chalidze
Unconditional Right To Exist
(Israel's war of independence is not over.)
Next time you admire the Coliseum, remember that it was built on Jewish gold, looted from the destroyed Jerusalem Temple. What American freedom-dreamers did more than two centuries ago, the Jews did about two millenia ago: they rebelled against a mighty colonial power. The Americans won, the Jews lost. As a result, they lost their country and had to disperse throughout the whole Roman empire and beyond. They penetrated mostly inhospitable corners of the world, to encounter centuries of suspicion, suppression and persecution, as they were very different and they resisted assimilation.
How did they manage to survive without forgetting who they are? By this I mean “survive” not only in their genes, but in the preservation of their culture and language, such that the language could be reincarnated as the state language of a reincarnated state. That is hardly a miracle that can be explained. Is the secret to their survival their loyalty to their God, or to their Jewishness, or simply the choice to resist those who wanted to destroy their identity?
Their chain of suffering led to what one would expect to be unthinkable in a civilized world: the Holocaust. And that led-- as an expression of some feeling of the guilt of the civilized world -- to the creation of the state of Israel.
Can the United Nations correct the wrongdoing of the Roman Empire? Well, it did. The creation of modern Israel was a heartbreaking joy for the Jewish people, but around the world it started a new wave of hatred, uniting anti-Semites of all persuasions. These days anti-Semites can even be politically correct by agitating not against Jews as such, but against Israel. And leftist democrats spouting human rights phraseology can spiritually unite with the ugliest dictators, like Ahmadinajad.
Here is a simple thing to remember: when you hurt Israel, you are hurting Jews who are trying to survive. They do live under siege there!
Do decent people in the West do enough to support Israel? The United States, to my admiration, is a strong defender of this tiny democratic country that is so close to us in culture and the understanding of civilized values. But generally, the West did not and does not do enough.
The West is still flirting with those forces that do not recognize the right of Israel to exist. In the racially-charged Middle East, perhaps there will never be peace and quite; but recognition of Israel's right to exist must be a minimal demand of Western countries, made on everyone in that part of the world.
Let’s not forget that the original resolution of the United Nations was to create Jewish and Arab states in the area. The two-state solution is not a recent idea. But Israel’s Arab neighbors rejected the Jewish state from the beginning -- from 1948 on. Therefore, they did not establish an Arab state. Instead, they attacked the newborn Israel. Did the United Nations defend it? No. The Israelis managed to defend themselves, against all odds. And from then on – for sixty years -- they were managing.
It is not for Western diplomats to teach the Israelis how to make peace in the Middle East. Instead, it is for Western civilization to insist on unconditional recognition of Israel's right to exist. All the diplomatic games can be played after that.
Valery Chalidze (who used to defend human rights in USSR). E-mail: vrazhek43 with Google.
Dec 4, 2010
In defence of Julian Assange
Julian Assange, knight of disclosure as founder of WikiLeaks, serves our civilization even in his mishaps. He reminds us that a certain type of slander was and is easily accepted by people, and by countries. Who needs proof where sex is involved?
I was there myself. In the last year of my human rights activity in Russia, Yuri Andropov -- head of the Soviet secret police and future dictator -- was looking for a way to jail me for violating a non-political criminal article. Contrary to all the evidence, the KGB launched a rumor of homosexuality about me; in that place and time homosexuality was, literally, a crime punishable by imprisonment.
When the rumor was spread, Andropov duly reported to the government: "Now Chalidze is compromised." Luckily for me, instead of imprisoning me, the government opted merely to exile me to the West and revoke my Soviet citizenship.
The head of the Swedish secret police knows better how to play the dirty diplomatic game, against an Australian social hero. The Swedish police managed to manipulate two fallen girls to accuse Assange of criminal sexual conduct (although as I understand the allegations, the blame should perhaps be directed against the condom manufacturer). Perhaps it was silly of Assange to have sex in Sweden with no lawyer present, considering how many people are out to get him. Yet a UN working group has opined that Assange’s confinement in Equadorian Embassy amounts to arbitrary detention.
Our civilization should be ashamed of itself over this case. I hope our own government has clean hands in this affair. Assange is not one of us, and is not obliged to protect our secrets. We might symbolically slap him on his key board and express disapproval, but we should not dirty our hands participating in the centuries-old custom of screaming "gotcha" and abandoning the
presumption of innocence, when the shadow of sex falls across the light of openness.
Valery Chalidze
Benson, Vermont, USA
E-mail: vrazhek43 with Google.
August 21, 2016
The Paradox Of the Open Court
A long time ago, the Supreme Court of Russia held a hearing in the case of Anatoly Marchenko, who was accused of saying "Communists drank all my blood". When his defence lawyer quoted this phrase, the judge angrily stated: "No need to repeat this phrase in open court". (I was there.)
Perhaps Soviet judges were not taught elementary logic, but if this phrase was evidence, it had to be be quoted in open court. If the prohibition against quoting the "criminal" words is strong enough, then the whole case is not fit for a system of justice with public trials. In honor of this distinguished, now deceased, dissident, I'll call this the "Marchenko Paradox".
Now, there is the case of Vladimir Bukovsky, also a dissident. He lives in England, a country where judges supposedly did learn elementary logic. In a gloomy irony, this known defender of the freedom of information, in his declining age, is accused of having thousands of "child pornography" files on his computer, downloaded from the Internet.
Using children to produce pornography is obviously a crime. That is not the accusation against Bukovsky, however. He stated that he was
researching freedom of information on the Internet -- not that anyone should bother to explain his reasons for saving zillions of ones and zeros.
And here is the same Marchenko paradox: if the government cites those files as evidence of a crime, let the government show them in open court, or forever hold its peace.
Valery Chalidze
Benson, Vermont, USA. 2017
E-mail: vrazhek43 with Google.