Israel: A Homeland in Danger

When asked about Salazar’s fateful fall from office, Mário Soares replied – “I was very happy!”. It is well known that the Soares family never got along well with the indifference of the President of the Council – old wars of an Afonso-supporting João Lopes Soares. However, it is legitimate to read in the socialist’s words a joy in the face of other people’s misfortune. Decades later, we saw the political left shocked by the recent Israeli attacks on Iran and the physical elimination of some of its leaders. In solidarity with Iranian tyranny, it was – and still is – those on the front line who rejoiced at the abrupt end of the unfortunate creator and his creature, the so-called Ancien Régime.

The left is all about regimes: the dictatorships that are the enemies of my enemy, even if this enemy is a democracy, are my friends. This is the case with the PC, the Bloco – and some histrionic voices from the PS. The militants and supporters of these parties have never stopped to address the details of the lack of respect for human rights and the absence of free elections. Using the old feminist image (if I may still say so), they not only refuse to recognize the legitimacy of the Israeli democratic regime but also take pride in beating a woman with flowers, and in this case, the only female florist in the neighborhood. Given the inhospitable place and its constitutionalities ab initio (Israel does not exist/Israel must be destroyed, a modern version of Carthago delenda est ), Israel is obliged to behave with the increased vigilance of a lamb that everyone wants to sacrifice. – In other words, being the lamb of the Middle East, it must wear the skin (the bones and muscles) of a wolf. For Agostinho Costa to understand me, the Israeli State must arm itself and prevent others from arming themselves.

I won’t go into the origins of the conflict – the current situation is dense enough. Among the many rhetorical questions that the left and its military like to throw out is the following: why can Israel have nuclear weapons and Iran cannot? The answer is necessarily dry: if the latter had them, the former would no longer exist. Thus, not only does Iran survive, but Gaza survives. The selectivity of Israeli targets is real: Hamas terrorists, (curiously) supported by Iran, and Iranian officials are the targets. It could not be otherwise: whether in Gaza or in former Persia, the inhabitants already suffer too much at the hands of their self-imposed leaders; moreover, in the “Palestinian territories” the terror is immense, with the population being used as a fortress and shield against weapons coming from the other side of the narrow strip. To be even clearer: if Tel Aviv wanted it that way, Gaza would no longer exist. And so much for genocide. On the other hand, however, the moral, political and religious obligation to fight and destroy Israel, as an entity and territorialization of the Jewish nation, prevails: given this Iranian nuclear weaponry, Israelis, Jews and non-Jews, would cease to exist.

Another consideration that is often pointed out by detractors of the Zionist state is that there is no conclusive evidence that Iran is on the verge of having a nuclear weapon. In other words, this attack is simply intended to divert attention from the terrible humanitarian situation in Gaza. These politicians and commentators behave like European leaders from 100 years ago: faced with strong evidence that Nazi Germany was arming itself heavily, they shouted from the rooftops that Hitler was a man of peace. The most astonishing thing is that the communists in England, once the conflict began, refused to fight a “capitalist and imperial” war and accused the British government of warmongering – only when the USSR was invaded did they suddenly call for fighting the Huns.

The cities of Israel are currently experiencing an atmosphere of blitz: indiscriminate and constant destruction. Far be it from me to say that Netanyahu is a Churchill, but the regime of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei seems determined to force the comparison. The English statesman has always known how to stay one step ahead of his colleagues, allies and enemies alike and, like the Israeli Prime Minister, he soon realised that a change of regime would be desirable. Then, in freedom and with political awareness, the Iranians will be able to decide their future.