The whole world is looking on, when in Sudan (Darfur) Hundred Thousands are killed. There are no demonstrations against this genocide, and we can see very seldom a report on this misery on TV. The situation in Lebanon is quite different. Recognising that there is legitimate criticism of Israeli politics and actions in this war and a lively debate going on in Israel itself, the red line is crossed whenever Israel is accused – without proof – of war crimes, if the activities of Israeli army are compared or brought into connection with the Wehrmacht.
Needless to say, that “Middle East experts” profit from a boom. One of the often quoted Austrian “Middle East experts” is Dr. John Bunzl, who is staff member of the Austrian Institute for International Affairs and lecturer for political science at two Austrian universities. My article tries to show his modus operandi, which has not changed much since he was a young anti-Zionist.
Bunzl, born in London in 1945 as son of a well known Jewish family of industrialists, returned with his. parents to Austria in 1946, where his father became manager of a paper-factory which was given back to the family. He grew up in a small town in Lower Austria, as the only non catholic child. His parents had a leftwing past, so as he has written himself, he became “überangepasst”, meaning more than conformist, he spoke the local dialect, wore leather shorts “Lederhosen”. [1]
In 1967 he volunteered for a period to stay in a Kibbuz. He came back disillusioned. After trying several left wing youth groups he finally joined the very active Trotzkyte group revolutionary Marxists GRM.
From 1970 the social-democratic party (SPÖ) under chancellor Bruno Kreisky was government party. The prospect of young revolutionaries was not revolution now, but to enter the SPÖ or at least to get protection of politicians and get a nice job. Many of them achieved this aim. One of them was Dr. John Bunzl.
He and his organisation was in the seventies not worried about the integration of Nazis into the socialist government, the Austrian justice stopping prosecution of Nazi criminals did not worry them either.
Friedrich Peter, a former Waffen-SS man was at this time leader of the right wing party FPÖ. Peter’s official biography stated that he had discharged his “duty” “at the front” during the Second World War. In 1975, Simon Wiesenthal showed that the SS unit in which Peter served was mainly concerned with the large-scale slaughter mostly of Jewish civilians behind the front. Yet, Peter continued to be Party chairman. His most prominent defender at that time was SPÖ chairman Bruno Kreisky who, while protecting Peter, launched harsh, personal and implicitly antisemitic attacks against Wiesenthal.
Anat Peri wrote in 2001 [2] “In the antisemitc society the “honest Jew” plays the part that Jewish converts once played in the middle ages: enjoying the credibility of an “expert” on Judaism, the “honest Jew” serves to confirm the common antisemitic ideas, supposedly from an “objective” point of view, since a Jew, it is believed, cannot be antisemite.
The model Austrian “honest Jew” was the Socialist Chancellor during the 1970s, Bruno Kreisky, whose Jewishness allowed him to express antisemitic statements about Israeli, American and Austrian Jews – and especially against Simon Wiesenthal. Kreisky’s attack on Wiesenthal made him the darling of the right wing…”.
Kreisky never once distanced himself from the praise of the extreme right wingers. After trying to convince his comrades in Klagenfurt to put up bilingual road signs according to the state treaty of 1955 in Carinthia, where a Slovene minority lives, nationalist demonstrators spat upon Kreisky and called him a “Saudjud”. This did not prevent him, to minimise or outright to deny anti-Semitism in Austria.
GRM had other worries, during Abba Ebans visit in Austria in March 1973 they issued a leaflet: “Down with complicity between an SPÖ-government and the Zionist rulers”.
In late spring 1973 the state of Israel celebrated the 25th anniversary of its existence. An appropriate time for John Bunzl to explain why GRM propagated the “destruction of the Zionist state”. He argued. “When we speak about the smashing of the state of Israel, we do not do this because this state is or is called Israeli, but because Israel is a capitalist class state and integrated part of the imperialist world system, as well as a state based on national suppression and discrimination. Institutions inimical to workers and peasants should be smashed; Institutions of national suppression. The proletarian power should be constructed, which is leaning on poor peasants and which is directed against the national suppression. The slogan “destruction of the Israeli state!” is therefore imprecise, could be falsified in nationalist way. We speak rather about the smashing (elimination) of Zionism, of the Zionist state, the Zionist structures etc. and indicate, that only a common arab-jewish struggle against Imperialism, Zionism and Arab reaction….” [3]
A few years later Bruno Kreisky let off a barrage of abuse against Menahem Begin, accusing him to be a “little political pettifogger, a little polish advocate or whatever he is. They are so alienated, these Ostjuden, (Jews from Eastern Europe, in German speaking countries a pejorative term). They lack political responsibility. They are good soldiers, but one can learn that very quickly, it is only a refined form of robbery. They lack subtleness in politics. They make themselves unpopular at United Nations. The most hated diplomats today are the Israeli diplomats. It is incredible. They need yet hundred years. They are exactly as unpleasant as the Africans, who are also unbearable….” [4]
Kreisky’s outburst was not only antisemitic, but also racist. Only very few from the left, dared to criticise Kreisky. Bunzl was not among them, on the contrary, when Begin replied to this abuse, Bunzl
sent Kreisky a solidarity cable. This was the right behaviour to make career. And career he made, as a “honest Jew”, who can be quoted as crown witness against Israeli politics.
I have since then written many articles about Bunzl’s anti-Zionism, some of them published only in print, and some on internet. [5]
Many years later, It was not surprising to find in 2003 a long detailed critical article about the anti-imperialist coordination (aik) and its anti-Semitism, written by a researcher of the Documentation Centre of Austrian Resistance (DÖW) [6]
When the DÖW published the exposé on its website in the column of “Action against anti-Semitism” it produced a very strange reaction from Dr. John Bunzl. He sent an e-mail letter to DÖW, which was published also on the website of AIK. Since it has been removed from there, here the translation:
John Bunz’s letter to DÖW published by AIK on February 18, 2003:
„Re: DÖW exposé: „The antiimperialist coordination (AIK) – Antisemitism in leftwing garment” (Antisemitismus im linken Gewand).
I admit, it was somehow confusing to discover the well known DÖW at the Front of the brave fighters against the völkisch anti-Semitism – of the Palestinians (!). But the enigma let itself easily solved, here a representative of the rubbish of the “antigerman left” („antideutschen Linken“ ADL) was set to work. Because their simple logic is here celebrated:
1) The worst thing on earth is “Germany”
2) The biggest crime of “Germany” is the genocide against the Jews.
3) Israel is the state of the victims of this genocide
4) The resistance against Israel of Palestinians, Arabs, Moslems and Leftist must defined as a prolongation of the völkisch anti-Semitism, which led to the annihilation of the Jews.
5) Violence coming from Israel must be defined accordingly as prolongation of antifascist resistance.
Logical? In a publication of ADL the logical conclusion was drawn and Sharon was celebrated as a proletarian hero….
According to my opinion this rubbish has nothing to do with the reality of the Middle East (representatives of ADL distinguish themselves in this regard through astonishing ignorance) it serves the (Profilierungsneurosen) image-neurosis and identity-acrobatics of ruined German (and Austrian)
Leftwingers, who in unrestrained self importance want to fight at last on the “right” side against National-Socialism and want to enjoy the psychological effect to accuse other left wingers of anti-Semitism.
Unfortunately the official Jewish community has according the motto, the enemy of my enemy is my friend has been taken in by ADL. They should have better taken the motto with friends like these,who needs enemies…
The method of ADL is as simple as banal: to quote selectively, out of context, to denounce, to assume Nazi-motives, to make sweeping judgments – only no serious dispute with (often problematic) positions of leftists and absolutely not with those of Israel. By the way, the frantic projection of a “völkisch” anti-Semitism on the Palestinians comes from the same mechanism, which moves Leftists and Rightists in this country out of causes of discharge, to identify Israel with National-Socialism.
Instead to ask the legitimate question, who and why is taking which position, in order to go sure, the worst is assumed, what result finally in a trivialization of the anti-Semitism- reproach.
It reminds me of a very old Israeli joke: Not everyone, who finds Brigitte Bardot more beautiful than Golda Meir is an antisemit…
University lecturer Dr. John Bunzl”
When his letter was received in DÖW, the question was raised, if this e-mail letter is genuine, because style and content of the letter did not fit into what is expected from a lecturer of political science at an Austrian university. Bunzl confirmed right away to be the author.
Instead of quoting at least something out of the exposé of DÖW, he preferred sweeping judgements on the “antigermans”, a leftist pro-Israeli group in Germany and on the Jewish community of Vienna. All the matters raised by him, had nothing to do with the article about the virulent anti-Semitism of AIK, which was documented in detail in the article „The antiimperialist coordination (AIK) – Antisemitism in leftwing garment”. A few months later AIK went so far, as to express solidarity with Dr. Ibrahim Alloush, a prominent Arab Holocaust denier.
Bunzl’s vicious attack on the DÖW which was founded in 1963 by former resistance fighters, victims of Nazi persecution and committed academics to combat those who wanted to write national socialism out of Austrian (and German) history and memory said more about him than about the DÖW.
The war against Hizb Allah
Whenever there is a war or a crisis in and around Israel, “Míddle East experts” are called by radio and TV to comment. I cannot keep track of all declarations of Bunzl. However, whatever is printed in main stream media can be put into the archive.
On July 22, 2006 the conservative Vienna daily Die Presse published “The way to Beirut” by Dr. John Bunzl. Here only one sentence of his text, which was also the subtitle of his article: “Like in Palestine, Israel seems to indicate to Lebanon: If you will not dispose of the “terrorists”, we will do it ourself.”
Bunzl has indicated by putting the word terrorists between quotation marks, that according to him the Lebanese Hizb Alla (party of God) are not really terrorists. I have published an analysis of his article [7] in which he repeats several worn out anti-Zionist clichés.
On August 2, the liberal Vienna daily Der Standard published a letter to the editor by Dr. John Bunzl, in which he is defending again Hizb Allah and comparing it out of all places with Hagana and Palmach.
“Let us imagine, the British mandatory power would have on June 29,1946 (black Sabbath) destroyed Kibbuzim like Kfar Giladi or Jagur together with their inhabitants, with the justification, that the terrorists of Hagana and Palmach (Jewish underground organisations) have hidden their weapons in civilian quarters.”
The historical background to the “Black Sabbath”: Because of the British refusal to let survivors of Holocaust to immigrate to Palestine, Hagana and Palmach made an attack on the communication (bridges, Radar etc) of the country in June 1946, causing a damage of 300.000 Palestine Pound, two weeks later the black Sabbath took place when also a number of members of the Executive of the Jewish Agency and suspected members of Hagana (and Palmach) were arrested an interned.
For Bunzl, Hizb Allah are “terrorist”, while in his eyes Hagana and Palmach were real terrorists. He is more popish than the pope. In the “Memorandum by His Britannic Majesty’s Government presented in July 1947, to the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine” Hagana is mentioned as “an illegal military formation controlled b y the Jewish Agency” and is accused of “stealing arms and ammunition from the British forces in the Middle East.”
As a matter of fact, Hagana and Palmach have hidden only light weapons for self defense only, while Hizb Allah hid not only rockets and heavy weapons in civilian quarters, but fires them from the roof of apartment houses, kindergartens etc. into Israeli territory.
By calling Hagana and Palmach terrorists Bunzl speculates on the lack of information of most Austrian readers, who have heard about Etzel and Lehi (Irgun and Stern gang).
Hagana and Palmach never used their arms to murder British soldiers or policemen. It would be boring to list all the murders committed by Hizb Allah. Here only one typical: William Higgins first lieutenant of the USA Marine corps, was on duty at the UN mission to supervise the armistice in Lebanon. In 1989 he was abducted and hanged. Hizb Allah abducted many western civilians during the eighties and nineties, f.i. also Terry Waite, the special emissary of the archbishop of Canterbury, who was held captive by them from 1984 until 1992.
The New Yorker has made available a two-part series from 2002 by Jeffrey Goldberg. In the first part, Goldberg speaks with Amal Saad-Ghorayeb, author of the book Hezbollah: Politics & Religion. A Shia scholar, Saad-Ghorayeb is severely critical of Israel, even calling it “a colonialist state.” But she is also quite frank about Hezbollah ideology. “There is a real antipathy to Jews as Jews,” she says, citing the following line from a Nasrallah speech: “If we searched the entire world for a person more cowardly, despicable, weak and feeble in psyche, mind, ideology and religion, we would not find anyone like the Jew. Notice, I do not say the Israeli.”
Hagana and Palmach never had the aim to destroy the United Kingdom or to exterminate the Arab people. No doubt, Hizb Allah has set the aim for destroying the Jewish state and a “rule of Islam” over Jerusalem. Hizb Allah is responsible for a lot of terrorist activity against Israel, since IDF has withdrawn its troops in May 2000 from Lebanon.
In the same letter to the editor the lecturer of political science Bunzl, referring to the comparison between Hagana and Palmach on one and Hizb Allah on the other hand, writes: “Only blind ethnocentrism can lead to a result, that a comparable action counts in one case for a war crime, in the other for legitimate self defense”.
So Hizb Allah firing rockets without any guidance into Israel with the aim to kill as many Israelis as possible (Jews, Arabs, Druse) is according to him not a war crime. When Israel is trying to draw the attention to the crimes of Hizb Allah, this has nothing to do with real or imagined ethnocentrism, but with the deeds of the Lebanese fundamentalists.
The United Nations Security Council issued an unprecedented condemnation of Hizb Allah on November 23, 2005 after an attack on November 21, 2005 that wounded 11 Israelis and caused damage to property.
The Council – which has never before reprimanded the Iranian backed group expressed “deep concern” over Hezbollah’s “acts of hatred.” It also urged the Lebanese government to impose order in southern Lebanon and prevent Hizb Allah from operating there.
Bunzl goes on to explain: “The causes for this ethnocentrism could be colonial unilateral but also in a specific processing of past traumata.”
Bunzl rebukes Israel, because the withdrawal of its army from Lebanon in May 2000 was unilateral, without talking with Hizb Allah – which wants to destroy Israel.
What does the political scientist mean, when he is writing about “a specific processing of past traumata”? He makes a psychological connection with the Holocaust, when Israel does, what every state would do in its place, when it defends its citizens. As if this would have to do something with the Holocaust.
John Bunzl agrees with the following quote of the German weekly Der Spiegel from 1982: “like the icy insanity of the destruction of Jews has taken away from the survivors the possibility to process the occurrence rationally, und as the politics of Israel is dominated by the reaction to this insanity, it must itself swing into the irrationality … which threatens to be the most gruesome of all the gruesome ironies of this century, that the still effective fright of the persecution of Jews makes Israel itself to the fright of the present generation all over the world.”
If the Jews, would have followed the example of the Palestinians and held the survivors of the Holocaust and their descendants in Camps assisted by United Nations, if Jews would have sworn eternal vengeance and would have tried to fight Germany and Austria with terror, than they would have “processed the occurrence” as Der Spiegel calls the Holocaust euphemistically, in a rational way?
The national socialists blamed the Jews for the hatred of Jews. Dr. John Bunzl tells us – not the first time – that Israel is to blame for the fact, that some of the neighbours do not recognise the right to existence of Israel, that they talk about the “Zionist entity” and that they want to destroy the Jewish and democratic state.
If we follow this train of thought of Dr. John Bunzl, we will have to understand those Germans and Austrians, who do not say anymore behind a hand but openly, that “the Jews” – excuse me but in fine diction they are called now “Zionists” – “are not better than the National Socialists” who really became the fright of their generation. Dr. John Bunzl has crossed again a red line.
1) John Bunzl: “Es war einmal im Piestingtal”, in “Das kann einem nur in Wien passieren”, Wien 2001
2) Anat Peri: Jörg Haider’s Antisemitism, Vidal Sassoon International Center for the Study of
Antisemitism, Jersualem 2001, 20
3) Wilhelm Swoboda: “Sandkastenspiele / Eine Geschichte linker Radikalität in den 70er Jahren“,
Wien 1998, 197f
4) Margit Reiter: „Unter Antisemitismus-Verdacht / Die österreichische Linke und Israel nach der
Shoah, Innsbruck, 2001, 266f
5) Karl Pfeifer: „New Historians rewrite History“ Neue Historiker schreiben die Geschichte um,
published in official monthly of Vienna Jewish Community, November 2002
www.ikg-wien.at/site/ober/html/news/nahost/pfeifer.php ;
Dr. John Bunzl “auf dem Leim” von Verharmlosern der Holocaustleugnung?
www.adf-berlin.de/html_docs/ berichte_oesterreich/karl_pfeifer_3_7_03.html
Vorwürfe und Antworten
www.adf-berlin.de/html_docs/berichte_ oesterreich/karl_pfeifer_15_7_03.html
Orientalische Geschichten in Wien
www.adf-berlin.de/html_docs/berichte_ oesterreich/karl_pfeifer_30_6_03.html
Orientalische Geschichten aus Wien II
www.adf-berlin.de/html_docs/ berichte_oesterreich/karl_pfeifer_1_7_03.html
Orientalische Geschichten aus Wien III
www.adf-berlin.de/html_docs/ berichte_oesterreich/karl_pfeifer_2_7_03.html
Ein österreichischer “Nahostexperte” gibt den USA “Ezzes”
www.adf-berlin.de/html_docs/berichte_ oesterreich/karl_pfeifer_21_8_03.html
Darf man Dr. John Bunzl kritisieren?
www.juedische.at/TCgi/TCgi.cgi?target=home& Param_Kat=29&Param_RB=35&Param_Red=864 – 16k
Ideologisches Recycling: Die antiimperialistische Gebetsmühle
www.hagalil.com/archiv/2005/06/aik.htm
Der Kreis der Antizionisten
www.hagalil.com/archiv/2005/06/antizionisten.htm
6) www.doew.at/aktuell/aktion/aik.html
7) Neues von Bunzl
http://www.hagalil.com/archiv/2006/07/bunzl.htm ;
Schlampig
