Joaquín Rábago reflexiona sobre Alemania, con Francesca Albanese y Pankaj Mishra

Publico aquí, en su original castellano, una muy pertinente reflexión del periodista Joaquín Rábago sobre la situación política en Alemania en relación con el genocidio palestino perpetrado por la entidad colonial sionista en el Mediterráneo más levantino.
Rábago menciona y cita a dos personas que tienen mucho y significativo que decir sobre el genocidio en marcha, la complicidad alemana y su represión de toda voz discordante. Los enlaces hipertexto son míos.

Alemania ha sacado las lecciones equivocadas del Holocausto
Por Joaquín Rábago, 23.02.2025

Alemania demuestra todos los días con un comportamiento que sólo cabe calificar de comprensivo, cuando no cómplice del genocidio israelí,  que ha sacado las lecciones equivocadas del Holocausto.
¿Cómo interpretar de otro modo la persecución tanto policial como judicial que hace de quienes denuncian en ese país a Israel por sus gravísimas violaciones del derecho internacional y se solidarizan con sus víctimas?
La propia relatora especial de las Naciones Unidas sobre los Territorios Palestinos, la abogada italiana Francesca Albanese, sufrió el otro día la humillación de que fuerzas especiales de la policía berlinesa entrasen armadas hasta los dientes en la sede del diario donde iba a hablar del genocidio por el supuesto “peligro” que aquel acto representaba.
El diario Junge Welt, sometido a observación por la Oficina de la Protección de la Constitución alemana por su inspiración marxista, algo insólito en democracia, decidió acoger a Albanese después de que la Universidad Libre de Berlín y la Ludwig-Maximilian, de Munich, sometidas a fuertes presiones, le retiraran su invitación.
Incluso habían aparecido pintadas en el multiétnico barrio berlinés de Kreuzberg en las que se denunciaba a la alta funcionaria de la ONU como “antisemita” y se tachaba de “terrorista” a la UNRWA (Agencia de las Naciones Unidas para los Refugiados).
Tras la aparatosa intervención de la policía en la sede del periódico, Albanese dijo que jamás olvidaría lo ocurrido y habló de la responsabilidad de Alemania, país que ha protagonizado no uno sino dos genocidios: el Holocausto de los nazis y el cometido antes por su Ejército imperial contra las etnias herero y nama de Namibia.
Otro que tampoco perdona a Alemania su apoyo total al Estado judío es el conocido ensayista y novelista indio Pankaj Mishra, cuyo último libro está dedicado precisamente a Gaza.
En declaraciones al semanario alemán Der Spiegel, Mishra denuncia a los alemanes por su defensa a ultranza del sionismo israelí y afirma que, con independencia de su pasado, “deben tener la libertad moral” de denunciar como “equivocadas” las actuales prácticas genocidas.
Según escribe Mishra en su libro “The World after Gaza” (El Mundo después de Gaza), con “su incondicional solidaridad” con el Gobierno israelí, Alemania se ha convertido en “cómplice de un criminal etnonacionalismo”.
“No comparto la obsesión con Hamás que siempre se espera por parte de los defensores de Israel”, afirma el indio, según el cual “en la historia del anticolonialismo, muchos movimientos fueron calificados en su día por EE UU y los europeos de “terroristas”, entre ellos el Congreso Nacional Africano de Nelson Mandela.
“El apoyo unilateral al Gobierno israelí ha destruido el prestigio de que gozaba Alemania” en muchos países del Sur global, afirma Mishra.
El ensayista indio dice no entender cómo ha desaparecido totalmente la simpatía que su día parecían sentir los cancilleres socialdemócratas Willy Brandt y Helmut Schmidt por el pueblo palestino.
Según explica Mishra, cuando visitó a finales de los noventa por primera vez Alemania, el país se caracterizaba por una visión del mundo “más abierta y cosmopolita”.
Y uno mismo, que fue varios años corresponsal en Bonn y ahora ha vuelto a vivir parte del año en Alemania, no puede sino darle la razón.

Recomiendo también la lectura de un artículo reciente de planteamiento similar y contenido complementario que debemos a David Cronin. Su título es una pregunta retórica: Is Germany incapable of learning from its past? y apareció publicado en la sección "Lobby Watch" (vigilancia del cabildeo) de The Electronic Intifada el 23.01.2025. De momento, en las elecciones legislativas de ayer domingo 23 los mejores resultados los obtuvieron dos extremas derechas: una extrema derecha económica, belicista y sionista, la CDU de Friedrich Merz, que es un agente de BlackRock, y una extrema derecha "tout court", la AfD.

En la Alemania actual se han disparado los antecedentes escandalosos, graves, alarmantes de prohibicionismo y represión contrarios a los derechos humanos, la libertad de expresión o circulación o irrespetuosos con el derecho internacional. Alemania ha hecho de la promoción de la guerra, el sionismo y sus masacres permanentes una razón de Estado. En el ámbito de las coerciones e impedimentos cutres, recuerdo la denegación de entrada en el país a Yannis Varufakis, o las diversas represalias o cancelaciones sufridas por personas tan diversas como Nancy Fraser (el año pasado, censurada por la Universidad de Colonia), Salman Abu Sitta, Irene Montero y otros, Hebh Jamal (el 18.02.2025, en el marco del DiEM25, no pudo emitir un primer corte de su película debido a la censura de la policía de Berlín)... Ya en mayo de 2023, más de 160 organizaciones, partidos y sindicatos se unieron a la campaña internacional contra la represión anti-palestina en Alemania. Lo que no impide que las manifestaciones anti-genocidas sigan teniéndolo muy crudo. Fue muy elocuente también la renuncia deLaurie Anderson, que decidió dejar de dar clases en la Folkwang Universität der Künste, de Essen (cf. su "Carta contra el apartheid"). Así lo explicaba The Guardian el 1.02.2024:

The artist, musician and film director Laurie Anderson has withdrawn from a guest professorship at a university in Germany after officials took issue with her support for a 2021 statement by Palestinian artists titled Letter Against Apartheid. The decision, announced days before Anderson is due to receive a lifetime achievement award at this year’s Grammys, adds to the wave of cultural events that have been scrapped in Germany after artists expressed views deemed by officials to be anti-Israel.
Late last week the Folkwang University of Arts in Essen said it had “engaged in talks” with Anderson – whose works include the 1981 single O Superman and the 2015 film Heart of a Dog, dedicated to her late husband, Lou Reed – after her name surfaced among the thousands of artists who had backed the open letter, which called for “an immediate and unconditional cessation of Israeli violence against Palestinians”.
The university said it believed that art, culture and science are places “where contentious issues are kept in check”.
Its statement continued: “It has now become apparent that, in 2021, Laurie Anderson publicly supported the Palestinian artists’ ‘Letter Against Apartheid’ appeal, which, among other things, takes up calls for boycotts by the anti-Israel BDS movement,” it said. “In light of the now public question regarding her political stance, Laurie Anderson has decided to withdraw from the professorship. (...)”

Casos que se unen a muchos otros de represión en Centroeuropa (por ejemplo, los muy recientes de Richard Medhurst en Austria o de Ali Abunimah en Suiza) o, no digamos, en el Reino Unido, paraíso del sionismo, la apología del genocidio y la demonización de los palestinos y sus defensores. Desgraciadamente, en Europa, en esta materia crucial, dirigentes como Michelle O'Neill, Mary Lou McDonald o Ione Belarra son rara avis.

Esta represión afecta también desde hace tiempo, y cada vez más, a muchos judíos antisionistas. Hemos citado aquí testimonios del difunto Hajo Meyer, de Avi Shlaim, Stavit Sinai y Ronnie Barkan, Katie Halper... Hace poco Rebecca Collard divulgaba el alucinante caso de un judío alemán con kippa reprimido en un parque público por la policía alemana debido a que llevaba una kufiya, el pañuelo palestino, al cuello. La declaración indescriptible de ayer del energúmeno racista y supremachista Steve B*nnon señalando a los judíos estadounidenses que no apoyen a Israel ni el delirio MAGA como "el enemigo nº 1 de los israelíes", sitúa la alianza pro-Israel de antisemitas y sionistas en su justo punto histórico y actual.

Steve B*nnon: Israel is a partner of the United States, but people in Israel got to understand something: the number one enemy to the people in Israel are American Jews that do not support Israel and do not support Maga, okay? Maga and the Evangelical Christians and the traditional Catholics in this country have Israel's back, they have the Jews’ back. The biggest single enemy to the Jewish people are not the Islamic supremacists; the biggest enemy you have is inside the wire, Progressive Jewish billionaires that are funding all this stuff. They are the number one enemy and the people in Israel need to get that right, because Maga has your back. Traditional Catholics have your back and Evangelical Christians have your back. We will always have the back of Israel, but, I got to tell you, you have an enemy inside the wire.

Mi solidaridad absoluta con todos los judíos justos, heroicos, que arriesgan reputación, carreras, sosiego e, incluso, la vida por defender la decencia y apoyar a las víctimas de una ideología sencillamente nazi. Estamos muy mal y, si no lo remediamos, vamos a peor.

Inserto a continuación la intervención de Francesca Albanese del 20 de febrero de 2025 en Berlín. Tuvo serias dificultades para tomar la palabra en el marco del DiEM25, como Hebh Jamal, pero la Relatora Especial sobre la situación de los derechos humanos en el territorio palestino ocupado desde 1967 lo consiguió, en una salita pequeña, aunque con difusión mundial vía internet, en vivo, aprovechable aquí en diferido, gracias a los buenos oficios del admirable diario berlinés Junge Welt y del resto de organizadores. Muchas gracias a todos por su fructífera tenacidad:

A pesar de la intimidación policial y los cambios de última hora respecto al lugar de celebración, Francesca Albanese pronunció un discurso histórico en Berlín, en un acto organizado por DiEM25, Jewish Voice for a Just Peace in the Middle East, Eye4Palestine y el Comité de Gaza de Berlín.
Después de que el lugar original del acto fuera presionado para cancelarlo, el diario Junge Welt intervino en el último minuto para lograr que pudiera llevarse a cabo este debate crucial. Lo importante es que quienes intentaron silenciarlo fracasaron. Más de 2.700 personas asistieron en línea, en directo, durante las 8 horas que duraron los actos, mientras Albanese, por su parte, expuso la brutal realidad: el genocidio en Gaza es innegable, Alemania es cómplice y la libertad de expresión y el derecho internacional están sometidos a un ataque feroz.
Este acto interesa sobremanera a quien crea en la justicia y se niegue a ser silenciado.
Fue moderado por Wieland Hoban de Jewish Voice for Peace in the Middle East.”

(Vídeo de 1:10:40)

TRANSCRIPCIÓN:

J’adore Francesca Albanese, je la trouve honnête, courageuse et pleine de bon sens, mais, comme d’habitude, les opinions exprimées par la personne que je cite ou que je transcris, elle ou autre, appartiennent à l’autrice/locutrice ou l’auteur/locuteur en question et ne reflètent pas nécessairement ou exactement ma position personnelle.

[Francesca] Just to make sure we are safe; can you confirm that police is here to protect all of us? [Crowd cheers] Good! [Crowd cheers]

[Wieland] So I have the great pleasure of welcoming Francesca Albanese [Crowd cheers]. United Nations Special Rapporteur for Human Rights in the Occupied Palestinian territories.
Before I hand over to Francesca for some preliminary remarks, I would just like to inform everyone that at the last update that I received, we had 1 ,700 people viewing the live stream. [Crowd cheers]
So, this may be a small room, but the virtual space we are occupying is a large one. So, without further ado, Francesca please speak to us. [Crowd cheers]

[Francesca] You're not police, right? [Crowd laughs] Camouflaging, okay.
So, I have to admit that about 75 hours in this country have made me pretty nervous. I can't wait to go back to peaceful Tunisia... [Crowd cheers] …because the situation is bad for freedom of expression, pretty much everywhere, and still I've never felt this sense of lacking oxygen as I do here. So, please, please, I know, they're very happy to see me. Makes sense.
Yes, but I'm someone who speaks of genocide, and there is a genocide ongoing and doesn't matter how much genocide denialism there is.
We need to be really aware, aware of what we need to do, all together, because I really want to be heard loud and clear before we start talking about what I came to know the most, genocide, this year.
I want to say a few things on which I absolutely don't want to be taken wrong and misquoted. But, of course, I will be misquoted!!!

So, it is a great pleasure for me to be with you today, and I wish to thank DiEM, A Jewish Voice for a Just Peace in the Middle East, Eye for Palestine and Gaza Committee for their immense work [Crowd cheers]… Stop it! [Crowd laughs] …for their immense work in bringing this meeting together and for inviting me to be here, in Berlin. I'm sure you have the gratitude of so many for creating this platform for many to come together to speak on one of the most urgent issues of our time. Without your courage and dedication, we would not be here today, although, although!!... for the venue, we must thank Junge Welt, who has given the event last-minute asylum and, of course, [Crowd cheers]… You are unruly!
And of course, we have to also acknowledge the Israeli ambassador, pro-Israel groups and professional smearers in Germany, a number of German politicians, including the city mayor, Berlin police, without whose relentless work and pressure and intimidation, we would be in another, much bigger venue.

I know how you feel. I feel it, too, somewhat, even though the intimidation has gotten on my nerves, but not yet under my skin, and with German authorities' permission, I plan to return, as I said, to the safety of my home in Tunisia before this changes.

We should not fear words. We shall fear crimes. Those that commit them, and those who deny them. And as we proceed, I must acknowledge that some of the words I will speak today might be heavy.
I recognise that many of you carry significant pain, and it is with this awareness that I ask for your patience and understanding as we explore these difficult subjects. Please, know that my intention is not to add to that pain, but to bring light, healing, and perhaps a sense of solidarity, as we move forward together. As you are all aware, my presence in Germany these few days has been controversial for many. Universities, the beacon of free speech!! the cradle of free debate, where people can also disagree, right? have cancelled events where I was supposed to give talks or lectures without any warning, let alone an apology. That's rude. The organisers in many cases have had to switch venues at the last minute, facing threats, condemnation and harassment on the street and online —hopefully not on site— as if I were someone advocating for hate or someone wanted by the International Criminal Court for war crimes and crimes against humanity. Instead, I'm just a legal expert appointed by the United Nations to document and report on the violations committed by Israel —this is what the resolution creating my mandate says, even if I also document the violations committed by Hamas and the Palestinian Authority.
I'm the eighth special rapporteur to do this after illustrious jurists such as John Dugard, Richard Folk, and Michael Link, and the first woman to serve in this position after 33 years.
It is in this capacity... This is where you applaud. [Audience laughs and applauds.] …I really want to chill a little bit, because it's heavy.
It is in this capacity that I came to Berlin. I arrived here —this is something I'm saying just to remind everyone that I came as a special rapporteur, still representing the United Nations, if there is an inch of respect for this institution that is left in this country—. I arrived here after traveling across Northern Europe and being generally welcomed, even where pro-Israel groups succeeded to have some cave in to their pressure and mafia-style techniques.
And I'm shocked to see how absurd the world that we live in has become, where impartiality to the facts and the requirements of international law generate more controversy than the killing, maiming, torturing, raping, starving, burning alive, and entire people as such, for 16 months and counting, and yet, this is the world we live in.
But so, before getting into the debate, what is impartiality and what does it mean? What is it not? Because this is something that I would like you to carry with you after this wonderful afternoon together.
Impartiality for human rights defenders, investigators and monitors, like myself, entails an obligation to investigate and establish the facts objectively, studying everything that is brought to our knowledge against applicable international law.
Once the assessment is done, my job is not to be equidistant from the parties, whatever it is, but to insist on measures to restore legality, to undo injustice and prevent further abuses.
In the case of Palestine, it is overwhelmingly documented that Israel commits intentionally, and as a matter of state policy, the gravest human rights offenses, as part of its long-standing plan to maintain control over what Israeli human rights organisation B'Tselem has called, quote: 'A regime of Jewish supremacy from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea.' [Crowd laughs] Full stop, end of quote.

Impartiality cannot be used as a pompous name for indifference and an elegant name for ignorance.
Impartiality is not about maintaining the pretence of both sides in the face of international atrocities, of maintaining, as I was saying, an equidistant position between conflicting parties, even when their positions are structurally and historically unequal. When one side occupies, depredates, and oppresses, and the other is being occupied, depredated, and dispossessed, this is a recipe for disaster and violence.
Impartiality is not neutrality, neutrality meaning maintaining an equidistant position between conflicting parties, even when their positions might not be equal and usually to deliver life-saving aid.
It's not my mandate, and not even that of universities and not even that of your politicians. Our job is not to stay neutral; our job is to stay truthful to international law. This is what all of us have in common.
And I stand firmly on universal human rights of respect for life and human dignity. And whenever it is the case that a state is being allowed with impunity to violate these rights, I must speak up, firmly, on the side of the oppressed.
If those who found my presence tonight controversial could understand this basic principle, the difference between ‘impartiality’ and ‘neutrality’, perhaps there would be far less controversy in the first place, and of course, there should be understanding and condemnation for what has happened to Israeli civilians during the brutal attack that Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups carried out on October 7, 2023, as there should be understanding and condemnation for the massacres, violence, and oppression that the Palestinians have experienced since the Nakba, and before the Nakba, resistance and opposition to which has certainly not spared the Israelis.
But here we are in an era where speaking out on human rights has become a hateful act or even a crime, where truth is a lie and lies the truth that is used to justify this... I mean, I don't see anyone, but I was prepared to see more police.

Orwell's famous proclamation that: 'War is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength' and that quote has never been more true than in the discourse surrounding Israel and Palestine.
This brings me to the elephant in the room, the genocide that Israel has been allowed to commit after 56 years of unlawful occupation of Palestine and 77 years since the mass ethnic cleansing of the Nakba began.
An event that was in ways irrefamiliar in the present day, carried out amid massacres and destructions that have been recounted by its victims, Nakba survivors, but also recorded in the testimonies of its perpetrators in some instances, or documented in Israeli archives, and brought to light by diligent and honest Israeli historians —an architect— who were able to access those archives for a brief period of time some 30 years ago.
For even the most sophisticated and experienced practitioners of doublespeak, this truth is no longer possible to deny.
I just want to point to one thing and then, we move into the discussion regarding, I mean, the topic of today, genocide.
In July 2024, the International Court of Justice has recognised, beyond any reasonable doubt, that the occupation that Israel maintained in Gaza, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem is unlawful and must be relinquished totally and unconditionally.
The troops, the military barracks, the military presence, but also the civilian presence, all the settlements must be dismantled. Which doesn't mean that there will be an uprooting of all Jewish people living in the occupied Palestinian territory, but the land is to be returned to their owners. and perhaps the Jewish Israelis who are there may want to rent, instead of stealing, and living as Palestinians if there is a Palestinian state. [Crowd cheers]
And this is not even new. This is not even new. Everyone knew that the occupation was unlawful and not just for violations of international law here and there, because Israel kidnapped children and adults, including in the middle of the night, and put them in jail for days, weeks, months, and years until they confessed crimes that they had not committed. And not just because of torturing, demolishing homes, killing people arbitrarily, no, not because of that. The occupation is unlawful because, by its very presence, it prevents the Palestinians from enjoying the right of self-determination, the right to exist as a people, free to determine themselves as a people, which is still being contested, and it shouldn't be confused with a two-state solution.
Because this is the political consensus that has formed, so that the Palestinians have the right, exclusive rights to a state, independent state in the land that remains. But nonetheless, nonetheless, any other rights lose meanings and becomes an exercise of intellectual rhetoric without the right of self-determination.
So, in the face of this groundbreaking advisory opinion which has confirmed what everyone knew, it is the obligation not only of the German government, but every German person, including those having businesses, living in the settlements, working as soldiers in the Israeli Occupation Forces [IOF], not to do that anymore. Otherwise, they might face consequences.
And this is where we are today. Instead of working on this and seeing how to abide by this incredibly important advisory opinion, the government of this country continues to repress the critical voices that ask for accountability. [Applause]

[Wieland] Thank you very much for those preliminary remarks. No doubt we'll get back to some of those points again later. But what I wanted to ask you about, and… —well, this is the title of this part of the program: International Law in the Face of the Gaza Genocide—. And something that's often been spoken about over the last 16 months by yourself, and by many actors of all sorts, legal experts, civil society figures, activists, is that the very concept of international law has been under attack, because the genocide has been allowed to take place and measures that have been set in motion to stop it, have also not achieved that result. The world has let it happen, and many feel that international law has become impotent and… even though, in the decades since the United Nations were founded, and we had the establishment of the Geneva Convention, and the various pillars of international law were built up, of course, this is not the first time that a power allied with the so-called West has chosen not to abide by international law, and recent decades have seen many other cases, the invasion of Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, etc. So, how is the situation different now? What additional or greater damage has been done to international law and how does one continue to work with the standard of international law from now on?

[Francesca] First of all, let me clarify a couple of things and then, we will have the opportunity to talk about what constitutes genocide, because there seems to be much confusion in this country. So, should I say that now or can we get back to this later?

[Wieland] I think we can get back to it later.

[Francesca] Perfect, as long as you say that. And so, international law is a set of norms that member states have agreed upon, either through treaties or that they have developed as customs, as practice, believed to be compliant with general principles of law and humanity.
So, what constitutes international law is a normative framework intended to prevent violations and to correct violations. So, it's a normative and remedial, it has a normative and remedial function.
Aside of it, but complementary, is the system, that is there, to regulate the conduct of states and so, it's the multilateral order which is to be regulated by international norms.
So, while international law has been selectively applied, more or less systemically violated, today we see the depth of it, and we see the system behind it, I believe. In the sense that it's clear that the system has never, I mean, the multilateral order, the General Assembly, which is now more democratic than it was 77 years ago, for example.
When the United Nations system was created, it was made of about 50, 53 states, and now it's made of 193 states.
So clearly, it has changed. but the centre of power, it has not changed.
The system that was birthed as dominated by the colonial world, like Europe and European offsprings, like Australia, New Zealand, the United States and Canada, and of course, the first colonies, the first settler colonial realities, where so many genocides had been committed, Latin America, Central and Latin America, sorry, Latin America. I mean, these were also part of the system, but the centre of power was with the West, what we would call today improperly: West, and remains there.
So, I think that the phase we live in has exposed how… unequal the system is, how it cannot serve as is the interest of everyone in the face of a fundamentally now a unipolar order, where the United States dictates pretty much what is to be done and what's not, regardless, or even blatantly against, international law.
So, we are at a critical point, and the system is breaking.
When we international human rights experts have said for years, especially this mandate, it's 20 years that whomever has held this mandate has said over and over, the system is breaking. The Occupied Palestinian Territory is a powder keg, and it will explode and will take all the system with it, because it's a settler colonial frontier, more violent than any other. It's not the only form of colonial domination, but it's an active settler colony where people are really struggling for what settler colonialism is in its more brutal form. One people taking control of land, of resources, pushing other people out!
Again, and it's the only one actively, actively militarily, politically, financially supported and enabled by Western countries.
So, this is the breaking point, because there are many people who identify themselves with injustice that the Palestinians have suffered. There are many people who, for the first time, realise, and there is a global awareness about this, and dissatisfaction.
We see in the fragility and how lonely the Palestinians are, in the face of all these powers, our own fragility, and this is why so many stand in solidarity with the Palestinians. On top of the fact that it's a simple empathy, the fact that what happens to other human beings touches us and doesn't… I mean, the fact of seeing bodies of children hanging from the wall or turned into smithereens whatever they are, incinerated in refugee camps or in tents, plastic tents, if not buried under the rubble. I mean, this is something that doesn't make many people sleep at night, and it's normal, it's a good sign, it's healthy, and we shouldn't become idle in the face of this pain. Yeah, so we need to decide.
Now it's the time, we are at the turning point and we need to decide.
The system, of course, will become uglier and more resistant and more fierceful, but because the system is being challenged. The system of which Israel's abuses are a symptom, and not… yeah, are a symptom.
So, this should be a wakeup call for all of us, people of conscience. I often say, a bit rhetorically, but I somewhat believe it, I mean, in the sense it's not the case that the UN Charter is not just about states' obligations, but it says: 'We the people'. Because ultimately, it's we the people who are the guardians of these values, these norms.
Human rights… I mean, I know that people complain a lot about international law: 'It serves no purpose.' Yeah, because you are not the ones who had to struggle to abolish slavery. You're not the ones who had to struggle to have women's rights recognised, even if I admit we still have a lot of work to do. But so, there have been so many struggles that have led to the development of human rights the way they are. So, while we tend to see human rights as a tool of emancipation, and that it's failing, I want to also remind you, if you take a step back and look at the arc of history that these human rights are first and foremost the result of someone else's struggle for emancipation.
And we have grown just too lazy in this part of the world, because you see the Palestinians, like many other people, they don't even have the time to think: shall I fight or not? “Fight” peacefully. I mean, because many people have no choice. If you have the choice, it means that you have privilege, that you have chosen not to use. And it's your choice, but trust me, everything is in line right now. It's coming… the way repression works in this country is scary, should —really!—… should scare the hell out of people. And the fact that you don't...

Thank you. [Inaudible] [Audience claps]

No, and the fact that people don't register how serious it is, the fact that media continue to be as pathetic as they are… Again, it's something that, I don't know, I'll try to help by continuing to tell what I've seen here. But again, I've been in many countries, including countries that are lectured by Germany about freedom of - freedom of oppression - [Audience laughs] ... Sorry!

[Wieland]  Appropriate choice of word.

[Francesca] No, freedom of expression and [Audience laughs]… freedom of... It was not even the worst that came out, the worst lapses that came out of my mouth today. However, freedom of expression and freedom of assembly, I mean, countries that have been lectured by Germany about how important these rights are, and who are really struggling to guarantee these rights. I mean, don't want to guarantee these rights to citizens, don't even make a mystery out of it. And still, I've experienced much less intimidation and fear than here.
So, I, again, I'm with you and yeah, let's brace for what happens next. [Applause]

(...)