Belgium’s prosecution of Sharon anti-Semitic

European anti-Semitism has reached a new low. Last week the
Belgian Supreme Court ruled that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel
Sharon could be tried in Belgium for alleged war crimes committed
in Lebanon two decades ago. The ruling is based on the 1993 Belgian
law of “universal jurisdiction” that allows for the
prosecution of suspected war criminals, regardless of the
nationalities of the accused and the victims and regardless of
where the crime was committed.

In the early 1980s, Israel found itself involved in a brutal
civil war between Lebanese Christians and Muslims. Yasser
Arafat’s Palestine Liberation Organization had fled from
Jordan to Southern Lebanon, where it continued to perpetrate terror
attacks against Israeli civilians across the border. Then, as now,
Israel was forced to defend itself, and Sharon led Israeli forces
into Lebanon.

During the war, Lebanese Christian Phalangists invaded the
refugee camps of Sabra and Shatila, massacring about 800
Palestinians. Palestinians blamed Israel for not preventing the
attacks, and in 1983 the Israeli government’s Kahan
commission found Sharon guilty of “indirect
responsibility” for not having anticipated the
Phalangists’ actions. Sharon was forced to resign as defense
minister. After his resignation, Sharon took a back seat in Israeli
politics for 18 years.

Clearly, Belgium’s decision to prosecute Sharon overlooks
a long list of candidates who are much more deserving than he is.
Consider the following: Muammar Qaddafi, Augusto Pinochet, Hafez
& Bashar al-Asad, Kim Jong Il, Alexander Lukashenko, Idi Amin
and, of course, Saddam Hussein. These are people who are considered
war criminals by most international standards.

In fact, Belgium itself has a history that would preclude it
from judging other countries. It is estimated that the government
of Belgium, which had occupied the Congo until 1960, killed
millions of Africans between 1880 and 1920. In another Belgian
colony, Rwanda, Hutu resistance in the first half of the 20th
century was brutally suppressed by the ruling Tutsis, all under the
supervision of the Belgians.

Of all the qualified candidates for prosecution, Belgium chose
someone who has been vindicated of blame (none of the others have)
and someone who has been investigated by his own country (none of
the others have).

Some have called Belgium’s decision to try Sharon a
violation of judicial jurisdiction. Some (even Israelis) have
claimed that it is just a political maneuver. I think that’s
letting the Belgians off easy.

The Belgians are practicing a new form of anti-Semitism that has
become common in Europe in the past few years. This anti-Semitism
veils itself in what the Europeans claim is “criticism of the
state of Israel,” and not of Jews. Nothing could be further
from the truth.

Singling out Sharon for “not preventing” an attack
by a Christian Militia when the Belgians could very well have had
their pick of another person to prosecute is the highest form of
anti-Semitism. What makes it most deplorable is that the Belgians
can hold a straight face when they say that they’re not singling
out Jews.

Sixty years after willingly sending half of their Jewish
population to Nazi gas chambers, Belgium still hasn’t learned
its lesson. The Jews of Belgium today still live in tight-knit
ghettos, and have been warned by law enforcement officials that
their safety cannot be guaranteed. Not coincidentally, hundreds of
synagogues have been vandalized and dozens of rabbis attacked
throughout Europe over the past few years.

The Belgian Supreme Court should turn its attention elsewhere,
but if it insists on prosecuting Sharon, it should at least have
the decency to publicly declare it anti-Semitism. This way it can
at least keep its pride and dignity ““ two things Europeans
hold dearer than life itself.

Shraga is a fourth-year computer science student and the vice
president of Bruins for Israel.