Thursday, 6 March 2008

Seamus Milne comments on Gaza

To blame the victims for this killing spree defies both morality and sense

Washington's covert attempts to overturn an election result lie behind
the crisis in Gaza, as leaked papers show

The Guardian
Wednesday March 05 2008

The attempt by western politicians and media to present this week's
carnage in the Gaza Strip as a legitimate act of Israeli self-defence
- or at best the latest phase of a wearisome conflict between two
somehow equivalent sides - has reached Alice-in-Wonderland
proportions. Since Israel's deputy defence minister, Matan Vilnai,
issued his chilling warning last week that Palestinians faced a
"holocaust" if they continued to fire home-made rockets into Israel,
the balance sheet of suffering has become ever clearer. More than 120
Palestinians have been killed in Gaza by Israeli forces in the past
week, of whom one in five were children and more than half were
civilians, according to the Israeli human rights group B'Tselem.
During the same period, three Israelis were killed, two of whom were
soldiers taking part in the attacks.

So what was the response of the British foreign secretary, David
Miliband, to this horrific killing spree? It was to blame the
"numerous civilian casualties" on the week's "significant rise" in
Palestinian rocket attacks "and the Israeli response", condemn the
firing of rockets as "terrorist acts" and defend Israel's right to
self-defence "in accordance with international law". But of course it
has been nothing of the kind - any more than has been Israel's 40-year
occupation of the Palestinian territories, its continued expansion of
settlements or its refusal to allow the return of expelled refugees.

Nor is the past week's one-sided burden of casualties and misery
anything new, but the gap is certainly getting wider. After the
election of Hamas two years ago, Israel - backed by the US and the
European Union - imposed a punitive economic blockade, which has
hardened over the past months into a full-scale siege of the Gaza
Strip, including fuel, electricity and essential supplies. Since
January's mass breakout across the Egyptian border signalled that
collective punishment wouldn't work, Israel has opted for military
escalation. What that means on the ground can be seen from the fact
that at the height of the intifada, from 2000 to 2005, four
Palestinians were killed for every Israeli; in 2006 it was 30; last
year the ratio was 40 to one. In the three months since the US-
sponsored Middle East peace conference at Annapolis, 323 Palestinians
have been killed compared with seven Israelis, two of whom were
civilians.

But the US and Europe's response is to blame the principal victims for
a crisis it has underwritten at every stage. In interviews with
Palestinian leaders over the past few days, BBC presenters have
insisted that Palestinian rockets have been the "starting point" of
the violence, as if the occupation itself did not exist. In the West
Bank, from which no rockets are currently fired and where the US-
backed administration of Mahmoud Abbas maintains a ceasefire, there
have been 480 Israeli military attacks over the past three months and
26 Palestinians killed. By contrast, the rockets from Gaza which are
supposed to be the justification for the latest Israeli onslaught have
killed a total of 14 people over seven years.

Like any other people, the Palestinians have the right to resist
occupation - or to self-defence - whether they choose to exercise it
or not. In spite of Israel's disengagement in 2005, Gaza remains
occupied territory, both legally and in reality. It is the world's
largest open-air prison, with land, sea and air access controlled by
Israel, which carries out military operations at will. Palestinians
may differ about the tactics of resistance, but the dominant view (if
not that of Abbas) has long been that without some armed pressure,
their negotiating hand will inevitably be weaker. And while it might
be objected that the rockets are indiscriminate, that is not an easy
argument for Israel to make, given its appalling record of civilian
casualties in both the Palestinian territories and Lebanon.

The truth is that Hamas's control of Gaza is the direct result of the
US refusal to accept the Palestinians' democratic choice in 2006 and
its covert attempt to overthrow the elected administration by force
through its Fatah placeman Muhammad Dahlan. As confirmed by secret
documents leaked to the US magazine Vanity Fair - and also passed to
the Guardian - George Bush, Condoleezza Rice and Elliott Abrams, the
US deputy national security adviser (of Iran-Contra fame), funnelled
cash, weapons and instructions to Dahlan, partly through Arab
intermediaries such as Jordan and Egypt, in an effort to provoke a
Palestinian civil war. As evidence of the military buildup emerged,
Hamas moved to forestall the US plan with its own takeover of Gaza
last June. David Wurmser, who resigned as Dick Cheney's chief Middle
East adviser the following month, argues: "What happened wasn't so
much a coup by Hamas but an attempted coup by Fatah that was pre-
empted before it could happen."

Yesterday, Rice attempted to defend the failed US attempt to reverse
the results of the Palestinian elections by pointing to Iran's support
for Hamas. Meanwhile, Israel's attacks on Gaza are expected to resume
once she has left the region, even if no one believes they will stop
the rockets. Some in the Israeli government hope that they can
nevertheless weaken Hamas as a prelude to pushing Gaza into Egypt's
unwilling arms; others hope to bring Abbas and his entourage back to
Gaza after they have crushed Hamas, perhaps with a transitional
international force to save the Palestinian president's face.

Neither looks a serious option, not least because Hamas cannot be
crushed by force, even with the bloodbath that some envisage. The
third, commonsense option, backed by 64% of Israelis, is to take up
Hamas's offer - repeated by its leader Khalid Mish'al at the weekend -
and negotiate a truce. It's a move that now attracts not only left-
leaning Israeli politicians such as Yossi Beilin, but also a growing
number of rightwing establishment figures, including Ariel Sharon's
former security adviser Giora Eiland, the former Mossad boss Efraim
Halevy, and the ex-defence minister Shaul Mofaz.

The US, however, is resolutely opposed to negotiating with what it has
long branded a terrorist organisation - or allowing anyone else to do
so, including other Palestinians. As the leaked American papers
confirm, Rice effectively instructed Abbas to "collapse" the joint
Hamas-Fatah national unity government agreed in Mecca early last year,
a decision carried out after Hamas's pre-emptive takeover. But for the
Palestinians, national unity is an absolute necessity if they are to
have any chance of escaping a world of walled cantons, checkpoints,
ethnically segregated roads, dispossession and humiliation.

What else can Israel do to stop the rockets, its supporters ask. The
answer could not be more obvious: end the illegal occupation of the
Palestinian territories and negotiate a just settlement for the
Palestinian refugees, ethnically cleansed 60 years ago - who, with
their families, make up the majority of Gaza's 1.5 million people. All
the Palestinian factions, including Hamas, accept that as the basis
for a permanent settlement or indefinite end of armed conflict. In the
meantime, agree a truce, exchange prisoners and lift the blockade.
Israelis increasingly seem to get it - but the grim reality appears to
be that a lot more blood is going to have to flow before it's accepted
in Washington.

2 comments:

Jason Dittle said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Jason Dittle said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.