Christchurch: White supremacists’ failed mission

BY ABUKAR ARMAN

Any atrocity of the scale of the Christchurch terrorist attack is both a mirror that objectively shows us our own reflection and what needs our immediate attention, and a valuable book that teaches us how to prevent similar tragedies and the reactionary vengeance they could inspire.

The horrendous news hit me like a ton of bricks. I was on the freeway driving back home from a hospital visit when the news anchor said: two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand were under attack and many Muslim worshipers were feared dead.

50 worshipers of all ages were killed in cold blood, the youngest being a 3 year old Mucad (Mu’ad) Ibrahim. Hereare faces of the fallen.

A Personal Perspective

Like many Muslims around the world, I attended my local Friday prayers on that sad and traumatic day knowing very well that Fridays could never get too dark to submit one’s will to God. The mosque located in the outskirt of Columbus, Ohio was not only in full capacity, but there were also a number of children in attendance, though it was a school day. I couldn’t tell how many parents brought their kids because they wanted to keep them safely next to them and how many brought them in defiance of the terrorists’ wishes.

When the salah (prayer) began and the Imam (prayer leader) started reciting al-Fatiha (a short chapter in the Qur’an that is similar to the Lord’s Prayer in the Christian faith) the usual silence was broken by angelic voice of a child who was innocently trying to outpace the Imam’s recitation. It was a breath of solace beyond what any words could adequately describe. That feeling grew more profound when the Imam concluded with this verse:

“O you who accepted faith, seek refuge in patience and prayer. Indeed, God is with the patient.” Qur’an 2:153

The Cesspool of Supremacy

Periodical manifestation of White Supremacist terrorism in America—the fountainhead of a racial superiority complex— cannot be dismissed as random acts of insanity or weaponized hate. Terrorism has only one name.

There is no randomness in the targeting of Muslims in their mosques. True, there are Muslims who carry terrorist acts in the name of Islam, though they spare no one. Across the world, Muslims constitute the largest number of terrorism victims.

There is no randomness in targeting New Zealand as one of the safest places on earth, where the police force are not even armed, where Muslims who fled wars were welcomed to settle, find jobs and become part of this exceptionally welcoming society.

There is no randomness in the targeting of Christchurch as a city whose name clearly carries a religious meaning. The terrorist clearly indicated in his manifesto that one of his motives was to provoke a religious war.

There is no randomness in the terrorist being from Australia- a country that is nowadays more known for its rising bigotry than neighborhood roaming kangaroos. Aside from its foundational racist history, Australia has overtly racist high-ranking politicians, law-makers and media groups that are in par with Fox News and Breitbart News.

There is no randomness in those whom the terrorist glorified in his manifesto and considered inspirational heroes- Donald J. Trump, the White Supremacist In Chief, topping the list.

Ever since Donald Trump ran and won on an anti-immigrant platform that projected Muslims as a national security threat, famously said “I think Islam hates us” in an interview and promised to ban Muslims, White Supremacists and their enablers went overboard with Islamophobia, anti-Semitism, racism and against all those whom they perceived as their defenders. They saw vigilantism receiving a Presidential seal of approval.

On March 13, two days before the Christchurch Muslim massacre, President Donald Trump gave an interview to Breitbart News. He offered this desperately ominous assertion that was apparently intended to blow the dog whistle to the radical elements within his as his presidency hangs in the balance: “I have the support of the police, the support of the military, the support of the Bikers for Trump – I have the tough people, but they don’t play it tough – until they go to a certain point, and then it would be very bad, very bad.”

Manipulating the Masses

The most common method used by those who radicalize others is a slightly modified version of the method used to manipulate minds for marketing, absolute political loyalty, or for collective madness.

In 1929, Edward Bernays wrote his book ‘Propaganda’. He focused on how to strategically lure the masses into collective state of submissive mindlessness, and how to use selective history as a weapon. He successfully convinced the American public that Jacobo Árbenz, Guatemala’s democratically elected President was a diehard communist which eventually led to his overthrowing.

Then came Joseph Goebbels—Hitler’s Minister of Propaganda—who amended Bernays’ strategy and used it against European Jews. This would later compel Bernays to coin a new name that is widely accepted today: public relations.

We now live in a world where the leader of the most powerful nation on earth constantly tells the masses that all media are counterfeit enterprises that spread “fake news” except Fox News and Breitbart News. The former for those who are enticed visually and the latter for those who like to read.

The Manufactured Boogieman

Dehumanization of Muslims and vilification of Islam through blatant propaganda and less graphic Islamophobic rhetoric is widespread and is a seldom frowned upon in the West. Though this has been slowly improving, Muslims are seldom invited to mainstream media platforms to represent themselves and their faith. Muslims are more commonly defined by professional propagandists of all shades of malice who propagate falsehood about Islam and Muslims. They paint Muslims who are monolithic in moral extremism. An Islam that is innately and historically violent.

Recently, one of Fox News’ hosts and President Trump’s staunch supporter and unofficial adviser Jeanine Pirro’s Islamophobic tirade attempted to brand Congresswoman Ilhan Omar as an extremist who could not be trusted as a law-maker because she wears hijab as prescribed by the Qur’an.

This triggered massive outrage, especially on social media. Initially, Fox News ignored the waves of public pressure to fire Pirro until White Supremacist terrorism hit Christchurch mosques. Pirro’s show scheduled the following day was suspended without any official explanation.

Of course it did not take long for Trump to intervene. The US President unabashedly took it to his Twitter feed pressuring Fox News executives and urging his base to demand her return.

These professional propagandists are part of the hate-mongering apparatus that encourages White Supremacists to show up at mosques provocatively displaying their assault weapons to harass and intimidate Muslim worshipers. Imagine if some American-born, Second Amendment enthusiast, Muslims were to show up in front of churches across US while openly carrying their legally acquired large weapons and wearing their Islamic attires.

To expose their political witch brew or debunk the disinformation spread by these Islamophobic pundits may require an unyielding army of well-informed goodwill advocates who are cool-headed social media savvy, fact-oriented, and critical thinkers who expose them in every opportunity.

Better Days Ahead

I still believe contrary to common misconception, the human-being is innately good though toxic environments and situations at home or outside could render him heartless and wicked. I am even more convinced today after reading, hearing and watching the overwhelming global support that was extended to the Muslims who were impacted by this latest White Supremacist terrorism.

It was overwhelmingly touching to see non-Muslims trying to save Muslims and showing up in mosques to offer security while people prayed inside. And who could forget Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern wearing a black hijab as compassionately consoled grieving family members and promising them swift justice. She also declared Friday 22nd of March a day of solidarity and the Azaan (Islamic call for prayer) to be nationally broadcasting through TV New Zealand and Radio New Zealand as Muslims went back to their mosques for Friday prayer. More importantly, she successfully spearheaded a ban on semiautomatic weapons and all devices that enhance their lethal capacity.

In Christchurch, White Supremacist terrorism has not only brought Muslims and Christians much closer, but also Muslims and people of conscience of all faiths and creeds.

At the global level, however, the scope of indulgence and the magnitude of ignorance that propel Islamophobia still remain scandalously ubiquitous. It is time to break free from the intellectual and spiritual bondage of bigotry. We must grow in life not as mere living-beings, but as human-beings with thoughts, sense of empathy and conscience.

We are living in a period of history that—properly aligned—could sift and differentiate the scum from the decent; the anarchist from the transformative, the real terrorists from the real counter-terrorist forces.

Despite the pains caused by the terrorists, their objective to sow hate and violence has clearly failed. The tides started turning against the purveyors of violent hate and agents of anarchy. It is a matter of sustaining the momentum, especially in the US.

ABUKAR ARMAN

Abukar Arman is a former diplomat (Somalia's Special Envoy to the US). He is a widely published analyst. Focus on foreign policy/Islam/Horn of Africa /extremism.

Understanding white supremacy beyond the far-right and the Daily Mail

writes Dr Sadia Habib

In the wake of last Friday’s terror attacks in Christchurch, it has become embarrassingly clear that Muslims haven’t really understood the multi-faceted nature of white supremacy, writes Dr Sadia Habib. 

After the grief of Friday’s terror attack at two mosques in Christchurch, Muslims around the world have been mourning, reflecting and processing how this atrocity occurred.

More than ever before, we must urgently read and learn about the basics of how race, racism and white supremacy operate.

What is white supremacy?

The opening words of Charles W. Mills’ The Racial Contract introduce us to the meaning, function and nature of white supremacy as an ‘unnamed political system that has made the modern world what it is today’ (p1).  Mills details at length which theories you will encounter in your politics and philosophy textbooks, and it won’t be about the system of white supremacy.

Moreover, what we must never forget is that this ‘omission’ is ‘not accidental’: ‘standard textbooks and courses have for the most part been written and designed by whites, who take their racial privilege so much for granted that they do not even see it as political, as a form of domination’ (p1).

What is the function of racism?

Where, why and how is white supremacy pervasive in our world?

These are core questions we should be visiting and re-visiting.

Beyond far right racism

There are different ways we might begin to try and understand how Christchurch could have happened.  Comprehending what happened is incumbent on us all who yearn for a world without Islamophobia. We can’t simply bury our heads in the sand, and leave the few to speak up against rising Islamophobia. That’s not the Islamic way.

Christchurch massacre suspect Brenton Tarrant

Some have been reading through the killer’s manifesto – The Great Replacement – to try and make sense of what led to this unthinkable act of violence against Muslims.

That alone is not enough. It’s far too easy to blame far right extremists for white supremacy.

We need to move beyond focusing on far right racist rhetoric.  We need to do more than boycott the tabloid gutter press, like the Daily Mail.

We can’t just keep on sharing those clever memes and infograms that rightly highlight how mainstream media perpetually represents Black people as ‘thugs’, Muslims as ‘terrorists’, and Whites as a ‘lone wolf’.

BBC Newsnight platforming Islamophobes

Of course, we must keep on interrogating how the mainstream media is complicit in emboldening the far right, in normalising far right White supremacists, in readily giving extremist White racists a platform.

On the very day that the Muslim Ummah was grieving globally about Christchurch, popular news and current affairs television programme, BBC Newsnight, invited Generation Identity onto the show.

When criticised for airing White supremacist Islamophobes, BBC Newsnight attempted very badly to defend their poor decision as being in the interests of anti-racism: “It is important we examine and challenge ideologies that drive hate crimes in a wider context, whether they have been distorted, and the connection they may have with any European or UK groups.” And yet the big complaints made on social media by viewers were that not only was this an insult to the grief of Muslims, but that worse yet, there was no critique.

And that’s how white supremacy works – in the case of BBC Newsnight, we see how whiteness operates to serve and protect white supremacist thinking, ironically under the guise of faux anti-racism.  Are savvy enough to recognise this and tackle this?

Invisible Muslims

Where are we failing when it comes to knowing how white supremacy operates? Moving beyond the aforementioned examples of the Islamophobia of far right extremism and the mainstream media, more importantly, we must also dissect the invisibility of Muslims.

White supremacy doesn’t just perpetuate negative representations of Muslims, it also works in cunning and strategic ways to promote the positive representation of white actors, at the expense of Muslims.

Muslims are either painted as villainous, or they are erased. White supremacy isn’t just about Muslims being vilified in the media, whilst whiteness is typically glorified or vindicated. It’s way more than that.

It’s our responsibility to learn what constitutes whiteness and how it reigns supreme in multi-faceted ways.

EggBoy and PM Jacinda Ardern

Think deeply about the humanisation of whiteness – of white terrorists, white racists, white politicians, white pretty-much-everyone.  Even that young boy who we can’t help but cheer on – EggBoy.

Of course it’s very easy to commend EggBoy and the NZ PM Jacinda Ardern. Muslims and all seem to be understandably bowled over by the compassion of these two and their actions in our names.

But racism operates in such insidious ways that the media will keep on reproducing these actors as white saviours, again at the expense of the Muslim saviours and Muslim victims.

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern

Much as we might admire EggBoy and Jacinda, we must continue to ask questions about why Muslims aren’t at the forefront of positive media attention.They very rarely are. If they are, we feel we are expected to feel relieved, excited or grateful.

Why are Muslim victims not humanised in painstaking detail, as White victims of terror and even White terrorists are? Think Manchester. Think Je suis Charlie. Think about the killer of Jo Cox described as a timid man who loved volunteering and gardening.

When Mills refers to the political system of white supremacy that’s made the world what it is today, we can see how this relates to what is erased in media narratives about Muslim lives, communities and deaths.  Again, as Mills reminds us, this erasure is never accidental, but reflects, both wittingly and unwittingly, the status quo of white supremacy.

Humanising whiteness

That’s how racism operates at every level. Not just demonising Muslims, but importantly humanising white terrorists, white criminals, white regular folk, white politicians, white everyone.

White supremacy is reproduced everywhere. Seemingly benign words and actions relentlessly repeated by the institutions of politics and media are often not virtuous or harmless. They serve to perpetuate the myth of white innocence, white compassion, white saviours or white fragility. Whiteness as the norm. And construct everyone else as the opposite. As abnormal, and as deviant.

If we don’t educate ourselves on the meanings, practices, and systems of racist oppression, how can we ever even begin to disrupt and dismantle these insidious injustices?

Ask. Read. Reflect.

It’s imperative then that we keep on asking important critical and nuanced questions. We question. We read. We reflect. We write. And we continue until we better understand how racism and white supremacy operate at every level in society to keep us down, keep us ignorant and keep us oppressed.

Dr Sadia Habib is author of Learning and Teaching British Values (Palgrave, 2017). She is co-founder of The Riz Test and co-editor of The Bookslamist.  You can follow her on Twitter on @educ_research. 

Australia’s politicians have a history of ‘othering’ Muslims and normalising right wing bigotry

RAMONA WADI

Following the New Zealand terror attack, there has been a plethora of statements from politicians worldwide, ranging from perfunctory condolences to victim blaming. Australian Senator Fraser Anning’s tweet, “Does anyone still dispute the link between Muslim immigration and violence?” is not a solitary sentiment. Indeed, the only factor distinguishing Anning from the right-wing elements in any society is his political office, which gives him leverage to influence and incite the masses against minorities.

Senator Fraser Anning@fraser_anning

Does anyone still dispute the link between Muslim immigration and violence?

4,820

11:20 - 15 Mar 2019

Twitter Ads information and privacy

12.2K people are talking about this

Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison condemned Anning’s statements, yet his intervention does not reflect a consistent approach. According to the Sydney Morning Herald, Morrison had, as opposition spokesman for immigration in 2011, urged “to capitalise on the electorate’s growing concerns about Muslim immigration, Muslims in Australia and the inability of Muslim migrants to integrate.”

This month, Australian Minister for Home Affairs Peter Dutton and Finance Minister Mathias Cormann, spoke out against refugees and asylum seekers stranded on Nauru accessing medical treatment in Australia. Morrison backed the arguments, stating, “If we’ve got to treat more people in Australia then obviously they’re going to take the place of people who were getting that treatment anyway. It’s just simple math.” The government’s claims were contradicted by medical directors, who said that asylum seekers and refugees could be accommodated to seek treatment.

Former Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott’s national security address in 2015 also focused on the purported terror threat from Muslims. People, he said, are angry, “because all too often the threat comes from someone who has enjoyed the hospitality and generosity of the Australian people.”

But right-wing terrorists in Western countries, not just Australia, are part of the social fabric of which politicians regularly seek to exclude Muslims, whether they are refugees or not. The politics of exclusion advocated by governments and politicians has created extremist views on who deserves to belong and who doesn’t, thus altering the political and social fabric of society. When the tactic backfires, or rather, reveals its true colours, as Australian right-wing terrorist did in New Zealand, political reactions veer towards either denying right-wing incitement and actuation of violence, or else taking a temporary step back from right-wing incitement until media hype turns its attention elsewhere.

The Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO) states that “Sunni Islamist extremism is the primary terrorist threat facing Australia.”

Michelle Grossman from Deakin University stated that terror attacks such as Brenton Tarrant’s are difficult to predict “because they tended to be lone actors or work in very small cells.”

While this might be true, there is also a political process behind such isolation. Western governments have consistently played upon white privilege and purported democracy to promote their intervention politics. The mainstream acceptance of such violence also contains the ability to conceal violence through normalisation, hence the absence of action when it comes to tackling far-right hatred and incitement to violence. If politicians have endorsed this philosophy through their rhetoric, the next step would be to uphold its support base within society.
Incitement to terrorism by governments, therefore, must be regarded as one of the main influences.

No matter the postulating on values in the aftermath of bloodshed such as occurred in New Zealand, the truth is that government incitement against Muslims and refugees has created the space within society for the right-wing to be perceived as a movement, as well as an isolated phenomenon, depending on what suits political interests at the given moment. The terms “invasion” and “defending our country” – typical of the right-wing – are not without precedents in political rhetoric, as governments pits society against each other to ensure an accumulation of votes.

Amid this intentionally orchestrated hatred, which governments disguise under diplomacy, it is worth remembering the origins of invasion and how, in recent years, the same discourse was mellowed for public acceptance under the pretext of foreign intervention and “bringing democracy” to the Middle East.

How is it possible to justify right-wing terrorism as a lone act when one needs only to look at incitement from the highest political echelons?

Why the far-right loves Israel & Israel loves the far-right

RAMONA VASSALLO

Another aim would be to divert focus away from the fact that citizens of any country have more in common with minorities than with the governments ruling their country.

The political spectrum has ceased to exist, except in theory. What remains of political jargon are words such as allies and enemies which are applied consistently within a mainstream narrative that calls Israel’s colonial presence in Palestine a democracy.

Right-wing groups have endorsed and disseminated this line of thinking, despite their contention with governments on other issues. Fear has been evoked from the imaginary and projected upon vulnerable minorities as a shield for governments behind which it is also possible to manipulate the meaning and implications of accountability.

There is more than one narrative at play, yet the collusion between right-wing groups and governments is bound by the assimilation to fear, which overrules any contention such groups might have with political leaders. As a result, it is even possible now for the right-wing to claim it is not right-wing, despite the exclusionary ideology.

A more accurate assessment would be to state that the majority of governments are right-wing and politics have normalised different strands of such an ideology for various reasons. One is to differentiate between the right-wing and the far-right within one’s country. Such a strategy promotes further discord between citizens. Another aim would be to divert focus away from the fact that citizens of any country have more in common with minorities than with the governments ruling their country. Again, this leads back to the blurring of political lines to the point that everything can be given different values and meanings depending on what exploitative measures are undertaken by the government.

The other reason is to perpetuate illusions in order to have the public contribute to the government’s foreign policy. It is little wonder that among so-called right-wing activists, or far-right wing activists, Israel has become something akin to a cause. The narrative is reversed because such groups, despite disagreeing with their governments on other political issues, have no problem with aligning themselves to the prevailing discourse disseminated by Israel and promoted by the international community, that Israel is “the only democracy in the Middle East”. That is, besides such groups portraying themselves as beholden to the earlier colonial myths that Israel had always existed, even though history and archaeological studies by respected historians have dispelled such claims. In any case, Israel’s inception started in the aftermath of the 1948 Nakba, which does not translate to “always”.

It is important to state that Israel is directly involved in the dissemination of such fabricated narratives, which right-wing groups are endorsing and thus, through ideological or financial association with Zionist adherents, help to propagate. Once again, the blurring of lines between anti-Semitism and Zionism do not matter when the aim is to promote Israel’s colonialism as democratic.

In Europe and Latin America, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is forming allegiances with right-wing governments which promote anti-immigrant and anti-indigenous sentiment respectively. Endorsement of such governments by the right-wing is an automatic endorsement of Israel and there is no shard of apology forthcoming, or at the very least, an attempt to decipher between right-wing democratically elected governments and Israel’s colonial government elected by a settler-colonial population.

If Israel calls itself a democracy and the rest of the international community fails to point out that Israel is a Zionist settler-colonial state, the failure goes beyond the simplified notions of right-wing and far-right. Perpetuating the lie that colonialism and democracy are synonymous is not a recent endeavour; it has roots in the earlier colonial history which world powers refuse to address.

Approval of Israel and the perpetuation of its fabricated rights and security must be traced back to the source. It means going back and unravelling the lies which now make no distinction between colonialism and democracy. Furthermore, it also requires scrutiny of the proclaimed democracies which approved the existence of colonial Israel in historic Palestine.

Common Enemy: Why Israel is Embracing Fascism in Europe

By Ramzy Baroud

Israeli leaders are keen to benefit from Europe’s move to the far right and the anti-Muslim sentiment that accompanies it.


Hungarian Prime Minister, Viktor Orban, visited Israel on July 19, where he met Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, and other officials. Orban’s visit would have not required much pause except that the Hungarian leader has been repeatedly brandedfor his often racist, anti-Semitic remarks.

So why is Orban wining and dining with the leaders of the so-called ‘Jewish State‘?

The answer does not pertain only to Orban and Hungary, but to Israel’s attitude towards the rapidly growing far-right movements in Europe, as a whole. Netanyahu and Zionist leaders everywhere, are not just aware of this massive political shift in European politics but are, in fact, working diligently to utilize it in Israel’s favor.

On his visit to Israel, Orban asserted that Hungarian Jewish citizens should feel safe in his country, an odd statement considering that it was Orban and his party that deprived many Jews and other members of minority groups of any feeling of safety.

Still, Netanyahu has welcomed Orban as a “true friend of Israel” and Orban called on his European counterparts to show more support for Israel. Mission accomplished.

Netanyahu had visited Budapest in July 2017, but that supposedly ‘historic’ visit did nothing to change Hungary’s official discourse, dotted with racism and anti-Semitism. In fact, in March 2018, Orban derided Jews, focusing his criticism mostly on Jewish financiers such as George Soros.

At an election rally campaign, Orban said, “We are fighting an enemy that is different from us. Not open but hiding; not straightforward but crafty; not honest but base; not national but international; does not believe in working but speculates with money; does not have its own homeland but feels it owns the whole world.”

It is well-known that Israel and Zionist leaders are quite selective in manipulating the definition of ‘anti-Semitism’ to serve their political agendas, but Israel’s attitude towards the racist far-right movements in Europe takes this truth to a whole new level.

Indeed, the ‘special relationship’ between Netanyahu and Orban is only the tip of the iceberg. For years, Netanyahu’s Israel has been ‘flirting’ with radical right movements in Europe.

The unmistakable Israeli strategy, of course has its own logic. Israeli leaders feel that Europe’s move to the far-right is irrevocable and are keen to benefit from the anti-Muslim sentiment that accompanies this shift as much as possible.

Moreover, the EU’s resolve to label illegal settlement products and refusal to heed calls for moving their embassies from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem is pushing Netanyahu to explore these new routes.

During his previous visit to Hungary, Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, met with leaders from the so-called Visegrad-4, which includes Hungary, Poland, the Czech Republic and Slovakia.

On that visit, Netanyahu hoped to find new channels of support within the EU, through exerting pressure by using his new-found allies in these countries. In an audio-recording obtained by Reuters, Netanyahu chastised Europe for daring to criticize Israel’s dismal human rights record, illegal settlement policies and military occupation.

“I think Europe has to decide whether it wants to live and thrive or it wants to shrivel and disappear,” he said.

Netanyahu’s arrogance is unbridled, especially as the censure is emanating from a leader who represents an ethno-nationalist state, which has just recently canceled any reference to ‘democracy’ in its newly-issued Jewish Nation-state Law.

The new ‘basic law’ defines Israel by an ethnic identity, not any democratic values. Netanyahu is now closer to Europe’s far-right racist groups than to any liberal democratic model, thus the ongoing flirting between Israel and these groups.

Related article: The Jewish Nation State Law: If Israel Practiced Democracy, It’d Be Called Palestine

In fact, the term ‘flirting’ is itself an understatement considering that Israel’s ties with various far-right, neo-Nazi and fascist parties in Europe involve high-level political coordination and, in the case of the Ukraine in particular, the actual supplying of weapons.

Human rights groups recently petitioned the Israeli High Court to stop Israel’s export of weapons to neo-Nazi groups.

The Israeli-far-right embrace almost touches every single European country, including Italy and Germany, whose history of Nazism and Fascism has wrought death and misery to millions.

In Italy, the connection between Italian far-right parties and Israel goes back to the early 2000s, when post-Fascist leader, Gianfranco Fini, labored to rebrand his movement.

Initially, Fini was the leader of the Movimento Sociale Italiano (Italian Social Movement), which saw itself as the “heir to the Fascist Party”.

The rebranding of the party required a trip by Fini to Israel in 2003, after changing the name of his movement to the ‘National Alliance.’ Interestingly, in his highly-touted visit, Fini was accompanied by Amos Luzzatto, the head of the Italian Jewish community.

Unsurprisingly, far-right leader, Matteo Salvini, Italy’s current Interior Minister, went through the same political baptism by Zionist Israel—as Orban and Fini also did—by paying a visit to Tel Aviv in March 2016 to launch his political career and declaring his undying love for the Jewish State.

The same scenario is being repeated in Germany where the far-right party—Alternative for Germany (AfD)—has risen in ranks to the point that it nearly toppled a government coalition led by Chancellor Angela Merkel.

AfD has more in common with Israel than the common anti-Muslim and anti-immigrant views. The party which is “derided for anti-Semitic, xenophobic views redolent of the Nazis is also staunchly supportive of Israel,” reported the Times of Israel.

Last April, the anti-Muslim, anti-Semitic German party, enthusiastically began a campaignpushing for the recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, despite Merkel’s views to the contrary.

The story, however, does not end there. What began as Israeli flirting with far-right racist movements is now Israel’s official policy towards Europe. The same story, with different actors and names can be found in Austria’s Freedom Party (FPOe), Belgium’s Vlaams Belang (Flemish Interest) and virtually everywhere else.

It remains to be seen how Israel’s embrace of fascist Europe will bode, both for Israel and the European Union. Will the EU “shrivel and disappear”, or will Israel be finally exposed for what it truly is, an ethno-nationalist state with no interest in true democracy in the first place?