Tell me if you notice what's contradictory in J.J. Martin's analysis
here (Hint: it's in bold):So why has the international community been mute in condemning Israel’s attacks on Lebanon?
Perhaps it is the fear of being accused of anti-Semitism that has made western governments reluctant to speak out. It seems as if criticising Israel’s onslaught in Lebanon equates to anti-Semitism. Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero has found this out the hard way.
When Sr Zapatero accused Israel of using “abusive force” in Lebanon at a Socialist youth rally in Alicante and was photographed wearing a Palestinian scarf a Jewish community leader in Spain claimed that Sr Zapatero was anti-Semitic. “The silence of the international community today towards what is happening in the Middle East could become regret tomorrow,” said Sr Zapatero.
Foreign Minister Miguel Angel Moratinos defended Sr Zapatero’s comments saying that the Spanish government will not tolerate accusations of anti-Semitism against the Prime Minister, arguing that that the Spanish leader’s criticism of Israeli tactics in Lebanon should not be interpreted in those terms. After all Sr Zapatero’s comments are completely in line with a large part of Spanish and international opinion. There have been protest rallies against the Israeli bombardment of Lebanon in Spain, the United Kingdom, Amsterdam, Russia and as far afield as Sydney, Australia.
I really don't think the international community has been mute, do you?