TEL AVIV, June 21 (RIA Novosti) - Israel has assisted in the evacuation of at least 100 Palestinian refugees from violence-torn Gaza to Egypt via Israeli territory, an army spokesperson told RIA Novosti Thursday.
Hundreds of Palestinians, mostly Fatah loyalists desperate to flee from the Hamas-controlled enclave, have already spent several nights in a tunnel at the Erez checkpoint on the northern end of the Gaza Strip, blocked by Israeli troops.
"The decision [to allow the evacuation] was made by the [Israeli] political leadership in coordination with Egyptian authorities," the spokesperson said.
The refugees traveled south through Gaza to the Kerem-Shalom crossing point, where they were let into Israel, and then transported to Egypt.
Meanwhile, Israeli radio station Galei Tzahal said Israel's Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas would meet Sunday at the Egyptian resort of Sharm el-Sheikh.
The sides are set to discuss the situation in the Palestinian territories following the violent takeover by radical Islamist group Hamas of Gaza last week, and the establishment of an emergency government by Abbas in the West Bank city of Ramallah.
Last week's armed clashes between Hamas and pro-presidential Fatah left at least 100 people dead. President Abbas, who now controls only the West Bank, dismissed the Hamas-led government following the coup, and his new emergency cabinet led by Prime Minister Salam Fayyad has received the backing of most Western nations, and the more moderate Arab states.
Showing posts with label Israel. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Israel. Show all posts
Thursday, June 21, 2007
Saturday, December 16, 2006
Who's Arming Israel?
Frida Berrigan and William D. Hartung
July 26, 2006
Editor: John Feffer, IRC
Foreign Policy In Focus
Much has been made in the U.S. media of the Syrian- and Iranian-origin weaponry used by Hezbollah in the escalating violence in Israel and Lebanon. There has been no parallel discussion of the origin of Israel's weaponry, the vast bulk of which is from the United States.
The United States is the primary source of Israel's far superior arsenal. For more than 30 years, Israel had been the largest recipient of U.S. foreign assistance and since 1985 Jerusalem has received about $3 billion in military and economic aid each year from Washington. U.S. aid accounts for more than 20% of Israel's total defense budget.
Over the past decade, the United States has transferred more than $17 billion in military aid to this country of just under 7 million people.
Israel is one of the United States' largest arms importers. Between 1996 and 2005 (the last year for which full data is available), Israel took delivery of $10.19 billion in U.S. weaponry and military equipment, including more than $8.58 billion through the Foreign Military Sales program, and another $1.61 billion in Direct Commercial Sales
During the Bush administration, from 2001 to 2005, Israel received $10.5 billion in Foreign Military Financing—the Pentagon's biggest military aid program—and $6.3 billion in U.S. arms deliveries. The aid figure is larger than the arms transfer figure because it includes financing for major arms agreements for which the equipment has yet to be fully delivered. The most prominent of these deals is a $4.5 billion sale of 102 Lockheed Martin F-16s to Israel.
Given the billions of dollars of aid it provides to Israel every year and the central role of U.S.-supplied weaponry in the Israeli arsenal, the United States has considerable leverage that it could use to promote a cease fire in the current conflict between Israel and Hezbollah before more Israeli and Lebanese civilians are killed and displaced. President Bush needs to go beyond vague calls for “restraint” to demands for a cease-fire between Israel and Hezbollah, bringing in other key actors in the region, including Iran and Syria.
Click here for the full World Policy Institute report.
July 26, 2006
Editor: John Feffer, IRC
Foreign Policy In Focus
Much has been made in the U.S. media of the Syrian- and Iranian-origin weaponry used by Hezbollah in the escalating violence in Israel and Lebanon. There has been no parallel discussion of the origin of Israel's weaponry, the vast bulk of which is from the United States.
The United States is the primary source of Israel's far superior arsenal. For more than 30 years, Israel had been the largest recipient of U.S. foreign assistance and since 1985 Jerusalem has received about $3 billion in military and economic aid each year from Washington. U.S. aid accounts for more than 20% of Israel's total defense budget.
Over the past decade, the United States has transferred more than $17 billion in military aid to this country of just under 7 million people.
Israel is one of the United States' largest arms importers. Between 1996 and 2005 (the last year for which full data is available), Israel took delivery of $10.19 billion in U.S. weaponry and military equipment, including more than $8.58 billion through the Foreign Military Sales program, and another $1.61 billion in Direct Commercial Sales
During the Bush administration, from 2001 to 2005, Israel received $10.5 billion in Foreign Military Financing—the Pentagon's biggest military aid program—and $6.3 billion in U.S. arms deliveries. The aid figure is larger than the arms transfer figure because it includes financing for major arms agreements for which the equipment has yet to be fully delivered. The most prominent of these deals is a $4.5 billion sale of 102 Lockheed Martin F-16s to Israel.
Given the billions of dollars of aid it provides to Israel every year and the central role of U.S.-supplied weaponry in the Israeli arsenal, the United States has considerable leverage that it could use to promote a cease fire in the current conflict between Israel and Hezbollah before more Israeli and Lebanese civilians are killed and displaced. President Bush needs to go beyond vague calls for “restraint” to demands for a cease-fire between Israel and Hezbollah, bringing in other key actors in the region, including Iran and Syria.
Click here for the full World Policy Institute report.
Arms Sales To Israel Must Stop
Amnesty International today published an open letter from Irene Khan, Amnesty's Secretary General, to EU Heads of State and governments asking them to immediately halt sales or transfers of arms to all parties in the Israel/Palestine conflict. Israel, naturally, reacted negatively to the proposal. Mark Regev, spokesman for Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said that an arms embargo "would leave every man woman and child in this country to face a multitude of hostile challenges that there are here. It ignores the real threats faced by the Jewish state and gives comfort to those who say Israel should be wiped off the map."
"Israel is a democracy where there is rule of law which puts the issue of human rights at the centre of civic life," Regev added. The reality is that Israel systematically and deliberately abuses the human rights of its perceived enemies. As Irene Khan has put it, "Most civilian deaths have been the result of deliberate and reckless shooting and artillery shelling or air strikes by Israeli forces carried out in densely populated areas in the Gaza Strip". A Human Rights Watch report on the Lebanon war earlier this year, entitled 'Fatal Strikes: Israel's Indiscriminate Attacks Against Against Civilians In Lebanon', describes how Israeli forces,
'consistently launched artillery and air attacks with limited or dubious military gain but excessive civilian cost. In dozens of attacks, Israeli forces struck an area with no apparent military target. In some cases, the timing and intensity of the attack, the absence of a military target, as well as return strikes on rescuers, suggest that Israeli forces deliberately targeted civilians.'
The report concludes that 'a systematic failure by the IDF to distinguish between combatants and civilians' was the primary cause of the massive civilian suffering caused by the war.
An Amnesty International investigation into the same war, entitled 'Deliberate Destruction or "Collateral Damage"? Israeli attacks on civilian infrastructure' reached similar conclusions:
'The evidence strongly suggests that the extensive destruction of public works, power systems, civilian homes and industry was deliberate and an integral part of the military strategy, rather than "collateral damage" - incidental damage to civilians or civilian property resulting from targeting military objectives.'
That report also noted that under international law, it is 'forbidden to use starvation as a method of warfare, or to attack, destroy, remove or render useless objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population.' Israel has been using starvation as a method of controlling the Palestinian population ever since they elected the wrong people to power in January. After Hamas was elected to government, the Israeli government convened a meeting to decide how it should respond. Present were Dov Weisglass (advisor to the Prime Minister), the chief of staff of the IDF, the head of Shin Bet, a host of senior generals and officials and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livny. All concluded that an economic siege on the Palestinians was the way forward. Or, as Dov Weisglass expressed it, "It's like an appointment with a dietician. The Palestinians will get a lot thinner, but won't die".
Since January 2006, the Palestinian people have been subject to economic sanctions - the first time, as UN Special Rapporteur for human rights in the Occupied Territories John Dugard has noted, that an occupied people has been so treated. Since Hamas' electoral victory, Israel has withheld some $500 million in tax revenues it collects on behalf of the PA. The U.S. and the EU have also restricted aid to the Palestinians in a shocking display of contempt for democracy and human rights. Meanwhile Israel has continued its policy of cutting the West Bank into dozens of mini-cantons by increasing the number of military roadblocks by 40% in a year. David Shearer, head of the UN's Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), described the effect these roadblocks have on the residents of the West Bank:
"Since [the height of the intifada] it's become much more systematic, much more sophisticated in terms of monitoring Palestinian movement and closing Palestinian movement...The West Bank, for example, is effectively being chopped up into three big areas... and there are pockets within those areas where people also can't move."
John Dugard, who was also a prominent anti-apartheid lawyer, writes that Israel system of roadblocks resembles, but in severity goes well beyond, apartheid South Africa's "pass system" and that, in general, ' Many aspects of Israel's occupation surpass those of the apartheid regime. Israel's large-scale destruction of Palestinian homes, leveling of agricultural lands, military incursions and targeted assassinations of Palestinians far exceed any similar practices in apartheid South Africa.'
Meanwhile, the Palestinians living in the Gaza Strip have suffered a brutal and relentless siege since June 25, when an Israeli soldier was captured by Palestinian militants. The Israeli government used the capture as an excuse to completely seal the Strip off from the outside world, arbitrarily closing borders vital to Palestinian trade for extended periods of time. The Rafah crossing between Gaza and Egypt - ostensibly under EU control but in reality subject to Israel's wishes - has been closed more than it has been open. In November, the crossing was open for just 36 hours spread out over four days. In July, thousands of Palestinians were left stranded in the Sinai desert after Israel refused to open the border crossing to allow them to return to their homes in the Gaza Strip. Several people were reported to have died from heat exhaustion. The closure of the Rafah crossing truly is devastating to the Palestinians in Gaza. The Palestine Hospital in Cairo is an essential part of Gaza's health infrastructure, and many Palestinians who need to travel there for treatment are either not allowed to leave the Strip or are prevented from returning once they do.
Under the Agreement on Movement and Access (AMA) brokered by the United States a year ago, Israel agreed to leave the Rafah crossing open continuously regardless of threats to security unrelated to the crossing itself. Despite this, after the capture of Cpl. Shalit on June 25 Israel closed the border indefinitely. A recent UN report accuses Israel of violating every single one of its border crossing agreements, explaining that the Rafah crossing has been open for only 21 days since June 24. At the Karni crossing, which has been open only intermittently, an average of 12 lorries are allowed through each day, despite Israel's promise to raise that number to 400 by the end of this year. According to the report,
"The ability of Palestinian residents of the Gaza Strip to access either the West Bank or the outside world remains extremely limited and the flow of commercial trade is negligible"
and, as a result, unemployment in the Strip has risen from 33.1% to 41.8% this year. A military document leaked to Ha'aretz confirmed that the closure of the Rafah crossing is intended to "apply pressure" to the Palestinian people - as journalist Amira Hass puts it, 'The experiment was a success: The Palestinians are killing each other.'
So, in summary, Regev is talking crap. Israel has no respect for Palestinian human rights, and Amnesty International is right to call for a ban on arms sales and transfers to it.
The request comes at a time when the Iraq Study Group report calls on the U.S. and the UK to settle the Israel/Palestine conflict to stabilise the wider region, specifically Iraq. The U.S. is the primary source of Israel's superior arsenal, and U.S. aid counts for 20% of Israel's defence budget. During the Bush administration, from 2001-2005, Israel received $10.5 billion in U.S. military aid and $6.3 billion in U.S. arms deliveries. This military dependency gives the U.S. considerable leverage over Israel, leverage that could be used to force a peace settlement. Sadly, the U.S. has chosen to be a force for violence rather than peace in the region. For example, in the summer the U.S. delivered shipments of 'bunker-busting' bombs to Israel before the Lebanon war was even over. This arming of the aggressor was accompanied by the unanimous Senate adoption of a resolution praising Israel's military campaign, neglecting even to include the obligatory reminders to avoid targeting civilians. Sadly, both the Democrats and the Republicans are on record as supporting Israeli war crimes.
In Britain there is a similar story. Despite Tony Blair's announcement in September that he will devote the last six months of his premiership to resolving the Israel/Palestine conflict, he is unlikely to abide by Amnesty's call to stop providing Israel with the tools it uses to oppress and to kill. The trouble, as I wrote at the time, is that,
'when Tony Blair talks about being "fair", "just", what he really means is conspiring with the US to block a resolution calling for an "immediate" ceasefire early on in the Lebanon conflict. When Blair talks about imparting "values" with an "even hand", what he really means is allowing US planes carrying bombs and missiles to Israel to re-fuel at British airports. That's right; Blair helped arm the aggressor before the war was even over, and he now has the nerve to talk about and bringing "peace" to the Middle East with an "even hand".'
In 2005 British arms sales to Israel doubled to £22.5 million. It is official British government policy that "no licence will be granted for arms exports if there is a clearly identifiable risk that the weapons could be used aggressively against another country or to assert, by force, a territorial claim". Liberal Democrat leader Menzies Campbell was therefore right to call for an immediate cessation of arms sales to Israel in the light of 'disproportionate military action by Israel in Lebanon and Gaza'. After all, there can be no doubt that Israel uses combat helicopters and air-to-surface missiles - components for which are supplied by the UK - to commit war crimes against the Palestinians (and, this year, against the Lebanese). In 2002, Blair's government cleared the way to allow BAE Systems to sell components for F-16 jets supplied to Israel by the United States. Israel uses F-16s to carry out targeted assassinations - a policy declared by the UK Foreign Office to be "illegal under international law". For example, in July 2002 an Israeli F-16 dropped a one-tonne bomb on a crowded Gaza City apartment block with the official aim of assassinating the militant Salah Shehada. As well as Shehada, seven adults and nine children were killed in the attack, and 70 people were injured. There is ample proof that Israel cannot be trusted to use arms lawfully, so why does Britain continue to sell weapons to Israel, in violation of its own arms trade policies? For the answer, we can turn to ex-Foreign Secretary Jack Straw who, in 2002, justified his government's decision to license the export of components used in F-16 jets destined for Israel thus:
"Any interruption to the supply of these components would have serious implications for the UK's defence relations with the United States."
Or, in other words, 'the commercial relationship between BAE Systems and US companies such as Lockheed Martin was judged more important than the lives of Palestinians.' The British government, like its American counterpart, is almost completely subservient to the military-industrial complex. So, despite Mr. Blair's professions of good intent towards the Palestinians, his unblemished record of supporting the occupation and facilitating Israeli war crimes is not going to be broken now. It's a pity, because the idea of giving aid instead of weapons and of facilitating diplomacy and peace as opposed to arms races and war is definitely one whose time has come.
"Israel is a democracy where there is rule of law which puts the issue of human rights at the centre of civic life," Regev added. The reality is that Israel systematically and deliberately abuses the human rights of its perceived enemies. As Irene Khan has put it, "Most civilian deaths have been the result of deliberate and reckless shooting and artillery shelling or air strikes by Israeli forces carried out in densely populated areas in the Gaza Strip". A Human Rights Watch report on the Lebanon war earlier this year, entitled 'Fatal Strikes: Israel's Indiscriminate Attacks Against Against Civilians In Lebanon', describes how Israeli forces,
'consistently launched artillery and air attacks with limited or dubious military gain but excessive civilian cost. In dozens of attacks, Israeli forces struck an area with no apparent military target. In some cases, the timing and intensity of the attack, the absence of a military target, as well as return strikes on rescuers, suggest that Israeli forces deliberately targeted civilians.'
The report concludes that 'a systematic failure by the IDF to distinguish between combatants and civilians' was the primary cause of the massive civilian suffering caused by the war.
An Amnesty International investigation into the same war, entitled 'Deliberate Destruction or "Collateral Damage"? Israeli attacks on civilian infrastructure' reached similar conclusions:
'The evidence strongly suggests that the extensive destruction of public works, power systems, civilian homes and industry was deliberate and an integral part of the military strategy, rather than "collateral damage" - incidental damage to civilians or civilian property resulting from targeting military objectives.'
That report also noted that under international law, it is 'forbidden to use starvation as a method of warfare, or to attack, destroy, remove or render useless objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population.' Israel has been using starvation as a method of controlling the Palestinian population ever since they elected the wrong people to power in January. After Hamas was elected to government, the Israeli government convened a meeting to decide how it should respond. Present were Dov Weisglass (advisor to the Prime Minister), the chief of staff of the IDF, the head of Shin Bet, a host of senior generals and officials and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livny. All concluded that an economic siege on the Palestinians was the way forward. Or, as Dov Weisglass expressed it, "It's like an appointment with a dietician. The Palestinians will get a lot thinner, but won't die".
Since January 2006, the Palestinian people have been subject to economic sanctions - the first time, as UN Special Rapporteur for human rights in the Occupied Territories John Dugard has noted, that an occupied people has been so treated. Since Hamas' electoral victory, Israel has withheld some $500 million in tax revenues it collects on behalf of the PA. The U.S. and the EU have also restricted aid to the Palestinians in a shocking display of contempt for democracy and human rights. Meanwhile Israel has continued its policy of cutting the West Bank into dozens of mini-cantons by increasing the number of military roadblocks by 40% in a year. David Shearer, head of the UN's Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), described the effect these roadblocks have on the residents of the West Bank:
"Since [the height of the intifada] it's become much more systematic, much more sophisticated in terms of monitoring Palestinian movement and closing Palestinian movement...The West Bank, for example, is effectively being chopped up into three big areas... and there are pockets within those areas where people also can't move."
John Dugard, who was also a prominent anti-apartheid lawyer, writes that Israel system of roadblocks resembles, but in severity goes well beyond, apartheid South Africa's "pass system" and that, in general, ' Many aspects of Israel's occupation surpass those of the apartheid regime. Israel's large-scale destruction of Palestinian homes, leveling of agricultural lands, military incursions and targeted assassinations of Palestinians far exceed any similar practices in apartheid South Africa.'
Meanwhile, the Palestinians living in the Gaza Strip have suffered a brutal and relentless siege since June 25, when an Israeli soldier was captured by Palestinian militants. The Israeli government used the capture as an excuse to completely seal the Strip off from the outside world, arbitrarily closing borders vital to Palestinian trade for extended periods of time. The Rafah crossing between Gaza and Egypt - ostensibly under EU control but in reality subject to Israel's wishes - has been closed more than it has been open. In November, the crossing was open for just 36 hours spread out over four days. In July, thousands of Palestinians were left stranded in the Sinai desert after Israel refused to open the border crossing to allow them to return to their homes in the Gaza Strip. Several people were reported to have died from heat exhaustion. The closure of the Rafah crossing truly is devastating to the Palestinians in Gaza. The Palestine Hospital in Cairo is an essential part of Gaza's health infrastructure, and many Palestinians who need to travel there for treatment are either not allowed to leave the Strip or are prevented from returning once they do.
Under the Agreement on Movement and Access (AMA) brokered by the United States a year ago, Israel agreed to leave the Rafah crossing open continuously regardless of threats to security unrelated to the crossing itself. Despite this, after the capture of Cpl. Shalit on June 25 Israel closed the border indefinitely. A recent UN report accuses Israel of violating every single one of its border crossing agreements, explaining that the Rafah crossing has been open for only 21 days since June 24. At the Karni crossing, which has been open only intermittently, an average of 12 lorries are allowed through each day, despite Israel's promise to raise that number to 400 by the end of this year. According to the report,
"The ability of Palestinian residents of the Gaza Strip to access either the West Bank or the outside world remains extremely limited and the flow of commercial trade is negligible"
and, as a result, unemployment in the Strip has risen from 33.1% to 41.8% this year. A military document leaked to Ha'aretz confirmed that the closure of the Rafah crossing is intended to "apply pressure" to the Palestinian people - as journalist Amira Hass puts it, 'The experiment was a success: The Palestinians are killing each other.'
So, in summary, Regev is talking crap. Israel has no respect for Palestinian human rights, and Amnesty International is right to call for a ban on arms sales and transfers to it.
The request comes at a time when the Iraq Study Group report calls on the U.S. and the UK to settle the Israel/Palestine conflict to stabilise the wider region, specifically Iraq. The U.S. is the primary source of Israel's superior arsenal, and U.S. aid counts for 20% of Israel's defence budget. During the Bush administration, from 2001-2005, Israel received $10.5 billion in U.S. military aid and $6.3 billion in U.S. arms deliveries. This military dependency gives the U.S. considerable leverage over Israel, leverage that could be used to force a peace settlement. Sadly, the U.S. has chosen to be a force for violence rather than peace in the region. For example, in the summer the U.S. delivered shipments of 'bunker-busting' bombs to Israel before the Lebanon war was even over. This arming of the aggressor was accompanied by the unanimous Senate adoption of a resolution praising Israel's military campaign, neglecting even to include the obligatory reminders to avoid targeting civilians. Sadly, both the Democrats and the Republicans are on record as supporting Israeli war crimes.
In Britain there is a similar story. Despite Tony Blair's announcement in September that he will devote the last six months of his premiership to resolving the Israel/Palestine conflict, he is unlikely to abide by Amnesty's call to stop providing Israel with the tools it uses to oppress and to kill. The trouble, as I wrote at the time, is that,
'when Tony Blair talks about being "fair", "just", what he really means is conspiring with the US to block a resolution calling for an "immediate" ceasefire early on in the Lebanon conflict. When Blair talks about imparting "values" with an "even hand", what he really means is allowing US planes carrying bombs and missiles to Israel to re-fuel at British airports. That's right; Blair helped arm the aggressor before the war was even over, and he now has the nerve to talk about and bringing "peace" to the Middle East with an "even hand".'
In 2005 British arms sales to Israel doubled to £22.5 million. It is official British government policy that "no licence will be granted for arms exports if there is a clearly identifiable risk that the weapons could be used aggressively against another country or to assert, by force, a territorial claim". Liberal Democrat leader Menzies Campbell was therefore right to call for an immediate cessation of arms sales to Israel in the light of 'disproportionate military action by Israel in Lebanon and Gaza'. After all, there can be no doubt that Israel uses combat helicopters and air-to-surface missiles - components for which are supplied by the UK - to commit war crimes against the Palestinians (and, this year, against the Lebanese). In 2002, Blair's government cleared the way to allow BAE Systems to sell components for F-16 jets supplied to Israel by the United States. Israel uses F-16s to carry out targeted assassinations - a policy declared by the UK Foreign Office to be "illegal under international law". For example, in July 2002 an Israeli F-16 dropped a one-tonne bomb on a crowded Gaza City apartment block with the official aim of assassinating the militant Salah Shehada. As well as Shehada, seven adults and nine children were killed in the attack, and 70 people were injured. There is ample proof that Israel cannot be trusted to use arms lawfully, so why does Britain continue to sell weapons to Israel, in violation of its own arms trade policies? For the answer, we can turn to ex-Foreign Secretary Jack Straw who, in 2002, justified his government's decision to license the export of components used in F-16 jets destined for Israel thus:
"Any interruption to the supply of these components would have serious implications for the UK's defence relations with the United States."
Or, in other words, 'the commercial relationship between BAE Systems and US companies such as Lockheed Martin was judged more important than the lives of Palestinians.' The British government, like its American counterpart, is almost completely subservient to the military-industrial complex. So, despite Mr. Blair's professions of good intent towards the Palestinians, his unblemished record of supporting the occupation and facilitating Israeli war crimes is not going to be broken now. It's a pity, because the idea of giving aid instead of weapons and of facilitating diplomacy and peace as opposed to arms races and war is definitely one whose time has come.
Friday, November 24, 2006
Israel kills 2 Palestinians in Gaza: medics
By Nidal al-Mughrabi
GAZA (Reuters) - Israeli forces shot dead a 10-year-old Palestinian boy and a militant in Gaza on Friday, hospital officials said as the government vowed it would only end its assault when militants stopped attacking Israel.
The latest Israeli ground and air offensive, about a week old, is part of ongoing efforts to stop Gaza militants from firing rockets at Israel. Two Israeli soldiers were slightly wounded in the northern Gaza Strip when gunmen detonated an explosive device near troops, the army said.
"If the Palestinian terror factions, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, stop terror activities from the Gaza Strip, Israel would have no reason or incentive to operate in Gaza," said government spokeswoman, Miri Eisin.
Palestinian factions in Gaza late on Thursday had offered to stop firing rockets if Israel halted military action in Gaza and the occupied West Bank. Israel rejected the offer.
Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh told reporters it was up to Israel to respond positively.
"The issue should not be seen as if there is a Palestinian army with an arsenal of rockets ... The issue is that there is an unarmed Palestinian people who are subject to Israeli aggression," he said.
Palestinian hospital officials said the boy was shot dead east of the town of Beit Lahiya. Israel's army said it was not aware of the incident. Hamas said the other dead Palestinian was a militant and cameraman from the faction's armed wing who filmed Hamas fighters in action.
Israel has killed nearly 400 Palestinians in Gaza, about half of them civilians, since it began its offensive in June following the abduction of an Israeli soldier in a cross-border raid, hospital officials and residents say.
Three Israeli soldiers have been killed.
ROW OVER UNITY GOVERNMENT
The fresh fighting coincides with a visit to Gaza by President Mahmoud Abbas of the once-dominant Fatah faction, who has been meeting Haniyeh to try to revive talks on forging a unity government.
Haniyeh is a member of the Hamas movement, which ousted Fatah in elections earlier this year and has resisted international pressure to renounce violence and recognize the state of Israel.
Hamas accused Abbas on Friday of imposing what it called unacceptable conditions for a unity cabinet, including the release of a captured Israeli soldier and a halt to attacks on Israel.
Palestinians hope a unity government will convince Western nations to renew aid to the Palestinian Authority after sanctions were imposed because of Hamas's refusal to recognize Israel and renounce violence.
"Mr. Abu Mazen (Abbas) has started putting new conditions which were not included in the understandings and agreements we have concluded to form a unity government," said a Hamas statement from Damascus, where many of its leaders live in exile.
Yasser Abed Rabbo, a senior Abbas aide, said Hamas had "invented" the idea the president was imposing new terms, saying they had been on the table for months.
"This is the latest trick by the Hamas leadership to portray itself to the public as not being responsible for the destruction of the internal Palestinian situation," he said.
Haniyeh was more upbeat, saying the "true intention" of the talks was to reach an agreement.
(Additional reporting by Ari Rabinovitch in Jerusalem, Mohammed Assadi in Ramallah and Khaled Yacoub Oweis in Damascus)
GAZA (Reuters) - Israeli forces shot dead a 10-year-old Palestinian boy and a militant in Gaza on Friday, hospital officials said as the government vowed it would only end its assault when militants stopped attacking Israel.
The latest Israeli ground and air offensive, about a week old, is part of ongoing efforts to stop Gaza militants from firing rockets at Israel. Two Israeli soldiers were slightly wounded in the northern Gaza Strip when gunmen detonated an explosive device near troops, the army said.
"If the Palestinian terror factions, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, stop terror activities from the Gaza Strip, Israel would have no reason or incentive to operate in Gaza," said government spokeswoman, Miri Eisin.
Palestinian factions in Gaza late on Thursday had offered to stop firing rockets if Israel halted military action in Gaza and the occupied West Bank. Israel rejected the offer.
Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh told reporters it was up to Israel to respond positively.
"The issue should not be seen as if there is a Palestinian army with an arsenal of rockets ... The issue is that there is an unarmed Palestinian people who are subject to Israeli aggression," he said.
Palestinian hospital officials said the boy was shot dead east of the town of Beit Lahiya. Israel's army said it was not aware of the incident. Hamas said the other dead Palestinian was a militant and cameraman from the faction's armed wing who filmed Hamas fighters in action.
Israel has killed nearly 400 Palestinians in Gaza, about half of them civilians, since it began its offensive in June following the abduction of an Israeli soldier in a cross-border raid, hospital officials and residents say.
Three Israeli soldiers have been killed.
ROW OVER UNITY GOVERNMENT
The fresh fighting coincides with a visit to Gaza by President Mahmoud Abbas of the once-dominant Fatah faction, who has been meeting Haniyeh to try to revive talks on forging a unity government.
Haniyeh is a member of the Hamas movement, which ousted Fatah in elections earlier this year and has resisted international pressure to renounce violence and recognize the state of Israel.
Hamas accused Abbas on Friday of imposing what it called unacceptable conditions for a unity cabinet, including the release of a captured Israeli soldier and a halt to attacks on Israel.
Palestinians hope a unity government will convince Western nations to renew aid to the Palestinian Authority after sanctions were imposed because of Hamas's refusal to recognize Israel and renounce violence.
"Mr. Abu Mazen (Abbas) has started putting new conditions which were not included in the understandings and agreements we have concluded to form a unity government," said a Hamas statement from Damascus, where many of its leaders live in exile.
Yasser Abed Rabbo, a senior Abbas aide, said Hamas had "invented" the idea the president was imposing new terms, saying they had been on the table for months.
"This is the latest trick by the Hamas leadership to portray itself to the public as not being responsible for the destruction of the internal Palestinian situation," he said.
Haniyeh was more upbeat, saying the "true intention" of the talks was to reach an agreement.
(Additional reporting by Ari Rabinovitch in Jerusalem, Mohammed Assadi in Ramallah and Khaled Yacoub Oweis in Damascus)
Wednesday, October 18, 2006
Italian TV: Israel used new weapon prototype in Gaza Strip
By Meron Rapoport
13 October 2006
An investigative report to be aired on Italian television today raises the possibility that Israel has used an experimental weapon in the Gaza Strip in recent months, causing especially serious physical injuries, such as amputated limbs and severe burns. The weapon is similar to one developed by the U.S. military called DIME, which causes a powerful and lethal blast, but only within a relatively small radius.
The Italian report is based on the eyewitness accounts of medical doctors in the Strip, as well as tests carried out in an Italian laboratory. The investigative team is the same one that exposed, several months ago, the use by U.S. forces in Iraq of phosphorous bombs, against Iraqi rebels in Faluja.
Israel Air Force Maj.-Gen (res.) Yitzhak Ben-Israel, formerly head of the IDF's weapons-development program, told the Italian reporters that "one of the ideas [behind the weapon] is to allow those targeted to be hit without causing damage to bystanders or other persons."
The investigation, by Rai24news, follows reports by Gaza-based doctors of inexplicably serious injuries. The doctors reported an exceptionally large number of wounded who lost legs, of completely burned bodies and injuries unaccompanied by metal shrapnel. Some of the doctors also claimed that they removed particles from wounds that could not be seen in an x-ray machine.
According to those who testified, the wounded were hit by munitions launched from drones, most of them in July.
Dr. Habas al-Wahid, head of the emergency room at the Shuhada al-Aqsa hospital, in Deir el-Balah, told the reporters that the legs of the injured were sliced from their bodies "as if a saw was used to cut through the bone." There were signs of heat and burns near the point of the amputation, but no signs that the dismemberment was caused by metal fragments.
Dr. Juma Saka, of Shifa Hospital, in Gaza City, said the doctors found small entry wounds on the bodies of the wounded and the dead. According to Saka, a powder was found on the victims' bodies and in their internal organs.
"The powder was like microscopic shrapnel, and these are what likely caused the injuries," Saka said.
The Italian investigative team raised the possibility that the IDF is making use of a weapon similar in character to DIME - Dense Inert Metal Explosive - developed for the U.S. military. According to the official website of a U.S. air force laboratory, it is a "focused lethality" weapon, which aims to accurately destroy the target while causing minimum damage to the surrounding.
According to the site, the projectile comprises a carbon-fiber casing filled with tungsten powder and explosives. In the explosion, tungsten particles - a metal capable of conducting very high temperatures - spread over a radius of four meters and cause death.
Weapon in testing phase
According to the U.S.-based website Defense-Tech, "the result is an incredibly destructive blast in a small area" and "the destructive power of the mixture causes far more damage than pure explosive." It adds that "the impact of the micro-shrapnel seems to cause a similar but more powerful effect than a shockwave."
The weapon is supposed to still be in the testing phase and has not been used on the battlefield.
The Italian reporters sent samples of the particles found in wounds of injured in the Gaza Strip to a laboratory at the University of Parma. Dr. Carmela Vaccaio said that in analyzing the samples, she found "a very high concentration of carbon and the presence of unusual materials," such as copper, aluminum and tungsten. Dr. Vaccaio says these findings "could be in line with the hypothesis" that the weapon in question is DIME.
On the matter of DIME, Ben-Israel told the Italian reporters that "this is a technology that allows the striking of very small targets."
The report says that the weapon is not banned by international law, especially since it has not been officially tested.
It is believed that the weapon is highly carcinogenic and harmful to the environment.
The non-governmental organization Physicians for Human Rights has written to Defense Minister Amir Peretz requesting explanations for the aforementioned injuries to Palestinians. Amos Gilad, a senior adviser to the minister, is supposed to meet with the group on the matter in the near future.
13 October 2006
An investigative report to be aired on Italian television today raises the possibility that Israel has used an experimental weapon in the Gaza Strip in recent months, causing especially serious physical injuries, such as amputated limbs and severe burns. The weapon is similar to one developed by the U.S. military called DIME, which causes a powerful and lethal blast, but only within a relatively small radius.
The Italian report is based on the eyewitness accounts of medical doctors in the Strip, as well as tests carried out in an Italian laboratory. The investigative team is the same one that exposed, several months ago, the use by U.S. forces in Iraq of phosphorous bombs, against Iraqi rebels in Faluja.
Israel Air Force Maj.-Gen (res.) Yitzhak Ben-Israel, formerly head of the IDF's weapons-development program, told the Italian reporters that "one of the ideas [behind the weapon] is to allow those targeted to be hit without causing damage to bystanders or other persons."
The investigation, by Rai24news, follows reports by Gaza-based doctors of inexplicably serious injuries. The doctors reported an exceptionally large number of wounded who lost legs, of completely burned bodies and injuries unaccompanied by metal shrapnel. Some of the doctors also claimed that they removed particles from wounds that could not be seen in an x-ray machine.
According to those who testified, the wounded were hit by munitions launched from drones, most of them in July.
Dr. Habas al-Wahid, head of the emergency room at the Shuhada al-Aqsa hospital, in Deir el-Balah, told the reporters that the legs of the injured were sliced from their bodies "as if a saw was used to cut through the bone." There were signs of heat and burns near the point of the amputation, but no signs that the dismemberment was caused by metal fragments.
Dr. Juma Saka, of Shifa Hospital, in Gaza City, said the doctors found small entry wounds on the bodies of the wounded and the dead. According to Saka, a powder was found on the victims' bodies and in their internal organs.
"The powder was like microscopic shrapnel, and these are what likely caused the injuries," Saka said.
The Italian investigative team raised the possibility that the IDF is making use of a weapon similar in character to DIME - Dense Inert Metal Explosive - developed for the U.S. military. According to the official website of a U.S. air force laboratory, it is a "focused lethality" weapon, which aims to accurately destroy the target while causing minimum damage to the surrounding.
According to the site, the projectile comprises a carbon-fiber casing filled with tungsten powder and explosives. In the explosion, tungsten particles - a metal capable of conducting very high temperatures - spread over a radius of four meters and cause death.
Weapon in testing phase
According to the U.S.-based website Defense-Tech, "the result is an incredibly destructive blast in a small area" and "the destructive power of the mixture causes far more damage than pure explosive." It adds that "the impact of the micro-shrapnel seems to cause a similar but more powerful effect than a shockwave."
The weapon is supposed to still be in the testing phase and has not been used on the battlefield.
The Italian reporters sent samples of the particles found in wounds of injured in the Gaza Strip to a laboratory at the University of Parma. Dr. Carmela Vaccaio said that in analyzing the samples, she found "a very high concentration of carbon and the presence of unusual materials," such as copper, aluminum and tungsten. Dr. Vaccaio says these findings "could be in line with the hypothesis" that the weapon in question is DIME.
On the matter of DIME, Ben-Israel told the Italian reporters that "this is a technology that allows the striking of very small targets."
The report says that the weapon is not banned by international law, especially since it has not been officially tested.
It is believed that the weapon is highly carcinogenic and harmful to the environment.
The non-governmental organization Physicians for Human Rights has written to Defense Minister Amir Peretz requesting explanations for the aforementioned injuries to Palestinians. Amos Gilad, a senior adviser to the minister, is supposed to meet with the group on the matter in the near future.
Saturday, September 30, 2006
Israel used precision bomb to hit UN officers
UN: Israel used precision bomb to hit UN officers
By Evelyn Leopold
Fri Sep 29, 3:40 PM ET / reuters
Israel used a precision-guided bomb to launch a direct hit on four U.N. peacekeepers killed in southern Lebanon last July, the United Nations said on Friday of its probe into the incident.
But a report by a special U.N.-appointed board of inquiry could not affix blame because Israel did not allow the access to operational or tactical level commanders involved in the July 25 disaster at Khiam. Four military observers died, officers from Austria, Canada, China and Finland.
Therefore, the board was "unable to determine why the attacks on the U.N. position were not halted, despite repeated demarches (communications) to the Israeli authorities from U.N. personnel, both in the field and in U.N. headquarters," Secretary-General Kofi Annan said in a statement.
Annan said the U.N. bunker at Khiam "was struck by a 500- kilogram precision-guided aerial bomb."
Despite not drawing any conclusions, a senior U.N. official briefing reporters on condition of anonymity, said precision-guided munitions were "precision-guided and meant to hit the targets they hit, which was the United Nations."
"War is hell, peacekeeping is not supposed to be," the official said.
Israel has accepted full responsibility for the incident and apologized to the United Nations for the army's "tragic operational mistake." But Annan and other officials made clear they were not able to verify if and how the error occurred.
The report was released only to Austria, Canada, China and Finland because such investigations are not publicized to preserve the confidentiality of informants in future probes.
"In this particular case, since the Israeli government also conducted its own investigation which they released, we also felt it's necessary to speak about the conclusion of ours," U.N. spokesman Stephane Dujarric said.
Israel presented its findings on September 15 to the four countries that lost peacekeepers and then briefed reporters.
'HOSTILE ACTIVITY'
Foreign Ministry spokesman Mark Regev said maps of the area had been incorrect. "There was a mishap on the Israeli side where in duplication of maps, the U.N. position on the maps was not marked as it should have been and that created the tragedy," he said.
Israel launched an offensive into Lebanon after Hizbollah guerrillas captured two Israeli soldiers in a cross-border raid on July 12.
Regev said the investigation found that about 100 metres (yards) from the U.N. position there was a Hizbollah position where there was "hostile activity."
U.N. officials agreed Hizbollah guerrillas were at a base in the area as well as in a nearby prison. But they said there was no activity from the militia on July 25 and the U.N. bunker was clearly marked.
Jane Holl Lute, a deputy head of U.N. peacekeeping operations, told the U.N. Security Council on July 26 there were 21 strikes within 300 metres (yards) of the observer post during the six hours before it was completely destroyed.
Twelve of the 21 struck within 100 metres, including four that scored direct hits, Holl Lute said.
While there was speculation Israel may have been targeting Hizbollah positions near the Khiam post, Holl Lute said there was no Hizbollah firing coming from near the outpost.
An Irish army officer in south Lebanon warned Israeli forces six times that its strikes threatened the lives of the four observers, Ireland's Foreign Ministry said.
By Evelyn Leopold
Fri Sep 29, 3:40 PM ET / reuters
Israel used a precision-guided bomb to launch a direct hit on four U.N. peacekeepers killed in southern Lebanon last July, the United Nations said on Friday of its probe into the incident.
But a report by a special U.N.-appointed board of inquiry could not affix blame because Israel did not allow the access to operational or tactical level commanders involved in the July 25 disaster at Khiam. Four military observers died, officers from Austria, Canada, China and Finland.
Therefore, the board was "unable to determine why the attacks on the U.N. position were not halted, despite repeated demarches (communications) to the Israeli authorities from U.N. personnel, both in the field and in U.N. headquarters," Secretary-General Kofi Annan said in a statement.
Annan said the U.N. bunker at Khiam "was struck by a 500- kilogram precision-guided aerial bomb."
Despite not drawing any conclusions, a senior U.N. official briefing reporters on condition of anonymity, said precision-guided munitions were "precision-guided and meant to hit the targets they hit, which was the United Nations."
"War is hell, peacekeeping is not supposed to be," the official said.
Israel has accepted full responsibility for the incident and apologized to the United Nations for the army's "tragic operational mistake." But Annan and other officials made clear they were not able to verify if and how the error occurred.
The report was released only to Austria, Canada, China and Finland because such investigations are not publicized to preserve the confidentiality of informants in future probes.
"In this particular case, since the Israeli government also conducted its own investigation which they released, we also felt it's necessary to speak about the conclusion of ours," U.N. spokesman Stephane Dujarric said.
Israel presented its findings on September 15 to the four countries that lost peacekeepers and then briefed reporters.
'HOSTILE ACTIVITY'
Foreign Ministry spokesman Mark Regev said maps of the area had been incorrect. "There was a mishap on the Israeli side where in duplication of maps, the U.N. position on the maps was not marked as it should have been and that created the tragedy," he said.
Israel launched an offensive into Lebanon after Hizbollah guerrillas captured two Israeli soldiers in a cross-border raid on July 12.
Regev said the investigation found that about 100 metres (yards) from the U.N. position there was a Hizbollah position where there was "hostile activity."
U.N. officials agreed Hizbollah guerrillas were at a base in the area as well as in a nearby prison. But they said there was no activity from the militia on July 25 and the U.N. bunker was clearly marked.
Jane Holl Lute, a deputy head of U.N. peacekeeping operations, told the U.N. Security Council on July 26 there were 21 strikes within 300 metres (yards) of the observer post during the six hours before it was completely destroyed.
Twelve of the 21 struck within 100 metres, including four that scored direct hits, Holl Lute said.
While there was speculation Israel may have been targeting Hizbollah positions near the Khiam post, Holl Lute said there was no Hizbollah firing coming from near the outpost.
An Irish army officer in south Lebanon warned Israeli forces six times that its strikes threatened the lives of the four observers, Ireland's Foreign Ministry said.
Israel abused Hamas officials
3 August 2006
Hamas officials who were detained by Israel in the occupied West Bank accuse their Israeli jailers of abusing them, the BBC reported.
Three top Hamas officials, who were freed this week after two months detention, said they were abused and maltreated at the hands of Israeli interrogators and complained of poor living conditions in detention.
Wasfi Kabha, Palestinian Minister for Prisoners' Affairs, told the Associated Press news agency that he had been released because there was no evidence to back Israeli claims that he belonged to a terrorist organization.
"I spent 11 days under heavy interrogation," he said by telephone from the West Bank town of Jenin.
"They would take me at 0500 in the morning, hands and legs cuffed, and place me in a chair without a back until 1700.
"The only rest I got was during the sirens when Hezbollah launched rockets at Israel. They would take me down into a cell underground and they would leave to take shelter somewhere in the jail."
Mr Kabha added that his cell was a small place with four dirty mattresses on the ground and with two very dirty and old blankets".
Hasan Khurayshah, a deputy speaker in the Palestinian parliament, and Palestinian Finance Minister Omar Abdal Razeq also said that they were abused in Israeli jails.
"Everybody was treated in the same bad way," Khurayshah said.
"They bound our legs and hands to a chair and put blindfolds so we could not see anything. There was very little water and food and they were unfit for human consumption. The jailers were cursing and insulting us."
Israel arrested more than 64 Hamas cabinet ministers, lawmakers and activists in the West Bank and East Jerusalem to pressure the Hamas-led Palestinian government, whose armed wing is part of three other resistance groups who captured an Israeli soldier on June 25.
Israel has launched a deadly offensive in the Gaza Strip in the wake of the soldiers' capture.
The brutal military campaign has so far killed more than 126 Palestinians, mostly civilians.
More killed as Israel pounds Beirut, Gaza
3 August 2006
Israel resumed its deadly air strikes on the Lebanese capital, Beirut, as Israeli occupation forces moved back into southern Gaza, the Herald Sun reported.
The Israeli army said more than 70 air strikes were carried in Lebanon overnight.
Witnesses said at least four huge blasts rocked the southern Beirut suburb of Dahieh, a Hezbollah stronghold that has been frequently shelled by Israel since the fighting began three weeks ago.
There were also air raids on a bridge in the northern region of Akkar, roads near Lebanon’s border with Syria, and in the Bekaa Valley.
In southern Lebanon, Israeli ground troops and Hezbollah fighters are still battling for control of at least five villages along the border, where Israel has launched ground incursions with more than 10,000 soldiers.
Meanwhile, Israeli officials say more than 70 Hezbollah rocket attacks hit northern Israel. The resistance group has fired at least 300 missiles into Israel on Wednesday, some of which landed up to 70 km inside the Jewish state; the deepest so far.
At least 900 Lebanese people, mostly civilians, have been killed and more than 3,000 wounded since Israel launched its deadly offensive in Lebanon, Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora said in a video message to Muslim leaders meeting in Malaysia.
About 55 Israelis, most of them soldiers, have been killed.
In a separate development, UN diplomats say the UK, France, and the U.S. are working on a UN resolution calling for an immediate end to the fighting. The three countries want to present the resolution to the other 12 members of the UN Security Council later on Thursday.
Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has said there will be no ceasefire until an international force is deployed in southern Lebanon. He also said that Israel would have the right to respond to Hezbollah attacks even after the deployment of the international force.
Meanwhile, the Israeli armys probe into the Qana massacre concluded that the deadly attack was a mistake.
The report claimed the building where more than 60 civilians were sheltering was thought to be a hiding place for Hezbollah fighters.
The New York-based group Human Rights Watch has accused Israel of committing war crimes after the Qana attack, which killed more than 54 civilians, many of them children.
Residents flee Lebanese cities
A quarter of Lebanons population one million had been displaced as a result of the Israeli bombardment, according to Prime Minister Fuoad Siniora.
In the virtually empty port city of Tyre, street cats and dogs have taken over the streets. Shops are closed and construction sites are quiet. The smell of the rubbish heaps fills the city. The silence is broken only by the cries of the cats, according to an article on AFP.
Just last week, Tyre was home to about 100,000 people, both residents and refugees from other war-torn areas. Now, some 10,000 people remain in the city, which is completely cut off from the outside world.
Israel bombed the highway. Some roads are open towards the south and east, but the route is too risky due to Israels bombardment.
The residents who remained have no where to go.
"We're waiting for them (the Israelis)," said Hajje, a 70-year-old woman who owns a grocery shop in Tyre. "They want to do to Lebanon what they've done in Iraq. But we won't let them. We're ready
"They have always failed, and they will fail again," says Hajje, who hangs a huge portrait of Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah on the shop wall.
Another resident agrees, showing that Hezbollahs resistance against Israel has boosted the groups image among ordinary Lebanese.
"The Israelis tried four times, and they were pushed back four times," says Ali, referring to the fighting which preceded Israel's withdrawal from south Lebanon in May 2000.
"The warriors are the strongest of all, and thanks to them Lebanon will survive," he added.
UN warns of environmental crisis
The UN Environment Program (UNEP) warned of an environmental crisis and called for immediate action after thousands of tons of heavy fuel from the bombed Jiyyeh power plant, 30 km south of Beirut, spread to the Syrian coastline, AFP reported.
The UNEP warned that the longer a spill of 110,000 barrels of oil isnt cleaned up from Lebanons coast, the more severe the environmental impact will be. It also said that the oil slick have arrived on Syrias coast after affecting more than 80 km of the Lebanese coastline.
"Now it has become even more vital to take immediate action. In addition to the humanitarian circumstances, an environmental catastrophe is threatening the Mediterranean region," said Paul Mifsud, UNEP's coordinator for the Mediterranean Action Plan.
"Hostilities must cease to guarantee immediate safe access to the affected area," he stressed.
Lebanese Environment Minister Yacub Sarraf told AFP between 10,000 and 15,000 tons of heavy fuel oil have spilled out into the sea, adding that cleaning up Lebanons beaches would cost between 45 and 50 million dollars and would not be finished until next summer.
Gaza air strikes kill 7
In Gaza, Israeli troops, backed by tanks and bulldozers, pushed further into the south, closing off the eastern entrance to Rafah, a town on the Gaza-Egypt border, and taking positions at the Gaza air port, security officials said, according to the BBC.
Correspondents say the incursion is the deepest into Gaza since the start of Israels month-long offensive.
As Israeli troops took up positions, Israeli jets carried out air strikes, killing more than seven people, including a child, and injuring more than 26 others, residents said.
Two more people were wounded when a tank shell hit their house, medics said.
The Israeli army claimed that the raids targeted Palestinian resistance fighters who were about to launch anti-tank rockets at Israeli forces.
Israeli launched a deadly offensive in Gaza last month to pressure the Hamas-led government, whose armed wing is part of three other resistance groups who captured an Israeli soldier.
More than 140 Palestinians, mostly civilians, have been killed since the assault began. The United Nations says the dead include 35 children.
On Wednesday, UN officials renewed warnings of a humanitarian crisis in Gaza, which is suffering food, water and electricity shortages as well as repeated Israeli incursions, air strikes and shelling.
Arab states must repudiate ties with Israel now
2 August 2006
Ali Abunimah, The Electronic Intifada, 31 July 2006
Palestinians demonstrate in the West Bank town of Ramallah against the Israeli offensive in Lebanon, 30 July 2006. An Israeli air strike on Qana killed more than 54 people, 37 of them children, in south Lebanon. (MaanImages/Mushir Abdelrahman)
The scenes of carnage from Qana, where ten years after an almost identical massacre, rescue workers are pulling the broken bodies of children from the rubble, break the heart and generate a deep and boiling anger. But it is not enough to point the finger at Israel's war criminal government which carried out the atrocity, nor the United States administration, which encourages Israel, funds and arms it. We must also demand that all those with the power to act do so immediately.
Over the past two decades, "moderate" (pro-American) Arab governments including Egypt, Jordan, the Palestinian Authority, Morocco, Tunisia, Qatar and Oman have established ties with Israel, their public rationale being that integrating Israel into the region and normalizing it will encourage moderation on Israel's part. Egypt, Jordan and the Palestinian Authority have formal agreements with Israel; the other states various official and unofficial ties. At the 2002 Arab League summit in Beirut, Arab governments unanimously reached out to Israel offering full peace in exchange for a full Israeli withdrawal only from the territories Israel occupied in 1967, allowing it to maintain its hold on all the land Zionist militias seized from the Palestinians whom they ethnically cleansed in 1947-48. Israel is giving its answer to the Beirut offer by destroying Beirut and all of Lebanon.
Israel has rejected all Arab peace initiatives, no matter how far-reaching and generous, in favor of continued colonial expansion and occupation. It has taken these peace moves as signs of Arab weakness and as a license for further aggression. The Israeli public (except for Palestinian citizens of Israel) almost unanimously supports Israel's massacres in Lebanon and Palestine, and until Israelis start to feel there is a price in terms of international isolation, we cannot expect that to change. And as long as Israeli colonialism remains unchallenged by supine governments, millions of people will see 'non-state actors' like Hizbullah and Hamas as their best option to protect their most fundamental interests, and the power and popularity of such groups will grow as governments consign themselves to irrelevance. Israel and its allies need to ask themselves why demonstrators are shouting the name of Hizbullah leader Hasan Nasrallah from Cairo to Ramallah to Doha, and stop deluding themselves that millions of people are merely puppets of some Syrian-Iranian conspiracy.
Arab states must publicly break their ties with Israel, not merely as an expression of the overwhelming outrage and grief of their own citizens, but as a strategic message to Israel that it will face total and permanent isolation if it does not change course. Arab governments should also support the growing global civil society campaign for boycott, divestment and sanctions against Israel.
Days after Israel began its premeditated rampage in Lebanon, using the July 12 Hizbullah operation against Israeli military forces on the border as a pretext, Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia condemned the Israeli actions. But what attracted attention was their apparent laying of the blame at Hizbullah's doorstep. Egypt and Jordan issued a joint statement on July 14 warning against "the region being dragged into 'adventurism' that does not serve Arab interests." Just the day before, a Saudi official had used the same word when he told the SPA news agency that, "It is necessary to make a distinction between legitimate resistance (to occupation) and irresponsible adventurism adopted by certain elements within the state."
The common interpretation both in the Arab and western media was that these three US-allied governments had implicitly joined up with the American-Israeli axis to take on "radical" and popular forces in the region, specifically Hizbullah and Hamas, that resist Israeli colonialism. The Washington Post, citing "senior Israeli and U.S. officials" reported on July 16 that, "Israel, with U.S. support, intends to resist calls for a cease-fire and continue a longer-term strategy of punishing Hezbollah, which is likely to include several weeks of precision bombing in Lebanon." The same report stated that, "Whatever the outrage on the Arab streets, Washington believes it has strong behind-the-scenes support among key Arab leaders also nervous about the populist militants -- with a tacit agreement that the timing is right to strike." ("Strikes Are Called Part of Broad Strategy; U.S., Israel Aim to Weaken Hezbollah, Region's Militants," The Washington Post, 16 July 2006).
Yet as Israel failed to achieve the quick victory that its generals promised, and as Hizbullah fought stubbornly and skillfully, gaining support and respect from every corner of the region, calculations started to change rapidly. The New York Times reported that Saudi Arabia and Jordan which "were initially more worried about the rising power of Shiite Iran, Hezbollahs main sponsor, are scrambling to distance themselves from Washington." ("Tide of Arab Opinion Turns to Support for Hezbollah," The New York Times, 28 July 2006)
Saudi Arabia hurriedly announced a $1.5 billion aid package to help rebuild Lebanon and Jordan made a public show of sending humanitarian aid. But the damage was already done. "Tent after green tent stands just off one of Beirut's fashionable shopping areas, part of a field hospital sent by Jordan to treat Lebanese wounded," Reuters reported on July 28. "Jordanian soldiers sit idly in the shade nearby and a peek into one tent reveals the beds are empty. Lebanese casualties are rejecting aid from Jordan in protest at what they view as its failure to press for an end to Israeli air strikes in the 17-day-old war against Hizbollah." A Lebanese worker near the field hospital stated, "They've been here three days and we have seen no casualties treated here... They cannot give the green light for this strike against us and then show up to treat us. We don't want their sweetness or their bitterness." ("Lebanese wounded turn cold shoulder on Jordan aid," Reuters, 28 July 2006)
Hours after the Qana massacre, Jordan's King Abdullah II released a statement which "strongly condemned the ugly crime of the Israeli forces in Qana" The statement reiterated Jordan's calls for "an immediate ceasefire."
Such statements are welcome and necessary but unlikely to be sufficient. Israel, as it has shown time and again, is not swayed by words. On the contrary, it deliberately twists and misinterprets them whether from friend or foe. Following the failure of last week's Rome summit Israel claimed it had a "green light" from all the participating states to continue bombing Lebanon. (Although Israel certainly does have a green light from the United States, which is rushing more bombs to kill Lebanese civilians to Israel, this public boasting by Israel was embarassing enough to the U.S. that State Department spokesman Adam Ereli termed it "outrageous.")
Arab states must end their long forbearance which sends the message to Israel that the lives of their citizens are cheap. Action is required no less for the best interests and domestic and international standing of these governments as for the region as a whole. In Jordan's case it would only be exercising rights and responsibilities that are contained within its 1994 peace treaty with Israel and thus could not even be interpreted as violating the treaty's spirit or letter. The peace treaty was supposed to be one element in a wider regional peace that has failed to materialize due to Israel's aggressive construction of new colonies on occupied Palestinian land and refusal to withdraw from occupied Lebanese and Syrian territory. The preamble to the treaty states that Israel and Jordan aim at "a just, lasting and comprehensive peace in the Middle East based on Security Council resolutions 242 and 338 in all their aspects." In Article 2 of the treaty, both states commit themselves to "respect and recognize the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every state in the region."
Israel's continued and deepening occupation of Palestinian, Syrian and Lebanese territory, violations of their sovereignty, blatant interference in the internal affairs of Palestinians and Lebanese, and its mounting atrocities which have claimed Jordanian and Egpytian as well as thousands of Lebanese and Palestinian lives are not only crimes against humanity but violations of Israel's treaty commitments. Jordan and Egypt have a right and obligation to respond.
Arab governments have a slim chance to play a genuine leadership role and prove that their earlier positions were simply being misinterpreted and exploited. Breaking off relations may seem like a small step in the current circumstances, but it is the minimum they must do and it will set an example for other international actors such as the EU and the UN who have also failed in their international responsibilities, siding with the aggressor against the victim and thereby enabling Israel's unspeakable crimes.
After Qana, Jordan's foreign minister Abul-Ilah al-Khatib urged the international community "take a firm stand against the aggression." Amman and Cairo should lead the way with more than words.
Hamas officials who were detained by Israel in the occupied West Bank accuse their Israeli jailers of abusing them, the BBC reported.
Three top Hamas officials, who were freed this week after two months detention, said they were abused and maltreated at the hands of Israeli interrogators and complained of poor living conditions in detention.
Wasfi Kabha, Palestinian Minister for Prisoners' Affairs, told the Associated Press news agency that he had been released because there was no evidence to back Israeli claims that he belonged to a terrorist organization.
"I spent 11 days under heavy interrogation," he said by telephone from the West Bank town of Jenin.
"They would take me at 0500 in the morning, hands and legs cuffed, and place me in a chair without a back until 1700.
"The only rest I got was during the sirens when Hezbollah launched rockets at Israel. They would take me down into a cell underground and they would leave to take shelter somewhere in the jail."
Mr Kabha added that his cell was a small place with four dirty mattresses on the ground and with two very dirty and old blankets".
Hasan Khurayshah, a deputy speaker in the Palestinian parliament, and Palestinian Finance Minister Omar Abdal Razeq also said that they were abused in Israeli jails.
"Everybody was treated in the same bad way," Khurayshah said.
"They bound our legs and hands to a chair and put blindfolds so we could not see anything. There was very little water and food and they were unfit for human consumption. The jailers were cursing and insulting us."
Israel arrested more than 64 Hamas cabinet ministers, lawmakers and activists in the West Bank and East Jerusalem to pressure the Hamas-led Palestinian government, whose armed wing is part of three other resistance groups who captured an Israeli soldier on June 25.
Israel has launched a deadly offensive in the Gaza Strip in the wake of the soldiers' capture.
The brutal military campaign has so far killed more than 126 Palestinians, mostly civilians.
More killed as Israel pounds Beirut, Gaza
3 August 2006
Israel resumed its deadly air strikes on the Lebanese capital, Beirut, as Israeli occupation forces moved back into southern Gaza, the Herald Sun reported.
The Israeli army said more than 70 air strikes were carried in Lebanon overnight.
Witnesses said at least four huge blasts rocked the southern Beirut suburb of Dahieh, a Hezbollah stronghold that has been frequently shelled by Israel since the fighting began three weeks ago.
There were also air raids on a bridge in the northern region of Akkar, roads near Lebanon’s border with Syria, and in the Bekaa Valley.
In southern Lebanon, Israeli ground troops and Hezbollah fighters are still battling for control of at least five villages along the border, where Israel has launched ground incursions with more than 10,000 soldiers.
Meanwhile, Israeli officials say more than 70 Hezbollah rocket attacks hit northern Israel. The resistance group has fired at least 300 missiles into Israel on Wednesday, some of which landed up to 70 km inside the Jewish state; the deepest so far.
At least 900 Lebanese people, mostly civilians, have been killed and more than 3,000 wounded since Israel launched its deadly offensive in Lebanon, Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora said in a video message to Muslim leaders meeting in Malaysia.
About 55 Israelis, most of them soldiers, have been killed.
In a separate development, UN diplomats say the UK, France, and the U.S. are working on a UN resolution calling for an immediate end to the fighting. The three countries want to present the resolution to the other 12 members of the UN Security Council later on Thursday.
Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has said there will be no ceasefire until an international force is deployed in southern Lebanon. He also said that Israel would have the right to respond to Hezbollah attacks even after the deployment of the international force.
Meanwhile, the Israeli armys probe into the Qana massacre concluded that the deadly attack was a mistake.
The report claimed the building where more than 60 civilians were sheltering was thought to be a hiding place for Hezbollah fighters.
The New York-based group Human Rights Watch has accused Israel of committing war crimes after the Qana attack, which killed more than 54 civilians, many of them children.
Residents flee Lebanese cities
A quarter of Lebanons population one million had been displaced as a result of the Israeli bombardment, according to Prime Minister Fuoad Siniora.
In the virtually empty port city of Tyre, street cats and dogs have taken over the streets. Shops are closed and construction sites are quiet. The smell of the rubbish heaps fills the city. The silence is broken only by the cries of the cats, according to an article on AFP.
Just last week, Tyre was home to about 100,000 people, both residents and refugees from other war-torn areas. Now, some 10,000 people remain in the city, which is completely cut off from the outside world.
Israel bombed the highway. Some roads are open towards the south and east, but the route is too risky due to Israels bombardment.
The residents who remained have no where to go.
"We're waiting for them (the Israelis)," said Hajje, a 70-year-old woman who owns a grocery shop in Tyre. "They want to do to Lebanon what they've done in Iraq. But we won't let them. We're ready
"They have always failed, and they will fail again," says Hajje, who hangs a huge portrait of Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah on the shop wall.
Another resident agrees, showing that Hezbollahs resistance against Israel has boosted the groups image among ordinary Lebanese.
"The Israelis tried four times, and they were pushed back four times," says Ali, referring to the fighting which preceded Israel's withdrawal from south Lebanon in May 2000.
"The warriors are the strongest of all, and thanks to them Lebanon will survive," he added.
UN warns of environmental crisis
The UN Environment Program (UNEP) warned of an environmental crisis and called for immediate action after thousands of tons of heavy fuel from the bombed Jiyyeh power plant, 30 km south of Beirut, spread to the Syrian coastline, AFP reported.
The UNEP warned that the longer a spill of 110,000 barrels of oil isnt cleaned up from Lebanons coast, the more severe the environmental impact will be. It also said that the oil slick have arrived on Syrias coast after affecting more than 80 km of the Lebanese coastline.
"Now it has become even more vital to take immediate action. In addition to the humanitarian circumstances, an environmental catastrophe is threatening the Mediterranean region," said Paul Mifsud, UNEP's coordinator for the Mediterranean Action Plan.
"Hostilities must cease to guarantee immediate safe access to the affected area," he stressed.
Lebanese Environment Minister Yacub Sarraf told AFP between 10,000 and 15,000 tons of heavy fuel oil have spilled out into the sea, adding that cleaning up Lebanons beaches would cost between 45 and 50 million dollars and would not be finished until next summer.
Gaza air strikes kill 7
In Gaza, Israeli troops, backed by tanks and bulldozers, pushed further into the south, closing off the eastern entrance to Rafah, a town on the Gaza-Egypt border, and taking positions at the Gaza air port, security officials said, according to the BBC.
Correspondents say the incursion is the deepest into Gaza since the start of Israels month-long offensive.
As Israeli troops took up positions, Israeli jets carried out air strikes, killing more than seven people, including a child, and injuring more than 26 others, residents said.
Two more people were wounded when a tank shell hit their house, medics said.
The Israeli army claimed that the raids targeted Palestinian resistance fighters who were about to launch anti-tank rockets at Israeli forces.
Israeli launched a deadly offensive in Gaza last month to pressure the Hamas-led government, whose armed wing is part of three other resistance groups who captured an Israeli soldier.
More than 140 Palestinians, mostly civilians, have been killed since the assault began. The United Nations says the dead include 35 children.
On Wednesday, UN officials renewed warnings of a humanitarian crisis in Gaza, which is suffering food, water and electricity shortages as well as repeated Israeli incursions, air strikes and shelling.
Arab states must repudiate ties with Israel now
2 August 2006
Ali Abunimah, The Electronic Intifada, 31 July 2006
Palestinians demonstrate in the West Bank town of Ramallah against the Israeli offensive in Lebanon, 30 July 2006. An Israeli air strike on Qana killed more than 54 people, 37 of them children, in south Lebanon. (MaanImages/Mushir Abdelrahman)
The scenes of carnage from Qana, where ten years after an almost identical massacre, rescue workers are pulling the broken bodies of children from the rubble, break the heart and generate a deep and boiling anger. But it is not enough to point the finger at Israel's war criminal government which carried out the atrocity, nor the United States administration, which encourages Israel, funds and arms it. We must also demand that all those with the power to act do so immediately.
Over the past two decades, "moderate" (pro-American) Arab governments including Egypt, Jordan, the Palestinian Authority, Morocco, Tunisia, Qatar and Oman have established ties with Israel, their public rationale being that integrating Israel into the region and normalizing it will encourage moderation on Israel's part. Egypt, Jordan and the Palestinian Authority have formal agreements with Israel; the other states various official and unofficial ties. At the 2002 Arab League summit in Beirut, Arab governments unanimously reached out to Israel offering full peace in exchange for a full Israeli withdrawal only from the territories Israel occupied in 1967, allowing it to maintain its hold on all the land Zionist militias seized from the Palestinians whom they ethnically cleansed in 1947-48. Israel is giving its answer to the Beirut offer by destroying Beirut and all of Lebanon.
Israel has rejected all Arab peace initiatives, no matter how far-reaching and generous, in favor of continued colonial expansion and occupation. It has taken these peace moves as signs of Arab weakness and as a license for further aggression. The Israeli public (except for Palestinian citizens of Israel) almost unanimously supports Israel's massacres in Lebanon and Palestine, and until Israelis start to feel there is a price in terms of international isolation, we cannot expect that to change. And as long as Israeli colonialism remains unchallenged by supine governments, millions of people will see 'non-state actors' like Hizbullah and Hamas as their best option to protect their most fundamental interests, and the power and popularity of such groups will grow as governments consign themselves to irrelevance. Israel and its allies need to ask themselves why demonstrators are shouting the name of Hizbullah leader Hasan Nasrallah from Cairo to Ramallah to Doha, and stop deluding themselves that millions of people are merely puppets of some Syrian-Iranian conspiracy.
Arab states must publicly break their ties with Israel, not merely as an expression of the overwhelming outrage and grief of their own citizens, but as a strategic message to Israel that it will face total and permanent isolation if it does not change course. Arab governments should also support the growing global civil society campaign for boycott, divestment and sanctions against Israel.
Days after Israel began its premeditated rampage in Lebanon, using the July 12 Hizbullah operation against Israeli military forces on the border as a pretext, Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia condemned the Israeli actions. But what attracted attention was their apparent laying of the blame at Hizbullah's doorstep. Egypt and Jordan issued a joint statement on July 14 warning against "the region being dragged into 'adventurism' that does not serve Arab interests." Just the day before, a Saudi official had used the same word when he told the SPA news agency that, "It is necessary to make a distinction between legitimate resistance (to occupation) and irresponsible adventurism adopted by certain elements within the state."
The common interpretation both in the Arab and western media was that these three US-allied governments had implicitly joined up with the American-Israeli axis to take on "radical" and popular forces in the region, specifically Hizbullah and Hamas, that resist Israeli colonialism. The Washington Post, citing "senior Israeli and U.S. officials" reported on July 16 that, "Israel, with U.S. support, intends to resist calls for a cease-fire and continue a longer-term strategy of punishing Hezbollah, which is likely to include several weeks of precision bombing in Lebanon." The same report stated that, "Whatever the outrage on the Arab streets, Washington believes it has strong behind-the-scenes support among key Arab leaders also nervous about the populist militants -- with a tacit agreement that the timing is right to strike." ("Strikes Are Called Part of Broad Strategy; U.S., Israel Aim to Weaken Hezbollah, Region's Militants," The Washington Post, 16 July 2006).
Yet as Israel failed to achieve the quick victory that its generals promised, and as Hizbullah fought stubbornly and skillfully, gaining support and respect from every corner of the region, calculations started to change rapidly. The New York Times reported that Saudi Arabia and Jordan which "were initially more worried about the rising power of Shiite Iran, Hezbollahs main sponsor, are scrambling to distance themselves from Washington." ("Tide of Arab Opinion Turns to Support for Hezbollah," The New York Times, 28 July 2006)
Saudi Arabia hurriedly announced a $1.5 billion aid package to help rebuild Lebanon and Jordan made a public show of sending humanitarian aid. But the damage was already done. "Tent after green tent stands just off one of Beirut's fashionable shopping areas, part of a field hospital sent by Jordan to treat Lebanese wounded," Reuters reported on July 28. "Jordanian soldiers sit idly in the shade nearby and a peek into one tent reveals the beds are empty. Lebanese casualties are rejecting aid from Jordan in protest at what they view as its failure to press for an end to Israeli air strikes in the 17-day-old war against Hizbollah." A Lebanese worker near the field hospital stated, "They've been here three days and we have seen no casualties treated here... They cannot give the green light for this strike against us and then show up to treat us. We don't want their sweetness or their bitterness." ("Lebanese wounded turn cold shoulder on Jordan aid," Reuters, 28 July 2006)
Hours after the Qana massacre, Jordan's King Abdullah II released a statement which "strongly condemned the ugly crime of the Israeli forces in Qana" The statement reiterated Jordan's calls for "an immediate ceasefire."
Such statements are welcome and necessary but unlikely to be sufficient. Israel, as it has shown time and again, is not swayed by words. On the contrary, it deliberately twists and misinterprets them whether from friend or foe. Following the failure of last week's Rome summit Israel claimed it had a "green light" from all the participating states to continue bombing Lebanon. (Although Israel certainly does have a green light from the United States, which is rushing more bombs to kill Lebanese civilians to Israel, this public boasting by Israel was embarassing enough to the U.S. that State Department spokesman Adam Ereli termed it "outrageous.")
Arab states must end their long forbearance which sends the message to Israel that the lives of their citizens are cheap. Action is required no less for the best interests and domestic and international standing of these governments as for the region as a whole. In Jordan's case it would only be exercising rights and responsibilities that are contained within its 1994 peace treaty with Israel and thus could not even be interpreted as violating the treaty's spirit or letter. The peace treaty was supposed to be one element in a wider regional peace that has failed to materialize due to Israel's aggressive construction of new colonies on occupied Palestinian land and refusal to withdraw from occupied Lebanese and Syrian territory. The preamble to the treaty states that Israel and Jordan aim at "a just, lasting and comprehensive peace in the Middle East based on Security Council resolutions 242 and 338 in all their aspects." In Article 2 of the treaty, both states commit themselves to "respect and recognize the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every state in the region."
Israel's continued and deepening occupation of Palestinian, Syrian and Lebanese territory, violations of their sovereignty, blatant interference in the internal affairs of Palestinians and Lebanese, and its mounting atrocities which have claimed Jordanian and Egpytian as well as thousands of Lebanese and Palestinian lives are not only crimes against humanity but violations of Israel's treaty commitments. Jordan and Egypt have a right and obligation to respond.
Arab governments have a slim chance to play a genuine leadership role and prove that their earlier positions were simply being misinterpreted and exploited. Breaking off relations may seem like a small step in the current circumstances, but it is the minimum they must do and it will set an example for other international actors such as the EU and the UN who have also failed in their international responsibilities, siding with the aggressor against the victim and thereby enabling Israel's unspeakable crimes.
After Qana, Jordan's foreign minister Abul-Ilah al-Khatib urged the international community "take a firm stand against the aggression." Amman and Cairo should lead the way with more than words.
Thursday, September 28, 2006
Postmodern Moral Reasoning about Israel
Twenty to thirty years ago, the liberal consensus was that Israel held at least some, if not all or most, of the moral high ground in the Middle East conflict. Today on college campuses and elsewhere, many liberals castigate Israel and side largely with the Palestinians. What has changed?
Perhaps Israeli tactics—appropriating settlement territory (albeit land won in a defensive war, be it remembered), bulldozing houses, killing civilians in strikes on Hamas leaders—have fostered increased negative judgment against Israel among well-meaning liberals sensitive to injustice.
But there is a tendency among those making such judgments to dismiss sound moral reasoning in two respects:
the incitements and terrorism of unrelenting and genocidal Palestinian attacks on Israeli civilians are ignored or shallowly rationalized as self-defense of an occupied people, and
the basic nature of the two parties is omitted from moral calculation. Israel is fundamentally a Western state with deep-rooted liberal and democratic institutions and culture, a society which has proven itself capable of self-correction, of the restraining and arresting of its militants and of acceptance of a Palestinian nation’s right to exist. In contrast, the Arab world is composed mainly of autocratic, anti-liberal states, and the Palestinians in particular have a deeply corrupt civil and political culture and a high tolerance for the virulently intolerant, anti-Semitic Hamas and others who are openly disdainful of a two-state solution, indeed proud of their devotion to the killing of Jews and the utter destruction of Israel.
How can self-professed liberals be capable of such shabby moral judgments?
Over the last twenty to thirty years, moral reasoning among many liberals has descended into a peculiar postmodernism, whereby the moral features of parties involved in a conflict matter not at all or decisively less than where the parties stand in a binary hierarchy: the oppressor and the oppressed, the powerful and the “subaltern.” The motives, methods and acts of the parties are irrelevant. The way power is exercised does not matter: democrats and fascists are equally guilty of being in authority. The only thing that matters is who has the power and who does not. In essence, this way of reasoning, beyond good and evil, derives from Nietzsche, filtered through hungover Marxism, postcolonialism and Michel Foucault’s analysis of cultural power. According to this view, all moral pretense, all reason, is merely a mask for the will to power. But whereas Nietzsche celebrated and honored the will to power and its discharge as the only “good,” his lapsed descendents sneak a collectivist sense of justice into the equation, so that a weak group and its will to power is all good and a powerful one and its will to power is all bad.
It doesn’t matter that the weak group might be corrupt, anti-democratic and viciously terroristic in targeting civilians or shamefully complicit in tolerating such terrorism. As long as it is getting the short end of the stick, it deserves support, it is “good,” it has whatever moral stature such an amoral classification system can grant. It doesn’t matter that the strong group is viably democratic and self-correcting and open to compromise. If the stronger group holds an upper hand, has a position of advantage, it is bad and to be condemned.
Aside from the flimsy foundations, or lack of them, under this line of reasoning, there is in it a residue of, ironically, a peculiarly Jewish moral tenet: support for the underdog. But the failure of attention to the actual qualities of the acts and motives of the parties represents an abysmal descent from sound moral reasoning and is more postmodernist than liberal.
This sort of reasoning is today widespread among college students and professors, under the influence of Foucault and Edward Said and others. Thus we see the weird support for Palestinian militancy and the knee-jerk condemnation of defensive Israeli action among so-called liberals.
Perhaps Israeli tactics—appropriating settlement territory (albeit land won in a defensive war, be it remembered), bulldozing houses, killing civilians in strikes on Hamas leaders—have fostered increased negative judgment against Israel among well-meaning liberals sensitive to injustice.
But there is a tendency among those making such judgments to dismiss sound moral reasoning in two respects:
the incitements and terrorism of unrelenting and genocidal Palestinian attacks on Israeli civilians are ignored or shallowly rationalized as self-defense of an occupied people, and
the basic nature of the two parties is omitted from moral calculation. Israel is fundamentally a Western state with deep-rooted liberal and democratic institutions and culture, a society which has proven itself capable of self-correction, of the restraining and arresting of its militants and of acceptance of a Palestinian nation’s right to exist. In contrast, the Arab world is composed mainly of autocratic, anti-liberal states, and the Palestinians in particular have a deeply corrupt civil and political culture and a high tolerance for the virulently intolerant, anti-Semitic Hamas and others who are openly disdainful of a two-state solution, indeed proud of their devotion to the killing of Jews and the utter destruction of Israel.
How can self-professed liberals be capable of such shabby moral judgments?
Over the last twenty to thirty years, moral reasoning among many liberals has descended into a peculiar postmodernism, whereby the moral features of parties involved in a conflict matter not at all or decisively less than where the parties stand in a binary hierarchy: the oppressor and the oppressed, the powerful and the “subaltern.” The motives, methods and acts of the parties are irrelevant. The way power is exercised does not matter: democrats and fascists are equally guilty of being in authority. The only thing that matters is who has the power and who does not. In essence, this way of reasoning, beyond good and evil, derives from Nietzsche, filtered through hungover Marxism, postcolonialism and Michel Foucault’s analysis of cultural power. According to this view, all moral pretense, all reason, is merely a mask for the will to power. But whereas Nietzsche celebrated and honored the will to power and its discharge as the only “good,” his lapsed descendents sneak a collectivist sense of justice into the equation, so that a weak group and its will to power is all good and a powerful one and its will to power is all bad.
It doesn’t matter that the weak group might be corrupt, anti-democratic and viciously terroristic in targeting civilians or shamefully complicit in tolerating such terrorism. As long as it is getting the short end of the stick, it deserves support, it is “good,” it has whatever moral stature such an amoral classification system can grant. It doesn’t matter that the strong group is viably democratic and self-correcting and open to compromise. If the stronger group holds an upper hand, has a position of advantage, it is bad and to be condemned.
Aside from the flimsy foundations, or lack of them, under this line of reasoning, there is in it a residue of, ironically, a peculiarly Jewish moral tenet: support for the underdog. But the failure of attention to the actual qualities of the acts and motives of the parties represents an abysmal descent from sound moral reasoning and is more postmodernist than liberal.
This sort of reasoning is today widespread among college students and professors, under the influence of Foucault and Edward Said and others. Thus we see the weird support for Palestinian militancy and the knee-jerk condemnation of defensive Israeli action among so-called liberals.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)