented one fundamental truth that Hindu-Muslim separatism or hatred between these two communities was not at all an issue.

AYODHYA

After independence Ayodhya emerged as a place which caused rise of immense hatred between sections of Hindus and Muslims. Babri Masjid-Ram Janmbhoomi dispute played significant role in creating an environment of violence and mistrust between the two largest religious communities of India. But in 1857, it was the same Ayodhya where Maulvis and Mahants and common Hindu-Muslims stood united against the British rule and kissed the hangman’s noose together. Maulana Ameer Ali was a famous Maulvi of Ayodhya and when Ayodhya’s well-known Hanuman Garhi’s (Hanuman Temple) priest Baba Ramcharan Das took lead in organizing the armed resistance to the British rule, Maulana also joined the revolutionary army. In one battle with the British and their stooges, both of them were captured and hanged together on a tamarind tree at the Kuber Teela (now in Faizabad Jail) in Ayodhya.

This region also produced two more great friends, belonging to different religions who made life hell for the British sponsored armies. Achchan Khan[5] and Shambhu Prasad Shukla[6]   jointly led the army of Raja Devibaksh Singh[7] in the district of Faizabad. Both of them were able to defeat the Firangee army in many battles. It was due to the treachery again that they were captured. In order to desist anyone from such companionships between Hindus and Muslims both these friends were publicly inflicted prolonged torture and their heads were cruelly filed off.

It is not difficult to understand that why the same Ayodhya where blood of both Hindus and Muslims flowed for liberating the motherland in 1857 later became a permanent source of friction between the two communities. The joint heritage of Ayodhya needed to be erased if the British rule was to survive. It was meticulously done by the British rulers and their henchmen turning the heritage of communal unity at Ayodhya upside down. Not surprisingly, the RSS-BJP rulers are replicating the same.

RAJASTHAN

Kota state (now in Rajasthan) was ruled by a Maharao subservient to the British. The leading courtier, Lala Jaidayal Bhatnagar, a great literary figure when found that Maharao was collaborating with the British he joined hands with the army chief, Mehrab Khan and established a rebel government in the state. When Kota was captured by the British forces with the help of stooge neighbouring princes, they together continued fighting in the region till 1859. Betrayed by an informer both were hanged at Kota on September 17, 1860.

HARYANA

Hansi town (now in Haryana) presents another heart-warming example of how Muslims and Jains fearlessly challenged the foreign rule and did not hesitate in sacrificing their lives together. In this town lived two close friends, Hukumchand Jain and Muneer Beg. They were known as literary giants and love for mathematics. The revolutionary government of Bahadurshah Zafar chose them as advisors and appointed them as commanders in the region of west of Delhi. They led many successful military campaigns in the area but due to the treachery of Native rulers of Patiala, Nabha, Kapurthala, Kashmir and Pataudi were defeated in a crucial battle and captured. The British highly perturbed by this kind of unity decided to kill them in a most sickening manner. After hanging them on the same tree in Hansi on January 19, 1858, Hukumchand Jain was buried and Muneer Beg was cremated against the custom of their respective religions. The obvious purpose was to make fun of the unity of these two revolutionaries belonging to two different religions and show hatred towards their comradeship. Another unspeakable crime committed by the British was that when Faqir Chand, 13 year old nephew of Hukamchand Jain protested to this treatment he too was hanged, although there was no sentence passed against him.

CENTRAL INDIA

JHANSI: We all are familiar with Rani Laxmi Bai’s heroic resistance to the British rule and her death fighting the British forces at Gwalior. She was able to put up such a great resistance with her Muslim commanders; Ghulam Ghouse Khan (chief of artillery), Khuda Bakhsh (chief of infantry) both of whom were martyred defending Jhansi fort on June 4, 1858. Even her personal bodyguard was a young Muslim lady, Munzar who laid down her life with Rani on June 18, 1858 at Kotah-ki-Sarai battle in Gwalior.

MALWA: Malwa region in the then Central Province (now Madhya Pradesh) was another war theatre where big and crucial battles were fought against the British. The joint command of Tatia Tope, Rao Saheb (Pandurang Sadashiv), Laxmi Bai, Ferozshah and Moulvi Fazal-ul- Haq, was able to mobilize a huge rebel army of 70-80 thousand fighters. This army won innumerable battles against the British. However, in a crucial battle at Ranod when due to the treachery of stooge princes the revolutionary army led by Tatia Tope, Ferozeshah and Moulvi was encircled, Moulvi Fazal-ul- Haq stood as a rock in the way of advancing British troops. He and his 480 companions laid down their lives on December 17, 1858, but were able to save the main force which included Tatia Tope, Rao Saheb and Ferozshah. Thus saved by the supreme sacrifice by Moulvi Fazl Haq and his comrades, Tatia Tope continued to wage war till the beginning of 1859.

ROHILKHAND

The present day Bareilly, Shahjahanpur, Badaun and Bijnor was the area which was a strong hold of revolutionaries from the very beginning. Immediately after the announcement of an independent Indian government at Delhi on May 11, 1857, Khan Bahadur Khanwas appointed as the viceroy of Mughal emperor there. Khan soon after assuming charge appointed a committee of eight members consisting both Hindus and Muslims to conduct the affairs of the state, his deputy being Khushi Ram. This government forbade cow-slaughter in deference to the sentiments of local Hindus. Khan and Khushi Ram led troops defeated the British and their stooges in many battles but were defeated in a crucial battle at Bareilly. Both of them were hanged with hundreds of their followers outside old Kotwali on March 20, 1860.

DELHI

The revolutionary army was led by a joint command consisting of Mohammed Bakht Khan, Azimullah Khan, Sham Singh Dooga, Sirdhara Singh, Ghouse Mohammad, Hira Singh and a ‘Doabi Brahmin’. The contemporary British documents show that despite all their attempts to create communal divide in the ranks of revolutionary army and residents of Delhi, the Indians stood as one. In order not to let the British spies succeed in creating communal conflict amongst Delhites, General Bakht Khan, C-in-C of the revolutionary army prohibited cow slaughter. What kind of communal amity existed in Delhi under siege can be further known by the fact that when a huge canon of Shahjahan’s times which was lying unused was taken out, repaired and made useable, before firing the first canon, in the presence of Bahadur Shah Zafar and other army officials, Hindu priests performed Aarti, garlanded it and blessed it with Vedic hymns. Hindu-Muslim unity during the First Indian War of Independence was not confined to one area or one section of the population. This unity pervaded the whole country at all stratum. It was a ground reality and fact of life with which, naturally, women also did not remain untouched. In a small town, Thana Bhawan, situated in Muzaffar Nagar district (now in western Uttar Pradesh) 11 brave women belonging to different religions and castes were hanged together or burnt alive for taking up arms against the repressive British rule. The names and heroic deeds of some of them are peerless and unforgettable. Asghari Begum, 45 years old, belonged to a well-to-do family and was burnt alive for organizing rebellion in the area. Another revolutionary woman was, 28 years old, Asha Devi, who belonged to a Hindu Gujar family and was hanged. Another martyred woman was young Bhagwati Devi, born into a Tyagi family of farmers who fought in many battles against the Firangee rule. 24 year old, Habeeba, belonging to a Muslim Gujar family, fearlessly fought in many battles to liberate neighbouring areas from the British tyranny. She was captured while resisting a British attack and was executed on gallows in 1857. Another brave woman from this area was named Mam Kaur who belonged to a family of shepherdess and was hanged at the young age of 25 years. Bhaktawari another brave woman from the region too laid down her life fighting the British rulers.  26 years old, Umda was another gallant woman from this area, born into a Jat Muslim family who sacrificed her life resisting the British invasion. Raj Kaur born in 1833, hailed from a Sikh family and made the supreme sacrifice fighting against the British in Thana Bhawan area only.

The degree of communal unity among the rebels can further be known by going through the Rebel Anthem of 1857, penned by Azimullah Khan. It was in Urdu and read:

Hum haeniss ke malik, Hindoostan hamaaraa/Paak watan hae qaum kaa Jannat se bhee piyaaraa.

[We are its owners, it belongs to us. It is our holy land, lovelier than paradise.]

Yeh hamaari milkiat Hindoostan hamaaraa/iss kee roohaniyat se Roshan hae jug saaraa.

[It is our Hindustan, our owned. The whole world sparkles with its spiritualism.]

Kitnaa qadeem kitnaa naeem, sab duniyaa se niyaraa/kartee hae zarkhez jisse Gang-o-Juman kee dhaaraa.

[It is old as well as new, it is pleasant in the world. Ganga and Jamuna irrigates its alnds.]

Oope rbarfeela parvat pehre-daar hamaaraa/Neeche sahil per bajta sagar kaa naqqaaraa.

[On top snow clad mountain guards us. On the lower end you can hear roaring of sea.]

Iss kee khanen ugal raheensona, heera, paaraa/iss kee shaan shaukat kaa duniyaa maen jaikaaraa.

[Its mines produce gold, diamond and lead. Its greatness is renowned throughout the world.]

Aayaa Firangee door se, essaa mantar maaraa/loota donon hathoon se piyaaraa watan hamaaraa.

[The British came from far away, played trick. Our dear land was looted with both hands.]

Aaj shahidon ne tumko, ahl-e-watan lal-kaaraa/Todo ghulamee kee zanjeeren barsao angaaraa.

[Martyrs are calling you, countrymen. Break shackles of slavery, spit fire.]

Hindoo-Mussalmaan-Sikh hamaaraa bhai piyaaraa-piyaaraa/yeh hae azaadi kaa jhanda isse salaam hamaaraa.

[Hindu-Muslim-Sikh are our dear brothers. This is the flag of independence, salute to it.]

CONTEMPORARY BRITISH NARRATIVES

William Russell, was sent by The Times, London aS war correspondent to cover the ‘Mutiny.’ In one of his reports dated, March 2, 1858, while underlining the unity among the ranks of rebel army he wrote:

“All the great chiefs of Oudh, Mussalman and Hindu, are there, and have sworn to fight for their young king, Birjeis Kuddr [sic], to the last. Their cavalry is numerous, the city is filled with people, the works are continually strengthened. All Oudh is in the hands of the enemy, and we only hold the ground we cover with our bayonets.”

Another senior British officer, Thomas Lowe who led British attacks on Jhansi, Kalpi and Kanpur admitted that,

“the infanticide Rajput, the bigoted Brahmin, the fanatic Mussalman, and the luxury loving, fat-paunched ambitious Maharattah [sic], they all joined together in the cause; the cow-killer and the cow-worshipper, the pig-hater and the pig-eater, the crier of Allah is God and Mohommed [sic] his prophet and the mumbler of the mysteries of Brahma.”

Fred Roberts (became the Commander- in-Chief of the British armed forces in India later) was one of the leading British military commanders who led the British army to recapture Lucknow. In one of his letters, from the Lucknow front dated Nov 25, 1857, while rejoicing victory on that day at Sikander Bagh, Lucknow could not miss out the fact that even in the face of death the rebel army consisting of both Hindus and Muslims did not lose heart and stayed glued to each other. When Fred entered the Sikander Bagh he found nearly 2000 rebels on the ground dead or dying.

“I never saw such a sight. They were literally in heaps, and when I went in were a heaving mass, some dead, but most wounded and unable to get up from the crush. How so many got crowded together I can’t understand. You had to walk over them to cross the court. They showed their hatred even while dying, cursed us and said: ‘if we could only stand, we would kill you.’”

Throughout the War of Independence every hook and corner of the country was replete with such instances of fearless fighters, supreme sacrifices and strong bond of unity amongst people belonging to different religions. Such glorious instances of unbreakable Hindu-Muslim unity did really happen 168 years back. It can be verified even today by a simple perusal of the contemporary British archives, personal collections, diaries and narrations. Given these realities of history, it is not difficult to understand why a divide between Hindus and Muslims was necessitated, who were instrumental in accomplishing it and who benefited out of this divide. The survival of the British Empire in India depended on the successful execution of this strategy of divide and rule. The flag-bearers of the politics of two-nations in the past and communal politics today are the ones who helped the British to execute this evil design. We should never ignore the fact that communalism was a ploy of the British who feared the end of their Empire in India if Hindus and Muslims continually stood united. On the eve of 167th anniversary of the great rebellion, we must rise to take pledge of never betraying the shared heritage and shared martyrdoms of the First Indian War of Independence and not let the RSS-BJP rulers of India undo it.

[All references and quotes presented in this article are based on contemporary documents.]

Shamsul Islam is a retired professor of Delhi University

9 May 2025

Source: countercurrents.org

By Heather Stroud

Israel is very adept at drawing attention away from itself and onto other countries as it carries out its genocide of Palestinians in Gaza. In a recent incident when the ‘Conscience’, an aid boat attempting to reach the starving people of Gaza, was hit by drones (likely fired by Israel) a few miles out of Maltese territorial waters, all attention descended upon the Maltese authorities.

The vessel was flying the flag of the Pacific Island of Palau, however prior to the drone hit, Palau withdrew the registration leaving the crew vulnerable to accusations of being without official papers. Israel had also made accusations of terrorism, claiming that the crew of activists were Hamas militants. There is no basis to the claim that the peaceful activists have any military connections or intentions. The crew are internationals of conscience, who had gathered together from various countries in an attempt to break the blockade of Gaza, carry essential supplies and draw attention to the desperate plight of people in Gaza.

A nearby Maltese tug boat was the first to arrive to the boat’s aid, having been alerted by the authorities to the SOS distress call. The tug boat was equipped with a fire hose and managed to totally extinguish the fire. However, with holes in the boat from the drone attack and extensive damage to the generator, the boat has been slowly taking on water. When the authorities arrived shortly after, the captain of the Conscience’ informed them that the crew would not abandon their vessel or let any of the authorities board it.

The fears by the crew of sabotage from an unknown person or persons boarding their boat, are not unrealistic. Besides incidents of sabotage, activists from the earlier Freedom Flotilla Coalitions, in attempting to break the siege of Gaza, have experienced deaths, arrests, theft and the destruction of vessels. In 2008 the ‘Dignity’, was rammed – with clear lethal intent by the Israeli military. The damage was so extensive the boat was taking on water leaving it totally unseaworthy. Although the authorities in Israel and Egypt ignored the call for help, the Lebanese responded and rescued the sixteen international activists on board. In 2010, ten activists were murdered by the Israeli military. In 2018, Dr. Swee Ang a passenger on the ‘Al Awda’ freedom boat, describes how prior to reaching the Gaza coast line they were boarded by the Israeli military, arrested, humiliated and stripped naked. There boat was confiscated.

The young, well known environmental activist, Greta Thunberg, is already in Malta and along with other internationals hopes to join the ‘Conscience’ as early as possible. However being well known is no guarantee of survival or success as orthopaedic surgeon David Halpin can testify from his experience on the ‘Dignity’. The Israelis have a documented history of committing crimes against anyone – Palestinian or international, if they are perceived to challenge their Zionist aspirations to turn all of Palestine and beyond, into a Jewish State.

The Maltese authorities agreed to allow the boat to come into Malta and to assist with repairs, however they insisted that the boat go through the normal customs procedures of inspection. The Maltese Navy, with concerns for Malta’s security and a responsibility for the security of those on the boat from further attack, blocked all vessels from approaching the Conscience’. Included in those blocked, from the area around the boat, were activists connected with the freedom flotilla. This led to a stand off between the two groups as each tried to express their own security concerns while also addressing the vessel’s evident need for assistance.

All eyes turned away from Israel’s war crime and toward Malta. Sandwiched between Zionist political pressure from Israel on one side, and on the other side, pressure from international humanitarian groups, the Maltese authorities were thrown into the spotlight as the potential villains. The Maltese people, along with the internationals, were ready to hold a protest in the capital city of Valletta in support of the humanitarian venture. However the protest was called off after it appeared that the crew and supporters of the ‘Conscience’ were in genuine negotiations with the Maltese Government.

This is a narrative that is still unfolding. It remains to be seen how the Maltese authorities will respond, however whatever the outcome of the negotiations between the activists and the Maltese Government, we must remind ourselves that the real villain here is, not Malta, but Israel. If justice is ever to be achieved, the Israeli Government must be held accountable for its ongoing theft and coveting of Palestinian land. Only then will Palestinians be free of this hundred year plus catastrophe that has led to displacement, occupation, and genocide.

Heather Stroud is an activist

9 May 2025

Source: countercurrents.org

By Maung Zarni

A book review of an influential report on Eichmann’s trial by Hannah Arendt – slightly older than   me – published in Jan. 1963.  I came out of my mother’s womb 60 days after the review was printed in the NYRB.

I used to have a copy of the book itself.  I moved at least 15 times to about 6 countries in 36 years.   In one of the moves I must have lost some books – including a hard copy of my PhD thesis and Arendt’s classic.

I don’t think I read Death in Jerusalem cover to cover.   But “the banality of evil” continues to be highly contested – its meaning or applicability is far from being settled among those of us who take words seriously.

One of my late teachers at Wisconsin, Bob Koehl was typically keen to point out how adept (and deceptive) his own subjects of study – the SS – were: liquidation, administrative custody, and a whole cluster of euphemisms that concealed their most criminal deeds.

I saw one of the most infamous documents in history – the Final Solution – on display in a dimly lit glass showcase in the Jewish History Museum at the old Warsaw Ghetto.   A copy really.

An English translation of a particular way of killing the Jews stays with me:  “natural or environmental factors” will do their jobs as well, or something to that effect.

I look at the USA, ICE, Trump, Musk, Patel etc.  And I look at Israel in Gaza and Palestine.

Chillingly, I  feel that the Trump gang and Israel are far more evil than the Nazis or individuals like Himmler or Heydrich or Eichman.

The Nazis felt a need to conceal their real intent and euphemisize their crimes or cover their tracks (like burning documents and blowing up crematorium) or making light of their fear and loathing of the European Jews  in their statements to the American psychologists at the Nuremberg (in the case of Goering, for instance).

After I spoke on the Rohingya genocide at the online bi-annual conference hosted by Auschwitz during the Covid lockdown, I flew to the museum in order to explore ways to promote genocide awareness and use the museum’s darkly iconic standing as an instrument for prevention of more genocide.    (Well, the Museum issued a statement supporting Israel’s right to defend a week after October 7 – so much for my grossly misplaced hope or expectations for these Holocaust memorial sites and museums globally.  That’s a story for another day.  The Polish museum  administrators at Auschwitz too live in their own “zone of interest”, no doubt).

At the museum, the deputy archivist gave me a one-on-one talk on how Auschwitz does the documentation.  He said the Nazis destroyed 90+ % of their documentary evidence.

In sharp contrast, both the Trump Inc. American Nazis and Bibi-Gvir-Smotrich Jewish Nazis  don’t feel a need to conceal anything.

That’s why the Jewish American political commentator Katie Halper publicly called Israel and Zionism the greatest threats to the Jewish people around the world.

Watch her here:
https://www.instagram.com/share/reel/BAKYhb0wH3

I am cutting and pasting the full text of this review below.

Warmly,

Zarni
_____________________________________________

“The picture Hannah Arendt paints is extremely depressing with respect to the past, and very alarming for the future. She points out that there is now a historic precedent for genocide, and given the conditions likely soon to confront governments as the result of the population explosion, it is only too possible that excuses will be found to follow the Nazi precedent, covering it over, of course, with the methods of a less primitive bureaucracy, with subtler euphemisms, officialese and new language rules.”

“Eichmann’s mind was ruined by miseducation before it was distorted by politics. And even supposing that a man like Eichmann can get into a powerful position, should not one expect that in a civilized country Eichmann’s clichés, his “language rules,” his evasions and euphemisms would have made him ludicrous to an educated public? Perhaps the greatest delusion of the Germans about themselves is that they are a cultivated, educated people. But then, when it comes to resisting the “language rules” used by politicians (the existence of the H-bomb has created a whole new vocabulary of evasions), who is today resisting?”
“Miss Arendt’s underlying theme is the corruption of individual or personal values by grandiose, perverted social aims which see people not as individuals but as the object of statistical calculations, as disposable, even interchangeable, social units.”

The most deeply distressing pages in this book—pages which will doubtless give rise to the most bitter recriminations—are those in which Miss Arendt discusses the cooperation of the Jewish Councils and of certain Zionist leaders or representatives with the Nazis. Within the context of war and of Nazi corruption, the interests of the officials representing Nazis and Jews could appear to merge and become at some points the same. The one part of Eichmann’s story which he never abandoned in the trial was that in Vienna in 1938 when he had been in charge of “forced emigration” (i.e. expelling the Jews from Austria), “he and his men and the Jews were all ‘pulling together’…. The Jews ‘desired’ to emigrate and he, Eichmann, was there to help them, because it so happened that at the same time the Nazi authorities had expressed the desire to see their Reich judenrein.” So the Jewish leaders would meet Eichmann in a cordial atmosphere (he even shook hands with them, and seemed in his behavior “perfectly correct”) to arrange, sometimes, for the emigration of the “best Jews” to Palestine. The aims of the Jews and the Nazis coincided at a time when both sides could agree that there were “good Jews” who qualified for salvation, “bad” ones who could be disregarded.

The New York Review

Death in Jerusalem

Stephen Spender

June 1, 1963 issue