By Ken Abramowitz and Jon Sutz
See the sources for this article and more research in the Additional Reading section.
On November 12, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) of the European Union (EU) ruled that all of its 28 member states must add special labels to all Israeli food products imported to the EU, which are manufactured in Judea and Samaria (aka “The West Bank”). This decision is the result of the ECJ’s determination that Jews living in Judea-Samaria are “illegally occupying” the region, and therefore have no right to produce anything there.
There are four points of grim irony that should be noted here:
(1) Judea is approximately to the Jewish people what Mecca and Medina are to Muslims. How do we know this? Because “Judea” is a derivative of “Jude,” which in several languages — including German — means “Jew.” Jews began building civilizations in Judea, and Samaria, and throughout the land of Israel, 3,800 years ago — which is 2,100 years before the advent of Islam. Here is the actual history of Israel, and the Palestinian people, as articulated by Danny Ayalon, former Israeli deputy foreign minister:
(2) The Nazis used the word “Jude,” the origin of “Judea,” to vandalize Jewish stores, and incite boycotts against them – and hatred for Jews – during the lead-up to the Holocaust. Here is one example of this phenomenon:
Here is one of the propaganda posters the Nazis created to stir up hate against the Jews — referred to as “Jude”; note that kriegsanstifter and kriegsverlangerer means “war agitator” and “war prolonger”:
(3) The Islamist terrorist groups Hamas, Fatah, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and others share the EU’s position that Jews have no relationship to Judea & Samaria (the terrorists also claim their murderous acts are to compel the Jews to vacate the land). This fact has been documented to be these terrorist groups’ position for many years, but unfortunately, has often gone without substantive challenge in popular culture, and as a result, the allegation that the “settlements” are “illegal” has become a prevailing narrative.
(4) So central is the word “Jude” to Jews that in 2018, Paul McCartney affirmed he meant no offense to the Jewish people when he wrote the song “Hey Jude.”
The EU has publicly stated that Judea and Samaria should be turned over to the Palestinian Authority (PA), even though the PA has never ruled over that region, and has never engaged in serious negotiations with Israel over the area.
Of supreme irony, the ECJ rule came nearly 81 years after the exact day of the Kristallnacht pogrom, when German paramilitary forces attacked Jews throughout Germany, destroyed 267 synagogues, attacked 7,000 businesses, and arrested 30,000 Jewish men — for the “crime” of being Jews.
This ECJ decision demonstrates that the Europeans have learned nothing over the 81 years of anti-Semitic attacks against the Jews — or from the Nazis’ attacks on the Jews, before and during World War II, or the murder of 60 million people, 90% of whom were Christians and non-Jews, during the Nazis’ takeover of much of Europe. (I noted similar points in a recent editorial, here.)
The current ECJ legal attack could well lead to other negative consequences:
- It may well incite, and morally justify the PA’s attempt to use terrorist acts to seize the Judea-Samaria region.
- There is a strong possibility that the PA will be taken over by Hamas (derived from the Muslim Brotherhood), Hezbollah, and other proxies of Iran, which would jeopardize Jews, Christians and non-Islamist Muslims living in the Judea-Samaria region and throughout Israel.
- Such events may also increase the threat to Christians in Cyprus, Greece, and mainland Europe, as militant Islamists become more emboldened, after having been morally justified by the EU’s supreme forum of “justice.”
So why is the EU acting this way, and why is its collective court acting with such anti-Semitic bias?
Why is the EU acting against democratic Israel, instead of the illegitimate, tyrannical Iran?
Why are the Europeans, as a whole, acting against their own self interest?
So what should happen, in response?
- EU member states should protest the injustice forced by the ECJ on Israel, and defy its ruling.
- The US should purposely over-react to send the strongest statement of condemnation to the world community. The US Treasury should sanction this court, so long as it maintains this unjust and anti-Semitic ruling, sanction all the judges involved on a personal basis, and treat this court as a criminal entity for, in effect, providing material support for terrorism.