The Online Speech Given by Yanis Varoufakis After German Police Raid Palestine Congress

Spread the love

Original article by BRETT WILKINS republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). 

German police move in to break up the Palestine Congress being held in Berlin on April 12, 2024.  (Photo: Sean Gallup/Getty Images)

Friends, we are here because vengeance is a lazy form of grief. We are here to promote not vengeance but peace and coexistence across Israel-Palestine.”

Prominent Greek leftist Yanis Varoufakis on Friday condemned the German government’s complicity in Israel’s ongoing genocidal attack on Gaza as well as its domestic crackdown on pro-Palestinian advocacy in an online speech originally meant to be delivered before a conference that was raided by Berlin police earlier in the day.

Varoufakis—a former Greek finance minister who heads the Democracy in Europe Movement 2025 (DiEM25)—was scheduled to address the Palestine Congress, which was slated to run through Sunday in the German capital. However, hundreds of police officers blockaded the event venue on Germaniastraße in Templehof before storming the building and demanding organizers cut the livestream and end the event. Several people including at least one Jewish participant were led away by police.

“This is what democracy in Europe right now really looks like!” DiEM25 said on social media.

In his speech, Varoufakis lamented that “a decent people, the people of Germany, are led down a perilous road to a heartless society by being made to associate themselves with another genocide carried out in their name, with their complicity.”

“You want to silence us. To ban us. To demonize us. To accuse us. You, therefore, leave us with no choice but to meet your accusations with our accusations,” Varoufakis said, referring to the German political establishment—including the leftist Greens.

“So, let’s be clear: We are here, in Berlin, with our Palestinian Congress because, unlike the German political system and the German media, we condemn genocide and war crimes regardless of who is perpetrating them,” Varoufakis said. “Because we oppose apartheid in the land of Israel-Palestine no matter who has the upper hand—just as we opposed apartheid in the American South or in South Africa. Because we stand for universal human rights, freedom, and equality among Jews, Palestinians, Bedouins, and Christians in the ancient land of Palestine.”

Varoufakis’ speech comes as Germany faces an International Court of Justice case brought by Nicaragua and which accuses Berlin of complicity in the Israeli genocide in Gaza, where nearly 110,000 Palestinians—mostly innocent men, women, and children—have been killed or maimed by over the past six months.

The convening of the Palestine Congress, and the antagonism against it by authorities, coincides with a growing crackdown by German officials on pro-Palestinian voices in academicartisticliterary, and other spaces.

Watch Varoufakis’ speech:

Read Varoufakis’ remarks as prepared for delivery:

Friends,

Congratulations, and heartfelt thanks, for being here, despite the threats, despite the ironclad police outside this venue, despite the panoply of the German press, despite the German state, despite the German political system that demonizes you for being here.

“Why a Palestinian Congress, Mr. Varoufakis?” a German journalist asked me recently. Because, as Hanan Asrawi once said: “We cannot rely on the silenced to tell us about their suffering.”

Today, Asrawi’s reason has grown depressingly stronger: Because we cannot rely on the silenced who are also massacred and starved to tell us about the massacres and the starvation.

But there is another reason too: Because a proud, a decent people, the people of Germany, are led down a perilous road to a heartless society by being made to associate themselves with another genocide carried out in their name, with their complicity.

I am neither Jewish nor Palestinian. But I am incredibly proud to be here amongst Jews and Palestinians—to blend my voice for peace and universal human rights with Jewish voices for peace and universal human rights—with Palestinian voices for peace and universal human rights. Being together, here, today, is proof that coexistence is not only possible—but that it is here! Already.

“Why not a Jewish Congress, Mr. Varoufakis?” the same German journalist asked me, imagining that he was being smart. I welcomed his question.

For if a single Jew is threatened, anywhere, just because she or he is Jewish, I shall wear the Star of David on my lapel and offer my solidarity—whatever the cost, whatever it takes.

So, let’s be clear: If Jews were under attack, anywhere in the world, I would be the first to canvass for a Jewish Congress in which to register our solidarity. Similarly, when Palestinians are massacred because they are Palestinians—under a dogma that to be dead they must have been Hamas—I shall wear my keffiyeh and offer my solidarity whatever the cost, whatever it takes.

Universal human rights are either universal or they mean nothing.

With this in mind, I answered the German journalist’s question with a few of my own:

  • Are 2 million Israeli Jews, who were thrown out of their homes and into an open-air prison 80 years ago, still being kept in that open-air prison, without access to the outside world, with minimal food and water, no chance of a normal life, of traveling anywhere, and bombed periodically for 80 years? No.
  • Are Israeli Jews being starved intentionally by an army of occupation, their children writhing on the floor, screaming from hunger? No.
  • Are there thousands of Jewish injured children with no surviving parents crawling through the rubble of what used to be their homes? No.
  • Are Israeli Jews being bombed by the world’s most sophisticated planes and bombs today? No.
  • Are Israeli Jews experiencing complete ecocide of what little land they can still call their own, not one tree left under which to seek shade or whose fruit to taste? No.
  • Are Israeli Jewish children killed by snipers today at the orders of a member state of the United Nations? No.
  • Are Israeli Jews driven out of their homes by armed gangs today? No.
  • Is Israel fighting for its existence today? No.

If the answer to any of these questions was yes, I would be participating in a Jewish Solidarity Congress today.

Friends, today, we would have loved to have a decent, democratic, mutually respectful debate on how to bring peace and universal human rights for everyone, Jews and Palestinians, Bedouins and Christians, from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, with people who think differently to us.

Sadly, the whole of the German political system has decided not to allow this. In a joint statement including not just the CDU-CSU or the FDP but also the SPD, the Greens and, remarkably, two leaders of Die Linke, joined forces to ensure that such a civilized debate, in which we may disagree agreeably, never takes place in Germany.

I say to them: You want to silence us. To ban us. To demonize us. To accuse us. You, therefore, leave us with no choice but to meet your accusations with our accusations. You chose this. Not us. You accuse us of anti-Semitic hatred. We accuse you of being the antisemite’s best friend by equating the right of Israel to commit war crimes with the right of Israeli Jews to defend themselves.

You accuse us of supporting terrorism. We accuse you of equating legitimate resistance to an apartheid state with atrocities against civilians which I have always and will always condemn, whomever commits them—Palestinians, Jewish settlers, my own family, whomever. We accuse you of not recognizing the duty of the people of Gaza to tear down the wall of the open prison they have been encased in for 80 years—and of equating this act of tearing down the Wall of Shame—which is no more defensible than the Berlin Wall was—with acts of terror.

You accuse us of trivializing Hamas’ October 7 terror. We accuse you of trivializing the 80 years of Israel’s ethnic cleansing of Palestinians and the erection of an ironclad apartheid system across Israel-Palestine. We accuse you of trivializing Netanyahu’s long-term support of Hamas as a means of destroying the two-state-solution that you claim to favor. We accuse you of trivializing the unprecedented terror unleashed by the Israeli army on the people of Gaza, the West Bank, and Easr Jerusalem.

You accuse the organizers of today’s Congress that we are, and I quote, “not interested in talking about possibilities for peaceful coexistence in the Middle East against the background of the war in Gaza.” Are you serious? Have you lost your mind? We accuse you of supporting a German state that is, after the United States, the largest supplier of the weapons that the Netanyahu government uses to massacre Palestinians as part of a grand plan to make a two-state solution, and peaceful coexistence between Jews and Palestinians, impossible.

We accuse you of never answering the pertinent question that every German must answer: How much Palestinian blood must flow before your justified guilt over the Holocaust is washed away?

So, let’ s be clear: We are here, in Berlin, with our Palestinian Congress because, unlike the German political system and the German media, we condemn genocide and war crimes regardless of who is perpetrating them. Because we oppose apartheid in the land of Israel-Palestine no matter who has the upper hand—just as we opposed apartheid in the American South or in South Africa. Because we stand for universal human rights, freedom, and equality among Jews, Palestinians, Bedouins, and Christians in the ancient land of Palestine.

And so that we are even clearer on the questions, legitimate and malignant, that we must always be ready to answer: Do I condemn Hamas’ atrocities? I condemn every single atrocity, whomever is the perpetrator or the victim. What I do not condemn is armed resistance to an apartheid system designed as part of a slow-burning—but inexorable—ethnic cleansing program.

Put differently, I condemn every attack on civilians while, at the same time, I celebrate anyone who risks their life to TEAR DOWN THE WALL.

Is Israel not engaged in a war for its very existence? No, it is not. Israel is a nuclear-armed state with perhaps the most technologically advanced army in the world and the panoply of the U.S. military machine having its back. There is no symmetry with Hamas, a group which can cause serious damage to Israelis but which has no capacity whatsoever to defeat Israel’s military, or even to prevent Israel from continuing to implement the slow genocide of Palestinians under the system of apartheid that has been erected with longstanding U.S. and E.U. support.

Are Israelis not justified to fear that Hamas wants to exterminate them? Of course they are! Jews have suffered a Holocaust that was preceded by pogroms and a deep-seated antisemitism permeating Europe and the Americas for centuries. It is only natural that Israelis live in fear of a new pogrom if the Israeli army folds. However, by imposing apartheid on their neighbors, by treating them like sub-humans, the Israeli state is stoking the fires of antisemitism, is strengthening Palestinians and Israelis who just want to annihilate each other, and, in the end, contributing to the awful insecurity consuming Jews in Israel and the diaspora.

Apartheid against the Palestinians is the Israelis’ worst “self-defense.”

What about antisemitism? It is always a clear and present danger. And it must be eradicated, especially amongst the ranks of the global Left and the Palestinians fighting for Palestinian civil liberties around the world.

Why don’t Palestinians pursue their objectives by peaceful means? They did. The PLO recognized Israel and renounced armed struggle. And what did they get for it? Absolute humiliation and systematic ethnic cleansing. That is what nurtured Hamas and elevated it in the eyes of many Palestinians as the only alternative to a slow genocide under Israel’s apartheid.

What should be done now? What might bring peace to Israel-Palestine? An immediate ceasefire. The release of all hostages: Hamas’ and the thousands held by Israel. A peace process, under the U.N., supported by a commitment by the international community to end apartheid and to safeguard equal civil liberties for all.

As for what must replace apartheid, it is up to Israelis and Palestinians to decide between the two-state solution and the solution of a single federal secular state.

Friends, we are here because vengeance is a lazy form of grief. We are here to promote not vengeance but peace and coexistence across Israel-Palestine. We are here to tell German democrats, including our former comrades of Die Linke, that they have covered themselves in shame long enough—that two wrongs do not one right make—that allowing Israel to get away with war crimes is not going to ameliorate the legacy of Germany’s crimes against the Jewish people.

Beyond today’s congress, we have a duty, in Germany, to change the conversation. We have a duty to persuade the vast majority of decent Germans out there that universal human rights are what matters. That “never again” means never again. For anyone, Jew, Palestinian, Ukrainian, Russian, Yemeni, Sudanese, Rwandan—for everyone, everywhere.

In this context, I am pleased to announce that DiEM25’s German political party MERA25 will be on the ballot paper in the European Parliament election this coming June—seeking the vote of German humanists who crave a member of European Parliament representing Germany and calling out the E.U.’s complicity in genocide—a complicity that is Europe’s greatest gift to the antisemites in Europe and beyond.

I salute you all and suggest we never forget that none of us are free if one of us is in chains.

Original article by BRETT WILKINS republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). 

US Official Says Iran’s Message Is: ‘Don’t F*ck With Us and We Won’t F*ck With You’

‘Genocidal Actions’ Persist in Gaza as Israel Blocks Aid and US Weapons Flow

US Tax Day Campaign Urges Congress to Stop Arming Israel’s Genocide in Gaza

Continue ReadingThe Online Speech Given by Yanis Varoufakis After German Police Raid Palestine Congress

Milei celebrates violent repression of thousands protesting hunger in Argentina

Spread the love

Original article by peoples dispatch republished under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 (CC BY-SA) license.

Police attacked the protest organized by UTEP in Buenos Aires. Photo: UTEP

Police cracked down on a protest of thousands of workers in the capital who demanded the government listen to its demands to send food to the community kitchens and address the growing hunger in the country

On Wednesday April 10, the Federal Police and the Police of the city of Buenos Aires violently evicted and repressed a peaceful demonstration on 9 de Julio Avenue in the center of the capital. The mobilization organized by the Union of Workers of the Popular Economy (UTEP) was one of many which took place in cities across the country to raise awareness to the critical situation faced by workers in the popular, or informal, economy in Argentina.

Organizations part of UTEP claim that the national government has suspended programs providing food to community kitchens and has also refused to dialogue with organizations who have repeatedly denounced the suspension and now, are unable to provide food to the thousands of families that they previously worked with. Many poor families across the country have also suffered from a freezing and arbitrary reduction of their “Social Complementary Salary”, a government program which provided supplementary economic aid to workers of the popular economy.

In Buenos Aires, thousands of protesters attempted to march to the Ministry of Human Capital when they were violently attacked by police with gas, water cannons. Over 10 were arrested in the brutal police repression and several were injured, including one protester who was dragged down the street and hit against the asphalt. Additionally, a journalist with the outlet Crónica TV driver was hit with a rubber bullet in the face.

The Ministry of Human Capital is a creation of the Milei government as a part of his promise to cut the majority of ministries and secretaries and create “super ministries”. It is the combination of the former Ministry of Labor, Ministry of Employment and Social Security, Ministry of Education, Ministry of Culture, and the Ministry of Social Development. This move, in addition to massively reducing the number of people working for the ministry, also saw severe cuts be made to the dozens of social programs run by those areas.

Milei, who was in Miami visiting with zionist and far-right US leaders such as Ben Shapiro, celebrated the repression of the protesters who were demanding government action against hunger amid unprecedented levels of poverty in the country. Milei reposted a publication from user Diego Álzaga Unzué on X which said: “Applause, gentlemen, see how the fire hydrant truck came out to remove the picketers who wanted to get dirty and cut off 9 de Julio Avenue, harming the workers. This is cinema. Enjoy, my friends.”

His Minister of Security Patricia Bullrich declared: “Law and order” in her post praising the “effective” crackdown on the mobilization through her “anti-picket protocol”.

Following the repressive operation, UTEP wrote in a statement: “We tried to create a channel of dialogue by all possible means, but once again the only response to the social and economic crisis is batons, gas and bullets. We denounce the violent actions of this Government, which the only thing it proposes for the people is planned misery. Our fight plan will continue to deepen to get food for our community kitchens, work and projects in our working class neighborhoods and social wages for the workers of the popular economy.”

The past week saw mass unrest across Argentina after over 10,000 public sector workers lost their jobs. As the “chainsaw” austerity of Milei continues alongside a growing military partnership with the United States, Argentina’s robust social organizations continue to be engaged in fierce struggle and opposition.

Original article by peoples dispatch republished under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 (CC BY-SA) license.

Continue ReadingMilei celebrates violent repression of thousands protesting hunger in Argentina

Braverman’s consultation on anti-protest laws was ‘only open to police’

Spread the love

Original article by Anita Mureithi republished from OpenDemocracy under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence

Liberty’s lawyers say police feedback was ‘directly incorporated into the final text’ of Braverman’s anti-protest laws  | Richard Baker / In Pictures via Getty Images

High Court told government only sought feedback from people it knew would agree with its controversial changes

Only police were consulted on anti-protest laws before they were forced through by the UK government, according to human rights lawyers suing the home secretary.

Campaign group Liberty has been in court this week challenging James Cleverly over amendments to the Public Order Act that were pushed through by his predecessor, Suella Braverman, last year.

Liberty was given permission to take legal action against Braverman in October after she used secondary legislation – subject to less parliamentary scrutiny – to strengthen police powers to shut down protests that cause “more than minor disruption to the life of the community”.

The group says Braverman’s actions amounted to a “serious overreach” and that she acted unlawfully because the changes to the law had already been rejected in the House of Lords.

And Liberty has labelled a consultation on the proposed laws in 2022 as “one-sided” and “unfair” – because the Home Office only consulted police. The government gave the Met, Staffordshire Police, Essex Police, the National Police Chiefs’ Council, and the College of Policing opportunities to give their views on the legislation, but did not seek input from anyone who might be impacted by the laws.

Liberty argued: “The [home secretary] voluntarily embarked upon a process of consultation about the contents and drafting of the regulations but then only consulted a narrow group of stakeholders in support of the amendments rather than an even-handed group representative of all those whose interests may be adversely impacted.”

Its lawyers also say police feedback was “directly incorporated into the final text” of the amendments to the Public Order Act, including on the definition of “serious disruption to the life of the community”.

The new powers have been criticised by Liberty and other human rights groups due to the vagueness of the new language, which campaigners say allows police to shut down almost any protests. The changes forced through by Braverman mean officers can interfere with and arrest anyone taking part in protests that they believe will cause “more than minor disruption to the life of the community”.

Police feedback on “cumulative disruption” was also included in the final amendments to the act. Under this law, officers must take into account all “relevant cumulative disruption”, regardless of whether or not your protest is related to any other protest or disruption in the same area. Before this amendment, there was no explicit requirement for police to consider this.

While the government held multiple meetings with police representatives in December 2022 to seek input and “refine policy”, Liberty argues that the fact that no rights groups or members of the public were consulted is rooted in “procedural unfairness” and that the changes must be reversed.

Katy Watts, Liberty’s lawyer leading the case said: “The government has shown it’s determined to put itself above the law, avoid scrutiny and become untouchable – so it’s no surprise it only consulted people it knew would agree with its new law.

“Our democracy exists to make sure a government can’t just do whatever it wants, and an important part of that is consulting a wide range of voices on new laws – especially those likely to raise reasonable concerns. This improves government decision making and helps to make our laws better. The government’s failure to do this is just one of the ways it acted unlawfully when it forced these powers though.”

The laws were initially brought in to clamp down on protests by climate activist groups like Just Stop Oil, Insulate Britain, and Extinction Rebellion, but other protesters are now also being targeted.

The government has accused pro-Palestine protesters of “hijacking legitimate protests”, “shouting down and coercing elected representatives”, and has also called them “un-British” and “undemocratic”.

In a new ‘defending democracy policing protocol’ released this week, the government pledged £31m of additional funding to protect MPs after safety fears were raised.

The Home Office said it wants to “protect the democratic process from intimidation” but according to its own policy paper, only met with police representatives from the National Police Chiefs Council, the Association of Police and Crime Commissioners, and the College of Policing.

The Home Office did not respond to a request for comment.

The two-day hearing ended yesterday and Liberty’s lawyers expect a decision could take up to three months.

Original article by Anita Mureithi republished from OpenDemocracy under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International

licence

OpenDemocracy’s free daily email

Protest isn’t harassment, says group suing UK government over law change

Home Office ‘did not discuss’ Islamophobia risk in wake of Hamas attacks

Continue ReadingBraverman’s consultation on anti-protest laws was ‘only open to police’

Police watchdog called in over claim officer ‘shoved’ child at Palestine march

Spread the love

Original article by Anita Mureithi republished from Open Democracy under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence

11 November 2023, hundreds of thousands gathered in London to call for an end to the Israeli bombing of Gaza | Richard Baker / In Pictures via Getty Images

The police watchdog has been called in over claims a Met Police officer “shoved” a nine-year-old boy at the Palestine solidarity march on Armistice Day.

The force referred the complaint to the IOPC on Friday, hours after being contacted by openDemocracy about the incident.

The boy and his parents were leaving the march for Palestine on 11 November when an officer allegedly pushed the child, leaving the boy and his parents distraught. His parents, Abu and Saheema – who asked us not to use their surname, shared a video of the aftermath of the incident with openDemocracy last week. In it, Abu can be heard asking the officer: “Why did you push a child?”, to which he replies: “You brought your child to a violent protest… think about what you’re doing.”

The Met said: “We are aware of the social media post and have received a public complaint. We are keen to fully investigate the matter and have urged the complainant to pass on any relevant footage. Due to the level of public interest, we have voluntarily referred the matter to the Independent Office of Police Conduct (IOPC). It would not be appropriate to discuss further at this time.”

A spokesperson for the IOPC confirmed that the watchdog received a voluntary complaint referral from the Met on Friday and said: “We are currently assessing the referral and will decide whether any further action is required from us”.

The boy’s mother told openDemocracy she hopes the watchdog assesses the family’s claim “promptly and in an unbiased manner”.

The incident happened as the family walked over Vauxhall Bridge on their way home from the march. Their tired son was walking a few paces ahead of his parents and sat down on the kerb.

Noticing officers walking in his direction, he got up – and it’s at this point that his parents say he was “shoved” out of the way by an officer who told him to move.

Saheema told openDemocracy the “force and aggression” used by the officer had their son “in absolute bits, crying and holding his shoulder”.

The child was taken to hospital after the incident where – according to Abu and Saheema – a children’s specialist confirmed that he suffered a soft-tissue injury on his shoulder.

Original article by Anita Mureithi republished from Open Democracy under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence

Continue ReadingPolice watchdog called in over claim officer ‘shoved’ child at Palestine march

Just Stop Oil deliver an Open Letter to Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley

Spread the love
Just Stop Oil delivers an open letter to the Metropolitan Police urging them to prosecute politician climate criminals and to investigate others. Image: Just Stop Oil assumed.
Just Stop Oil delivers an open letter to the Metropolitan Police urging them to prosecute politician climate criminals and to investigate others. Image: Just Stop Oil assumed.

Climate activist group Just Stop Oil have delivered an open letter to the Metropolitan Police calling for the prosecution of politician climate criminals.

[email protected]
26th October 2023

Dear Sir Mark Rowley,

Just Stop Oil supporters will remain in civil resistance until you prosecute the criminals responsible for crimes against humanity and acts of genocide

The facts are clear. New oil and gas licensing in 2023 will kill hundreds of millions of people, adding to the already mounting global death toll from climate breakdown. It will push our climate, oceans and the living world beyond the point of no return, triggering runaway global heating and setting in motion an unstoppable process of global societal collapse. To know these facts and still encourage drilling for UK new oil and gas is reckless and immoral. There can be no greater crime. 

Of course, the politicians planning to max out the UK’s oil and gas reserves are not directly seeking mass death, neither are those executives signing off on plans to drill for new oil and gas or finance and insure new oil exploration. The primary aim of their support for fossil fuels is profit and power. To them, it’s an inconvenient side effect that millions and eventually billions of people will die when carbon emissions from new oil and gas cause heat waves, drought and crop failure.

But under International Criminal Law, this is no mere side effect: it is murder by oblique intent. Under Article 30 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, death or harm doesn’t have to be a primary intention for someone to be held criminally responsible. They simply have to be ‘aware that it will occur in the ordinary course of events’.

Since 2021 when the International Energy Agency (“IEA”) declared that there could be no new oil, gas or coal if we want an even chance of limiting global temperature rise in line with the Paris Agreement, it has been abundantly clear that new oil and gas will lead to mass death. 

In 2022 you received a dossier of evidence requesting you investigate and charge five top British politicians for crimes against humanity and genocide. You have declined to do so.

We say to you now that you already have all the evidence you need to prosecute those politicians and to launch an investigation into those executives signing off on plans to drill for new oil and gas or to finance and insure new oil exploration. If you are uncertain who they are, Just Stop Oil will be publishing a list on Sunday 29th October to assist in your enquiries.

Failure to act will force Just Stop Oil into full non-compliance with the police and judicial system and we will remain in civil resistance until such time as you launch an investigation and bring charges.  

As Metropolitan Police Commissioner you promised to police “without favour or prejudice”. We are asking you now to uphold your oath and uphold the law: it is a matter of life and death.

Respectfully yours,

Just Stop Oil

Continue ReadingJust Stop Oil deliver an Open Letter to Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley