The Vice Chancellor has accused Israel of violating international law. Although he’s not actually a terror belitcher, he sings in the follower choir. The fact that he came into this case is also due to the Greens.

I am surprised that Robert Habeck has now joined the ranks of Israel critics, who unfortunately argue beside the point. It disappoints me. Very much so.

The Vice Chancellor of the Green Party has accused Israel of breaking international law. “The famine, the suffering of the Palestinian population, the attacks in the Gaza Strip – like us now also see it in court – incompatible with international law.” Israel has crossed borders.

Nevertheless, Habeck is by no means one of the service’s haters of Israel and Jews. He has proven that for years and days. Also bravely swimming against the current. This is precisely why his statements must be seriously refuted. The wooden hammer is the wrong instrument for this.

Beyond the matter, you also have to consider the situation. The European elections will take place in a few days. Surveys show: The Greens are threatened with severe losses. Not just from swing voters who vote green when green is “in”, i.e. particularly fashionable.

Prof. Dr. Michael Wolffsohn is a historian, journalist and university professor. Above all, he analyzes the relationships between Germans and Jews at the state, political, economic and religious levels. Wolffsohn regularly speaks out on important political, military policy, historical and religious issues.

Wolffsohn’s latest publications: “Never again? Again! Old and new anti-Semitism” (2024), “Another Jewish world history” (2023)

The traditional base, especially the base that has always been anti-Israel, yes, anti-Zionist since the Green’s beginnings, is also turning away from the Greens. She resents her own incumbents, “those up there,” for both the (in my view) laudable, military-activist pro-Ukraine policy and the hitherto more pro-Israel policy in the Gaza war.

The Green Party base was particularly “angry” with Habeck. His now justly legendary, empathetic pro-Israel and at the same time wisely weighing Israel speech was the straw that broke the camel’s back for Habeck. Let’s also not forget that Habeck is building up to be Green number one against Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock. I sincerely wish him much success. That would be good for Germany.

Ergo: Habeck is a homo politicus, ultimately, like all politicians, a party politician. As such, he must and wants to capture voices for himself and his people. That’s why he can’t always howl against the wolves. Here and there he has to sing in the follower choir. So far, so-so. The subjective view.

Objectively and certainly not subjectively intended, but objectively effective, his now very critical, yes, harsh words against Israel are grist for the mill of national and global Israel and Jew haters. Therefore: “If you had remained silent, you would have been a wise man,” said the ancient Romans. “Si tacuisses…”

Regarding Habeck’s substantive criticism: the famine and suffering of the Palestinians are not compatible with international law. He is right. But he names the wrong culprit. This is not Israel, but Hamas. From a purely military perspective, their situation is hopeless. They should have laid down their weapons long ago in the interest of their own civilians. As it is, every day of war predictably and politically intended by Hamas – because of the emotionally stirring images – means many of its own deaths and starvation deaths.

Tacheles: In the fight for the facts in history and politics – by Michael Wolffsohn

The Hamas fighters do not wear uniforms and cannot be distinguished from civilians. Therefore, for outsiders, even dead Hamas fighters are “civilians”. This is a politically controlled attempt by Hamas to mislead the world. Even judges at the International Court of Justice fall for it.

Parts of this judiciary, about half, are politically programmed, not legally, and a large proportion are demonstrably anti-Israel in their attitudes and actions. The chairman of the International Court of Justice is Lebanese. He represented his country in the UN for around ten years. There it was one of the agitators against Israel. Is this what the qualified personification of international law looks like?

The UN and the Hague Court of Justice are – wrongly – sacred cows for German politics and society. That’s why the politician Habeck cannot toot his horn against them. But unlike the “High Hamas” screamers who are inciting genocide against Jewish Israelis nationally and internationally, Habeck says quite rightly: Hamas could or should for its part end the war and lay down its weapons. Habeck definitely differentiates.

Conclusion: It is completely wrong to put Habeck in the box of haters of Jews and Israel or of those who trivialize terrorism. But public debates are not suitable for differentiation. Robert Habeck actually knows that. He also knows the big difference between what is subjectively wanted on the one hand and what is objectively achieved on the other. That’s why he should have remembered the wise saying of the ancient Romans: “If you had remained silent…” Nevertheless: Robert Habeck is a man of honor.