In the American case, the children are brought in by their parents seeking better life or escaping persecution…. In the Israeli case, it was one of answering the call that all Jews should return to the homeland. But what the non-European and non-American Jews failed to understand was that the call did not include them because Zionism is a racist ideology.
Australia, Israel and the United States (U.S.) are countries of migrants, but they are also places that are dangerous for children, especially if they are not White. I am not referring to the common-place massacre of children in U.S. schools by the clearly deranged, or the routine murder of Blacks in ‘God’s Own Country.’
I am referring to the U.S. snatching migrant children from their parents, the Stolen Generations of children in Australia and the on-going scandal in Israel, which has revealed that between 1948 and 1954, over 1,000 children under the age of three ‘disappeared.’ Also within the period, hundreds of children ‘died’ in Israeli hospitals without death certificates being issued. The children have a common denominator, they were Mizrahi Jews – the Eastern and Oriental Jews with Middle East ancestry. They were mainly poor Jews from Yemen, who migrated to the new Israeli nation. In contrast, the children of the Ashkenazi Jews – from the European Diaspora – did not ‘disappear’ or ‘die’ in such mysterious circumstances.
As it has turned out, those children were mainly kidnapped by Israeli officials and given to White Jews who needed children. Some were given to Jews in America for adoption, while some were used as human guinea pigs for scientific experiments.
There was the case of Yosef Avraham, who migrated from Yemen on September 16, 1949 with his wife, Ketzia; daughter, Mazal; and a one-week old son, Tov. The family was housed in the Pardesiya camp for new immigrants. The family was hospitalised. Yosef recovered after one week, found his daughter, Mazal but never found his wife and son.
Gil Grunbaum was the son of wealthy parents or so he thought. In adulthood, he found that after his birth to Tunisian migrants in 1956, he was stolen by the doctors. After a three-year search, he found that his family name was Maimon and has traced his biological mother to the suburbs of Haifa.
Leah Aharni had twin daughters but was told that one of them, Hanna, died. But when her surviving daughter, Hagit was 18 and eligible for national military service, Leah received two draft notices, one for Hagit and the other for the ‘dead’ Hannah. Documents showed that Hanna was moved to Tel Aviv after she was supposed to have died.
Part of the danger in the American case is that there are no clear cut processes of keeping track of the children, or being certain where they are being kept. There is also no system of reuniting the children and their parents.
The Israeli government confirmed that some of the Yemeni children died from experiments when they were injected with Albumin (dry egg-white), serum, and dry plasma, to check if they had traces of the sickle cell disease. On January 23, 2018, the Yemeni Jews staged a protest after which some were given permission to exhume some graves to carry out DNA tests of those they believe were their missing family members.
In the case of the U.S., the separation of migrant children is now causing a storm, with President Donald Trump blaming the Democrats for the ‘law’ under which his administration is snatching thousands of migrant children from their parents and flinging them into a world of uncertainty, where they may never see their biological families again. Trump seems willing to do anything except stop the practice, which in reality is the product of his administration’s policy.
In this context, ‘policy’ is actually an elegant word, because in reality, the American government is merely experimenting. There is the case of a mother who was apprehended with her son, and a 10-year-old girl with Down syndrome. The woman established that her husband is a legal U.S. resident. She was sent to a detention facility, and the girl, rather than being reconciled with her father, was locked up in a different detention centre in Texas.
The current problem began with the April 6, 2018 U.S. Justice Department declaration of a new “zero tolerance policy”, which has the separation of children from their parents as a major plank. With missionary zeal, American officials swooped on family migrants entering the country. Between April 18 and May 31, the Homeland Security announced children were separated from 1,940 adults.
The children taken away from their parents are labeled “unaccompanied minors” and sent to foster care, while the parents are labeled criminals and sent to jail. Some American lawyers have challenged this on the basis that illegal migration is a civil, not a criminal issue.
In May, in blaming the Democrats for enacting the law separating the children and their parents, Trump tweeted: “Put pressure on the Democrats to end the horrible law that separates children from their parents once they cross the border into the US.”
Part of the danger in the American case is that there are no clear cut processes of keeping track of the children, or being certain where they are being kept. There is also no system of reuniting the children and their parents.
So the danger of permanent separation of the parents and children, is real. The New York Times also reports that some parents have been deported without their children, against their will.
In May, in blaming the Democrats for enacting the law separating the children and their parents, Trump tweeted: “Put pressure on the Democrats to end the horrible law that separates children from their parents once they cross the border into the US.” In a later tweet he said: “Separating families at the border is the fault of bad legislation passed by the Democrats. Border security laws should be changed but the Dems can’t get their act together.” But Trump has failed to produce such a law. In any case, if it were to exist, the fact is that it is his administration that is implementing the inhuman law and all he needs is to put a stop to the implementation.
In the case of Australia, the British migrants, some of them prisoners sent to the continent by Britain, almost wiped out the indigenous Aborigines. When they realised that some of the Aborigines had ‘half caste’ children, the British settlers from 1905 to the 1970s seized such children from their parents. Sometimes, the mothers were tied in their homes while the state kidnapped their children. In some cases, the children were seized from their parents in public places like post offices. They were then placed in foster homes, with foster parents or so called charities. They put through so called ‘resocialisation programmes’. The Australian government admits that between one in ten and one in three indigenous Australian children were seized from their parents and communities.
In the American case, the children are brought in by their parents seeking better life or escaping persecution. They are non-Whites who have to contend with an overwhelming White establishment. In the Israeli case, it was one of answering the call that all Jews should return to the homeland. But what the non-European and non-American Jews failed to understand was that the call did not include them because Zionism is a racist ideology. In that of Australia, it is a case of colonised people being almost wiped out by the colonialists. Whatever the case, these were or are not good times for the children victims to grow.
Owei Lakemfa, former Secretary General of African Workers is a Human Rights activist, journalist and author.
END
Be the first to comment