Mohammed Moussa, The Face Before You: To Write Poetry on Genocide.

Buried.

With the remains

of my first child

in my arms,

I journey barefoot, fragile

as a newborn,

breathing in the tears

of premature farewells.

 

He is light as a feather,

but impossibly heavy.

Upon arrival I’m greeted by my family,

friends, acquaintances, strangers,

they all feel closer

and further away from me than ever.

 

Our grief finds little solace

in embraces,

our damaged souls

gnaw at our hearts

and bodies

they stain out evenings.

 

Our grief settles into our hearts,

already heavy as stone, overflowing

with the pain of untimely death.

 

The sky once a refuge,

is now filled

with the faces of slain infants;

the sea, once a source of solace,

now gnashes its half-formed teeth.

 

The land, our haven,

is crowded with graves,

into which we pour

the collective grief of a city stripped

of its children.

 

the world watches,

but chooses to leave our grief

unmarked, anonymous, worthless.

 

Notes.

When can we call a natural disaster, unnatural?

Armenian Earthquake 1988, over 25 000 died.

Palo Alto, California 1989, 63 dead.

When can we call war genocide?

About 1,200 people were killed when Hamas attacked Israel on 7^th October 2023. More than 250 people were taken hostage. Since then, according to Gaza's Hamas-run health ministry, more than 70,000 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli military action. Almost half, women and children. That number continues to grow.

 

When does war become genocide—with perks of office?

 

•             “A form of government by individuals who primarily seek personal gain at the expense of those they govern.” Britannica

•             “Government by those who seek chiefly status and personal gain at the expense of the governed.” Merriam Webster

•             Literally: rule by thieves (from Greek kleptein = to steal, kratos = rule).

• Systemic corruption
• Leaders divert public resources for private benefit
• Weak rule of law
• Lack of transparency
• Cronyism and patronage networks
• Often associated with authoritarian regimes

The allegations against Donald Trump often blend personal misconduct with the use of political power. Critics argue that his actions reflect a "private-sector kleptocracy," where the lines between the leader's business interests and the nation's interests are blurred.

• E. Jean Carroll & Sexual Misconduct:
  • The Verdict: In May 2023, a federal jury found Trump liable for the sexual abuse (though not rape, specifically defined under NY law at the time) and defamation of writer E. Jean Carroll in the 1990s.
  • The Comparison: In traditional kleptocracies, sexual violence is often used by rulers (such as Saddam Hussein's family or Muammar Gaddafi) as a tool of absolute power and intimidation without any legal recourse. In the US context, the fact that a former president was held civilly liable demonstrates a remaining, albeit contested, judicial check that traditional kleptocracies lack.
• Monetizing the Office: * Critics point to the hundreds of millions in foreign government spending at Trump-branded properties during his first term and his recent promotion of a private crypto-platform, World Liberty Financial, while in office. This mirrors the "rent-seeking" behavior of kleptocrats who ensure that to do business with the state, one must first do business with the leader.
• Legal Immunity: * His efforts to dismiss federal and state cases (including the January 6th and Classified Documents cases) are seen by some as a move toward the kleptocratic "protection" of the leader, where the law exists to serve the ruler rather than rule over them.

2. Benjamin Netanyahu: Survival and "The System"

Netanyahu’s case is often cited as a "slow-motion" kleptocratic shift, where the leader attempts to dismantle the institutions that are trying to prosecute him.

• The Corruption Trial: He is currently on trial for Case 1000 (illegal gifts), Case 2000 (media manipulation), and Case 4000 (bribery). These charges suggest a system of "mutual benefit" between the leader and wealthy moguls.
• The Judicial Overhaul: Critics argue that Netanyahu’s push to weaken the Israeli Supreme Court is a classic kleptocratic manoeuver: removing the only body capable of holding the executive accountable.
• Comparison to Tradition: Like the Marcos family in the Philippines, Netanyahu’s supporters often frame these legal battles as "persecution" by an elite deep state, a common rhetorical tactic used by kleptocratic leaders to maintain populist support while bypassing legal hurdles.

3. Comparison Summary: Traditional vs. Modern

Feature	Traditional Kleptocracy (e.g., Mobutu, Abacha)	Modern Alleged Kleptocracy (e.g., Trump, Netanyahu)
Primary Goal	Direct enrichment (stealing from the treasury).	Maintaining power, legal immunity, and indirect profit.
View of Law	The leader is the law; courts don't exist.	The leader fights the law; attempts to delegitimize courts.
Method of Theft	Siphoning billions in oil/mineral revenue.	"Pay-to-play" access, favourable regulations, and patronage.
Misconduct	Openly uses violence/sexual assault as a perk of power.	Allegations of misconduct are litigated in civil/criminal courts.

The "Kleptocratic Risk": While neither the US nor Israel fits the definition of a failed-state kleptocracy, political scientists argue they are experiencing "Institutional Decay." This happens when the leader uses the appearance of legality to achieve the same results as traditional thieves: protecting their wealth, avoiding jail, and ensuring that the state's resources prioritize the leader's survival over the public good.

competition vs. centralization.

• Competitive kleptocracies:
  Corruption is the arena of politics as in oligarchical spheres of influence pre-Putin in Russia.
• Putin‑style oligarchic kleptocracy:
  Corruption is controlled by politics and one leader and his followers paying tribute. Making Putin (and Xi) the most powerful and wealthiest?

One is chaotic and pluralistic; the other is disciplined and authoritarian

The dividing line in American politics. Us versus Them.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/videos/ceqzj9932wjo

A US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent shot and killed 37-year-old Renee Nicole Good in the city of Minneapolis, Minnesota on Wednesday.

Who is the terrorist here?

A 2025 political‑science study finds that U.S. newspapers tend to limit coverage of human‑rights violators when doing so aligns with U.S. government interests 

United States and Israel, the legal architecture is being reshaped to provide what critics call a "Shield of Office." By rewriting laws or interpreting constitutions in favour of the executive, these followers are creating a legal environment where the line between "policy" and "self-interest" becomes unenforceable.

________________________________________

 Israel: The Dismantling of "Breach of Trust"

In Israel, the charge of "Fraud and Breach of Trust" is the primary tool used to prosecute public officials who use their position for personal gain without necessarily taking a direct bribe.

•             The Current Law: It covers "conflict of interest" scenarios where an official acts to benefit themselves or their associates, even if no money changes hands (e.g., Netanyahu’s Case 2000 and 4000).     The Strategic Rewrite: Netanyahu’s coalition has proposed legislation to narrow the definition of breach of trust or abolish it entirely for elected officials.

The Argument: They claim the law is "vague" and allows the "liberal judiciary" to criminalize politics.

The Kleptocratic Effect: If abolished, a leader could legally grant massive government contracts to their own business partners or family members, provided they don't receive a direct "envelope of cash." This turns public resources into a private patronage network.

________________________________________

 United States: The Doctrine of Absolute Immunity

In the U.S., the shift has come through the judiciary rather than the legislature, specifically through the landmark 2024 Supreme Court ruling in Trump v. United States.

The Ruling: The Court ruled that a President has absolute immunity for "official acts" and presumptive immunity for others. Crucially, it ruled that a leader’s motives cannot be questioned by a court when they are performing an official duty.

The Kleptocratic Effect: Official Act Shield: When President accepts a private payment (a bribe such as a free aircraft) in exchange for an official act (like a pardon or a massive tax break for a donor), the act itself is now shielded.

Evidence Suppression: The ruling prohibits using "official acts" as evidence even to prove the motive behind a non-official crime.

The Result: It creates a "legal black hole." A leader can effectively sell the powers of the state, but because the exercise of that power is "official," they cannot be prosecuted for the underlying corruption. Trump loves to sue--you.