Doubts about Qatargate are a reminder that liberal establishments are using courts to delegitimize opponents in France and Israel, just as they did in the United States against Trump
Jonathan S. Tobin
![]() |
Photo by Anne-Christine Poujoulat/AFP via Getty Images |
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had enough on his plate leading a country at war, a fractious governing coalition and coping with the distraction of a trial on corruption charges that has been going on for a staggering five years with no end in sight. Now he’s got another problem to deal with.
“Qatargate” is the latest addition to the list of issues
facing Netanyahu. The scandal is based on the claim that two people who worked
in the prime minister’s office were in “contact with a foreign agent” as well
as engaged in “money laundering, bribery, fraud and breach of trust.”
That’s a shocking accusation,
especially the part about his advisers allegedly being in cahoots with Qatar, a
nation that is allied with Iran and Hamas, as well as a leading funder of
Islamist fundamentalist schools and mosques around the world.
But if Netanyahu’s supporters
smell a rat, it’s not because they suspect the accused of being traitors. On
the contrary, both the prime minister and many of his backers see this as just
another dishonest attempt on the part of his opponents to use the legal system
to discredit or topple him.
Moreover, they are not alone
in thinking this way about the rash of similar efforts to take down the leaders
of right-wing and populist political parties among the world’s democracies by
non-democratic means.
Qatargate is being analogized
to the Russia collusion hoax that plagued President Donald Trump from 2017 to
2019; the attempt to impeach him over his threats to cut off aid to Ukraine;
and the efforts to jail and/or bankrupt him during the four years between his
first and second terms.
Nor is this phenomenon confined to the United States and Israel.
Lawfare in France
This week, Marine Le Pen, the
leader of the right-wing Rassemblement National Party (RN) and the frontrunner
in the 2027 French presidential race, was convicted of embezzlement and sentenced to prison. Yet
rather than being accused of stealing money for personal gain, the indictment
hinged on a technicality and a complicated chain of events concerning whether
RN staffers who work for its representatives should have been paid by the
European Parliament or by the party in France.
It’s far from clear that the
RN’s conduct was very different from what other French parties do or anything
that should have been labeled as embezzlement. It was, instead, widely
perceived as an attempt by the French political and legal establishment to prevent
Le Pen from running for president. The fact that the sentence handed down
involved a five-year ban on running for office, coupled with the judge’s
insistence that this part of his ruling be immediately enforced rather than
only after appeals have been exhausted, made it appear even more partisan.
As far as the RN is concerned,
what has happened to Le Pen is no different from the lawfare that was waged
against Trump in the United States.
Last year, France’s leading
neo-liberal centrist and far-left parties came together to deny RN control of
the French parliament, despite the fact that they won the most votes and seats.
Those factions have, under various parties, alternated in control over the
French Republic for the last 70 years. And they have no intention of letting
the upstart RN ascend to power.
The RN was founded by Marine’s
antisemitic father, Jean-Marie Le Pen, and had more than a tinge of Vichy
France fascism about it. Under his daughter, however, it has undergone a
transformation. Following Marine Le Pen’s succeeding her father as its leader
in 2011, it shed his racist point of view and expelled the elder Le Pen in 2015
(he died in January of this year).
It is now a vocal opponent of
the spirit of antisemitism that is so much a part of contemporary French life.
Jew-hatred in France is, as is the case elsewhere in Europe, driven by a
red-green alliance of Marxists and Islamists. RN is against the mass immigration
from the Middle East and North Africa, especially from former French
possessions where Islam is a dominant force, which has enabled that troubling
development.
Many French Jews are still
reluctant to make common cause with the RN because of its past, as well as the
historical association of the French right with antisemitism dating back to the
Dreyfus Affair in 1894. But in what can be considered both a historic irony as
well as a sign of the changing times, RN has become a crucial defender of the
embattled Jewish community. It’s also a stalwart supporter of Israel in a
country where the traditional hierarchy is either lukewarm at best or openly
hostile to the Jewish state.
But what just happened in
France is a theme playing out all across Europe, where a similar reaction to
the way mass immigration has enabled what could be called the Islamization of
societies and the marginalization of existing national cultures. In some places,
like Hungary, the Netherlands and Italy, right-wing populist parties have
ascended to government. Elsewhere, their opponents—whether traditional
liberals, centrists or leftists—have done their best to anathematize them.
In Germany, that’s been made
easier by the right-wing AfD Party’s failure to
purge the ranks of their parliamentary candidates of those who evince nostalgia
for their country’s Nazi past. But, as U.S. Vice President JD Vance pointed out
in a seminal speech to
the Munich Security Conference in February, the reason for the AfD’s rise is
because they are speaking out in defense of national borders and against the
impact of mass immigration enabled by both the traditional left and right.
Vance’s democracy lesson
The same point applies to
Romania, where a right-wing party won the country’s national elections. Rather
than accept the verdict of democracy, that victory was invalidated by the
Central Election Bureau, which then denied its leader, Călin Georgescu,
the right to run in the do-over balloting. That body gave no rationale for this
anti-democratic decision, but it came two weeks after Georgescu’s political
opponents, who were angry about his sympathy for Russia and hostility to
Ukraine, had orchestrated his indictment for “incitement to actions against the
constitutional order”; the “communication of false information”; and
involvement in the establishment of an organization “with a fascist, racist or
xenophobic character.”
One needn’t be sympathetic to
Georgescu or Le Pen—or any of the other nationalist and populist parties in
Europe that have come to the fore because of the impact of mass immigration—to
understand two things.
One is that the accusation
that the electoral success of contemporary right-wing political parties is a
rerun of the Nazi rise to power in the 1920s and ’30s is tone deaf to the
realities of the 21st century. Today, it is the left and their Islamist allies
that are the primary source of European antisemitism.
The other is that the lawfare
being employed in France and Romania is antithetical to democratic norms.
That was the point Vance made
in Munich when he said: “We must do more than talk about democratic values. We
must live them.” He went on to note that during the Cold War, it was the forces
of an evil Soviet empire that “censored dissidents, that closed churches, that
cancelled elections.” Sadly, he accurately noted that in 2025, the winners of
the Cold War—the nations that were the self-described members and leaders of
the “free world”—were acting in that manner.
That wasn’t something the
gathering of foreign- and defense-policy elites from Europe and North America
wanted to hear.
Characterizing lawfare against
political opponents as a triumph of “the rule of law,” as liberal commentators
in Europe and America have done, requires observers to
ignore the obviously partisan nature of these cases. At stake here is not the
efforts of a “reactionary international,” as French President Emmanuel Macron
put it, threatening the independence of the courts. What we are witnessing is a
dying establishment seeking to defend its power by any means necessary, even if
it means traducing the basic principles of democracy.
Banana republic tactics
It may be, as The New
York Times claimed, that the Romanian fiasco was a “propaganda coup” for Russia. But that’s only because
what the authorities did there, as well as months later in France,
unfortunately validated the claims of Moscow’s authoritarian leader, Vladimir
Putin, that those in the West who oppose his tyranny at home and aggression
against Ukraine are hypocrites when it comes to their supposed defense of
democracy.
As Vance said, if Americans
and Europeans want to stand up for democracy, they have to stop behaving like
they are running banana republics by engaging in censorship of dissent and
trying to jail their political foes, corrupt practices that the Biden administration
also engaged in.
As Netanyahu has said, the same problem of a “deep state” that seeks to
defeat political forces that oppose the liberal establishment by fair means or
foul exists in Israel. He is in power by virtue of winning a clear majority in
a democratic election. And despite everything that has happened since his
victory in November 2022, including both the paralysis of the Jewish state by
opponents of his judicial reform proposals and the catastrophe of Oct. 7, 2023,
he has an even chance of extending his already record term of
office when the country goes back to the polls, likely sometime in 2026.
And that is the context in
which Qatargate must be understood.
The war on Netanyahu
At this stage, with little of
the evidence of the alleged misconduct of Netanyahu’s staff being made public,
it’s hard to know what to think about these charges. Most people act on the
assumption that where there is smoke, there is fire—and that prosecutors and
police, as well as the judicial system, can be trusted to get to the truth.
Given the seriousness of these accusations, a wait-and-see approach to the
issue seems prudent.
Yet even if we are inclined to
give the investigators the benefit of the doubt, the notion that Netanyahu’s
advisers were actually agents of Qatar seems, on its face, preposterous.
More to the point, there is a
sense of déjà vu among many Israelis about all of this.
In 2016, when the
investigation of Netanyahu on the charges on which he is still standing trial
began, many observers assumed that at least some of the accusations being
lodged against the prime minister were legitimate. Or rather, they assumed that
they had to be since those making them had jobs in the legal system that
normally inspire trust.
But once the investigation
unfolded and the nature of the four separate cases that were brought against
him was made plain, that assumption proved unfounded. The charges were so
flimsy and clearly so partisan in nature that the only people who really treated
them as legitimate were those whose hatred for Netanyahu was so great that
they’d believe any accusation lodged against him.
There is a long tradition of
Israel’s liberal establishment seeking to delegitimize the political right,
dating back to the pre-state era. In recent years, that impulse to view the
right as beyond the pale has taken on an even more desperate character. That’s
a product of the way demography and the implosion of the once-dominant
left-wing Labor Party over its catastrophic “land for peace” policies have led
to the increasing electoral success of Netanyahu’s Likud Party, and its various
religious and right-wing allies.
The Israeli left has used its
stranglehold on a self-perpetuating majority on the country’s Supreme Court
that seeks to dominate the country’s government, rather than merely act as a
check on it as it does in other democracies, to hamstring Netanyahu. The
determination of the country’s liberal elites to falsely demonize Netanyahu as
a would-be authoritarian because of his efforts to reform the judiciary is not
unlike the Democratic Party’s similarly disingenuous approach to Trump.
From Russia collusion to
Qatar
This is why Netanyahu’s
pushback against Qatargate and the other efforts to take him down should
resonate for Americans who saw how the justice system in the United States was
weaponized against Trump.
It is theoretically possible
that Qatargate will, unlike Russia collusion, prove to be a real scandal as
opposed to a partisan conspiracy theory. But the way the corruption cases
against Netanyahu have imploded during the endless trial about them and the
open animus that the legal establishment has for the prime minister, skepticism
about such a scenario is far from unreasonable.
At this point, the claim that
these efforts to take down populist or right-wing political leaders are solely
about upholding the rule of law is risible. The political left—whether in the
United States, Europe and Israel—is not so much interested in debating its
opponents as they are in delegitimizing them. Asserting that any other point of
view but one’s own is inherently undemocratic is the standard argument of
tyrants, not the advocates for political freedom.
Democracy is in peril in 2025.
But as Vance rightly argued, the main threat to it now comes from the
practitioners of lawfare, who are the loudest in claiming to be its defenders.
Jonathan S. Tobin, editor-in-chief
of the Jewish News Syndicate, 3-4-2025
Hungary defies ICC, welcomes Netanyahu with military honor guard
Netanyahu, Orbán and Trump defy ICC, and a morally bankrupt global order
Sob o pretexto de "proteger a democracia", a esquerda usa tribunais para reprimir, censurar e eliminar qualquer oposição + a eleição em Wisconsin
2-4-2025: Oeste sem filtro – Justiça americana marca audiência para analisar o caso de Felipe Martins + Trump anuncia 'tarifaço' mundial
Le Pen venceria todos os outros candidatos presidenciais com facilidade, de acordo com a última sondagem antes de ter sido condenada
Marine Le Pen condenada a 4 anos de prisão e a 5 anos de interdição de atividade política num caso gritante de perseguição judicial
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário
Não publicamos comentários de anônimos/desconhecidos.
Por favor, se optar por "Anônimo", escreva o seu nome no final do comentário.
Não use CAIXA ALTA, (Não grite!), isto é, não escreva tudo em maiúsculas, escreva normalmente. Obrigado pela sua participação!
Volte sempre!
Abraços./-