“A Jew Can Be a Nazi” … Beyond Ukraine, More Than Disagreements and Tactics

“A Jew Can Be a Nazi” … Beyond Ukraine, More Than Disagreements and Tactics

Since the beginning of this month, official and nonofficial platforms around the world have been ablaze with talk, commentary, responses, and counter-responses regarding the Russian Foreign Minister’s statement, in which he mentioned the possibility that Hitler himself had Jewish origins.

Since the issue carries large dimensions the statement itself did not show as much as the subsequent reactions, especially in the Zionist Entity’s and Western media, and implicitly the dimensions whose effects reach us directly in Syria, we will investigate this “event” in this article and try to get a read of its dimensions and causes, starting with an extensive summary of what was said about it and around it.

Lavrov’s Statement

In an interview with the Russian Foreign Minister, Sergey Lavrov, with an Italian media outlet (the full text of the interview can be read here) on Sunday, 1 May 2022, a question was posed that Zelensky “believes denazification doesn’t make any sense. He is a Jew. The Nazis, Azov – there are very few of them (several thousand). Vladimir Zelensky refutes your view of the situation. Do you believe Vladimir Zelensky is an obstacle to peace?”

In his response, Lavrov said: “I heard him say that they would not even discuss demilitarization and denazification during peace talks. First, they are torpedoing the talks just as they did the Minsk agreements for eight years. Second, there is Nazification there: the captured militants as well as members of the Azov and Aidar battalions and other units wear swastikas or symbols of Nazi Waffen-SS battalions on their clothes or have them tattooed on their bodies; they openly read and promote Mein Kampf. His argument is: How can there be Nazism in Ukraine if he is a Jew? I may be mistaken but Adolf Hitler had Jewish blood, too. This means absolutely nothing. The wise of the Jewish people say that the most ardent anti-Semites are usually Jews. ‘Every family has its black sheep’, as we say”.

Official Reactions

This made the “Israelis” go crazy, and they quickly officially responded through a number of statements the day after the interview, including by the Entity’s Prime Minister and Foreign Minister. Naftali Bennett stated that he condemns in the strongest terms the Russian Foreign Minister’s statement and that the “goal of such lies is to accuse the Jews themselves of the most awful crimes in history, which were perpetrated against them, and thereby absolve Israel’s enemies of responsibility”. He added: “The use of the Holocaust of the Jewish people as a political tool must cease immediately”. The “Israeli” Foreign Ministry also released a statement, which was also posted by the Entity’s Foreign Minister, Yair Lapid, on his Twitter account, in which he said: “Foreign Minister Lavrov’s remarks are both an unforgivable and outrageous statement as well as a terrible historical error. Jews did not murder themselves in the Holocaust. The lowest level of racism against Jews is to accuse Jews themselves of antisemitism”.

A day later, the Russian Foreign Ministry responded to Lapid’s statement through a Tweet on the ministry’s Twitter account, which said: “the statement by FM of Israel Yair Lapid, which contradicts history and largely explains the policy by the current Government of Israel to support the neo-Nazi regime in Kiev”. A response to what Lapid said was also linked, in which examples were presented about Jewish personalities that had a role in killing Jews during the Holocaust, in addition to practices by Neo-Nazis during the last few years, which targeted Jews and other ethnic minorities in Ukraine, without any serious consequences, despite there being legal basis for that. All of that happened under the rule of Zelensky, who is “Jewish”.

A few days later, the Entity’s Prime Minister’s office alleged that during a called with the Russian President, Vladimir Putin, the latter apologized for what Lavrov said during the interview. The article published by the Entity’s Prime Minister’s office said: “The Prime Minister accepted President Putin’s apology for Lavrov’s remarks”. However, the Kremlin’s news about the call did not mention anything about an apology, and in a press conference for the Kremlin’s spokesperson, Dmitry Peskov, and in response to a question about this point, he denied the apology, saying: “there is currently nothing to add to what we’ve announced in our written statement after this contact”.

In addition to the reactions by “Israeli” officials, there were also statements by other officials about Lavrov’s comments. The Ukrainian Foreign Minister said through his Twitter account on Monday, 2 May 2022: “FM Lavrov could not help hiding the deeply-rooted antisemitism of the Russian elites. His heinous remarks are offensive to President Zelensky, Ukraine, Israel, and the Jewish people. More broadly, they demonstrate that today’s Russia is full of hatred towards other nations”.

The US State Department’s spokesperson, Ned Price, said in a press conference on Monday, 2 May 2022: “This statement from Foreign Minister Lavrov – it was the lowest form of racism, it was the lowest form of propaganda, it was the lowest form of insidious lies. And I think with it and other not only statements but conduct from the Kremlin, its top officials, its personnel – including its personnel in Ukraine – the Kremlin is consistently proving that there is no floor when it comes to just how low they can stoop. And this, I think, is just the latest example of that”.

The German government also denounced Lavrov’s comments, where a German official said, according to a Reuters article: “Lavrov’s remarks mock the victims of National Socialism in an unacceptable manner and shamelessly confront not only Jews but the entire international public with open anti-Semitism. Lavrov is cynically twisting victims and perpetrators of past and present”.

What Did Western and “Israeli” Media Say?

In addition to the aforementioned official statements, several Western and “Israeli” media outlets touched on the issue and with reactions mostly revolving around describing Lavrov and his remarks as antisemitic and indicating that Jews can be Nazis is outrageous. Some media outlets also went further to analyzing the expected repercussions, especially with regard to the military operation in Ukraine.

One day after the interview, an article on The Jerusalem Post titled: “Lavrov’s antisemitism means Israel no longer neutral on Ukraine-Russia” reviewed the development of the relationship between the Entity and Russia, particularly during the last ten weeks. This period witnessed in the beginning an attempt by “Israel” to appear as if it is adopting a moderate and neutral position, and taking the mediator role between Russia and Ukraine. “Israel” could not achieve this, so it started taking its natural position with the West, but at the same time it was and still is trying to maintain a certain level of good relations with Russia, particularly to be able to protect itself and its interests with regard to Syria.

The article also pointed out indicators of tense relations with Russia, the last of which was Lavrov’s statement. Nearly a month earlier when “Israel” voted for suspending Russia’s membership in the Human Rights Council, in response to which the Russian Foreign Ministry made strong statements in which it talked about “illegal occupation and creeping annexation” and that it is noteworthy that “the longest occupation in the post-war world history is carried out with the tacit connivance of the leading Western countries and the actual support of the United States”. At the end, the article points out that slowly and incident by incident, the plans of “Israel” to stay neutral in the war between Russia and Ukraine has been undone.

In another article in The Jerusalem Post, the author attacks Lavrov and accuses him of being like other high level diplomats who served the interests of autocrats like Hitler and Mussolini, and not like the “great” diplomats who changed history like Kissinger or Peres. The author starts the article by saying: “When Russian leaders turn to antisemitism, it means things are going bad, and are set to get worse”. He concludes the article by saying: “In fact, the more the regime abused the Jews the more it lost control of events. That is why we know that just like the pogroms didn’t prevent tsarism’s downfall, and just like defaming Israel didn’t prevent Communism’s collapse, Lavrov’s antisemitic broadsides will not offset his Ukrainian defeat”.

In a CNN article two days ago, the author touched on the various remarks about Lavrov’s comments, and said: “Whatever Lavrov’s intentions, it is important to counter his version of events. There are three issues at stake: first, his depiction of Ukraine; second, his characterization of Hitler; and third, his conception of Jewish (or any other) identity”. The author them went on to narrate a “historical” response to what Lavrov’s said in the context of “proving” that “it is evident that so-called ‘denazification’ is merely a pretext to ‘de-Ukrainize’ a territory that, for Lavrov and Russian President Vladimir Putin alike, lacks historical legitimacy”. At the end of the article, the authors concludes that “After all, Russian propaganda today is all about spreading falsehoods and misrepresentations, so much so that lack of commitment to consistency is the only reliable feature of Moscow's communications at the present time”.

An article about the subject in The Hill, an American media outlet, referred to the exchanged statements, under the title “Lavrov’s antisemitic Nazi remarks likely no accident”. The author says in the article that “Most observers said the ugly comments and Moscow’s defense of them show Russia remains focused on its propaganda effort, which from the beginning has been based on false tropes about neo-Nazis in Ukraine”. Some of the remarks referenced by the article touched on that Lavrov’s comments indicate that he is losing the war, they do not deserve a response, and are consistent with the way Russia is dealing not only with “Israel” but with the entire world and for the past 30 years. Other comments went to saying that Lavrov knows exactly what he is saying, it was not a “slip”, and he is merely a mouthpiece for Putin. Another remark added that Lavrov said this through an Italian media outlet, because Russia looks at Italy as “a relatively soft target” and the Italian audience is more sympathetic to Russia than audiences of other countries, not mention that Russia is the main natural gas supplier to Italy.

A BBC article published two days after the interview was keen to mention that the interview came “days after Israel marked Holocaust Remembrance Day, one of the most solemn occasions in the Israeli calendar”. The article also mentioned that “Israel” tried to be a mediator between Russia and Ukraine, and that its government faced criticism because it did not take a tougher position with Russia, and that “Lavrov’s comments will test Israel’s relations with Russia and while offensive to many, they reflect a common narrative amongst the Kremlin’s supporters”.


What is Behind the Statements and Responses?

Despite all that has been said about the subject, it remains largely in the orbit of looking at the issue from the Ukrainian angle only, that is within the limits that the obviously escalating nature of the clash between the Entity and Russia is centered around one point: the Entity’s position from what is going on in Ukraine and that the Russian behavior aims to pressure the Entity to change its position and alignment in this issue.

Although this interpretation enjoys a good amount of absurdity and naivety (as Russia stands today in the face of the US and with it Britain, most European countries, Japan, and others, in an open confrontation and on several levels. The alignment of the Entity here or there will not have a significant effect, especially with what appears to be Russian conviction that the Entity is already aligned with the West and cannot align anywhere else, regardless of pressures). What we are saying is that despite how shallow this angle is in looking at the subject, nevertheless it gives it a good cover that aims to obscure the true dimensions that are deeper and more essential. These are the dimensions that we will try to consider hereinbelow:

First: The Oligarchy

An article in “The Times of Israel”, titled “Sanctions on Russian oligarchs bite into funding for Jewish institutions”, notes that a number of wealthy Russian Jews have been subject to Western sanctions because of “their purported ties to Putin”. The article focuses on linking these sanctions to stopping the support to charitable and educational foundations, which has stopped support to those in need in “Israel”, in what appears to be an attempt to present an argument to exempt those from sanctions. The article also notes that those are also trying to have a role in mediating peace between Russia and Ukraine, which also contributes to attempting to add this to the list of their “charitable” actions that would exonerate them.

According to an article on The Jerusalem Post about Russian oligarchs, “In 2018 the US Treasury Department released the ‘Putin List’. It documented 210 Russians, including 114 senior political figures and 96 oligarchs all with a net worth of at least $1 billion, all considered close to the Kremlin. Twenty on the list were Jewish, many with Israeli passports”. The article mentioned in passing that “Israel” did not join the Western sanctions imposed on Russia, and that a number of those carry an “Israeli” passport and some of them have also been long-time residents in “Israel”. The article also notes the so-called “Milchan” Law, which was “tailored for billionaire Hollywood producer Arnon Milchan, who served as a Mossad agent for 20 years until the mid-1980s. This law exempts new immigrants from reporting foreign income to Israel’s IRS for 10 years after emigrating”, and that was to motivate those to bring their wealth to “Israel”.

An article in Forbes (an American magazine), titled “Why Israel Became A Safe Haven for Russian Billionaires”, notes that “Israel’s is one of the most common second passports among Russian-born billionaires”. And according to a report by the Council on Foreign Relations, since the beginning of the Ukraine events, “Several dozen Russian oligarchs, either dual citizens or non-Israeli Jews, have sought refuge in Israel”.

In short, the open conflict that Russia is waging, in which Ukraine represents the tip of the iceberg, has begun to move quickly, primarily due to Western sanctions, to a confrontation that includes major nerves inside Russia itself. The roles the Russian oligarchy played prior to the collapse of the Soviet Union are no secret, and later the roles it played in particular in the 1990s and to this moment. These roles were based on deep relations with Western institutions and implicitly Western and Zionist capital, and they emerged through various forms, including specific financial policies as well as economic policies.

The conflict between the independent and great state project and the interests of the oligarchy has been and still exists for the past twenty years. The oligarchy, especially the Jewish, has already received several blows during these two decades, but it has not lost all its positions (for example, Chubais who became out of the game only after the Ukrainian latest events). However, with the new situation, things have reached a turning point. Russia’s survival and the success of its project now requires real independence from the West and its plundering mechanisms; these same mechanisms are the source of the oligarchy’s outrageous wealth, and therefore destroying these mechanisms means destroying it as well.

In this sense, Lavrov’s statements, in one aspect thereof, can be understood as a shot not only directed at the Entity, but also at the Western-linked Russian oligarchy itself, in which the Jewish oligarchs hold key positions, and at least some of them openly play these days roles that are completely coherent with the Western position.

Second: Zionism

If the conflict in which Russia is in the direct forefront today, with giants the size of China and India standing with it, with direct and indirect support from various regional countries around the world, targets in essence the existing world system, dominated by the West, then it implicitly targets the core of that existing system, which is founded on financial domination of the dollar that has turned into the most criminal plundering tool in history.

It is no secret that Zionism as a system, which is broader and larger than the “Israel” project, is essentially a financial bloc that invested in the Entity project and invests in multiple projects around the world. This bloc is an essential component in the nucleus of the existing global dollar financial system, and the conflict is implicitly with it. Therefore, striking the basis that Zionism has always exploited by claiming a contradiction between it and Nazism, means that with time the battle will become more and more open. This is regardless of the intentions and way of thinking of those in control even in Moscow. Meaning that this trend is an objective trend with regard to Russia. If Zionism had succeeded during World War II in investing in Nazism to the maximum and reaping the fruits, implicitly the occupation of Palestine and the establishment of the Entity, then the current battle with the new chapter of Nazism does not seem amenable to Zionist investment. Furthermore, this opens the door to reconsidering Georgi Dimitrov’s definition of fascism as: “the flagrant terrorist dictatorship of the most reactionary, chauvinistic, and imperialist elements of capital”. This definition applies in our contemporary world to Zionism in all its aspects.

Third: The Entity

It is implicit that highlighting the historical truth of the relationship between Zionism (although not yet mentioned by name) and Nazism, would also undermine the foundations used to invest in the Entity project. More clearly, the Entity that claims to be a “state of the Holocaust grievances” will cease to be so when Judaism as a religion is separated from Zionism as a colonial project. When it is said that a Nazi can be a Jew, this means that the “Israeli” Entity itself can also be Nazi, and this is what we have heard references to in statements by the Russian Foreign Ministry over the last two months, including a statement on April 15, which stated: “As is known, numerous Security Council and United Nations General Assembly resolutions are violated, as the Israeli government continues the illegal occupation and annexation of Palestinian lands, which has led to the deaths of thousands of Palestinians”.

The same statement stressed that the Gaza Strip had essentially become an “open-air prison” and millions had to survive for nearly 14 years under conditions of siege by the sea, air and, land imposed by “Israel”.

The statement concluded that: “It is also worth noting Israel’s path in maintaining the longest occupation in world history after the war, is done with implicit complicity of Western countries and with the actual support of the United States”.



The objective direction of the conflict will open the door to more contradictions between Russia and Zionism as a whole, and the “Israeli” Entity implicitly. This stems from the nature of the historical Zionist position, which is organically linked to the dollar system that is being served blows these days.
This objective trend, regardless of what appears on the surface and what is hidden, and regardless of the seemingly ups and downs of the matter in the coming months and years, will not stop getting stronger and deeper. This will have multiple repercussions, including on the Palestinian and Syrian situations.

(النسخة العربية)

Last modified on Tuesday, 10 May 2022 19:02