Thank you for honoring me with your presence and presenting me with a wink of your time. Time is so precious and wears away so fast. Years trickle off, live lines develop – yet do you still know exactly what you did during the last, let’s say, three/ three and a half years? 

Did you enjoy every moment, every wink? In E.T.A. Hoffmann’s story ‘The Sandman’ the eyes of the life-size doll Olimpia and her glances, from his perspective always tracing the student Nathanael, make him first meet insanity then death. Yet, even though constant surveillance is torture, eyes and their glances are mirrors of the soul and of life. Hence, they fascinate me and are a never ending source of inspiration. 

So, it is no wonder that I got hooked by two other books in which eyes play a major role – Dante Alighieri’s Divine Comedy and J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter series. Admit it, you never thought you would ever hear these two works mentioned under the same breath. Yet Dante’s paradise, for him a divine or heavenly place that is fortified on all sides against the invasion of evil or unhappiness, is with its 9 spheres quite similar to Rowling’s 9 story, medieval castle with its thick walls, high watchtowers, which is known as a ‘stronghold of ancient magic’, which can only be seen by those few with the ability to wield magic and which would never have come into existence without the same talent. 

And what is all this talk about eyes then? While Dante travels to paradise while looking into the eyes of his first and deepest love Beatrix, a love he was never to live, Harry is recognized by his eyes that are so similar to that of his mother, who died because she loved him dearly. These eyes accompany us on our travel to and through paradise searching for the gold in the world and in us. 

And still, the eye in the first picture of my ‘Hogwarts and Dante’s 9 Spheres of Paradise’ series shines rather like a black sun. It reminds us that Paradise is fragile and nobody living there is a one-dimensional, all-good, all-saint creature. This is a message repeated on every sphere of Dante, every level of Hogwarts, every picture of the series. 

If already paradise up to the Fixed Stars and the Empyrean Heaven is not perfect why should our world beneath it, that vibrates around us, be split in good people and Death Eaters, even though I admit such an approach would make the judgment and solution of complex conflicts and the opinion finding process much easier? Yet, we need to keep aware that gold is buried in mud. We all and everything have light and have a Shadow that escorts us like an uninvited guest who came to stay. 

Furthermore, everyone has a story, a past, strengths and weaknesses, has a parentage and background and talents. It’s not without reason that it is said: Whoever rescues a single life rescues a whole universe. The largest universe for us to discover, the only corner of the world we can change is us. 

I sallied forth, have the freedom, am a permanent student of myself. After I’ve read a lot – next to other books I’ve read ‘Who am I? And if yes, how many?’, a question I, the pumpkin and it’s seeds, can clearly answer with “21” – it was time to write my own story. ‘One King’s Children’, even though it was not planned like that as it is designed to be a political thriller, became another try to get a better understanding of myself and to embrace a cactus. 

No fear, your eyes on me have not yet driven me crazy so that I started to stutter nonsense. One calls a Jew born in the country “Sabre”, prickly pear. Therefore, the place s/he has grown from must be a cactus. Israel, the land my grandparents did their share to build up, the place my mother was born and the dream living in my heart, has the beauty of a succulent with thorns one has to deal with. While looking into the stingy subjects as well as while arguing any other subject the world can bring up I allow myself the wealth of an opinion of myself and of taking my own path. And as you can see I make them tangible and audible at occasions like these. 

Remembering, attention gaining, turning the limelight onto an injustice that needs to be eliminated as fast as possible as it already lasts for way too long is in the end my primary concern here and on this day. So, let me repeat my question from the very beginning – so you still know what you did during the last three, three and a half years, since June 25, 2006? 

No? One young man called Gilad Shalit knows to name exactly the one thing he did since he did only one thing. After at age 19 being kidnapped by Palestinian militants in a cross border raid from the Gaza Strip at June 25, 2006 he sat in captivity ever since. 1215 days, more than three years without any contact to the world he loved – what an unbelievable long period in an already tight measured life time! Much more than just a wink. It is a time span in that a seed grows to a seedling resembling already the tree it once will become. It is a time span in that the tree of life has developed and changed so much. 

Since very recently, since a video message was published, that the Israeli government bought at the high price of the release of 20 convicted criminals before their time, we know that Gilad Shalit has kept hold of the tree of life during all these years. But now in the very latest it is high time to give him as well the opportunity to search for the gold in the world and in himself, to discover himself, to allow him the wealth of an opinion of himself and to enjoy every wink. It is time to rescue another universe. Freedom for Gilad Shalit!

It’s 5:30 at Ben Gurion airport. I am waiting for my airplane to the place where I was born and where I sucked in the language with the mother milk. I am heading to a place where I have an apartment if only for rent, where I have a job that covers my life’s expenses, where my degrees in law with focus on international and EU law and in physical therapy are recognized without question. I am scheduled to go to a city where I have earned some recognition as an artist when working for the Buddy Bear society and others and where my next exhibition at the compounds of Siemens will open on October 29. 

It is a place where the boys reaching drafting age might not be called upon at all or rather learn to handle bandages or bed pans than weapons as the land hasn’t seen any war for more than 60 years. In the heart of good old Europe it is firmly embedded in the EU, NATO, and UN. It had time to prosper and grow, it even had 20 years almost to the day to become one nation and to close the scar the Wall once had ripped open. Hence, the place I am going to is known for a rather good economy and a very strong social security hammock some people choose or are forced to use their whole life long without leading a miserable one. It offers health insurance and education at no or low costs for all. 

It is so deeply rooted in the Christian tradition and values that it can call itself a secular state with religious freedoms for all and still only few would question the righteousness of the statement when shops close on Sundays, Christian holidays are given off by law and Christian values are protected by the constitution. It is an undisputed democracy even though the large parties have a hard time to distinguish their programs from each other as they all gather in the middle and people complain on a very high level. And it is liberal enough to allow for a female chancellor, an openly gay mayor heading the capital and in the future a not less openly gay foreign minister. 

Yes, I am aware of the privileged life I am allowed to live in Berlin. Yet still, l have this silly hope for someone to come up to me in the last minute telling me that I mustn’t step into this airplane, that I have to stay; saving me of the need to make a decision and defend it; giving me an excuse not to return – as I have fallen in love. 

I have fallen in love with Anat, Tsachi, Ron and Dan, Amos and Zipora, Boaz, Ayelet and their motek who have welcomed me with open arms, doors and hearts into their home though they barely knew more of me than a few words sent back and forth via internet. I fell in love with Debra, Aaron and their two daughters who celebrated Shabbat with me in Jerusalem after a day in the beginning dedicated to the blackness and pain of Yad V’Shem. And maybe last in this list but definitely not least I fell in love with Josh whom I discovered to be in many ways so similar to me that it sometimes became scary, but in the end he is so much braver than I am. 

However, even more so I fell in love with what I call my cactus. If Jews born in the country like my mother are called Sabres the thing they grow from must be a cactus. And Israel has the rough, stingy beauty of a succulent. 

It is not always easy to embrace her. Some examples? I was more than just a bit disappointed when I tried for several months before my trip that ends today to find a contact in the IDF able and willing to explain to me why – though I have always been a citizen of Israel thanks to my mother – I have never been called upon for service in the army and how I could possible make up for it by working for the IDF now applying my skills even at the high age of 33. Though I called, wrote emails and letters, and approached all possible sources up to Def Min Barak and President Peres I received the typical Israeli runaround and never even got as much as a recognition of my tries. I didn’t like the fact that at some occasions even friends introduced me as German although I’m Israeli – just that my Hebrew is still rotten. But hey, there are people living in the country who are even worse and don’t even try to use it. And when it comes to some of my favorite subjects – domestic and foreign politics and international law – high levels of testosterone, religious and national fanaticism as well as unteachable enemies and maybe well meaning outsiders getting involved in the conflicts produce many stings that pinch the skin when hugging. 

But it is always worth to care for Israel as its flowers and fruits repay one a thousand fold for any hustle. Where else would they ask me for the Jewish holidays we just celebrated to check my identity if not at Ben Gurion airport? In Israel’s beautiful lap of all places I am not the orchid in a field of corn and its flowers, always in a more or less immanent danger of becoming one of an extinct kind. I am just one of a kind, maybe able to find a significant other of the same species in order to multiply; definitely able to use my skills to make a difference in a still young, unsettled nation. Here the constant struggle of survival in a sometimes hostile environment is turned into palpable energy, lived daily and not saved in banks and insurance funds for a distant day that may come or not. 

The words don’t just sound like it, I’m a Zionist. But in the end it is not so much that I think that Israel needs me. I am not that vain. She can survive and prosper without me. But on this trip even more so than ever before I realized that I need her. 

Bred and raised in Germany by an Israeli mother and a German father I combine the blood of the henchmen with the genes of the victims. That’s not just a pathetic sentence. While my maternal grandparents were in dear danger of dying by the hands of the Nazis and later did their share to built up the state of Israel, my paternal grandparents never overcame their brown ideas, their proud in being completely Aria and this grandfather fed me in my childhood with his cherished stories of how he guarded the V1 rockets in France and crossed half of Europe until he ended in Italy once they had to abandon their ‘babies’. 

I don’t know how my parental grandparents were able to compartmentalize and how they were able to blend out the guilt. Nor do I understand why my maternal grandparents were allowed to live while millions of others were tortured and killed. But I’m thankful my people is still alive and lives its culture and traditions. I’m grateful I’m allowed to live. And I am indebted to owe this blue passport with the menorah on the cover that promises me that I will never again be denounced to prey. And now I want to know how it is to live this promise, secure it for generations to come. On the way I hope to find the other, still missing half of my Me that was put with me into my cradle and made me the orchid. 

I guess then it is now the moment to enter the airplane back to the old life to let go of what was and dive into the dark and unknown. I will try to do it organized as much as the life of an artist can be organized and to start it with a conscious decision. But still I need to jump into a void. I can just hope that I will be brave enough and lucky to find the right people helping me along, to avoid the stings as much as possible and to be rewarded with the beauty. 

I leave with a promise to my love: I’ll come back home asap.

B. Netanyahu called German chancellor A. Merkel today a “real friend of Israel” though she repeated her commitment to a 2 state solution as this is in her opinion the only path to a peaceful solution, though she demanded a complete stop of all settlement construction as she sees it as a decisive requirement for peace in the region. But the two heads of states argued for sharper actions and tighter sanctions on Iran. And since yesterday the signs thicken that Germany mediates in the talks about freeing captured soldier Gilad Shalit.

That’s deserving of thanks. Anything making the fate of Gilat Shalit easier and lessens the number of days he still has to spend in this dreadful captivity is highly welcomed. Yet, I wonder why information on the mediation leaked just in this moment. Was it just the upcoming visit of Netanyahu turning the focus onto the German Israeli relations?

Honi soit qui mal y pense. Germany has a general election for the Bundestag upcoming in September. After just another legislative period under the lead of a great coalition of SPD and CDU/CSU current chancellor Merkel can’t score in any domestic question anymore. The involvement of Bundeswehr in Afghanistan is seen very critical since what started as a happy boys scout trip has made more soldiers return in coffins than the ordinary, politics-dispirited German, who asks what dealings Germans have at the Hindu Kush, can stand. And though Germany is still in the ban of Obama-mania, the pivotal hero isn’t inclined to pose for nice photos and nice words. Hence, another success in some unsolved question praised internationally would come in handy.

That Germans involved precisely in talks with the Hamas is somewhat telling. Although Merkel joined Netanyahu in calling for tighter sanctions on Iran now, one shouldn’t forget that Germany is one of the best trading partners of the Mullah regime that is as well the backer of the Hamas. As they mediate and do something good for Gilad Shalit and Israel they talk with the terrorist organization. Though this might seem a simple statement the reasons behind it or the consequences of talks becoming public are not. This is just another small step to a possible normalization of relations with Hamas as is more frequently demanded in Europe lately.

But while I’m always for talks with enemies to further peace as one does not negotiate peace agreements with friends I would think it necessary to work things the other way around. Mediate if you are in a position to help but do it in secret without the desire to take advantage of the result for your own position domestically or internationally. Ask the terror organization publically for a renunciation of all terror (legal-wise there is no use in asking them to recognize Israel as Jewish state or state of the Jews as states exist once they consist of the three elements state territory, state authority, body politic and the Jewish element has to be anchored in a possible constitution; yet politic-wise it would be a nice add on). And only once they did so and meant it, consider publically to talk to them officially.

Yet, this wouldn’t help Merkel in the upcoming election anymore as it would take too much time and patience. And it is probably not in the interest of Germany’s good trading partner…

“RT @Jew4palestine: @IsraeliSoldier do you wait until u see the tears in their eyes before you shoot. or wait until they cry mommy then snipe” 

I read this dialog this afternoon on twitter. And it reminded me immediately of Tucholsky’s ‘All soldiers are murderers’ remark. 

Tucholsky? Kurt Tucholsky (January 9, 1890 – December 21, 1935) was a German journalist and writer. He was one of the most famous publicists of the Weimar Republic, a social critic, democrat, participant of WWI and afterwards adept pacifist. His remark ‘All soldiers are murderers’ originally derives from the gloss ‘The Guarded War Arena’, published under the alias Ignaz Wrobel in the mag ‘Die Weltbuehne’ in 1931. There he wrote: 

“There had been four years long many square miles of land where murders were obligatory, while half an hour away from that place it was strictly forbidden to do just that. Did I say: murder? Certainly, murder! All soldiers are murderers.” 

Tucholsky, who was co-founder of the Friedensbund der Kriegsteilnehmer (Coalition for Peace of Participants of the War), criticized with his remark national governments that force young men in recruiting age to kill for national interests and deduced that a war is an ordered, collective murder. 

From then on up to today the remark has occupied many German courts including the Bundesverfassungsgericht (Supreme Constitutional Court) and has become a catch phrase of the German pacifistic community. 

Yet, what do you think? Where would we be without people brave enough to risk their lives for our freedom and integrity? 

Sure, you could say that if all people laid down their guns and embraced a peaceful life we wouldn’t need any army anymore – swords into ploughshares, peace and prosperity for all! But with humankind as it is, always dreading the different in the other, always thinking the own kind superior, and always begrudging the other of the things s/he has earned or gained this is just utopia. 

As long as the prisoner’s dilemma enchains our minds we need armies to enforce our values – our laws, democracy, freedom and sheer our lives – and defend them against those attacking us. Certainly, armies need rules too and have to keep up to moral standards. Their conduct needs to be checked and checked again, as weapons mean power and power might fog the brains and wits. And any misconduct needs to be punished severely.   

But in the end, imho no soldier in the army of a democratic state is automatically a murderer. And to blame one of cold-blooded behavior in a moment of death or life is plainly defamation and over-simplifying a very difficult situation.

It’s almost September. This is not just of interest to me since it means my much longed for vacation is just around the corner. But it also means we are about to read the Goldstone Commissions report on their findings about the Gaza War, eagerly expected by many though not less eagerly criticized since the establishment of the commission.

As the discussion of the commission, its fact finding mission and its report passes through yet another warming up phase (as if the subject wouldn’t be heated up enough already) I want to take a look at where the criticism mainly voiced by Israel derives from. 

Relevant articles like Irwin Cotler’s Op-Ed contribution to the Jerusalem Post “The Goldstone Mission – Tainted to the Core” here and here  mainly name three problems which they unfortunately deal with promiscuously: the organization that runs the investigation, (the composition of the Commission) and the task issued to the Commission in context of the resolution it is based on. I don’t like mulligan as I prefer an organized arrangement on my plate. The same goes for my thoughts. Therefore, I will discuss the two of the problems one by one starting with the last, but in my opinion most important problem. 

Resolution S-9/1 by the United Nations Human Rights Council, adopted on January 12, 2009 and the thereupon based mandate of the international independent Fact Finding Mission established on April 3, 2009-08-23 

On 3 April 2009, the President of the Human Rights Council established an international independent Fact Finding Mission with the mandate 

“to investigate all violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law that might have been committed at any time in the context of the military operations that were conducted in Gaza during the period from 27 December 2008 and 18 January 2009, whether before, during or after.”  

This is already a revised version of the mandate. The original version called on the Commission to focus only on Israeli actions. Yet, though the wording of the mandate has been changed on demand of commission head Richard Goldstone so that he may be able to look into Hamas actions as well the appointment of the mission followed the adoption of resolution S-9/1 by the United Nations Human Rights Council at the end of its 9th Special Session on 12 January 2009 and is based on it. 

Resolution S-9/1 is headlined: The grave violations of human rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, particularly due to the recent Israeli military attacks against the occupied Gaza Strip. Concerning the Fact Finding Mission it states: 

14.        Decides to dispatch an urgent, independent international fact-finding mission, to be appointed by the President of the Council, to investigate all violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law by the occupying Power, Israel, against the Palestinian people throughout the Occupied Palestinian Territory, particularly in the occupied Gaza Strip, due to the current aggression, and calls upon Israel not to obstruct the process of investigation and to fully cooperate with the mission; 

While the headline of the resolution concludes already what the commission is suppose to investigate, the wording of the paragraph, defaming Israel as an occupying power, is at least biased. However, most important phrase of the paragraph in my opinion is “current aggression”, especially in the light of the general renunciation of force laid down in the UN Charter and specified in the GA resolutions 2625 and 3314. 

Aggression, as a standing term in international law implies that Israel was wrong to use any force in Gaza during its operation, whether or not the actions taken were in accordance with all rules of ius in bello and irrespective of any findings of the Fact Finding Commission. If taken as a fact Israel deemed an aggressor would be deemed culpable of an offense under international law and would be liable for all damages, even for damages originated by actions lawful according to the standards of ius in bello. 

A violation of the renunciation of force under international law implies an international element and the use of military force. The international element is problematic when we deal with the Palestinian Territories. Even though Israel withdrew from the Gaza Strip in 2005, Palestine is still a state created by invitro-fertilization and stuck in retort. But I focused on that question in an earlier article on the Goldstone Commission . The use of force by Israel can’t be argued. 

On the other hand, even the use of military force can be justified under Art. 51 UN Charter that explicitly acknowledges a nature-given right to self-defense. Allowed is the force necessary to ward off an attack. The attack in question has to be immanent, armed, attributable to the other state and has to excess a certain threshold of intensity. As much as one wants to allow the IDF to go into Gaza anytime just so to free captured and kidnapped soldier Gilad Shalit his ongoing captivity can’t be subsumed to be an immanent, armed attack. 

But how about the decade worth of rocket-fire from Gaza targeting Israeli civilians, escalating in the three years after Israel’s complete withdrawal from the Strip? How many rockets are enough per month, per week, per day to speak of an immanent, armed attack that exceeds the threshold of intensity? Are 13 residents dead, hundredth wounded, damage worth in the millions and the traumatisation of nearly every inhabitant of Sderot e.g. enough? How about the non-extension of the truce with Israel announced by Hamas in December 2008? 

I would definitely say so. And if we come to the conclusion that Israel responded to an armed attack by Hamas from the Gaza Strip Israel’s military response could have been justified under Art. 51 UN Charter and therefore not nameable an aggression as she had a right to self defense – if the force used did not exceed the level necessary to ward off the attack. At this point I will need to owe you an answer as I lack the military expertise. 

However, this won’t affect the result of my reflection as we still need to look at the general framework in that a renunciation of force works only. The negative assessment of the phenomenon of military force that had led to the development of a clause calling for the total renunciation of force in the UN Charter bases on the experience of the insufferable horror caused by the wars of the last century. This human rights based reasoning has not lost any of its validation. 

Yet, a measure taken because of humanitarian reasons mustn’t lead itself to the violation of human rights through the backdoor. Meaning: The renunciation of force is ultimately only acceptable if the enforcement of rights and interests is possible in another way. It requires that in a framework of collective security the community of states takes effective actions against any and all law-breakers and comes to the defense of the victims. 

The UN should be the one to provide the framework. But put into work in praxis it proves to work unfortunately only imperfectly to say the least. The Security Council knocks itself off on a regular base due to the veto power of its permanent members. And the UN Human Rights Council is too busy condemning Israel it hasn’t even once addressed the question of rockets fired by Hamas in a decade or the problem of a kidnapped soldier in more than three years of captivity. But the UN Human Rights Council’s story is sad enough to get a chapter of its own. 

The Organization that runs the investigation: the UN Human Rights Council 

“I believe in the indefeasibility and the dignity of every human being. I believe that God gave all people the same right to freedom. I pledge to offer resistance to any offense against freedom and to resist tyranny wherever it may occur.” 

I am a front-line city girl. Grown up in the daily antagonism of the East-German education system vs. West-German media, permanently exposed to propaganda of both sides until my 14^th birthday, my parents took care I wouldn’t grow any walls in my head or in my heart though I experienced a real one on a daily base. What was planted in my head instead was the belief in the opening statement that echoed every Sunday at noon over the air via RIAS Berlin, Radio in the American Sector. 

This statement represents my first approach to Human Rights. Back when I first heard it nobody would have believed that one day I would argue with my International Law professor in the oral part of my final law exam about the binding character of the UN UDHR. Not with the same consequences (I passed the exam in spit of the debate) but nevertheless never less passionate Human Rights are discussed at many stages. They are one of the few things even the Generation Crisis, otherwise completely self-centered and opinion-less, would join a Facebook group to take a stance against their violation.  

Yet though the phrase ‘human rights’ is used easily, do we all really speak about the same thing? I don’t want to start the same debate about the question of penetration of the Human Rights Declaration into binding international law that I had with the professor some years ago (btw: the leading opinion still is that the Universal Declaration on Human Rights had been a resolution of the UN General Assembly without any binding power and it has still not become part of international customary law as the understanding of human rights is too diverse in different legal systems).  

I just mean with Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and all the other more or less highly funded NGOs working for the universal observation of Human Rights around, with the principle of universal jurisdiction anchored in many criminal law codes around the world to some degree, with the Human Rights Council installing inquiry teams and investigating violations what are the basic principles of human rights we all agree? Aren’t these the norms a rational human being, seeking to survive and prosper, would act upon and expect others to act according to because what s/he fears most is violent death by the hand of others? Isn’t it what is expressed in the opening statement of this chapter? Aren’t these the norms you would expect the UN Human Rights Council to safeguard for all nations? 

The UN Human Rights Council was established by the UN General Assembly in 2006 as a subsidiary body. It is the successor to the UN Commission on Human Rights that had to be replaced because of the Commissions inefficiency due to the presence of human rights violators and the politicization of the body. But just as the US had already stated when voting against the resolution establishing the UN Human Rights Council, it has no adequate provisions to keep states which abused human rights from Council membership. And it also lacks the precautions to avoid falling victim to the whims of political interests. 

With Darfur, China, North Korea, Afghanistan, Iran, even the US’ CIA excesses at Guantanamo around and happening, 80% of the UN HRC’s resolutions target just one state, Israel. And as the language of the one resolution (S-9/1) mentioned exemplifies, the dealing with Israel is highly biased. Israel, just as any other nation, is far from perfect. But in the UN HRC she falls victim to prejudgment and can’t expect any help from this side. I dare to predict that even in case the Goldstone report of the Fact Finding Mission will stress violations from Hamas as well as from Israel, Israel will be condemned in the following resolution with the Palestinians not even mentioned in a footnote. 

The UN Human Rights Commission at least isn’t part of a framework of collective security Israel can trust in. 

Final Remarks 

Still, though the Goldstone Commission’s mandate and the organization behind can be criticized and the final report and any follow up resolutions have to be eyed carefully and in the context of the information given above, the deduction cannot be – Israel or any other nation is forth on allowed to use any military force it thinks suitable for her cause. From a moral and a humanitarian point of view any war or military action is hard to justify. From a political point of view it can be deadly and isolating. And so it should always stay the last, the ultimate choice after all other options have been explored unsuccessfully because the enemy thinks human rights, the right to live in peace and freedom, are meant for everyone else but not for Israelis.

I have a countdown going. 4 weeks and a day until my airplane will depart to Tel Aviv. I will meet up with a couple of people and I want to take host presents with me, something special to remember the moment. And as I ‘met’ most of them while twittering I came up with the idea to create Special Tweets for special people. Special Tweets are small objects with a meaning and a design containing a 140 character long note. But see for yourself as I already created one last night:

Special Tweet birdeye look

Special Tweet front

Special Tweet back