Germany's blind eye: Protecting Israel while prosecuting Palestine

Germany, a Western state still trying to come to terms with its genocidal Nazi past continues to close its eyes to another possible genocide by putting activists protesting for Palestine on trial.

This week, Berlin has put yet another Palestinian activist on trial for chanting "from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free" during a protest, referring to the Mediterranean Sea in the west and the Jordan River in the east.

The defendant, whom her legal defence team refer to as "Daria," will face trial at a district court on the alleged basis that she was involved in the "circulation of symbols of unconstitutional and terrorist organisations," apparently referring to Hamas.

Earlier this month, a German court convicted Ava Moayeri for the same alleged offence.

Notably, the pro-Palestinian slogan was not coined by Hamas, which many Palestinians and a lot of governments see as a resistance group fighting Israel's continuing occupation.

Instead, the slogan first emerged in the 1960s among Fatah followers, who formed the backbone of the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO).

Verdict fallout

Fatah, which was founded by Yasser Arafat and his friends in 1959, is not regarded as a terrorist organisation by any government today. Its top figures including Mahmoud Abbas also currently lead the internationally-recognised Palestinian Authority (PA).

But all these facts appear not to matter to the German court that convicted Moayeri, a 22-year-old activist. She was ordered to pay a €600 ($668) fine because she "denied the right of the state of Israel to exist."

When issuing his verdict, Judge Birgit Balzer did not acknowledge Israel's illegal occupation and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government, nor its denial of a Palestinian state.

Addressing the court, Moayeri said she chanted the slogan to demand "peace and justice" for Palestinians, but the judge countered that Germans need to make Jews feel "safe and comfortable."

However, his verdict has only served to make Palestinians and those who empathise with their plight feel unsafe and uncomfortable in Germany. Moayeri's lawyer, Alexander Gorski, described Balzer's ruling as a win for "state repression" of freedom of speech, pledging to appeal it in a higher court.

No benefit of the doubt

Nadija Samour, a lawyer from the European Legal Support Centre who is representing Daria in this week's trial, also said she found the German court's motivation to be "highly political" and based on "shaky legal" ground.

Elsewhere in Germany, a Bavarian court ruled in favour of two defendants in June, finding that the slogan could not be banned categorically because it's ambiguous in its conceptual nature, and deserves to have the "benefit of the doubt."

However, the pro-Israel German government has acted so far in a way which does not grant any kind of benefit of the doubt to protesters and activists condemning Tel Aviv's atrocities across Gaza.

In fact, Germany's Interior Minister Nancy Faeser banned the slogan from being chanted publicly in the country in November on the grounds that it reflects support for Hamas. In February, her colleague Marco Buschmann, who runs the justice ministry, also claimed that chanting the slogan might amount to "anti-Semitic incitement."

Under controversial court decisions and government declarations like these, Germany security forces have been given the green light to crack down on many pro-Palestinian protesters in the country.

Supporting Israel: Germany's Staatsräson

Judge Balzer also quoted Staatsräson in her ruling against Moayeri, saying that this German political principle obliges Germany to defend Israel. Staatsräson literally means "reasons of state," referring to foundational principles of Germany's current existence after World War II following Nazi rule. At that time, Germany committed the Holocaust against Jewish populations living across Europe.

According to some interpretations including that of Balzer's and some leading German leaders like current Chancellor Olaf Scholz and his predecessor Angela Merkel, defending Israel is an indispensable part of the country's national identity.

"At this moment there is only one place for Germany. The place beside Israel. That's what we mean by saying: Israel's security is German Staatsräson," said Scholz in October after the Hamas-led attack.

Scholz's statement reinforces Merkel's previous statement in 2008 in a Knesset speech. "This historical German responsibility is part of the matter of state (Staatsräson) of my country. This means that for me as German Federal Chancellor, Israel's security is never negotiable," she said.

But Scholz's recent invokement of Staatsräson has prompted some political scientists to question the use of this concept in relation to defending Israel.

"These days, it conveys a sense of utter commitment for people to speak about Staatsräson, which supposedly means that Germany stands in full support of Israel's security. Almost like a constitutional principle,"wrote Ronen Steinkea,a German author and political analyst.

But the way Scholz put the concept, saying that he has "no doubt" that "the Israeli army will observe the rules arising from international law in its conduct," makes experts like Steinka doubt its constitutional nature.

Political science professor Antje Wiener agreed, writing that German leaders appear to be utilising the principle incorrectly.

"Against the backdrop of this statement, Staatsräson is a matter of belief, it certainly is not a 'constitutional principle' as Steinke notes," she said.