"In every language there are some words that cannot be properly translated into any other. It seems that they express something intimately connected with the speakers of that language and rooted in their history, traditions and reality. Such words become international expressions...
For example,... the English word "gentleman" and the American word "business". Or the Japanese word "kamikaze". Or the Mexican word "mañana" and the similar Arabic "bukra" and lately the Palestinian "intifada".
The most prominent Hebrew addition to this international lexicon is "chutzpah", a word that has no equivalent in any other language. Some English words may come close (impertinence, insolence, impudence, [vergonha], but no one conveys the full meaning of this Hebrew-Yiddish expression. It seems that it reflects something that is especially characteristic of Jewish reality, which was transferred to the State of Israel. |
The king of chutzpah, its very personification, is the Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert. If he had a gram of shame, the minimum of decency, he would have resigned the day after the cease-fire. There is no need for an inquiry to decide the obvious: that he is guilty of a long line of disasters that have caused the death of a thousand human beings, including almost 200 Israelis - men, women, old people and children. It can be debated of what exactly to accuse Olmert: the starting of an unnecessary and hopeless war (as I believe), or "only" the incompetent conduct of the campaign from start to finish. But any one of these is enough for a decent person to go home and wait there for the results of the inquiries. But Olmert does not even dream of doing that. He continues as if nothing has happened. In the US this is called "stonewalling". He stands there naked like the emperor in the children's story. All the promises he made only a few months ago, during the election campaign, have dissipated like smoke in the wind. He has no political plan left. He has not even the ability to carry out any plan, if he had one. He has no time to think about anything, except his political survival... He objects to the investigation of the war through the instruments prescribed by law. He tries to set up a whitewash investigation by an unquestioningly loyal group chosen by himself. He goes on using every opportunity to make another of his banal, cliché-laden speeches, which do not contain a single word of truth, or even of interest. That is chutzpah. Not chutzpah in the harmless, jocular sense often signified by this word, but a dangerous, rude and aggressive chutzpah... His personal survival overshadows everything else, from the problem of the prisoner exchange to the daily killing of Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza....
No need to waste words on the chutzpah of Amir Peretz. It speaks for itself. He bears personal responsibility for all the blunders of the war, from the unthinking decision to start it, up to the last military decision... The chutzpah of Peretz is almost bizarre. He achieved political power on the basis of his explicit promise to carry out basic social reforms. Not only did he ignore this promise, he did the very opposite. His effort to continue now as if nothing has happened and even to present himself as a social leader is pathetic.
But even these three champions - Katzav, Olmert and Peretz - pale in comparison with Dan Halutz... From a purely military point of view, Halutz is the greatest failure in the annals of the Israeli army. From a human point of view, he justified the prophecy that he has a brilliant future in the court of The Hague. From a political point of view, his understanding equals that of a primary school pupil (if the pupil community will excuse me.)... The boastfulness of the Air force, the arrogance of an incompetent general, the brutality of a person who is able to bring tragedy to hundreds of thousands without batting an eyelid - all of these were exposed during the war. As has been published, he told the government on the sixth day of the war that from that moment on there was no possibility of achieving anything more. Said so and did not demand to stop, said so and went on with the killing and destroying, day after day, night after night....Can a person who refuses to bear the responsibility for this entire bungled campaign demand that his subordinates shoulder theirs? When chutzpah is the norm in the army - what chance is there for its rehabilitation?
I know, there are several arguments for keeping the champions of chutzpah in office. There are no obvious alternatives. The bad may be replaced by worse. Olmert's resignation may lead to new elections, in which the more extreme Right may win. His resignation may also lead to the inclusion in the government of Avigdor Liberman, compared to whom the Frenchman Le Pen and the Austrian Haider are bleeding-heart liberals. Who can guess who and what might come after Halutz? All these arguments are valid, but they must give way to one simple demand: Chutzpah must not be allowed to reign. The acceptance of personal responsibility by the directors of the government and the army is an essential feature of a healthy society. It is a simple moral imperative, like the categorical imperative of Kant, an imperative that does not allow for any compromise."
Uri Avnery, 09/09/2006
B'Tselem: Violência de colonos judeus contra os nativos palestinos
Foi quando o primeiro ministro israelense Ehud Olmert resolveu dar um golpe de propaganda para tentar melhorar a imagem desgastada com os horrores da campanha fracassada. Sua impopularidade estava no auge, o sangue de centenas de pessoas em suas mãos ainda não secara. No Líbano os hospitais ainda estavam lotados e os enterros coletivos ainda eram lembrados em todas as cidades; e em Israel, muitas famílias choravam as mortes dos filhos-soldados.
Nada melhor do que um desvio de atenção para dar ao povo um vislumbre da paz que, naquela hora, almejava.
Nada melhor do que um desvio de atenção para dar ao povo um vislumbre da paz que, naquela hora, almejava.
Foi por isso que Olmert anunciou que concordava em encontrar o presidente da Autoridade Nacional Palestina Mahmoud Abbas para negociar.
E para ter certeza que a Autoriadade Palestina não concordaria com sua iniciativa dissimuladora, impôs uma condição impossível: que o Hamas libertasse o soldado da IDF que a resistência capturara. E isto, sem nenhuma contrapartida. Sem que Israel soltasse nenhum dos milhares de presos políticos palestinos.
Uma proposta tão absurda que pode parecer inacreditável que os israelenses engolissem a farsa batida.
Mas por mais absurdo que fosse a mascarada, este tipo de golpe publicitário sempre funciona dentro e fora de Israel. Como dizem, "a propaganda é alma do negócio". E é a progaganda que sempre prevalesceu e prevalesce neste conflito em que a verdade não vale nada. A cumplicidade voluntária ou induzida da grande mídia, interna e externa, não falha. Veicula a impostura como notícia de bom augúrio "esquecendo" as múltiplas enrolações do passado distante e de apenas um mês atrás. E quando os palestinos rejeitam o cavalo de Tróia, não tardam a chamá-los de mal-agradecidos.
O ardil da vez era que Olmert e a mídia esqueceram de mencionar o número de palestinos presos nas masmorras israelenses naquela data precisa: 9.003; 255 menores de idade.
Mas na história desta ocupação infame, uma simples manobra de comunicação já representa uma vitória política a mais para Israel, que angaria simpatia da opinião pública, nacional e internacional, e a paz que se dane.
Os familiares do soldado em questão ousaram apelar até para o governo francês, alegando a dupla-nacionalidade do filho.
(Como se o fato de escolher servir a IDF já não significasse que sua pátria era Israel e não a França. Mas nenhum jornalista francês jamais ousaria levantar esta lebreo, pois todos morrem de medo de dizer a verdade sobre o "conflito" e o lobby sionista tachá-lo de anti-semita.)
Na época a propaganda na França foi tanta que o "coitado do rapaz" suscitou pena e campanha contra os "malvados" palestinos que o detinham.
E para ter certeza que a Autoriadade Palestina não concordaria com sua iniciativa dissimuladora, impôs uma condição impossível: que o Hamas libertasse o soldado da IDF que a resistência capturara. E isto, sem nenhuma contrapartida. Sem que Israel soltasse nenhum dos milhares de presos políticos palestinos.
Uma proposta tão absurda que pode parecer inacreditável que os israelenses engolissem a farsa batida.
Mas por mais absurdo que fosse a mascarada, este tipo de golpe publicitário sempre funciona dentro e fora de Israel. Como dizem, "a propaganda é alma do negócio". E é a progaganda que sempre prevalesceu e prevalesce neste conflito em que a verdade não vale nada. A cumplicidade voluntária ou induzida da grande mídia, interna e externa, não falha. Veicula a impostura como notícia de bom augúrio "esquecendo" as múltiplas enrolações do passado distante e de apenas um mês atrás. E quando os palestinos rejeitam o cavalo de Tróia, não tardam a chamá-los de mal-agradecidos.
O ardil da vez era que Olmert e a mídia esqueceram de mencionar o número de palestinos presos nas masmorras israelenses naquela data precisa: 9.003; 255 menores de idade.
Mas na história desta ocupação infame, uma simples manobra de comunicação já representa uma vitória política a mais para Israel, que angaria simpatia da opinião pública, nacional e internacional, e a paz que se dane.
(Como se o fato de escolher servir a IDF já não significasse que sua pátria era Israel e não a França. Mas nenhum jornalista francês jamais ousaria levantar esta lebreo, pois todos morrem de medo de dizer a verdade sobre o "conflito" e o lobby sionista tachá-lo de anti-semita.)
Na época a propaganda na França foi tanta que o "coitado do rapaz" suscitou pena e campanha contra os "malvados" palestinos que o detinham.
Os nove mil e três palestinos que se encontravam em celas israelenses - 708 deles em "prisão administrativa", o que significa sem julgamento e sem direito nenhum (não é que os outros tivessem alguma regalia, é que pelo menos as acusações contra eles haviam sido formalizadas, bem que mal).
Portanto, sem mencionar os outros 8.295 palestinos detidos, no mínimo 708 deles se encontravam nas mesmas condições que o soldado israelense. Com uma diferença. Gilad Shalit era um soldado capturado em situação de serviço militar enquanto que a maioria dos prisioneiros palestinos são sequestrados dentro de casa, ou em checkpoints internos por uma bobagem. Sem contar os meninos que vão parar atrás das grades por reagirem a pedradas contra uma barreira que os impede de ir à escola ou simplesmente por estarem com um traque no bolso da calça.
Mas como se sabe, para os sionistas do mundo inteiro, a vida de um israelense vale mil vezes mais do que a de um palestino. Portanto, a matemática é fácil.
Também é fácil deduzir que com a nova manobra a fama do Hamas piorou e o Primeiro Ministro de Israel foi elogiado pela "boa vontade".
No dia 22 de setembro, descrente de falsas promessas e irritado com mais este golpe baixo, o Hamas declarou que não participaria de nenhum governo que reconhecesse Israel, contradizendo assim a promessa feita por Mahmoud Abbas.
Também é fácil deduzir que com a nova manobra a fama do Hamas piorou e o Primeiro Ministro de Israel foi elogiado pela "boa vontade".
Abu Mazen (Abbas), sob pressão, prometera às Nações Unidas que a futura coalição reconheceria Israel e renunciaria à violência, sem exigir contrapartida de Israel.
E por ansiar tanto por um Estado, deu abertura para a desculpa que faltava. E pior ainda, a ruptura entre o Fatah e o Hamas foi efetivada.
Pois o simples uso da palavra 'violência' já demonstrava os dois pesos e duas medidas que o Hamas abominava.
"Por que nossa resistência ao ocupante é demonizada com o termo de violência e os abusos diários, sequestros, assassinatos, exterminações coletivas praticadas pelo infrator às leis internacionais são assetizados com o termo 'operação militar'? "
É uma questão aberta exposta constantemente aos repórteres.
Eu não sei que resposta dar. Quem sabe?
Seguindo a questão dos dois pesos e duas medidas de violência, no dia 04 de outubro, na Cisjordânia, três homens mascarados assassinaram a tiros um líder do Hamas na saída da mesquita que frequentava, e escaparam.
No dia 11, na Faixa de Gaza, a IDF, de um avião visível, lançou um míssil na casa da ativista do Hamas Mariam Farhat, recém-eleita deputada na eleição de janeiro de 2006.
O atentado fracassou, mas a jurista gazauí, que morreu em março de 2013 com 64 anos e cujo funeral foi seguido por mais de quatro mil pessoas com Ismail Hanyeh (Primeiro Ministro "desapropriado" da pasta) puxando o cortejo, merece parágrafo. É uma figura controvertida, mas querida por muitos gazauís.
O nome inteiro de Umm Nidal (Mãe de Nidal) era Mariam Mohammad Yusif Farhat. Nasceu em 1948, no ano da Naqba. Teve dez filhos. Todos foram criados com raiva do ocupante e os seis homens entraram nas Brigadas al-Qassam, a ala militar do Hamas, logo que tinham idade.
Mariam era chamada de extremista. Embora o extremismo dela fosse fichinha em comparação com o do ministro das Relações Exteriores israelense Avigdor Lieberman. Ela era mais era uma versão palestina do general Ehud Barak, guardando as proporções - Mariam não dispunha de um exército à sua disposição e sim de apenas dez filhos. E lutava por pátria e dignidade e não para uma limpeza étnica disfarçada.
Uma das frases que Umm Nidal pronunciava era "The word 'peace' does not mean the kind of peace we are experiencing. This peace is, in fact, surrender and a shameful disgrace. Peace means the liberation of all of Palestine, from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea. When this is accomplished - if they want peace, we will be ready. They may live under the banner of the Islamic state. That is the future of Palestine that we are striving towards."
Três de seus filhos foram 'mártires' - como são chamados os participantes de atentados suicidas e as vítimas de assassinatos do Shabak.
Umm Nidal ( nidal significa algo como 'labuta' em árabe) era uma mãe de família comum até 2002. Nesse ano ficou famosa, quando seu filho de 19 anos, Mohammed, levou a cabo um atentado suicida na colônia israelense Atzmona, na Faixa, em plena Intifada.
Sua celebridade chegou com um vídeo que a imprensa recebeu em que ela incentivava o filho ao ataque e o reconfortava. Mohammed foi o primeiro filho que perdeu, mas este ela perdeu consciente.
No vídeo, mãe e filho apareciam de mãos dadas e ela rezava por ele. Depois da gravação o rapaz entrou na invasão judia armado de granadas e metralhadora e matou cinco pessoas antes de ser abatido por um soldado.
A declaração de Mariam na época deu no que falar: "I wish I had 100 boys like Mohammad. I'd sacrifice them for the sake of God. When I see all the Jews in Palestine killed, that will be enough for me. I wish he will kill as many as he can, so they will be scared."
Da boca pra fora. Mohammed foi seu primeiro e último filho a protagonizar atentado suicida. Ela perdeu mais dois, mas foi de outro modo. Estes foram friamente executados.
No ano seguinte ao atentado de Mohammed, insatisfeito em ter destruído a casa da família (como era de praxe após um atentado suicida) e com a punição coletiva infligida à Faixa de Gaza com bombardeios retaliativos infindáveis, a sede de sangue de Israel ainda não fora saciada. Ainda precisavam tirar mais sangue e lágrimas da família. Portanto, sem correr risco e sem risco de receber o adjetivo depreciativo de 'terrorista' que Mohammed recebeu em todos os jornais ocidentais, em fevereiro de 2003 o Shin Bet assassinou Nidal, o primogênito da família Farhat. O Serviço Secreto interno israelense (tipo um SNI da época de nossos generais) o executou com uma penca de explosivos para ter certeza de não falhar.
Em 2005 a IDF continuou o trabalho de extermínio da família em um atentado desta vez por míssil. Bem de longe, do alto, lançou a bomba no carro de Rawad que morreu despedaçado.
O quarto filho de Mariam foi preso e continua atrás das grades. Os outros dois, no Hamas.
Entre 2006 e 2010 o Shin Bet organizaria e levaria a cabo três atentados contra Mariam. Inclusive um direto, de um batalhão especial da IDF que não conseguiu passar do jardim da casa. Nem Mariam nem as filhas sofreram nada, mas Emad Akel, um dos melhores artesãos de bombas do Hamas que há um ano ela escondia no porão de casa, foi assassinado durante o assalto.
Quando foi eleita deputada ela disse que continuava de luto pela morte dos filhos, mas que "jihad comes ahead of everything, including my feelings as a mother."
E por ansiar tanto por um Estado, deu abertura para a desculpa que faltava. E pior ainda, a ruptura entre o Fatah e o Hamas foi efetivada.
Pois o simples uso da palavra 'violência' já demonstrava os dois pesos e duas medidas que o Hamas abominava.
"Por que nossa resistência ao ocupante é demonizada com o termo de violência e os abusos diários, sequestros, assassinatos, exterminações coletivas praticadas pelo infrator às leis internacionais são assetizados com o termo 'operação militar'? "
É uma questão aberta exposta constantemente aos repórteres.
Eu não sei que resposta dar. Quem sabe?
No dia 11, na Faixa de Gaza, a IDF, de um avião visível, lançou um míssil na casa da ativista do Hamas Mariam Farhat, recém-eleita deputada na eleição de janeiro de 2006.
O nome inteiro de Umm Nidal (Mãe de Nidal) era Mariam Mohammad Yusif Farhat. Nasceu em 1948, no ano da Naqba. Teve dez filhos. Todos foram criados com raiva do ocupante e os seis homens entraram nas Brigadas al-Qassam, a ala militar do Hamas, logo que tinham idade.
Mariam era chamada de extremista. Embora o extremismo dela fosse fichinha em comparação com o do ministro das Relações Exteriores israelense Avigdor Lieberman. Ela era mais era uma versão palestina do general Ehud Barak, guardando as proporções - Mariam não dispunha de um exército à sua disposição e sim de apenas dez filhos. E lutava por pátria e dignidade e não para uma limpeza étnica disfarçada.
Uma das frases que Umm Nidal pronunciava era "The word 'peace' does not mean the kind of peace we are experiencing. This peace is, in fact, surrender and a shameful disgrace. Peace means the liberation of all of Palestine, from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea. When this is accomplished - if they want peace, we will be ready. They may live under the banner of the Islamic state. That is the future of Palestine that we are striving towards."
Três de seus filhos foram 'mártires' - como são chamados os participantes de atentados suicidas e as vítimas de assassinatos do Shabak.
Umm Nidal ( nidal significa algo como 'labuta' em árabe) era uma mãe de família comum até 2002. Nesse ano ficou famosa, quando seu filho de 19 anos, Mohammed, levou a cabo um atentado suicida na colônia israelense Atzmona, na Faixa, em plena Intifada.
Sua celebridade chegou com um vídeo que a imprensa recebeu em que ela incentivava o filho ao ataque e o reconfortava. Mohammed foi o primeiro filho que perdeu, mas este ela perdeu consciente.
No vídeo, mãe e filho apareciam de mãos dadas e ela rezava por ele. Depois da gravação o rapaz entrou na invasão judia armado de granadas e metralhadora e matou cinco pessoas antes de ser abatido por um soldado.
Da boca pra fora. Mohammed foi seu primeiro e último filho a protagonizar atentado suicida. Ela perdeu mais dois, mas foi de outro modo. Estes foram friamente executados.
No ano seguinte ao atentado de Mohammed, insatisfeito em ter destruído a casa da família (como era de praxe após um atentado suicida) e com a punição coletiva infligida à Faixa de Gaza com bombardeios retaliativos infindáveis, a sede de sangue de Israel ainda não fora saciada. Ainda precisavam tirar mais sangue e lágrimas da família. Portanto, sem correr risco e sem risco de receber o adjetivo depreciativo de 'terrorista' que Mohammed recebeu em todos os jornais ocidentais, em fevereiro de 2003 o Shin Bet assassinou Nidal, o primogênito da família Farhat. O Serviço Secreto interno israelense (tipo um SNI da época de nossos generais) o executou com uma penca de explosivos para ter certeza de não falhar.
Em 2005 a IDF continuou o trabalho de extermínio da família em um atentado desta vez por míssil. Bem de longe, do alto, lançou a bomba no carro de Rawad que morreu despedaçado.
O quarto filho de Mariam foi preso e continua atrás das grades. Os outros dois, no Hamas.
Entre 2006 e 2010 o Shin Bet organizaria e levaria a cabo três atentados contra Mariam. Inclusive um direto, de um batalhão especial da IDF que não conseguiu passar do jardim da casa. Nem Mariam nem as filhas sofreram nada, mas Emad Akel, um dos melhores artesãos de bombas do Hamas que há um ano ela escondia no porão de casa, foi assassinado durante o assalto.
Quando foi eleita deputada ela disse que continuava de luto pela morte dos filhos, mas que "jihad comes ahead of everything, including my feelings as a mother."
Ela é conhecida na Faixa de Gaza como "Khansa da Palestina". Khansa é uma célebre poetiza árabe do Século VII. Mariam Farhat já faz parte da história palestina de construção do Estado.
No dia 20 de outubro a IDF continuou sua campanha de assassinatos desta vez visando Ismail Hanyeh, na saída de uma mesquita. Ninguém imaginaria que Olmert chegasse a tentar livrar-se do líder do recém-eleito Primeiro Ministro e número 1 do Hamas na Faixa de Gaza.
Um batalhão inteiro das forças especiais da IDF interceptou a passagem de seu carro e do de seus guarda-costas. O carro na frente do dele foi incendiado e os outros foram crivados de balas.
Ismail escapou por um triz. Alguns de seus companheiros não tiveram a mesma sorte. O Primeiro Ministro destituído por seus inimigos salvou-se porque os agressores fugiram em seguida temendo a chegada de reforços das Brigadas al-Qassan.
A emboscada ao líder do Hamas foi só o preâmbulo de uma série de ataques terrestres e aéreos que a IDF efetuaria no mês seguinte a fim de semear o terror na Faixa de Gaza e "lavar a honra" manchada pelo fracasso deste atentado.
Ehud Olmert queria mostrar que um civil podia ser e seria tão duro e impiedoso quanto os generais que o precederam no cargo de primeiro ministro. Prosseguiria na mesma linha de Ehud Barak e do general Bulldozer. A derrota da campanha militar no Líbano tinha de ser lavada com mais morte ainda para seus compatriotas deixarem de lamentá-la.
Desta vez se asseguraria que todos os mortos fossem palestinos.
No dia 20 de outubro a IDF continuou sua campanha de assassinatos desta vez visando Ismail Hanyeh, na saída de uma mesquita. Ninguém imaginaria que Olmert chegasse a tentar livrar-se do líder do recém-eleito Primeiro Ministro e número 1 do Hamas na Faixa de Gaza.Um batalhão inteiro das forças especiais da IDF interceptou a passagem de seu carro e do de seus guarda-costas. O carro na frente do dele foi incendiado e os outros foram crivados de balas.
Ismail escapou por um triz. Alguns de seus companheiros não tiveram a mesma sorte. O Primeiro Ministro destituído por seus inimigos salvou-se porque os agressores fugiram em seguida temendo a chegada de reforços das Brigadas al-Qassan.
Ehud Olmert queria mostrar que um civil podia ser e seria tão duro e impiedoso quanto os generais que o precederam no cargo de primeiro ministro. Prosseguiria na mesma linha de Ehud Barak e do general Bulldozer. A derrota da campanha militar no Líbano tinha de ser lavada com mais morte ainda para seus compatriotas deixarem de lamentá-la.
Desta vez se asseguraria que todos os mortos fossem palestinos.
Documentário da ONG israelense B'TSELEM, 10/2006.
Prisoner's children (10')
"A genocide is taking place in Gaza. This morning, 2 September, another three citizens of Gaza were killed and a whole family wounded in Beit Hanoun. This is the morning reap, before the end of day many more will be massacred. An average of eight Palestinian die daily in the Israeli attacks on the Strip. Most of them are children. Hundreds are maimed, wounded and paralyzed.
The Israeli leadership is at a loss of what to do with the Gaza Strip. It has vague ideas about the West Bank. The current government assumes that the West Bank, unlike the Strip, is an open space, at least on its eastern side. Hence if Israel, under the ingathering program of the government, annexes the parts it covets — half of the West Bank — and cleanses it of its native population, the other half would naturally lean towards Jordan, at least for a while and would not concern Israel. This is a fallacy, but nonetheless it won the enthusiastic vote of most of the Jews in the country. Such an arrangement can not work in the Gaza enclave — Egypt unlike Jordan has succeeded in persuading the Israelis, already in 1948, that the Gaza Strip for them is a liability and will never form part of Egypt. So a million and half Palestinians are stuck inside Israel — although geographically the Strip is located on the margins of the state, psychologically it lies in its midst.
The inhuman living conditions in the most dense area in the world, and one of the poorest human spaces in the northern hemisphere, disables the people who live it to reconcile with the imprisonment Israel had imposed on them ever since 1967. There were relative better periods where movement to the West Bank and into Israel for work was allowed, but these better times are gone. Harsher realities are in place ever since 1987. Some access to the outside world was allowed as long as there were Jewish settlers in the Strip, but once they were removed the Strip was hermetically closed. Ironically, most Israelis, according to recent polls, look at Gaza as an independent Palestinian state that Israel has graciously allowed to emerge. The leadership, and particularly the army, see it as a prison with the most dangerous community of inmates, which has to be eliminated one way or another.
The conventional Israeli policies of ethnic cleansing employed successfully in 1948 against half of Palestine’s population, and against hundred of thousand of Palestinians in the West Bank are not useful here. You can slowly transfer Palestinians out of the West Bank, and particular out of the Greater Jerusalem area, but you can not do it in the Gaza Strip - once you sealed it as a maximum-security prison camp.
As with the ethnic cleansing operations, the genocidal policy is not formulated in a vacuum. Ever since 1948, the Israeli army and government needed a pretext to commence such policies. The takeover of Palestine in 1948 produced the inevitable local resistance that in turn allowed the implementation of an ethnic cleansing policy, preplanned already in the 1930s. Twenty years of Israeli occupation of the West Bank produced eventually some sort of Palestinian resistance. This belated anti-occupation struggle unleashed a new cleansing policy that still is implemented today in the West Bank. The Gaza imprisonment in the summer of 2005, which was paraded as an Israeli generous withdrawal, produced the Hamas and Islamic Jiahd missile attack and one abduction case. Even before the abduction of Giald Shalit, the Israeli army bombarded indiscriminately the Strip. Ever since the abduction, the massive killing increased and became systematic. A daily business of slaying Palestinians, mainly children is now reported in the internal pages of the local press, quite often in microscopic fonts.
The chief culprits are the Israeli pilots who have a field day now that one of them is the General Chief of Staff. In the 1982 Lebanon war, the Israeli airforce issued orders to its pilots to abort mission if within 500 square meters of their target they spotted innocent civilians. Not that these orders were kept, but the pretense for internal moral consumption was there. It is called in the Israeli airforce, the “Lebanon Procedure” [Nohal Levanon]. When the pilots asked a year ago if the “Lebanon Procedure” is in tact for Gaza, the answer was no. The same answer was given to the pilots in the second Lebanon war.
The Lebanon war provided the fog for a while, covering the war crimes in the Gaza Strip. But the policies rage on even after the conclusion of the cease-fire up in the north. It seems that the frustrated and defeated Israeli army is even more determined to enlarge the killing fields in the Gaza Strip. There are no politicians who are able or willing to stop the generals. A daily killing of up to 10 civilians is going to leave few thousands dead each year. This is of course different from genociding a million people in one campaign — the only inhibition Israel is willing to undertake in the name of the Holocaust memory. But if you double the killing you raise the number to horrific proportions and more importantly you may force a mass eviction in the end of the day outside the Strip — either in the name of human aid, international intervention or the people’s own desire to escape the inferno. But if the Palestinian steadfastness is going to be the response, and there is no reason to doubt that this will the Gazan reaction then the massive killing would continue and increase.
Much depends on the international reaction. When Israel was absolved from any responsibility or accountably for the ethnic cleansing in 1948, it turned this policy into a legitimate tool for its national security agenda. If the present escalation and adaptation of genocidal policies would be tolerated by the world, it would expand and used even more drastically.
Nothing apart from pressure in the from of sanctions, boycott and divestment will stop the murdering of innocent civilians in the Gaza Strip. There is nothing we here in Israel can do against it. Brave pilots refused to partake in the operations, two journalists — out of 150 — do not cease to write about it, but this is it. In the name of the Holocaust memory, let us hope the world will not allow the genocide of Gaza to continue".
Ilan Pappe is senior lecturer in the University of Haifa Department of political Science and Chair of the Emil Touma Institute for Palestinian Studies in Haifa. His books include among others The Making of the Arab-Israeli Conflict (London and New York 1992), The Israel/Palestine Question (London and New York 1999), A History of Modern Palestine (Cambridge 2003), The Modern Middle East (London and New York 2005) and forthcoming, Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine (2006).
The conventional Israeli policies of ethnic cleansing employed successfully in 1948 against half of Palestine’s population, and against hundred of thousand of Palestinians in the West Bank are not useful here. You can slowly transfer Palestinians out of the West Bank, and particular out of the Greater Jerusalem area, but you can not do it in the Gaza Strip - once you sealed it as a maximum-security prison camp.
As with the ethnic cleansing operations, the genocidal policy is not formulated in a vacuum. Ever since 1948, the Israeli army and government needed a pretext to commence such policies. The takeover of Palestine in 1948 produced the inevitable local resistance that in turn allowed the implementation of an ethnic cleansing policy, preplanned already in the 1930s. Twenty years of Israeli occupation of the West Bank produced eventually some sort of Palestinian resistance. This belated anti-occupation struggle unleashed a new cleansing policy that still is implemented today in the West Bank. The Gaza imprisonment in the summer of 2005, which was paraded as an Israeli generous withdrawal, produced the Hamas and Islamic Jiahd missile attack and one abduction case. Even before the abduction of Giald Shalit, the Israeli army bombarded indiscriminately the Strip. Ever since the abduction, the massive killing increased and became systematic. A daily business of slaying Palestinians, mainly children is now reported in the internal pages of the local press, quite often in microscopic fonts.
The chief culprits are the Israeli pilots who have a field day now that one of them is the General Chief of Staff. In the 1982 Lebanon war, the Israeli airforce issued orders to its pilots to abort mission if within 500 square meters of their target they spotted innocent civilians. Not that these orders were kept, but the pretense for internal moral consumption was there. It is called in the Israeli airforce, the “Lebanon Procedure” [Nohal Levanon]. When the pilots asked a year ago if the “Lebanon Procedure” is in tact for Gaza, the answer was no. The same answer was given to the pilots in the second Lebanon war.
The Lebanon war provided the fog for a while, covering the war crimes in the Gaza Strip. But the policies rage on even after the conclusion of the cease-fire up in the north. It seems that the frustrated and defeated Israeli army is even more determined to enlarge the killing fields in the Gaza Strip. There are no politicians who are able or willing to stop the generals. A daily killing of up to 10 civilians is going to leave few thousands dead each year. This is of course different from genociding a million people in one campaign — the only inhibition Israel is willing to undertake in the name of the Holocaust memory. But if you double the killing you raise the number to horrific proportions and more importantly you may force a mass eviction in the end of the day outside the Strip — either in the name of human aid, international intervention or the people’s own desire to escape the inferno. But if the Palestinian steadfastness is going to be the response, and there is no reason to doubt that this will the Gazan reaction then the massive killing would continue and increase.
Much depends on the international reaction. When Israel was absolved from any responsibility or accountably for the ethnic cleansing in 1948, it turned this policy into a legitimate tool for its national security agenda. If the present escalation and adaptation of genocidal policies would be tolerated by the world, it would expand and used even more drastically.
Nothing apart from pressure in the from of sanctions, boycott and divestment will stop the murdering of innocent civilians in the Gaza Strip. There is nothing we here in Israel can do against it. Brave pilots refused to partake in the operations, two journalists — out of 150 — do not cease to write about it, but this is it. In the name of the Holocaust memory, let us hope the world will not allow the genocide of Gaza to continue".
Ilan Pappe is senior lecturer in the University of Haifa Department of political Science and Chair of the Emil Touma Institute for Palestinian Studies in Haifa. His books include among others The Making of the Arab-Israeli Conflict (London and New York 1992), The Israel/Palestine Question (London and New York 1999), A History of Modern Palestine (Cambridge 2003), The Modern Middle East (London and New York 2005) and forthcoming, Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine (2006).
Alternative Focus: Wall of Shame
| "Is it possible fo force a whole people to submit to foreign occupation by starving it? That is, certainly, an interesting question. So interesting, indeed, that the governments of Israel and the United States, in close cooperation with Europe, are now engaged in a rigorous scientific experiment in order to obtain a defitinive answer. The laboratory for the experiment is the Gaza Strip, and the guinea pigs are the million and a quarter Palestinians living there. |
That was done in the following way: First, Ariel Sharon uprooted the Israeli settlements that were stuck there. After all, you can't conduct a proper experiment with pets roaming around the laboratory. It was done with "determination and sensitivity", tears flowed like water, the soldiers kissed and embraced the evicted settlers, and again it was shown that the Israeli army is the most-most in the world.
With the laboratory cleaned, the next phase could begin: all entrances and exits were hermetically sealed, in order to eliminate disturbing influences from the world outside. That was done without difficulty. Successive Israeli governments have prevented the building of a harbor in Gaza, and the Israeli navy sees to it that no ship approaches the shore. The splendid international airport, built during the Oslo days, was bombed and shut down. The entire Strip was closed off by a highly effective fence, and only a few crossings remained, all but one controlled by the Israeli army.
There remained a sole connection with the outside world: the Rafah border crossing to Egypt. It could not just be sealed off, because that would have exposed the Egyptian regime as a collaborator with Israel. A sophisticated solution was found: to all appearances the Israeli army left the crossing and turned it over to an international supervision team. Its members are nice guys, full of good intentions, but in practice they are totally dependent on the Israeli army, which oversees the crossing from a nearby control room. The international supervisors live in an Israeli kibbutz and can reach the crossing only with Israeli consent.
So everything was ready for the experiment.
The signal for its beginning was given after the Palestinians had held spotlessly democratic elections, under the supervision of former President Jimmy Carter. George Bush was enthusiastic: his vision of bringing democracy to the Middle East was coming true.
But the Palestinians flunked the test. Instead of electing "good Arabs", devotees of the United States, they voted for very bad Arabs, devotees of Allah. Bush felt insulted. But the Israeli government was ecstatic: after the Hamas victory, the Americans and Europeans were ready to take part in the experiment. It could start:
The United States and the European Union announced the stoppage of all donations to the Palestinian Authority, since it was "controlled by terrorists". Simultaneously, the Israeli government cut off the flow of money.
To understand the significance of this: according to the "Paris Protocol" (the economic annex of the Oslo agreement) the Palestinian economy is part of the Israeli customs system. This means that Israel collects the duties for all the goods that pass through Israel to the Palestinian territories - actually, there is no other route. After deducting a fat commission, Israel is obligated to turn the money over to the Palestinian Authority.
When the Israeli government refuses to pass on this money, which belongs to the Palestinians, it is, simply put, robbery in broad daylight. But when one robs "terrorists", who is going to complain?
The Palestinian Authority - both in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip - needs this money like air for breathing. This fact also requires some explanation: in the 19 years when Jordan occupied the West Bank and Egypt the Gaza Strip, from 1948 to 1967, not a single important factory was built there. The Jordanians wanted all economic activity to take place in Jordan proper, east of the river, and the Egyptians neglected the strip altogether.
Then came the Israeli occupation, and the situation became even worse. The occupied territories became a captive market for Israeli industry, and the military government prevented the establishment of any enterprise that could conceivably compete with an Israeli one.
The Palestinian workers were compelled to work in Israel for hunger wages (by Israeli standards). From these, the Israeli government deducted all the social payments levied on Israeli workers, without the Palestinian workers enjoying any social benefits. This way the government robbed these exploited workers of tens of billions of dollars, which disappeared somehow in the bottomless barrel of the government.
When the intifada broke out, the Israeli captains of industry and agriculture discovered that it was possible to get along without the Palestinian workers. Indeed, it was even more profitable. Workers brought in from Thailand, Romania and other poor countries were ready to work for even lower wages and in conditions bordering on slavery. The Palestinian workers lost their jobs.
That was the situation at the beginning of the experiment: the Palestinian infrastructure destroyed, practically no means of production, no work for the workers. All in all, an ideal setting for the great "experiment in hunger".
The implementation started, as mentioned, with the stoppage of payments.
The passage between Gaza and Egypt was closed in practice. Once every few days or weeks it was opened for some hours, for appearances' sake, so that some of the sick and dead or dying could get home or reach Egyptian hospitals.
The crossings between the Strip and Israel were closed "for urgent security reasons". Always, at the right moment, "warnings of an imminent terrorist attack" appeared. Palestinian agricultural products destined for export rot at the crossing. Medicines and foodstuffs cannot get in, except for short periods from time to time, also for appearances, whenever somebody important abroad voices some protest. Then comes another "urgent security warning" and the situation is back to normal.
To round off the picture, the Israeli Air Force bombed the only power station in the Strip, so that for a part of the day there is no electricity, and the water supply (which depends on electric pumps) stops also. Even on the hottest days, with temperatures of over 30 degrees centigrade in the shade, there is no electricity for refrigerators, air conditioning, the water supply or other needs.
In the West Bank, a territory much larger than the Gaza Strip (which makes up only 6% of the occupied Palestinian territories but holds 40% of the inhabitants), the situation is not quite so desperate. But in the Strip, more than half of the population lives beneath the Palestinian "poverty line", which lies of course very, very far below the Israeli "poverty line". Many Gaza residents can only dream of being considered poor in the nearby Israeli town of Sderot.
What are the governments of Israel and the US trying to tell the Palestinians? The message is clear: You will reach the brink of hunger, and even beyond, if you do not surrender. You must remove the Hamas government and elect candidates approved by Israel and the US. And, most importantly: you must be satisfied with a Palestinian state consisting of several enclaves, each of which will be utterly dependent on the tender mercies of Israel.
At the moment, the directors of the scientific experiment are pondering a puzzling question: how on earth do the Palestinians still hold out, in spite of everything? According to all the rules, they should have been broken long ago!
Indeed, there are some encouraging signs. The general atmosphere of frustration and desperation creates tension between Hamas and Fatah. Here and there clashes have broken out, people were killed and wounded, but in each case the deterioration was halted before it became a civil war. The thousands of hidden Israeli collaborators are also helping to stir things up. But contrary to all expectations, the resistance did not evaporate. Even the captured Israeli soldier has not been released.
One of the explanations has to do with the structure of Palestinian society. The Hamulah (extended family) plays a central role there. As long as one person in the family is working, the relatives, too, do not die of hunger, even if there is widespread malnutrition. Everyone who has any income shares it with all his brothers and sisters, parents, grandparents, cousins and their children. That is a primitive system, but quite effective in such circumstances. It seems that the planners of the experiment did not take this into account.
In order to quicken the process, the whole might of the Israeli army is now being used again, as from this week. For three months the army was busy with the Second Lebanon War. It became apparent that the army, which for the last 39 years has been employed mainly as a colonial police force, does not function very well when suddenly confronted with a trained and armed opponent that can fight back. Hizbullah used deadly anti-tank weapons against the armored forces, and rockets rained down on Northern Israel. The army has long ago forgotten how to deal with such an enemy. And the campaign did not end well.
Now the army returns to the war it knows. The Palestinians in the Strip do not (yet) have effective anti-tank weapons, and the Qassam rockets cause only limited damage. The army can again use tanks against the population without hindrance. The Air Force, which in Lebanon was afraid to send in helicopters to remove the wounded, can now fire missiles at the houses of "wanted persons", their families and neighbors, at leisure. If in the last three months "only" 100 Palestinians were killed per month, we are now witnessing a dramatic rise in the number of Palestinians killed and wounded.
How can a population that is hit by hunger, lacking medicaments and equipment for its primitive hospitals and exposed to attacks on land, from sea and from the air, hold out? Will it break? Will it go down on its knees and beg for mercy? Or will it find inhuman strength and stand the test?
In short: What and how much is needed to get a population to surrender?
All the scientists taking part in the experiment - Ehud Olmert and Condoleezza Rice, Amir Peretz and Angela Merkel, Dan Halutz and George Bush, not to mention Nobel Peace Price laureate Shimon Peres - are bent over the microscopes and waiting for an answer, which undoubtedly will be an important contribution to political science.
I hope the Nobel Committee is watching."
Uri Avnery. 14/10/2006
Reservista da IDF, forças israelenses de ocupação,
Shovrim Shtika - Breaking the Silence
US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation : The .... Professor Jonathan Scott draws parallels between the conditions of Palestinians under occupation.
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário