The world went beyond the heart of darkness on June 28, 2006. Irrespective of the ultimate outcome, the consequences of Israel's actions on that day will drastically change the course of its history and possibly that of the industrialized world. On June 28, 2006, a brutal force was unleashed against a defenseless people and the atrocities were accepted without condemnation or retaliation by the leaders of the western world. On June 28, 2006, Israeli warplanes and armed forces started a new campaign of destruction and terror, one of many committed against the Palestinian people. Israel bombed Palestinian infrastructure, electrical distribution, roads, bridges, seized Palestinian government officials and indicated the attacks were only a prelude to what awaits the defenseless Gazans. In effect, Israel's aggressive behavior, the lack of western world response and inaction from international institutions certified that the western industrial nations have divided the world between the Privileged and the Unfortunates. The Privileged are allowed to commit any violent action, including murder. The Unfortunates are not allowed to defend themselves and must either succumb to dictates or, in one simple word: perish.

Israel's militaristic behavior is one of the more ruthless and racist expressions in the modern era. The capture and holding of soldiers or even civilians are not unique. Iranian extremists captured and detained a whole embassy load of American diplomats in 1979. In some cases, after diplomacy fails, an attempt might be made to free the detained with a limited and well targeted police action; such as a few commandos navigating the heart of darkness to free one or more compatriots. This is the first time in history that a complete military force punishes an entire population to obtain a single captive's freedom. The severity of Israel's attacks, the intentional damage to a population's existence and the lack of consideration for Arab life have exposed to the world a virulent nationalist, militarist and racist Israel. Those who already had viewed Israel as a deterrent to peace have had their arguments reinforced. Many who had been partial to Israel will now reconsider the logic of their opinions. And that's not all.

Actions speak louder than words and by not confronting Israel's tyranny the European nations have shown compliance with oppression, manipulation and criminality. Their attitude will eventually provoke severe economic and social repercussions against them. 

If Iraqi Shiites seize a British soldier, does it mean the British can bombard Basra and destroy the city? 

If Iraqi Sunnis seize an American soldier, and they have, does it mean U.S. forces can obliterate Iraq? 

If the rebels in Darfur seize a Sudanese soldier, does it mean that the Sudan military can wreak havoc in Darfur?

The Security Council quickly responded to missile firings, to the test launches of North Korean missiles that landed in the Japan Sea and did no harm. The UN Security Council had good reasons to discuss North Korea's aggressive attitude. It had more reasons to respond to Israeli missile attacks that destroyed Palestinian infrastructure and turned Palestinian civilians, including children, into corpses. North Korea is being punished for developing missiles in order to counter what it perceives as a threat (doesn't every nation that develops missiles have to test them?), while Israel is being exonerated for using offensive weapons to murder Palestinians. In effect, the western industrialized nations deem it unacceptable for a nation to prepare to defend itself while not harming others and deem it entirely acceptable for a nation to offend and kill others, if the latter nation is one of them. 
 
The western media enjoys characterizing its "enemies" as mad, as if the leader's name and the adjective are one word. We have madman Kim Jong-il, madman Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the mad Mullahs. Is there sanity in Ehud Olmert who speaks of terrorizing people with sonic booms "until they go mad," who, after greatly escalating a conflict with deadly warplanes, characterizes an attack of a few rockets that cause little damage as "an escalation of unprecedented gravity?" This is the same leader, who, as Mayor of Jerusalem, demolished Palestinian houses in Israeli-occupied and annexed east Jerusalem, and proposed to have house razing take place "every week." 
 
Olmert has told the world, and the European nations have agreed, that the captivity of only one Israeli soldier, who is a symbol of oppression and occupation, is worth more than the captivity of almost 600,000 Palestinians (over the last 40 years) and still counting and, we can add to the gross worth, the killings by land, sea and air (more than 40 in the first days of Israel's new incursion into Gaza), and still counting, of defenseless people. Besides being crazed, isn't this racism? Not in Israel. Olmert's efforts complement the sermon given by Rabbi Yaacov Perin at the 1994 funeral of Baruch Goldstein, who walked into a mosque and machine-gunned twenty-nine Palestinians to death and wounded 125 others. The rabbi has been quoted: "One million Arab lives are not worth a Jewish fingernail." Olmert evidently intends to prove the rabbi is correct.

Despite the silent acquiescence of European parliaments and the American congress to the violence, Europeans have demonstrated impatience with Israel and consider it to be the greatest threat to world peace. A report titled, In Europe, an Unhealthy Fixation on Israel, by Robin Shepherd, Wash. Post, January 30, 2005, stated:

And the anger is reaching new -- and disturbing -- levels: A poll of 3,000 people by Germany's University of Bielefeld showed more than 50 percent of respondents equating Israel's policies toward the Palestinians with Nazi treatment of the Jews. Sixty-eight percent of those surveyed specifically believed that Israel is waging a "war of extermination" against the Palestinian people. 
 
Germany is not alone in these shocking sentiments. They have been expressed elsewhere, and often by prominent figures. In 2002, the Portuguese Nobel Prize-winning writer Jose Saramago declared, "What is happening in Palestine is a crime which we can put on the same plane as what happened at Auschwitz." In Israel, Mairead Corrigan Maguire, the Irish winner of the 1976 Nobel Peace Prize, compared the country's suspected nuclear weapons to Auschwitz, calling them "gas chambers perfected." 
 
In a Eurobarometer poll by the European Union in November 2003, a majority of Europeans named Israel as the greatest threat to world peace. Overall, 59 percent of Europeans put Israel in the top spot, ahead of such countries as Iran and North Korea. In the Netherlands, that figure rose to 74 percent.

Although European governments don't consider the value and the gravity of their citizens' opinions when Israel is involved, European Union deputies have expressed their resentments. From the EUobserver.com (06.07.2006)

"A state that acts like this is no different from a terrorist organization," Belgian socialist MEP and the former head of the EU's Gaza election monitoring mission, Veronique de Keyser, said. "We have to say: enough -- you have gone mad."

"Where's the condemnation from Europe? There is none," British liberal Chris Davies added. "The double standards are rank. We make the Palestinians jump through hoops but we let the Israelis get away with bloody murder."

On July 6, 2006 the UN Human Rights Council in a resolution "on the human rights situation in the occupied Palestinian territory, adopted by a vote of 29 in favor, 11 against and five abstentions, the Council demanded that Israel end its military operations in the occupied Palestinian territory; expressed grave concern at the detrimental impact of the current Israeli military operation on the already deteriorating humanitarian conditions of the Palestinian people; urged Israel to immediately release the arrested Palestinian ministers, and members of the Palestinian Legislative Council; and decided to dispatch an urgent fact-finding mission headed by the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the occupied Palestinian territory."

The result of the vote was as follows:  

In favor (29): Algeria, Argentina, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Brazil, China, Cuba, Ecuador, Ghana, Guatemala, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Malaysia, Mali, Mauritius, Morocco, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Tunisia, Uruguay, and Zambia. 

Against (11): Germany, Canada, Czech Republic, Finland, France, Japan, Netherlands, Poland, Romania, United Kingdom and Ukraine. 

Abstentions (5): Cameroon, Mexico, Nigeria, Republic of Korea, and Switzerland. 
 
Facts need to be stated to counter Israeli apologists making their usual accusations of Israel bashing. Two days before the capture of a soldier, Israeli agents kidnapped two Palestinians in Gaza and took them into captivity -- two in addition of hundreds of thousands over the years. No fuss about that. And also, the violence against the Palestinians started before a few rockets harmlessly landed in the Israeli city of Ashkelon. 
 
The Human Rights Council vote might prove to be more significant than its application to the Gaza situation. The vote aligned the Latin American, African and Asian nations, including the rising powerhouses of India, Brazil, China and Russia against the European nations. Considering the obvious merits of the resolution, the control of the moral authority of the world has shifted to the Third World with support from emerging world powers. A new alignment of the world's nations that politically, economically and socially support the developing nations and their objectives could translate to cooperation and treaties that diminish the reliance on western technology and markets and obstruct western nations' access to mineral resources. The European Union has started this trend by harming its integrity and lowering its credibility with a call for a "balanced" resolution, which is the usual Israel sponsored maneuver to nullify the argument and make certain that nothing is done.

It's not the resolution that should be balanced, but the violence. Have the European nations considered the imbalance between the violence committed against Israel -- detention of one soldier and a few poorly directed rockets that landed in Israel and caused minor injuries -- and the violence committed against the Palestinians -- 8000 Palestinians still detained and daily killings of Palestinians by a well directed war machine. It wouldn't be sensible to balance the violence by causing more violence to Israelis. Therefore, balancing the violence means diminishing the casualties to the Palestinians to nil, the same as the present number for the Israelis. This is the purpose of the UN Human Rights Council resolution and the European nations voted against the resolution. Who is mad, the Mullahs or the European leaders who ignore their constituents and side with Israel's aggression?  
 
Israeli Prime Minister Olmert has made a name for himself in history and not a pleasant one. He has elevated himself high on the list of war criminals, those who batter sensibility and endorse genocide. Olmert will also be remembered as the person who brought about the separation of the words western and civilization. From now there is only a western world and no longer a western civilization. The aggressive Israeli actions and the failure of European nations to curtail these actions are beyond comprehension.

Dan Lieberman is the Editor of Alternative Insight. He can be reached at danlan2000@worldnet.att.net.