• About
  • ODS

Free Haifa

~ Reading, Writing and Freedom Arithmetics

Free Haifa

Tag Archives: #GazaUnderAttack

In Spanish: Lecciones de la guerra de Gaza

01 Saturday Aug 2015

Posted by freehaifa in En Español

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

#GazaUnderAttack, Gaza War, Spanish

Traducido del inglés por Silvia Gabay

Hay muchas razones por las que no escribí ningún análisis político durante esta sangrienta guerra.

Una de las razones es que yo sólo quería que la guerra terminara, quería detener el derramamiento de sangre, aunque sabía que cuanto más tiempo la Franja pudiera resistir la masacre genocida de Israel, mayor sería la probabilidad de que los agresores no consiguieran lo que querían y que el sitio a Gaza -el cual a largo plazo es aún más destructivo para la vida humana y el desarrollo- sería levantado.

Pero la mejor excusa es que durante toda esta guerra, la monstruosa maquinaria de guerra israelí parecía torpe y carente de orientación, mientras que la resistencia en Gaza parecía mantener la calma y saber lo que estaba haciendo.

Preferí callar y hacer mi pequeña contribución en manifestaciones contra la agresión.

Ahora que la guerra ha terminado, ¿qué podemos aprender políticamente de ella? Voy a tratar de hacerlo corto, repasando diferentes aspectos de esta guerra, con la esperanza de escribir pronto en forma más detallada.

¿Quién ganó el enfrentamiento militar?

Las grandes guerras terminan con el lado ganador conquistando el territorio o con el perdedor firmando su rendición.

Los israelíes dijeron que podían conquistar Gaza, pero no lo hicie­ron. De hecho, ya lo hicieron dos veces, en 1956 y en 1967. Cuando se retiraron de Gaza en 2005 fue sin acuerdo, después de que pagaran un alto precio con las dos intifada palestinas. El hecho de que Gaza no fuera ocupada de nuevo es el resultado combinado de que la re­sistencia estaba expectante al acto de ocupación y a la memoria de la resistencia a lo largo de 38 años de ocupación continua. De cualquier forma que se relate, la resistencia es lo que mantiene a Gaza libre de la ocupación directa.

Sin ganar terrenos o sin rendición, ¿no es una guerra total con el objetivo de matar gente y destruir sus medios de vida? Los funciona­rios israelíes, políticos y expertos toman en sus manos el ser jueces de la Historia llorando: “hemos matado a más de 2.000 personas; hemos destruido los hogares de casi medio millón de habitantes de Gaza, lo que hicieron con nosotros no es nada en comparación con esto. ¡Nos declaramos ganadores!”.

Pero ésta no es la forma en que la guerra se decide. Vivimos en un mundo de expectativas. Todo el mundo sabe que Israel tiene una potencia de fuego militar como para destruir Gaza. Si la guerra no fue para la aniquilación total de la otra parte, entonces se luchó para demostrar algo sobre la relación de fuerzas.

Al igual que Hezbollah en Líbano en el verano de 2006, la resisten­cia palestina en el verano de 2014 -liderada por las Brigadas Qassam, el ala militar de Hamas- sorprendieron a Israel con sus preparación técnica y con su poder de combate.

Misiles y morteros

El ataque israelí anterior contra Gaza, en noviembre de 2012, terminó con unos cohetes que alcanzaron la zona metropolitana de Tel Aviv, donde vive la mayoría de los israelíes. Ahora, por primera vez, Tel Aviv fue atacada sistemáticamente, poniendo en duda la suposición israelí de que pueden librar sus guerras en tierras de otros pueblos sin ser ellos el blanco. Desde los primeros días de la confrontación, ya que no tenían manera efectiva de detener los cohetes, los comandantes militares israelíes afirmaron que la resistencia se estaba quedando sin municiones. Al fin de la primera semana, declararon que un tercio de los misiles ya habían sido utilizados. Después de 51 días de guerra, la única conclusión posible es que no tienen idea de cuántos cohetes tie­ne la resistencia. Lo único positivo para los israelíes fue el desarrollo de los sistemas antimisiles, lo que limitó el daño práctico que sufrieron. Queda abierta una pregunta ¿cuánto de esto es éxito tecnológico real y cuánto es el resultado de la debilidad de los nuevos cohetes palestinos? Sin embargo, se debe recordar que muchas de las personas en Gaza que lanzaron estos cohetes pasaron sus veranos como niños lanzando piedras a los soldados israelíes. Tienen muchas razones para sentir que han hecho progresos.

Los túneles

En esta guerra, la resistencia palestina dio una nueva dimensión a la vieja noción del movimiento subterráneo. Se compensó la potencia abrumadora de fuego y el control total del aire y el mar por parte de Israel con esta vieja solución tecnológicamente sencilla. Los túneles corren debajo de la cerca y detrás de las líneas israelíes, donde sólo son un pequeño aditamento. La fijación de Israel en “destruir los túneles” (ya sea real o simulada) permitió a la resistencia matar a muchos más soldados dentro de Gaza que los muertos por ataques a través de los túneles.

Resistencia

Israel no estaba preparado para una larga confrontación. Al final, fue la guerra más larga en su tipo. Normalmente, el pensamien­to político israelí fue que debían utilizar lo más posible el tiempo político con el fin de permitir que el ejército hiciera su trabajo (lo llaman “Dejá ganar a las Fuerzas de Defensa de Israel), a pesar de que ni siquiera recuerdo la última vez que ganaron, ni tienen idea alguna de lo que debería ser ganar…). Por otro lado, el liderazgo de Hamas hizo un trabajo cuesta arriba durante los largos días de lucha y negociaciones para mejorar el funcionamiento de la nueva unidad palestina y cerrar algunas de las brechas en la solidaridad árabe. Las noticias finales de cohetes que caían en Tel Aviv se ubicaron, en las noticias occidentales, en algún lugar entre los coches bomba en Bagdad y un terremoto en Islandia, lo cual no es un ranking que el Estado sionista pueda aprobar como niño mimado de las principales potencias del mundo.

Por todas estas razones, esta confrontación militar creó algunos cambios en el equilibrio completamente desequilibrado de poder a favor de los palestinos.

La política de la guerra

La confrontación militar es sólo la punta del iceberg de una con­frontación más amplia entre las entidades (instituciones) políticas, sociales y económicas. Cada lado es profundamente dependiente en nuestros días de un “campo” de apoyo por parte de los Estados, pueblos y culturas.

Israel comenzó esta guerra en lo que parecía una combinación óptima de circunstancias políticas. El sufrimiento del pueblo pales­tino tiende a ser ensombrecido por el sangriento caos en Siria, Irak, Libia y otros países árabes. Las potencias occidentales han perdido cualquier objetivo o algo parecido a una dirección en el manejo del conflicto en Palestina y su actitud se define por su prejuicio hacia los palestinos, a los que tildan de “terroristas” y por el mantra del “derecho de Israel a defenderse”, no importa lo que cualquiera de las dos partes esté haciendo.

La resistencia palestina entró en esta guerra en las peores condi­ciones regionales. Nunca antes había estado más aislada. El Estado egipcio está ahora controlado por una contrarrevolución en ebulli­ción que considera a Hamas como una extensión de su principal enemigo, los Hermanos Musulmanes. Los partidarios tradicionales de la resistencia en Irán y Siria están ocupados en sofocar la insurrec­ción del pueblo sirio y no se olvidan de que Hamas tomó partido en la revuelta contra Bashar. Así que la resistencia en Gaza se quedó sólo con Catar y Turquía como respaldos políticos activos para su aspiración de romper el cerco.

En estas condiciones, la evolución de la guerra no trajo ningún gran avance, pero ayudó poco a poco para inclinar la balanza hacia el lado de la resistencia.

En el comienzo de la guerra, Israel estaba entusiasmado con su unidad en torno de la causa sagrada. Esta unidad monolítica es tí­pica de la comunidad de colonos en Israel al comienzo de cualquier guerra, la que se mantiene unida por un total desprecio hacia los palestinos como seres humanos y por una larga práctica en rituales de auto-victimización.

Pero los acontecimientos recientes en la sociedad israelí hicieron que el extremismo racista, esa conclusión lógica de la mentalidad de los colonos, tomara el control de la política, de la calle y de los medios de comunicación. Antes del final de la guerra, la mayor parte de la coalición gobernante y la mitad del gabinete de guerra volvieron a los “ataques talkback” (ataques de espaldas, no de frente) contra el gobierno y la cúpula militar, porque no pudieron satisfacer sus sue­ños militaristas. La atmósfera de terror interno en contra de cualquier oposición a la guerra ayudó a silenciar a los opositores políticos, pero no hizo más fuerte al “frente interno”.

Por otro lado, los palestinos entraron en esta guerra con un recién creado “gobierno de unidad” que se inició con el presidente Mah- mud Abbas declarando que la seguridad de la cooperación con la ocu­pación es “sagrada” y fracasando en transferir los salarios de decenas de miles de empleados del gobierno en Gaza. Los israelíes esperaban utilizar a Abbas para añadir presión sobre la resistencia liderada por Hamas en Gaza.

A medida que el ataque a Gaza enfurecía a los palestinos, por otra parte hubo una movilización popular masiva -la más significativa en Al-Quds (Jerusalén)-, en la que se produjo una intifada local después del asesinato del joven Muhammad Abu Khdeir (obligado a beber gasolina, golpeado y quemado vivo).

En los territorios ocupados desde 1948, la juventud palestina llevó a cabo las más amplias confrontaciones con la policía desde octubre de 2000, cuando más de un millar de personas fueron detenidas. En Cisjordania hubo varias manifestaciones de masivas y varios manifes­tantes fueron muertos a tiros por el ejército israelí.

Finalmente, fueron los palestinos los que jugaron la carta de la unidad y lograron establecer una lista unificada de demandas pales­tinas, así como la creación de un equipo de negociación unida. Los “logros” israelíes y egipcios, como dejar que los hombres de Abbas controlen los cruces fronterizos, no son más que la cara para salvarse ellos y cubrir su acuerdo para aliviar el asedio. ¿Qué “seguridad” ex­tra podrán dar los guardias palestinos, dado que cualquier cosa que pase a través de los cruces es ya cuidadosamente estudiado por los israelíes o los egipcios?

En el plano árabe, Hamas hizo lo mejor en las peores condicio­nes. Por algún tiempo, la causa palestina volvió a ser el centro de atención. Hubo manifestaciones masivas en muchos lugares como Jordania, algunas incluso en Haleb (Alepo) a pesar de los continuos bombardeos por parte del régimen. En estas condiciones, cada go­bierno árabe se sintió obligado a parlotear para mostrar su apoyo a los palestinos. Incluso el gobierno egipcio tuvo que suavizar su hostilidad instintiva.

En todo el mundo se produjo una oleada de actividades y de apoyo a la causa palestina. Naturalmente “Alto a la guerra” (Stop the War) fue acompañado por “Dejen el asedio” (Lift the Siege), “BDS”1 y “Liberen Palestina” (Free Palestina).

La izquierda latinoamericana, la cual tomó el control de la mayor parte de los Estados de América del Sur durante la última década, dio un importante apoyo moral liderado por Evo Morales, el primer presidente indígena y socialista de Bolivia, quien respaldó al BDS y declaró a Israel como un Estado terrorista.

La opinión pública en el mundo árabe y en Occidente también obligó a un replanteamiento en los círculos imperialistas gobernantes. Llegó en su mayoría en dos oleadas: en primer lugar, la suspensión temporal de los viajes aéreos a Tel Aviv; después, una revisión de algu­nos suministros de armas de Estados Unidos, Gran Bretaña y España. Esto no significa que las potencias occidentales hayan superado su instinto racista -hemos visto, por ejemplo, la iniciativa europea ha­cia el final de la guerra para volver a la condición de que se levante el bloqueo de Gaza, basada en su desmilitarización, al igual que los propios israelíes, pero esta condición fue abandonada. Pero Israel no está considerado tan alto, como lo solía ser, en la agenda imperialista, ya que es ahora otra fuente de problemas. Sus amos imperialistas casi han olvidado cuándo fue la última vez que sirvieron a sus intereses de manera efectiva.

¿Y ahora qué?

El futuro de Gaza sigue siendo incierto. Incluso si llegan a un acuerdo con Israel (o con Egipto) no hay ninguna garantía de que se respetará, como ya ocurrió con los acuerdos después de la anterior guerra, en 2012, y con el intercambio de presos, en 2011. Sin embargo, Gaza está luchando por la libertad.

Se requiere una intifada para atraer a la Organización para la Li­beración de Palestina (OLP) y otra intifada para expulsar al ejército israelí y los colonos. La retirada israelí en 2005 permitió las eleccio­nes relativamente libres de 2006 y el establecimiento del gobierno de Hamas. En 2007, Hamas logró implementar las elecciones y tomar el control total después de abortar un intento de golpe de parte de una milicia entrenada en Estados Unidos dirigida por Dahlan.

Gaza se convirtió en la primera (y hasta ahora única) parte de Palestina bajo control palestino. Desde entonces, Israel hace todo lo posible para hacer de esta independencia palestina dolorosa. En los últimos años, su política oficial es la “diferenciación” para probar que vive bajo la ocupación y que Abbas en Cisjordania es mejor que la independencia (y asedio) bajo Hamas. Al ser reacios a dar algo a los palestinos, e impulsado por el deseo incontrolable de acabar con los asentamientos y apropiarse de las tierras, concentra sus esfuerzos en hacer un infierno la vida en Gaza.

Gaza se hizo más fuerte a pesar del asedio y los ataques conse­cutivos. En la última guerra, por primera vez, Gaza luchó como un Estado, sobre todo por las fuerzas armadas organizadas bajo el mando central. En medio de la guerra, el líder de Hamas, Khaled Meshaal, se jactó de que la resistencia estaba matando soldados mientras los israe­líes mataban a civiles. En el final de la guerra, la mayoría de los líderes palestinos acordaron que la garantía de sus logros no es un acuerdo, sino el poder de la resistencia.

Pero la lucha no es por Gaza: es sobre el futuro de Palestina. Y Palestina no puede ser liberada, mientras una gran parte del resto del mundo árabe se está deteriorando en una sangrienta guerra civil. La posición heroica de Palestina durante el último asalto en Gaza fue un importante recordatorio para el pueblo árabe de todo el mundo de que la lucha por la libertad requiere de la unidad de cara a los opreso­res y que se puede ganar, incluso en las condiciones más duras.

Publicado en el sitio Free Haifa, el 31 de agosto de 2014

http://freehaifa.wordpress. com/2014/08/31/lessons-jro m-the-gaza- war/

The Spanish translation was first published by Partido Obrero in En Defensa del Marxismo #43

Share this:

  • Twitter
  • Facebook

Like this:

Like Loading...

Ilan Pappe: A democratic state in all of Palestine is possible – The Palestinian movement should change direction

03 Friday Oct 2014

Posted by freehaifa in Jews in Palestine, ODS, Palestine

≈ 6 Comments

Tags

#GazaUnderAttack, Arab 48, Arara, BBC, BDS, Ethnic Cleansing, Gaza, Gaza History, Herak Shababi, Ilan Pappe, Israeli Government, Knesset Elections, Military Government, One Democratic State, Oslo, Palestine Solidarity, Resistance, ROR, Wadi Ara, West Bank

Ilan_Pappe_in_Arara_and_Flag

(This report was translated from the Hebrew original.)

The invitation to the lecture by historian Ilan Pappe in the township of Ar’ara in the Triangle (inside the “green line”), held on Friday, September 12, 2014, was signed by three local Palestinian youth movements. Published on Facebook, the invitation showed that the young activists wanted to discuss the issues in depth: It promised presentation of the “one democratic state” solution followed by an open discussion.

In January 2013, when it still seemed that the Arab Spring was bringing an unstoppable wave of democratic change to our region, toppling one by one the regimes of the old order, we hosted Ilan Pappe for a lecture in “Herak Haifa”. We were happy to learn that Israel is posed contrary to the historical trend. Since then history’s wheels got stuck in bloody battles in many of the region’s countries. Many activists lost hope for democratic change in the near future.

The bloody Israeli offensive last summer, initially in the West Bank and later against Gaza, and the success of the Palestinian resistance to stand up to this attack, concentrated again, for some time, international attention to the Palestinian cause and enabled us to re-examine the regional balance of power at the test of changing conditions.

Either because of the new energies that emerged in the context of resistance to the slaughter in Gaza, or because of the young audience and profound debate, I found that Pappe’s lecture in Ar’ara transcended several of his lectures which I’ve attended over the last year. In addition to historical details (some of them new for me) and principled and practical arguments proving the vital necessity of the one-state solution, this time Ilan also tried to outline concrete steps for action.

In the spirit of our time, the full video of the lecture (in Hebrew) was posted on 14.9 to YouTube. The organizers promise to add subtitles in Arabic and English soon. Thus I exempt myself from trying to summarize it in detail and focus on the essence, including critical discussion of some of the content.

Ethnic cleansing in installments

Ar’ara is a good place to explain the arbitrariness of the “Conceptual Partition” of Palestine between the regions captured by the Zionists at the great ethnic cleansing of 1948 and the 1967 occupation. As part of the Wadi ‘Ara region, in 1948 Ar’ara was in the “West Bank”, that part of Palestine that Israel agreed to leave to the Hashemite Kingdom within the framework of good relations between the two states. A year later, Israel recalled that it wants to own the road connecting ‘Afula and Hadera and demanded Jordan to hand over the Wadi. Only after Israel threatened to take military action did Jordan “agree” to relinquish the area and it was transferred to Israeli control in the summer of 1949…

Another historical note attesting to the artificial partition and the lack of any consideration of the human rights of Palestinians – the original inhabitants of the country – refers to the formation of the Gaza Strip. It is an artificial compound where refugees were crammed from the Negev and the southern coastal plain up to Jaffa. As a result the Gaza Strip has a special status as that part of Palestine the Zionists don’t really want to hold, because of its big population, and don’t know how to get rid of.

The central historical part of the lecture dealt with the West Bank and focused on the importance the Zionists attach to its control, both from historical and religious perspectives and for geopolitical and security considerations. Pappe relied on historical knowledge uncovered with the recent opening of the archives of the Israeli government. (Most archives, such as protocols from government meetings, open after 30 years. Security archives usually open after 50 years.) He disproved the Zionist narrative according to which the occupation of the West Bank was the unforeseen side effect of “Arab aggression” or the “security threat” in 1967 and of Israel’s need to defend itself.

He relied on four main facts:

  1. The existence from 1949 and until 1967 of a large lobby within the Israeli establishment which openly agitated for the occupation of the West Bank. This lobby included senior leaders from all Zionist parties, military officers and many members of the Zionist elite. Only the firm stance of Ben Gurion (despite being the biggest war criminal responsible for the ethnic cleansing of 48) against the occupation of the West Bank prevented this lobby from getting what it wanted earlier. As Ben-Gurion left the scene in 1963 the way opened for the realization of the plot.
  2. In 1964, the military appointed an officer named Michael Shakham, who was previously in charge of the military government controlling the Arabs within the 1948 borders, to prepare the structure and policy for imposing Israeli military government in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.
  3. The Israeli government’s discussions following its occupation of the West Bank, Gaza Strip, Sinai Peninsula and the Syrian Golan in 1967 indicate a determination never to return to the boundaries of the beginning of June 67 and to control the West Bank permanently.
  4. The building of Jewish settlements in any “free” area in the West Bank that began under the Labor-led government soon after the 1967 occupation.

In 1967 Zionism achieved its goal of establishing a single state between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River – a Jewish, racist and anti-democratic state. This is the reality in which we live and with it we have to deal.

There is a whole system of lies and illusions making it difficult to cope and change the situation. They transfer the consciousness and political struggle to another dimension – a mock battle between the “pro-occupation” and “a peace camp”. Ilan Pappe characterizes this illusionary search for peace as “searching for the key under the lamppost” – not where we have lost it.

The deception of temporary occupation and forged peace process

A significant part of the lecture was devoted to explanations and evidence proving that “the lamppost” didn’t just happen to be where it is. It is the result of a carefully conceived policy aiming to perpetuate Israeli control of all parts of Palestine.

The ideal solution, from the Zionist point of view, was to complete the ethnic cleansing and control all of Palestine without any of its original inhabitants. Zionism continues to work towards this goal, but faces considerable constrains on its freedom of action. Even the fact that the ethnic cleansing in 1948 has not been completed should be attributed to the staying power, Somoud, of the Arab population and not to any good will on the part of Zionism. Since 1967, some 450,000 Palestinians were expelled from the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. But even those who have not been physically deported are victims of ethnic cleansing of an indirect kind: denial of rights, restricting their freedom of movement, limiting personal and social development, preventing any real influence over laws or the government.

Referring to the internal discussions that took place within the Israeli government in 1967 just after the occupation, according to protocols that are now accessible, Pappe tells about proposals for immediate expulsion of the majority of the population. Those proposals found many supporters, mostly veterans of the ’48 ethnic cleansing. However, the Zionist leadership was fearful of active opposition from the population, many of them were already refugees from ’48. The presence of the international media, which was hardly considered in ’48, was another deterrent. Basically the war in ’67 ended quickly and it was difficult to organize and justify ethnic cleansing without the fog of war.

In this situation, out of conscious intention to control the area indefinitely and deny all the human rights of its people, Israel invented the magic formula of presenting the occupation as temporary. The status of the population will be settled “with the coming of peace”. This mode of operation allows Israel to continue to present itself as a “democratic state” and enjoy the many benefits attached to this status in the international arena.

Hence “the peace process” and talk about “two states for two peoples” are not in any contradiction with the occupation, not even the “temporary” occupation” of 1967, but a political and conceptual framework designed to enable and perpetuate the occupation.

Israel would find it hard to market this façade to the world if it was not being assisted by many others, some serving their self-interests and others out of misled good intentions. The leadership of the Palestinian national movement plays a key role in providing credibility for the fake peace process. It is followed by a large part of the leadership of the Palestinian Arab population within the green line. Many peace activists around the world have fallen into this trap.

Meanwhile, Israel has been working on the ground to perpetuate its control over the land, water, economy and all aspects of Palestinian lives. It creates a situation where even if a Palestinian state is announced, headed by Mahmoud Abbas as president, it will not have any practical significance.

ODS offering equality for all inhabitants and returning refugees

Against the reality of one racist state, tearing apart the façade of a fake peace process and “two-state solution”, Ilan Pappe suggests to “start looking for the key where we lost it”.

We need to start by correctly identifying the problem: expose Zionism as a colonialist movement and characterize Israel as an apartheid racist state. There is no other Zionism, nor another Israel. Exposure, by itself, may have huge effect: First of all because of the importance of international support in preserving Israel’s superiority against all local forces; but also due to internal conflicts within Israeli society.

Any solution should be derived from our understanding of the problem. It should start with a discussion among all residents of the country on how to live together within a framework where all enjoy full rights, equality and partnership. The Palestinian refugees should also take part in this discussion, as they have the right to return to Palestine and fully take part in shaping its/their future. It is essential to set the goal of establishing one state for all inhabitants and refugees of the country, because it defines who should participate in the discussion about this future.

Zionism has done, and continues to do, whatever it can to divide the Palestinian people and guide any part of them to get “stuck” in a different dead end. First came the distancing of the refugees outside Palestine’s borders and the isolation of the Palestinian population in the ’48 territories. Today we also witness the political separation between the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. Posing a new agenda, common to all sectors of the Palestinian people, is the beginning of the road toward a solution. Today’s technology can provide the basis for an open discussion across borders and checkpoints, forming a platform for more intense links and designing together the common path.

All this is not at all easy. There are problems in the relationship between different sectors of the public, between secular and religious folk, between the indigenous inhabitants and the third generation of settlers. A new distribution of resources is required to compensate for generations of dispossession and discrimination. It is not clear what will be the nature of the new society and what political framework we will build together; but it is essential that we start a serious discussion about all of it. Beyond that we face a hard struggle against an oppressive regime that regards any perspective other than a racist Jewish state as “Suicide” and “Existential Danger”.

This is our task and those are the problems we must solve. Until we look straight at this reality, we are wasting precious time. Understanding the problem and presenting a real solution can create strong dynamics for changing the balance of power.

Plan of Action

At the discussion with the audience Pappe tried to outline some chapters of a practical plan that one may work upon immediately for ODS:

  1. Arab representation in the Israeli Knesset gives great propaganda advantage to Israel in presenting itself as a democracy to world public opinion. In practice, Arab MKs have no real impact on legislation and are not even considered for coalition politics. Waiver of Arab representation in the Knesset shall constitute an important and effective message to the world while it carries minimal practical cost.
  2. One may search for an alternative to the Palestinian Authority that would not serve Israel.
  3. One may establish frames for cooperation and work on building a movement that will unite the different parts of the Palestinian people.
  4. We should open the way and call upon anti-Zionist Jews in Israel to become full partners in a unified political movement.

We must not assume that we are powerless and that there is some determinism assuring Israel’s superiority forever. A political activist should not ask “How long will it take until we win the fight?” but rather “What did I do today to bring the victory?”

Pappe mentioned his participation, in 1992, in a delegation which travelled to Tunis to request Arafat to raise the rights of Palestinian Arabs inside the Green Line in the Oslo negotiations with Israel. He recalled their disappointment as Arafat said that was an internal Israeli matter.

Divisions in the leadership of the Palestinian struggle and the lack of a clear political perspective prevent proper utilization of the support of the cause in world public opinion. Although Israel and its allies are working to strengthen these divisions, the responsibility for building the leadership of the Palestinian struggle falls ultimately upon Palestinians themselves.

Pappe finally predicts that when the Palestinian people will unite behind a clear democratic political perspective and clarify to the world that what Israel is fighting for is the perpetuation of racism, Zionism will fall. He says such a prediction was not possible in the past, but it is based on reading the dynamics of power relations and world politics today.

Positive change in the balance of power

Living in England and being involved in the international solidarity movement with the Palestinian people, Pappe describes how, despite the weakness of the Palestinian official position, international conditions are changing favorably. The Palestinian cause receives international awareness and support more than any other struggle for national liberation or democracy. The solidarity movement naturally starts as a popular protest movement, but it is acquiring recognition and support also within the elites and has already advanced and started to influence the decisions of governments and economic firms.

One of the factors that strengthen the solidarity with the Palestinian struggle is the ongoing crisis of the international capitalist system in the wake of the financial crisis that began in 2008. This crisis has led to a growing lack of trust in the political leadership and the governing elites in the global economy. New social movements see a direct connection between economic injustice “inside” and the oppression and exploitation toward third world nations. They are conscious of the direct link between the fate of blacks in the United States and the denial of rights of the Palestinian people. Insights that in the past were known only to a small minority of “rigid” Marxist are now common knowledge of the broader public.

The globalization of the international economy has led to the globalization of the protest movement. Today there is a broad sense of solidarity and commitment to protection of human rights.

He tells in detail about the achievements of the boycott movement (BDS) and the difficulties of Israeli Hasbara (propaganda). Israel is investing huge amounts of money in improving its image – especially in the United States, which many of us tend to consider “The Longest Yard”. Despite all of these efforts, Israelis speakers themselves admit their failure. They now consider campuses in the United States a lost cause.

The latest attack on Gaza, where Israel was not satisfied with ethnic cleansing but turned to outright genocide, led the solidarity movement to new heights. Law students in many faculties in England took over administrative offices in support of the Palestinians. Palestinian flags were raised on many municipal buildings across the UK.

Ilan demonstrates the potential of the solidarity movement by his recent experience. The BBC broadcasts during the attack on Gaza excelled in shocking lack of objectivity and blatant support for Israel’s position. When he heard about the preparations for a mass demonstration in London against the war, he called the organizers and suggested to change the route of the demonstration, pass by the offices of the BBC and stage a special protest there. Indeed, during the demonstration, hundreds of thousands participants rallied to protest outside the offices of the BBC.

Israeli society

When asked from the audience about the drift to the right and extremism in Israeli society, Ilan said that we all know how difficult things are but there is also some related advantage. In past times Israeli society could delude itself that there is a third way, “a Jewish and democratic state”. Today it is impossible to hide the contradiction, albeit with the vast majority of Israeli society choosing racism. This choice hurts Israel’s propaganda and will help us expose to the world the true nature of Israel.

The open choice by the majority of extremism and racism will also push more Israelis to look for alternatives. We witness the disappearance of “the Israeli left”, which will not return, but, in any case, it was a partner in all of Zionism’s crimes. It is necessary, and it is becoming more possible now, to explain to those Israelis whose conscience torments them or see the futility of occupation and racism that those vices stem directly from the Zionist ideology, on which they were educated from childhood.

We already see real signs that some Israelis draw conclusions from the situation. For example, whereas in the past the refusenik movement was mainly against army service in those territories occupied since ’67, now its mainstream is total refusal to serve in the Israeli army.

Zionist victory means perpetuating the character of Israel as a racist state. Even if Israel succeeds in suppressing the Palestinian people, it will only lead to more wars against the surrounding Arab world. In the end Israel as a Crusader state has no future and will be defeated in these wars (after the current internal conflicts in the Arab world are settled one way or another). In this respect, our program is also the only positive perspective proposed for the Israelis.

In turning to the Israeli public there is a division of roles and tasks between the Palestinian Arabs in the movement and anti-Zionist Jews. It is important that the Palestinian movement will explain to Israelis that anything less than full democracy for everyone and everywhere is unacceptable; whoever is opposed to it should be denounced as a racist. Anti-Zionist Jews have an important role in reaching out to the Jewish public. However, the main leverage for a broader change in Israeli society will come from the combination of international condemnation of Israel, the expansion of the boycott movement and a clear call from the joint ODS movement to anti-Zionist Jews to join the struggle for a common future.

Lessons from South Africa

The comparison with South Africa was repeated many times during the lecture, not always in the usual context of the characterization of Israel as an apartheid racist state or of the possibility of a solution based on the democratic principle of “one person, one vote.”

The main enemies against which Pappe spoke were despair and the perception that change is impossible. To this end, he recruited his own personal experience when he arrived in Europe in 1980 and joined the anti-apartheid movement. At that time there was gloom in the movement: many activists thought that popular struggle would never change the positions of governments and economic corporations which operate on self-interest and whose support enabled the continuation of apartheid. Britain was ruled by Margaret Thatcher, who defined Nelson Mandela as “arch-terrorist”.

Ten years later, under heavy international pressure, De Klerk announced the failure of the apartheid regime and in 1994 the liberation movement came to power in democratic elections.

Pappe also turned to the experience of South Africa to emphasise the principled position of the liberation movement there, under the leadership of the African National Congress (ANC), refusing any solution that is not based on full democracy for all residents. This position strengthened the boycott movement, which found a clear address for support and guidance. Today it is hard to find a clear address for the Palestinian liberation movement, nor for directing the struggle, neither for proposing a solution. The emergence of a movement of the inhabitants of Palestine struggling for ODS can fill this vacuum.

Another important lesson from South Africa relates to changing international conditions. The United States relied on South Africa, within the framework of the Cold War, both to counter leftist liberation movements and as a major supplier of uranium. As long as it needed SA, the US government was willing to ignore the crimes committed by the apartheid regime against the black population. The collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War (factors about which the liberation movement had no influence) abolished the usefulness of the apartheid regime and converted ​​it from an asset into a burden.

Similarly, the Western powers support Israel today because it serves their interests. These interests are changing and the day will come when they will lose interest in supporting Israel. The important questions are who will fight until that moment so that the rights of the Palestinian people will not be forgotten in the meantime and who would be ready at the moment of truth to dismantle the Israeli apartheid regime?

Al-Muqawama – The Resistance

Referring to the Palestinian leadership crisis, Ilan Pappe told the youth: there are some issues you have to discuss between yourself. You can do it without me.

Nevertheless, some twenty youngsters stayed half an hour after the lecture to ask questions and discuss various topics.

One of the issues that many of them do not see eye to eye with Ilan was the subject of armed resistance. When asked about it, Pappe stressed, on the one hand, that the oppressed people have the right to struggle for their liberty by all available means, including armed struggle. On the other hand he said that if he was a Palestinian young man, and he had to choose between a laptop and a Kalashnikov, he would choose a laptop, out of consideration which is a more effective tool in the fight. He also mentioned that nowadays armed struggle doesn’t have the same potential as in the 60s, the days of Che Guevara and the rise of the Palestinian revolution.

As a political activist, it seems to me that Pappe the historian lost here for a moment the historical context. It is true that we witness a process of democratic change in South America, which allowed the liberation movements (most of which were defeated in the armed struggle in the sixties and seventies) to bring about a significant change through democratic means. However, it is difficult to ignore the fact that we live in the heart of the Arab world where still no change was made possible through democratic means. Armed militias of all stripes and types, ranging from the nuclear-armed “Jewish state” to the decapitators of the “Islamic state”, compete between them for power through violent means.

Many years of armed struggle brought independence to the people of South Sudan, which are now fighting each other. The people of divided Kurdistan, another seemingly lost historical struggle, could not defend their very existence today were it not for the armed militias of the Kurdish Workers Party, which is still defined by the Western powers as a terrorist organization.

Armed resistance led to Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon in 2000 after 18 years of occupation and stopped another Israeli aggression in 2006. Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip was only made possible thanks to two bloody intifadas. Even those democratic protesters from England, who showed up to protest against the BBC, would probably not leave their homes, or would demonstrate for the sake of another just cause, had it not been for the spilled Palestinian blood in Gaza.

Armed struggle and political struggle are not opposites but complement each other.

The heavy price paid by the Palestinian people in their struggle is but another reason to ask whether the political leadership of the struggle serves the masses faithfully, with the due devotion and efficiency, to achieve their aspirations for Return and Freedom? Are we, the political activists, protesters, laptop holders, doing our best to build a movement that will remove the rule of Evil and establish a just society?

Arara_Pappe_Audience

Pappe_in_Arara_with_audience

Share this:

  • Twitter
  • Facebook

Like this:

Like Loading...

Lessons from the Gaza War

31 Sunday Aug 2014

Posted by freehaifa in Gaza, Palestine

≈ 11 Comments

Tags

#GazaUnderAttack, A-Sisi, Aleppo, AlQuds, Arab Revolution, Demonstration, Egypt, Gaza, Gaza 2014, Hamas, Imperialism and Israel, Latin America, palestine, Syrian Revolution, West Bank

gaza_palestine_after_war_026

There are many reasons why I didn’t write any political analysis at the time of this bloody war.

One reason is that I only wanted the war to be over, to stop the bloodshed, while I knew that the longer Gaza can stand in the face of the Israeli genocidal rampage, the better the chance that the aggressors will not get what they want and that the siege of Gaza, which, in the long term, is even more destructive to Human lives and development, will be lifted.

But the best excuse is that throughout this war the monstrous Israeli war machine seemed clumsy and clueless, while the Gaza resistance seemed to keep cool and know what they are doing.

I preferred to keep quiet and do my small thing by demonstrating against the aggression.

Now, that the war is over, what can we learn from it politically? I will try to do it short, going over many different aspects of this war, hoping to write in more details about some of them soon.

Who Won The Military Confrontation?

Great wars end with the winning side conquering territory or even with the loser signing his surrender.

The Israelis say they could conquer Gaza, but they didn’t do it. In fact, they already did it twice, in 1956 and in 1967. When they withdrew from Gaza in 2005 it was without agreement, after they paid a heavy price in two Palestinian intifadas. The fact that Gaza was not occupied again is the combine result of the expected resistance to the act of occupation and the memories of the resistance over 38 years of continued occupation. Any way you count it, the resistance is what keeps Gaza free of direct occupation.

Without gaining land or surrender, isn’t war all about killing people and destructing their livelihood? The Israeli officers, politicians and experts run to the judge of history crying: “We killed more than 2,000 people; we destroyed the homes of almost half a million Gazans, what they did to us is nothing to compare. You must declare us winners!”

But this is not the way the war is decided. We live in the world of expectations. Everybody knew that Israel has the military firepower to destroy Gaza. If the war is not for total annihilation of the other side, then it is fought to prove something about the relationship of forces.

Like Lebanon’s Hezbollah in summer 2006, the Palestinian resistance in summer 2014, led by the Qassam Brigades, the military wing of Hamas, surprised Israel both with their technical preparations and with their fighting power.

  • Missiles and mortars – The previous Israeli onslaught on Gaza, just in November 2012, ended with a few rockets that reached the Tel-Aviv metropolitan area, where most of the Israelis live. Now, for the first time, Tel Aviv was systematically targeted, putting in doubt the Israeli assumption that it can wage its wars on other people’s lands without being targeted. From the first days of the confrontation, as they had no effective way to stop the rockets flying, the Israeli military commanders claimed that the resistance is running out of ammunition. By the end of the first week they declared that a third of the missiles were already used. After 51 days of war the only possible conclusion is that they didn’t have any idea how many rockets there were. The only bright side for the Israelis was the development of the anti-rocket systems, which limited the practical damage they suffered. It is still an open question how much of this is real technological success and how much is the weakness of the new Palestinian rockets. Yet, you should remember that many of the people in Gaza that were launching these rockets spent their summers as kids throwing stones at Israeli soldiers. They have many reasons to feel that they are making progress.
  • The Tunnels – In this war the Palestinian resistance gave a new dimension to the old notion of Underground movement. It compensated for the overwhelming Israeli firepower and Israel’s full control of the air and the sea with this simple, old technological solution. The tunnels that went under the fence and behind Israeli lines where only a small addition. The Israeli fixation with “destroying the tunnels” (whether real or simulated) enabled the resistance to kill many more soldiers inside Gaza than those killed by attacks through the tunnels.
  • Endurance – Israel was not prepared for a long confrontation. In the end it was the longest war of its kind. Typically the Israeli political thinking was that they should buy as much as possible political time in order to let the army do its thing (They call it “Let the IDF win” – even though they don’t even remember when they last won, nor have any idea what such a win should be…) On the other side the Hamas leadership made an up-hill job during the long days of fighting and negotiations to improve the functioning of the new Palestinian unity and heal some of the breaches in the Arab solidarity. In the end news of rockets in Tel Aviv fell on the Western news somewhere between car bombs in Baghdad and an earthquake in Iceland – not a ranking that the Zionist state, as the spoiled child of the world’s top powers, can let themselves be in.

For all these reasons, this military confrontation created some shift in the completely imbalanced balance of power in favor of the Palestinians.

The Politics of the War

The military confrontation is just the tip of the iceberg of a much wider confrontation between political entities, societies and economies. Each side in our days is deeply dependant on a supportive “camp” of states, people and cultures.

Israel started this war at what seemed like an optimal combination of political circumstances. The suffering of the Palestinian people tends be shadowed by the bloody mayhem in Syria, Iraq, Libya and other Arab countries. The Western powers have lost any purpose or semblance of direction in handling the conflict in Palestine and their attitude is defined by their prejudice against Palestinians as “terrorists” and by the mantra about “Israel’s right to defend itself”, no matter what any of the two sides is doing.

The Palestinian resistance entered this war in the worst regional conditions. It has never been more isolated. The Egyptian state is now controlled by a boiling counter-revolution that regards Hamas as an extension of its main enemy, the Muslim Brothers. The traditional supporters of the resistance in Iran and Syria are busy putting down the insurrection by the Syrian people and didn’t forget Hamas’ taking sides with the revolt against Bashar.  So the resistance in Gaza was left with only Qatar and Turkey as active political backers for its aspiration to break the siege.

In these conditions, developments throughout the war didn’t bring any massive breakthrough but did help gradually to tilt the edge toward the resistance’s side.

In the beginning of the war Israel was exited by its own unity around the sacred cause. This wall to wall unity is typical to the settlers’ community in Israel at the beginning of any war and is held together by complete disregard to the Palestinians as Human beings and by the long practiced rituals of self-victimization. But recent developments in the Israeli society meant that racist extremism, the logical conclusion of the settler mentality, took control of politics, the street and the media. Before the end of the war most of the ruling coalition and half of the war cabinet turned to “talkback attacks” on the government and the military leadership for failing to satisfy their militarist dreams. The atmosphere of internal terror against any opposition to the war helped to silence political opponents but didn’t make the “internal front” much stronger.

On the other side the Palestinians entered this war with a newly established “unity government” that started its period by the PA President Abbas declaring that security cooperation with the occupation is “sacred” and failing to transfer wages to tens of thousands of government employees in Gaza. The Israelis hoped to use Abbas to add pressure on the Hamas-led resistance in Gaza.

As the attack on Gaza enraged Palestinians elsewhere, there was a massive popular mobilization – most significantly in Al-Quds, where there was a local Intifada after the burning to death of Muhammad Abu Khdeir. In the 1948-occupied territories Palestinian youth held the widest confrontations with the police since October 2000, in which more than a thousand were detained. In the West Bank there were several mass demonstrations and several demonstrators were shot dead by the Israeli army.

In the end it was the Palestinians that played the unity card, succeeded to form a united list of Palestinian demands and a united negotiating team. Israeli and Egyptian “achievements” like letting Abbas’ men control the border crossings are no more than face saving for them to cover their agreement to relieve the siege. What extra “security” for them will the Palestinian guards give as anything that goes through the crossings is already scrutinized by the Israelis or the Egyptians?

On the Arab level Hamas made the best in the worst conditions. For some time the Palestinian cause was again at the center of attention. There were demonstrations in many places, massive ones in Jordan, some even in Haleb (Allepo) in spite of continuous bombing by the regime. In these conditions every Arab government felt obliged to pay some lips’ service to show support for the Palestinians. Even the Egyptian government had to temper down its instinctive hostility.

Throughout the world there was a wave of activity and support for the Palestinian cause. Naturally “Stop the War” was accompanied by “Lift the Siege”, “BDS” and “Free Palestine”. The Latin American left, which took control of most of the state in South America over the last decade, gave important moral support, led by Evo Morales, Bolivia’s first Indian and Socialist president, who endorsed BDS and declared Israel a terrorist state.

Public opinion in the Arab World and the West also forced some rethinking in the ruling imperialist circles. It mostly came in two waves: First the temporary suspension of air travel to Tel Aviv, later re-examination of some weapons’ supply by the US, Britain and Spain. This doesn’t mean that the Western powers overcame their racist instinct – we have seen, for example, the European initiative toward the end of the war to re-condition the lifting of the siege of Gaza on its demilitarization – just as the Israelis themselves all but dropped this condition. But Israel is not as high as it used to be in the imperialist agenda – it is just another source of problems. Its imperialist masters have almost forgotten when was the last time that it served their interests in any effective way.

What Next?

The future of Gaza is still uncertain. Even when you reach agreement with Israel (or with Egypt) there is no guarantee that it will be honored, as happened with the agreements after the previous (2012) war and with the 2011 prisoners’ exchange. Yet Gaza is fighting for liberty…

It required one intifada to bring in the PLO and another intifada to throw away the Israeli army and settlers. The Israeli withdrawal in 2005 enabled the relatively free 2006 elections and the establishment of the Hamas government. By 2007 Hamas succeeded to implement the elections result and take full control after aborting an attempted coup by a US trained militia led by Dahlan.

Gaza became the first (and till now only) part of Palestine under Palestinian control. Since then Israel makes everything it can to make this experience at Palestinian independence painful. In the last years its official policy is “differentiation” – to prove that lives under the occupation and Abbas in the West Bank is better than independence (and siege) under Hamas. Being loath to give anything to the Palestinians and driven by uncontrollable desire for settlements and land grab, it concentrated its effort on making life in Gaza a hell.

Gaza became stronger in spite of the siege and consecutive attacks. In the last war, for the first time, Gaza fought like a state, mostly by organized armed forces under central command. In the middle of the war Hamas’ leader, Khaled Mashaal, boasted that the resistance is killing soldiers while the Israelis are killing civilians. By the end of the war most Palestinian leaders agreed that the guarantee for their achievements is not any agreement but the power of the resistance.

But the struggle is not about Gaza – it is about the future of Palestine. And Palestine could not be freed while much of the rest of the Arab world is deteriorating into a bloody civil war. The heroic standing of the Palestinian during the latest assault on Gaza was an important reminder to the Arab people everywhere that the fight for freedom requires unity in the face of the oppressors and that it can be won even at the harshest conditions.

This article was translated to Spanish and published in En Defensa del Marxismo #43

Share this:

  • Twitter
  • Facebook

Like this:

Like Loading...

Israel disproves its own lies about the Rafah massacre – and the massacre continues…

04 Monday Aug 2014

Posted by freehaifa in Gaza, Palestine

≈ 5 Comments

Tags

#GazaUnderAttack, Ban Ki-Moon, Cease Fire, Gaza, Gaza 2014, Givati, Goldin, Hannibal, Massacre, Obama, Rafah, War Crimes

Indiscriminate Israeli Bombing of Rafah, from Refugees in UNRWA Schools to Ambulances

Indiscriminate Israeli Bombing of Rafah, from Refugees in UNRWA Schools to Ambulances

In the bloody genocidal Israeli rampage against Gaza’s people – the massacre in the city and refugee camp of Rafah on the southern end of the Gaza strip was the worst, and it still continues. Just as I write this line on Monday morning (August 4, 2014), Israel declared a humanitarian ceasefire – but it will not include Rafah. So the people of Rafah will not be allowed even to dig their dead from under the ruins or treat the wounded or get some water to drink.

The Rafah massacre is also the most extreme proof of the “world community”, led by the US and the UN, active encouragement and support for the Israel’s war crimes. As you may remember, on Friday morning, August 1, a 72 hour ceasefire in Gaza had to start. About two hours after it started, Israel announced that a unit of its army was attacked by “a suicide bomber”, killing two soldiers, and that one soldier was held by the Palestinian militants.

Just as the news came, Barack Obama went on the air to adopt the Israeli version of events, denounce Hamas acts in strong words that he never used for the killing of more than a thousand Palestinian civilians, including 400 children. He went on to wonder whether Hamas can ever be trusted to make a ceasefire. The UN secretary-general, Ban Ki-moon, trying to outdo his bosses in Washington, said the Hamas attack was “likely to have very serious consequences for the people of Gaza” – actually encouraging the Israelis to go farther in the ongoing massacre.

Lies exposed

In an article in the Israeli Haaretz today, published in different versions in English and Hebrew, Gili Cohen brings some details from the IDF (The Israeli Army) internal inquiry about what happened on Friday morning.

The most important lines may be the small print, and don’t be astonished if they will disappear sometime soon. They say: “… a Givati Brigade patrol came under heavy fire while moving toward a building where a tunnel shaft was located.” So, according to the IDF itself, it was the Israeli patrol itself that advanced toward the area held by the Palestinian militants, clearly breaching the ceasefire agreement!

The report goes on to say that “Contrary to earlier reports, however, the inquiry concluded that the terrorist who came nearest the three soldiers wasn’t wearing a suicide belt, but simply continued firing his rifle until he was killed.”

It is typical that at the heights of the battle people exaggerate and public relations officers paint a picture that suits their purpose… But what will Obama and Ban Ki-moon say now to the relatives of the hundreds of people that died in the massacre that they have so enthusiastically encouraged?

The Hannibal Procedure

The Rafah events are also outstanding in demonstrating how the Israeli genocidal campaign has nothing to do with preserving the lives of Jews, not even of its own soldiers. It is rather a desperate case of racist “white supremacy” going psychotic.

The main argument underlying the severity of the attack on the Givati patrol in Rafah was the Israeli “fear” that one of its soldiers was captured by the resistance.

Haaretz goes on to report:

“The IDF then sent additional forces to the area, including aircraft… This included a tank battalion and an infantry battalion… These forces also laid down heavy fire “from all directions,” including tank shells, artillery bombardments and air strikes, in an effort to isolate the area where Goldin was thought to be, block all access routes to and from it and thereby ensure that nobody could either enter or leave without the soldiers noticing, the IDF source said. This was in line with the Hannibal procedure, which one senior officer said is meant to ensure that “every effort to locate the kidnapped [soldier] and the kidnappers” is made.”

Actually the main purpose of the onslaught on Rafah was to make sure that lieutenant Goldin will not stay alive at the hand of the Palestinians. It is reminiscent of the “better dead than red” slogans of the cold war. “We burned the village in order to save its people from communism…”

At the end of the report, Haaretz concludes:

“According to Palestinian reports, more than 130 Palestinians were killed in this onslaught, with some of the bodies located only in the days after it happened. Palestinians also accused the IDF of attacking vehicles en route to the Rafah hospital, including several ambulances.

“Given the massive firepower employed, it could be assumed that the casualties would probably include innocent civilians.”

(Notice Haaretz caution and under-statement in reporting Israel’s war crimes!)

By today’s announcement that the ceasefire will not include Rafah we may assume that the Israeli army is not fully sure that Goldin is already dead, but it is determined not to be proved wrong at any price…

The Startup Nation

Israel is very proud of its achievement in intercepting the relatively primitive missiles of the resistance.

They will now invest billions of dollars (from the US tax payers’ money) to build underground detectors and defenses…

But if their main concern is that a soldier may go stray and be held alive by the resistance, they could also solve it by cheap technology without causing so much collateral damage. They may inject each soldier with a death pill that will be activated as soon as he loses contact with his base…

Share this:

  • Twitter
  • Facebook

Like this:

Like Loading...

Israel’s Genocidal Rampage Must Be Stopped

26 Saturday Jul 2014

Posted by freehaifa in Gaza, Uncategorized, Zionism

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

#GazaUnderAttack, Egypt, Ethnic Cleansing, Gaza, Gaza 2014, Genocide, palestine, Protective Edge, Uri Misgav, Zionism

 

Children, tragic victims of Israeli aggression on Gaza: rights groups

Since the latest onslaught on the Palestinian people started I spend most of my time demonstrating, going to court to support the detainees from demonstrations and following the news which drive me mad…

What can you write that will knock the minds of people who close their eyes to the sight of burned kids and whose ears are deaf to the screaming of relatives who lost all their dear ones in the targeted mass killing of whole families by the most sophisticated western air force?

But, as I have the sickening privilege to read intensively the Zionist media, there are some things that I may better explain…

The Ultimate Goal

One of the best Zionist writers that I follow recently is Uri Misgav from Haaretz. At the beginning of the latest attack on Gaza he declared that Israel already failed, because it started a military operation without any conceived goal that can be achieved. But he failed to read the writing on the wall. The Israeli politicians had a very clear goal that the mob was chanting in all the “demonstrations” that prepared for the rampage: “Ma-vet la-a-ra-vim!” – “Death to the Arabs”.

When the Zionist mob gets out of control in the streets of Jerusalem – hunting the city’s cleaners and falafel sellers to beat and lynch – the Zionist law and order authorities and respectable media have a common phrase to hold them back: “Don’t take the law into your own hands”.

Israel is a Jewish Democracy and its politician should give their electorate what they want.

But it is not only electoral considerations and populism that make Israeli politicians complete to excel in propagating racist hatred and bath in the heroism of spilling Arab blood. It is the only real political plan in the country. While talking about political solutions, the Zionist still stick to their original goal: “A country without people to a people without a country”. They still systematically act in all legal and illegal means for ethnic cleansing in the Galilee and the Naqab as well as in Al-Quds and the rest of the West Bank. But expropriating the land doesn’t solve the Zionists main problem – the existence of the Palestinian people and their constant struggle to live as free people on their land. So they keep coming back to the ultimate solution: “Death to the Arabs!”Protesting Genocide in Gaza

 

Killing Time

General Schwarzkopf once said it is not worth the while to hold a bulldog if you don’t let it loose from time to time. For a long time Israel didn’t really needed a complete policy – it was pushing for a new attack until the rope was loosened to let her go after its victims. Then her master could hold it back for a nice profit for itself and throw a fat bone to the dog.

Till now, in all Israeli thinking about the politics behind the military rampage, the main task of the politicians and diplomats is to “buy time” for the military to act.

The Israeli generals and politicians are now looking to find how loose the rope is. Yesterday they bombed two UNRWA schools where Gaza families found shelter after they were expelled from their homes by previous bombings. Today they bombed another hospital, killing patients in their beds. They also successfully targeted a Palestinian ambulance, killing and wounding members of the medical team. The daily death toll in Gaza is now more than 100.

Of course, according to their military-technical potential, they could kill as many Palestinians as they like. But they need some justification, and they are somewhat afraid to be brought to justice for their war crimes. This was the logic behind the entrance of the ground forces into Gaza. Some spilling of Israeli blood and the need to protect their soldiers was the best justification for much wider massacres of the Palestinians. Now the fairy tales about the need to destroy Gaza “terror tunnels” is used to buy time for more killing spree.

The Brakes are Broken

Historically Zionism and Israel were used by the different imperialist forces to subdue the Arab national movement. Egypt’s president, Anwar Sadat, declared that 90% percent of the cards are in America’s hands – before throwing away any semblance of national independence and remaking his country into a colony.

At those times the break on Israel’s atrocities was the famous “anger of the Arab street” – the fear of imperialism that mass struggle aroused in solidarity with the Palestinians will put in danger their servile Arab regimes.

Now, after the Arab spring of 2011, the Arab anger is no more a frightening potential… Currently the war for democracy and freedom in the Arab world and the Middle East have so many hot fronts and so many internal contradictions that there is nobody to turn to.

The dearest strategic asset for the US – the Egyptian regime – is a special case. It used to be an authoritative regime that tried to have national and international respectability. Now it is a counter-revolution in the making, fighting the Egyptian people in the streets and competing with Israel in inciting against the Palestinians.

The western regimes and much of its media seem completely undisturbed to justify any war crimes on the side of Israel as “self defense”.

More than ever – we need the world’s people to make a stand and stop the killing.

Gaza Burning

 

Share this:

  • Twitter
  • Facebook

Like this:

Like Loading...

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Recent Posts

  • Israel’s Medical Apartheid begins with the numbers
  • There is no “US Democracy” – only Worldwide Apartheid
  • ODSC statement on the occasion of the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People
  • The Pseudo-Judicial Execution of Maher al-Akhras
  • Save Maher al-Akhras!

Archives

  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • November 2019
  • August 2019
  • April 2019
  • January 2019
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • May 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • April 2014
  • February 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012

Categories

  • Abna elBalad Movement
  • Administrative Detention
  • Anti Imperialist
  • Arab Revolution
  • Boycott the Knesset
  • China's Rise
  • Corona Pandemic
  • Crisis of Capitalism
  • Dareen Tatour
  • Editorial Notes
  • Egyptian Revolution
  • Em Português
  • En Español
  • En français
  • Free Ahmad Sa'adat
  • Gaza
  • Haifa
  • Herak Haifa
  • Human Rights
  • Hungry for Freedom
  • International
  • Israeli Apartheid
  • Jews in Palestine
  • Kurdistan
  • Latin America
  • Memories
  • Middle East
  • ODS
  • ODSC
  • One World
  • Palestine
  • Palestine 48
  • Police Brutality
  • Political Analysis
  • Political Detention
  • Popular Struggle
  • Prisoners
  • Queer
  • Racism
  • Right of Return
  • Socialism
  • Syrian Revolution
  • Technology
  • The Coming War
  • Uncategorized
  • West Bank
  • Zionism

Meta

  • Register
  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.com

Blogroll

  • Free Haifa Extra
  • Free Haifa in Arabic
  • Free Haifa in Hebrew
  • Yaffa ODS

Blog at WordPress.com.

Cancel
Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
%d bloggers like this: