TRANSCEND International’s Statement Concerning the Label of Anti-Semitism against Johan Galtung
EDITORIAL, 7 May 2012
by Antonio C. S. Rosa, editor – TRANSCEND
May 2nd 2012
1. Prof. Galtung has been working on the case of Anders Behring Breivik since the very day of the man’s murderous onslaught on July 22nd 2011. In this capacity, Prof. Galtung was invited late 2011 to give a public lecture at the University of Oslo to elaborate the components of Breivik’s motivational and political psychology.
Professor Galtung was shocked by the reaction to some of his peripheral observations in connection with his ongoing inquiry into Breivik’s mind in Norway. He did not expect to be labelled totally incorrectly as anti-Semite. He refuses this utterly repugnant black-white etiquetting. Günter Grass was also labelled as anti-Semite and denied access to Israel when he published a poem that warned against a specific point, a possible Israeli attack on Iran.
2. Again: All of this results from his ongoing inquiries into the Breivik case. All want to disassociate themselves from Breivik, but it is clear from Breivik’s own statements that he is firmly rooted in the Judeo- Christian history, including myths. As a Free Mason, he is a member of a secret organization with a loyalty oath. From a researcher’s perspective, this “conspiratorial oath to secrecy” makes a meaningful police investigation impossible.
3. Johan Galtung received a series of questions by email from the Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz. His answers are added at the end for public perusal. They have not been quoted in the Ha’aretz article, but been completely twisted out of context and misrepresented.
Almost everything human has positive and negative aspects. Some people cannot accept any criticism at all. Yet a critic may be your best friend. If someone walks towards a cliff, who is a real friend, the one who says, “Go right ahead!” or the one who says, “Stop, turn around, you are in danger!” There is no doubt who is a true friend.
4. Galtung fully recognizes that the “Protocols”, as revealed in 1921, are a sickening falsification, probably fabricated by the Russian Secret Police, to justify the pogroms. But he does not know precisely who was the author, a point prominently echoed by Umberto Eco for his masterful “The Prague Cemetery”. Galtung is fully aware that they represent a very sensitive issue that brings up all the sufferings of the Jewish people. This trauma notwithstanding, it is important that people know of those aspects of the content, which deal mainly with the use of debt bondage as power. The major actors that currently apply debt bondage are China, Japan and the EU relative to the US, Germany relative to peripheral countries in Europe, like Greece, Italy, Portugal, Spain and Ireland (GIPSI) and the World Bank relative to the World; for a horrifying example, see John Perkins (2004) “Confessions of an Economic Hit Man”. That people of Jewish belief and Judaism have nothing to do with any of this goes without saying.
5. To criticize Israel’s current foreign policy is not anti-Semitic, but a part of democratic debate. Johan Galtung, like many others, is the proponent of a prosperous and peaceful Israel, in peace with all its neighbors. He has a concrete proposal, first time made public in 1971: A Middle East Community of Israel with its five Arab neighbors, modeled after the European Community of the Treaty of Rome, which went into effect in 1958. This very proposal was published by Akiva Eldar in Ha’aretz in 2007 under the title “Ingredients for a True Peace Process.”
Appendix: Johan Galtung’s complete answers to questions by Ofer Aderet at Ha’aretz, 29 April 2012:
JG: Dear Ofer Aderet from Ha’aretz thanks for your questions and for being the first to ask me instead of just jumping to conclusions, And here are my answers; I keep them as short as possible:
Ha’aretz: A. Do you think it’s a legitimate hypothesis to suggest that the Mossad is behind this terror attack?
JG: When we know nothing about who is behind Breivik including whether there is anybody at all, any hypothesis is legitimate; that is in the nature of research. Major media immediately and legitimately assumed Islamist actors and that hypothesis has so far been eliminated (I still keep it open). The police presumably does the same as a researcher: eliminate one hypothesis after the other. I consider Mossad highly unlikely, but it is illegitimate to eliminate it as an hypothesis with no evidence.
Ha’aretz: B. What do you mean, what you say: Skal bli interessant – lese politirapporten om Israel under rettssaken.?
JG: Exactly what I say, I take it for granted that they are open to all hypotheses and not only prove what Breivik has done, but eliminate other hypotheses. That is not the same job.
Det er trist og skremmende når den meget dyktige svenske seniorforskeren ved Instiutt for fredsforskning blir unnsagt av direktøren fordi han i en artikkel i Nytt norsk tidsskrift også bringer inn hypotesen om at Mossad+ kunne ha stått bak Breivik, og nevner tempelriddernes inntog i Jerusalem i 1099, terrorbombingen av hotell King David i 1946, og Regjeringsbygningen-Utøya 2011: alle på samme dag, 22/7. Tilfeldig? Neppe. Fredsforskning er forskning, søk og søk igjen. Kanskje det burde bytte navn, til Norsk Sikkerhetsinstitutt? Skal bli interessant å lese politirapporten om Israel under rettssaken.
Ha’aretz: C. “70 prosent av professorene ved USAs 20 beste universiteter er jøder” What do you mean to say by mentioning this? Where did you get these numbers from? And what is your conclusion from it?
JG: Only one thing which I have witnessed in my numerous professorships in the USA (Columbia, Princeton, etc): the supreme intellectual quality and leadership of Jewish professors. I attribute it, rightly or wrongly, to the talmudic tradition of dialogue, always questioning. The number I have from a very famous Israeli professor who will remain unnamed.
Ha’aretz: D. Six Jewish Companies own 96% of world media So what about it? What do you conclude from mentioning it?
JG: US media. As I say in the article: this could be for the good, for intellectual quality, see above. But could also be more problematic: limiting the discourse about anything where Israel is involved. Thus, US mainstream media only discuss Iran in terms of nuclear arms, not in terms of the trauma of 1953 the CIA MI6 strike against a legally elected prime minister, and 25 years shah dictatorship. And Syria only in terms of dictatorship democracy, not in terms of minority dictatorship against a majority Sunni dictatorship with disastrous consequences. Or the Arab spring in terms of dictatorship democracy, not also in terms of the role of USA Israel behind those dictatorships.
Ha’aretz: E. Antisemitt. Jeg minnes en berømt professor i Israel hvor det går an å debattere alt dette: “Antisemitt, det er å være mer mot oss enn vi fortjener.” Underforstått: vi fortjener en del; men det er de som mener at bare jøder har tillatelse til å si det > who was that prof? When did he say so? And what do you understand from it.
JG: He is no longer among us so let me give examples of what I understand. The ambiguity of anything human. Terrible pogroms, but not unproblematic that Jews played a role in demanding payment from indebted peasants. Terrible Auschwitz, but not unproblematic that Jews had key niches in a society humiliated by defeat and Versailles. In no way, absolutely no way, does this justify the atrocities. But both caused a foreseeable anti Semitism. As a dedicated friend of Israel, I have defended, in Arab countries, not only Israel’s right to exist, but as a partner with Arab states in the Middle East. But, a good friend, like a good spouse, is one who does not applaud everything but says, look, you are driving toward the abyss, change course, and contributes ideas (like a Middle East Community). Two Jews do that recently in the famous books “The Unmaking of Israel” and “The Crisis of Zionism”. I have the right and duty to do the same, and will continue to do so.
Let me add one thing. It is shocking when in democracies books are banned, never to be read, not even to be mentioned. Long time ago it was proven that the Protocols were fabricated, as hate literature, by the secret Russian police, by whom I do not know. I read it as a strong warning against getting others, individuals, whole countries, into debt bondage. That power is today in the hands of China Japan EU relative to the USA; Germany relative to the EU periphery and the World Bank relative to much of the Third World. Not even the wildest anti Semite will construct this as a Jewish conspiracy. Only evil will come out of it like German Greek relations right now. A strong warning, indeed.
Best regards, Johan Galtung
This work is licensed under a CC BY-NC 3.0 United States License.
DISCLAIMER: In accordance with title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. TMS has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is TMS endorsed or sponsored by the originator. “GO TO ORIGINAL” links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the “GO TO ORIGINAL” links. This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.