Rogue State of Israel, finalmente, no banco dos réus?

  ICC to probe possible war crimes in Palestine

O ICC - Corte Penal Internacional na Háguia que julga crimes de guerra e genocídios - anunciou no fim da semana que abrirá inquérito sobre possíveis crimes de guerra cometidos em território palestino nos últimos meses.
O Russel Tribunal for Palestine deve fornecer seus depoimentos, e estes, mais as atrocidades que os promotores da Háguia investigarão diretamente, determinarão quem será julgado e por quais crimes precisamente.
O ICC declarou na sexta-feira que "A preliminary examination is not an investigation but a process of examining the information available in order to reach a fully informed determination on whether there is a reasonable basis to proceed with an investigation pursuant to the criteria established by the Rome Statute".

Richard Falks on ICC opening initial inquiry into war crimes in Gaza

Richard Falks comenta a abertura da investigação do ICC 

Ninguém duvida que o ICC encontrará inúmeras provas para abrir uma investigação que incrimine muita gente. Tanto que Avigdor Lieberman, ministro das relações exteriores de Israel e fora-da-lei internacional por residir em uma das invasões israelenses na Cisjordânia, logo defendeu o dele gritando que a decisão era "scandalous". Usou a ladainha vergonhosa que o único propósito do exame preliminar era "try to harm Israel's right do defend itself from terror". Pobrezinhos.
Como de costume, usou a palavra "terror" - que é cada vez mais empregada contra seu próprio país - para atacar o Hamas que é um grupo de resistência que luta contra a limpeza étnica de seu povo e por cidadania e liberdade.

O fascista Lieberman aproveitou os atentados em Paris para voltar a se fazer de vítima, dizendo que a decisão do ICC era "solely motivated by political anti-Israel considerations". A tentativa de se vitimizar foi infrutífera. O verdugo já não consegue mais fazer papel de vítima após o último massacre de Gaza que foi relatado diariamente por muitos jornalistas prontos a testemunhar.
Só quem reagiu em favor de Tel Aviv foi seu padrinho Estados Unidos. Os outros países ficaram quietos, sabendo que a opinião pública interna tem olhos e enxerga quem é o 'mocinho' e o 'bandido' neste conflito que só tem uma razão de ainda não ter sido resolvido.

Ammar Hijazi, alto funcionário do ministério das Relações Exteriores da Palestina, demonstrou confiança no processo do ICC. "The gravity aspect is there, as civilians were targeted [in Operation Protective Edge]. Palestine is ready to fully cooperate if there are any violations commited during the war by the Palestinian side as well". O próprio Ministro Riyad al-Malki disse confiante: "Everything is going according to plan, no state and nobody can now stop this action we requested... In the end, a full investigation will follow the preliminary one."

Foi um recado direto para o porta-voz do State Department dos EUA Jeff Rathke que condenou a decisão do ICC descaradamente. "We strongly disagree with the ICC prosecutor's action today. It is a tragic irony that Israel, which has withstood thousands of terrorist rockets fired at its civilians and its neighbourhoods, is now being scrutinised by the ICC."

Remembering Shujayea, victim of Operation Protective Edge 

Viagem de drone sobre o bairro Shujayea, em Gaza

Jeff Rathke omitiu que Israel protagoniza a ocupação mais longa da História, é um Estado bandido há mais de duas décadas - desde que os Organismos internacionais oficializaram a ilegalidade da ocupação militar e civil (através das invasões/assentamento/colônias judias), que é o único Estado no mundo que realiza uma limpeza étnica sistemática de toda uma etnia de maneira violenta e paulatina, e que se não apelasse para a ignorância de muitos cristãos e judeus, seria taxado formalmente de Estado terrorista na ONU.

Digam o que disserem, os Estados Unidos vão ter de suportar no mínimo a publicidade negativa do seu afilhado e no máximo que os criminosos identificados só possam viajar de Israel para os EUA (outro não assinante do Tratado de Roma certamente para seus crimes ficarem impunes) se não quiserem ser julgados como merecem.
Como o secretário geral das Nações Unidas Ban Ki-Moon confirmou que a Palestina será integrada formalmente no ICC no dia 1° de abril e a Corte informou que a jurisprudência seria retroativa ao dia 13 de junho de 2014, as duas operações militares precedentes de 20085/9 e 2012 não poderão ser punidas. Contudo, a Protective Edge realizada em 2014 e relatada aqui no dia a dia em julho e agosto, será, integralmente.
Israel declarou publicamente que vai lobby certos Estados membros do ICC  para que suspendam sua contribuição financeira à Palestina a fim de forçá-la a voltar atrás ou ir à bancarrota, já que Israel já bloqueou os impostos devidos a Ramallah e mais de 160 mil funcioários públicos ficaram sem renda.
Avigdor Lieberman disse literalmente que "We will demand that our friends in Canada, Australia and Germany simply to stop funding it [Palestine]". Nem cita os EUA porque esta causa já está ganha antecipadamente. O problema é que os governo da Austrália e do Canadá são sionistas, mas a maioria absoluta da população desses dois países é pró-regularização da situação da Palestina. Na Alemanha, idem. Aliás, Angela Merkell também é simpatizante da justiça, mas se voltar-se contra Israel, o lobby sionista vai gritar logo "anti-semita"! É o argumento de pressão que usam sempre contra a Alemanha.
O certo é que pode durar meses e anos, dependendo da pressão internacional, mas o simples fato de levar Israel a Tribunal já é uma vitória. Pequena, mas um avanço. Toda esta reação agressiva é a prova concreta que já foram atingidos porque sabem que têm muita culpa no cartório da justiça.

Contestando nas entrelinhas o Secretário Geral da ONU, ontem em Jerusalém, o primeiro ministro israelense Binyamin Netanyahu comentou a decisão do ICC à sua maneira: "It's absurd of the ICC to ignore international law and agreements under which the Palestinians don't have a state and can only get one through direct negotiations with Israel. The rules of the ICC are clear: No state, no standing, no case."
A cara-de-pau dos líderes israelenses é tão grande que até hoje, após 33 anos de prática, ainda fico atônita de ver até onde são capazes de chegar. Em uma única frase, Netanyahu debochou da ONU, do ICC, do Conselho de Segurança, enfim, do mundo, falando em lei internacional, quando Israel desrespeita todas há anos, falando em um Estado negociado, quando Israel declarou o seu, unilateralmente, há 66 anos; falando que os palestinos não têm um Estado, como se a culpa fosse deles e não de Israel que ocupa seu território com colônias e soldados infringindo as leis internacionais.
Só para lembrar, o fato é que a Palestina fez a demanda de adesão ao ICC em dezembro de 2014, depois assinou o Tratado de Roma (a Carta que levou à formação do Tribunal em 2002), e deve aderir formalmente à Corte em abril, como disse acima, com efeito retroativo de 10 meses.
Isto significa que o ICC investigará a Operação Protective Edge e os crimes de guerra cometidos por Israel na Faixa de Gaza - quando Israel matou mais de 2.300 palestinos, dentre eles mais de 500 crianças, e alega ter perdido 73 pessoas, mais de 60 soldados, dentre eles, pelo menos três jihadistas estrangeiros.
Netanyahu prosseguiu em sua lenga lenga terrorista a fim de enganar os incautos facilmente influenciáveis pelos recentes acontecimentos em Paris, pondo o Hamas no mesmo saco de terroristas.
Quanto ao Hamas, que segundo Netanyahu são "Palestinian terrorists who routinely commit multiple war crimes", sem citar o nome das supostas vítimas, "They deliberately fire thousands of rockets at our civilians while hiding behind Palestinian civilians whom they use as human shields".
Enough is enough. Foi a primeira vez que pus fotos que retratam um pouco do que os jornalistas veem e que não mostram por pudor, às vezes, mas mais por censura hierárquica. Fiz isto porque estou meio cansada dos dois pesos e duas medidas impostos para livrar a cara de Israel, que é um Estado que comete barbaridades inadmissíveis e insuportáveis. Isto tem de acabar.

Jamie Stern-Weiner on Israel's horrors in Gaza: http://www.newleftproject.org/index.php/site/article_comments/double_tapping_in_gaza

Inside the efforts to re-build Gaza

Se Israel estivesse com a consciência tranquila, por que reclamaria tanto?
Por que não deixar o ICC investigar sem atar-lhes as mãos? Por que Israel também não adere ao ICC em vez de esconder-se debaixo da saia dos Estados Unidos que também teme que a Lei se abata sobre eles?
Israel já vai livrar-se de investigações retroativas que o deixariam em piores lençóis ainda, como a Pillar of Defense à qual Miko Peled - filho de general da IDF e reservista - se refere neste vídeo.

E a Operação Cast Lead em 2008/9 que a Anistia Internacional e outras ONGs humanitárias denunciaram prolificamente.

E o Hamas, como reagiu à perspectiva de investigação de seus atos de resistência ditos ilícitos?
Seu porta-voz Fawzi Barhoum disse que seu partido fornecerá ao ICC "thousands of reports" que provam que "horrible crimes" foram cometidos pela IDF. "What is needed now is to quickluy take practical steps in this direction and we are readyto provide [the Court] with thousand of reports and documents that confirm the Zionist enemy has committed horrible crimes against Gaza and against our people."
Também só para lembrar, Israel desmantelou suas colônias na Faixa em 2005 e as transferiu para a Cisjordânia. O intuito era deixar a Faixa desgovernada e melhor bombardear os gazauís nos anos seguintes. Desde 2006 que a Faixa vive em estado de sítio, bloqueada por todos os lados - terra (Israel e Egito) mar e ar (forças armadas israelenses).
Dito isto, o Ministro das Relações Exteriores da Palestina mostrou-se tranquilo quanto à atuação do ICC, apesar da oposição de Israel e dos EUA (não membros) dizendo que "no state and nobody can now stop this action we requested".

Parlamento britânico condena Operação Protective Edge

The Palestinians’ Decision to Join the ICC Deserves Support: Keneth Roth, Executive Director of Human Rights Watch. Twitter: @KenRoth. 15, 2015

Atualização do dia 02/02/2015
 sobre a investigação dos crimes de guerra cometidos na FAixa de Gaza em 2014

William Schabas, chefe da comissão de investigação, se demite., por pressão de Israel.

Em seu lugar a ONU nomeou a estadunidense Mary McGowan Davis.

Gaza City - On Monday, February 02, Dr William Schabas tendered his resignation as chair and member of the Commission of Inquiry (COI) on the Gaza Conflict to the President of the Human Rights Council (HRC), Ambassador Joachim Ruecker of Germany. The resignation was effective immediately.

The resignation came after the Permanent Mission of Israel sent a letter to Ambassador Ruecker asking for the removal of Schabas due to a possible conflict of interest.

Schabas wrote a legal opinion for the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO) in 2012, for which he was paid $1,300. Schabas maintains that the opinion he wrote was no different from an advice he has given to many other governments and organisations. 

Ruecker accepted Schabas' resignation, saying that he "respects the decision of Professor Schabas and appreciates that in this way even the appearance of a conflict of interest is avoided, thus preserving the integrity of the process", according to a press release issued by the COI.

Al Jazeera spoke with Schabas about his resignation.

Al Jazeera: Does your resignation have anything to do with Palestine's membership in the ICC?

Dr William Schabas: Not at all, that was something that might have been relevant, but it happened while the commission was already under way. So we were already working when Palestine became a member, and we weren't working with the aim of presenting our findings to any officials with the ICC.

Obviously the issues are relevant, but it's an independent thing. The findings of the report, which I'm not aware of, as I have resigned, might have some bearing on Palestine's membership. But as far as my resignation, it wasn't a factor at all. 

Al Jazeera: Were you under pressure to resign ?

Schabas: No, unless you consider the fact that [Israeli Prime Minister] Netanyahu and [Israeli Minister of Foreign Affairs] Lieberman have been calling for my resignation since the moment I was appointed.

I resisted this pressure and criticism since the moment I assumed the role of chairperson of the commission.

My explanation for why I resigned has nothing to do with that pressure. It was difficult for me to proceed as chairman while there are allegations of a conflict of interest hanging overhead, and I was determined that the answer to dealing with this issue was resignation. The inquiry will be able to move forward unabated.

Al Jazeera: How much work is left for the commission?Schabas: The commission is due to present its report to the Human Rights Council on March 23, and it will need to issue the report sometime before then, so that governments can adopt positions and meet with counsellors. They need time to prepare statements and so on.  

There are five or six weeks of work left, and this mostly consists of writing the report itself.

The deadline for written submissions was Saturday, January 31. So now, the commission will be spending the next five or six weeks analysing the eye witness testimony and other data that was collected and writing the report. It's quite a bit of work that's left.

Al Jazeera: Considering the fact that the report will be published in March, will your resignation have any effect on public perception regarding the findings?

Schabas: I don't think so, I don't think that will change. Some people think my involvement tainted the commission's conduct from the very beginning, and my resignation won't change their mind in any way.

After six months of incessant calls of people for my resignation, I resigned and they still say it's "all wrong". I don't think it matters to people in these circles.  

Elsewhere, where people weren't influenced by Israel's criticism [of me], they will see the report for what it is. It's an honest report, and I'm confident that my involvement did not have any bearing on the objectivity of all those involved. We were charged with investigating allegations that international law was violated in the Gaza Strip. This is what was done.

Al Jazeera: Is there an idea on who will assume the position of head of the commission of inquiry?

Schabas: There are two people [Mary McGowan Davis of the United States and Doudou Diene of Senegal].

On Wednesday, it was announced  that McGowan Davis will be the next chairperson. 

Em dezembro a Anistia Internacional já concluiu em Nothing is immune”: Israel’s destruction of landmark buildings in Gaza que pelo menos conque pelo menos o bombardeio de prédios importantes em Gaza foram um ataque deliberado a civis. O diretor da AI para o Oriente Médio Philip Luther afirmou que "All the evidence we have shows this large-scale destruction was carried out deliberately and with no military justification. Both the facts on the ground and statements made by israeli military spokespeople at the time indicate that the attacks were a collective punishment agains the people of Gaza and were designed to destroy their already precairous livelihoods".

Há outras provas de crimes voluntários com testemunhas à vontade. É só entrevistar os jornalistas presentes nos locais, assistir às filmagens censuradas pela grande mídia, e ouvir o depoimento dos interessados - o povo que foi punido simplesmente por existir e resistir de pé.   No final das contas, o ICC, para o bem da justiça, só tem de trabalhar de braços dados com o Tribunal Russel (blog de 05/10/14).

Centenas de milhares de crianças gazauís ficaram sofrendo de choque pós-traumático após o massacre do ano passado,adicionado aos dois anteriores em 2008/09 e 2012, mais os ataques diários da IDF: a deadly missile bombardment.

Inside Story: Were war crimes committed in Palestine? 

Relatório da ONG israelense de Direitos Humanos B'Tselem sobre a Operação Protective Edge em Gaza:

Black Flag: The legal and moral implications of the policy of attacking residential buildings in the Gaza Strip, summer 2014 (pdf), B’Tselem investigated 70 incidents in which at least three people were killed while inside their home during what Israel called Operation Protective Edge.

Há imagens fortes que não são mostradas na mídia, mas que os jornalistas veem e filmam. A realidade das atrocidades de Israel é bárbara. Como as cabeças cortadas pelo Isis tão mediatizadas. 

Sobrevivente do Holocausto critica Israel

Update 19/01/15

Hundreds of Palestinians in Israel protested on Monday as thousands pariticipated in the funeral procession of a Bedouin man with Israeli citizenship who died during a confrontation with police on Sunday night. Protests were held by activists in Haifa, Jaffa, Nazareth, Beersheba, and Rahat, as well as by students at Tel Aviv University, Ben Gurion University, Haifa University and the Hebrew University in Jerusalem.

Around 100 protesters gathered in Haifa's Emile Habibi Square and marched through the city bearing placards and Palestinian flags and chanting slogans against police brutality. "Oh police, Arab blood is not cheap," dozens sang out in unison. Others yelled: "Resist, resist. Don't compromise on your rights!"

Sami al-Zayadna, a 43-year-old Bedouin man from Rahat, died from excessive tear gas inhalation when mourners were corned by police in a cemetery during a funeral which turned into a protest. Dozens were also injured, including at least three critical injures, according to local media reports.

An estimated 1.7 million Palestinians carry Israeli citizenship and live in cities, towns and villages across the country. A diverse community of Muslims, Christians and Druze, they face dozens of discriminatory laws that stifle their political expression and limit their access to state resources, such as land and education, according to rights groups.

Clashes also erupted between police and mourners during the funeral of 22-year-old Sami al-Jaar, who was fatally shot while standing on his patio, as police clashed with local youth across the street from his home on Wednesday night.

Salah Mohsen, media coordinator for the Haifa-based Adalah Legal Centre, noted that Zayadna is the 50th Palestinian citizen of Israel to have died at the hands of police officers since October 2000, when 13 unarmed demonstrators were fatally shot by police during protests across the Galilee region of the country.

From 11,282 complaints of police misconduct filed between 2011 and 2013, according to a September 2014 Adalah report, 93 percent were eventually "closed by Mahash with or without investigation" and a mere 2.7 percent resulted in the prosecution of officers.

Shops and businesses across the Negev were closed for a general strike on Monday, and the Higher Guidance Committee of Arab Residents in the Negev accused the government of "state terrorism".

Apartheid Adventures  XII

Aproveitando a onda "anti-terrorista" do atentado em Paris e a simpatia momentânea conseguida com a morte de quatro rapazes judeus entre os 17 atingidos pelos psicopatas muçulmanos, Israel atacou o Hezbollah no Líbano no dia 18. Seu alvo era Jihad Mughniyeh, de 26 anos. Um líder inato e muito estimado.
O Apache da IDF invadiu o espaço aéreo do país vizinho - além dos Golã que já ocupa desde 1967 - e assassinou seis membros do partido e seis iranianos, dentres eles, o general Mohammad Ali Allahdadi em Quneitra, perto da fronteira. O jovem assassinado era filho de Imad Mughniyeh, um dos líderes do Hizbollah que Israel assassinou em um atentado similar em Damasco em 2008. E ficou por isso.
O Hezbollah é um partido libanês xiita ligado ao Irã e que vem apoiando Bashar el-Assad contra o al-Nusra, o braço armado do Isis na Síria e os grupos rebeldes locais. Isto fez com que sua popularidade diminuisse bastante no Líbano.
O atentado é grave e suas consequências serão, sem dúvida, igualmente lamentáveis.
Desde que começaram os problemas na Síria esta é a sétima vez que Israel invade o espaço aéreo dos vizinhos para realizar atentados.
Três dias antes desta execução de Jihad, o chefe do Hezbollah, Hassan Nasrallah, declarara que considerava uma grande agressão as frequentes incursões de Israel na Síria contra Bashar.
O assassinato do filho de Mughniyeh foi um ataque direto à liderança do Hezbollah, devido à sua proeminente ascendência no partido e porque após a morte do pai, Nasrallah o tinha como filho.
Israel está cutucando o tigre com uma vara muitíssimo curta. Não acho que o partido possa deixar passar batido os assassinatos de pai e filho. Para Nasrallah é questão de liderança e de honra. Pode-se prever que o atentado terrorista seja retaliado. E os israelenses sabem disso. Deve ser por isso que assassinaram Jihad, porque sabem que o Hizbollah vai retaliar e aí eles protagonizarem outro massacre no Líbano, apoiados pelos Estados Unidos.
Por que agora? Porque Israel está em plena campanha eleitoral e nada como um banho de sangue alheio para conseguir votos. Binyamin Netaniahu não pode voltar a massacrar Gaza tão rápido, mas sua sede de sangue é inesgotável. Sobretudo porque deve achar que o Hizbollah está fragilizado por estar combatendo na Síria e suas forças armadas estarem engajadas lá. Como sempre, sua motivação é imediata e sua ação covarde.
Mas quando Israel atacar, que a grande mídia se lembre quem provocou e que não engula que Netanyahu ou outro Primeiro Ministro sanguinário está agindo em "legítima defesa". A provocação é ilegítima e clara. E em uma má hora em que todos deveriam unir-se contra as ameaças globais. O Irã tem um regime autoritário, mas na região, é o único estável. Se os ayatolás caissem agora, seria um desastre mundial, pois os extremistas ganhariam terreno rapidinho. Quanto ao Hizbollah, nunca praticou terrorismo, que eu saiba. Só defende o Líbano do expansionismo israelense.
Tanto o Irã quanto o Hizbollah são necessários neste momento de crise com o auto-proclamado Estado Islâmico e seus simpatizantes.
Porém, Israel só pensa em seus próprios interesses. O mundo que se dane nas mãos do Isis e do Al-Qaeda contanto que seus inimigos fabricados, ou seja, os cujo território ocupa e cobiça, sejam dizimados. Terrorismo pouco é bobagem.
Israel se congratula pelo assassinato de Jihad Mughniyeh por ele ser estrela ascendente la liderança do Hezbollah. Se fosse o Hizbollah que tivesse ido a Israel matar primeiro o general Ehud Barak e seis anos mais tarde o seu filho, como o mundo reagiria?
O problema são os dois pesos e duas medidas.

Hezbollah hab been cornered
"Israel's recent actions against Hezbollah, Damascus and Tehran suggest two possible calculations. Either it feels able to provoke the three allies with little if any consequence, or it is goading them into a confrontation.
Sunday's Israeli strike in Syria killed several Hezbollah fighters - including a commander and the son of the group's late military leader Imad Mughniyeh - as well as a general in Iran's elite Revolutionary Guards.
Days earlier, Hezbollah said it had detained one of its operatives who had confessed to spying for Mossad. A few weeks prior, Damascus said an Israeli drone had been brought down over Syrian territory. That was preceded a week earlier by an Israeli bombardment near Damascus airport and Syria's border with Lebanon. Add to that several previous Israeli strikes in Syria since the revolution against Bashar al-Assad began four years ago.
Threatening Hezbollah
The timing of Sunday's strike seemed designed to challenge Israel's opponents. It took place just days after Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallahsaid it was their "right to respond" to Israel's "frequent attacks" in Syria, and that retaliation "could happen any time". However, Nasrallah, Assad and Iran have little room for manoeuvre in terms of a response.
Hezbollah is militarily bogged down in Syria in support of Assad. Its involvement there has led to a string of jihadist attacks on Hezbollah's home turf, which looks set to continue, if not intensify.
Last week, al-Qaeda's Syrian wing, al-Nusra Front, addressed the following threat to Hezbollah; "We will spare no effort to strike you in your heartlands." Last month, the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) issued a call for "all the jihadis to move to Lebanon to break Hezbollah".
According to opinion polls, Hezbollah's popularity domestically and regionally has nose-dived due to its intervention in Syria.
This has galvanised its political opponents at home, and led to dissenting voices within its own support base.
Israel's killing of Hezbollah fighters in Syria rather than Lebanon may be a tactical decision to avoid Lebanese uniting behind the movement against the violation of their country's sovereignty, as they have done in previous conflicts with Israel.
This thinking can be seen in an editorial by Lebanon's Daily Star newspaper, which wrote that: "It is important to reiterate that the attack happened in Syrian territory, and it is up to the Syrian authorities to decide how and whether to react."
Nasrallah's primary regional allies are far weaker than they were during Israel's 2006 invasion of Lebanon. Assad, whose position is reliant on foreign fighters and weapons, has lost control of large swaths of Syria to various armed groups. Iran's military is increasingly involved in Syria and Iraq.
This has strained its economy, which is suffering greatly from plummeting oil prices and western sanctions (US sanctions have recently been increased).
Ready for another war
Following Sunday's strike, Nasrallah said his movement was ready for another war with Israel, but this looks more like posturing than reality. Hezbollah, Assad and Iran are too invested in each others' conflicts, as well as internal pressures and regional rivalries, to afford an all-out war with Israel.

The situation today is far removed from 2006, when Hezbollah was able to take on its long-time foe with the help of its allies, who were able to focus on providing sufficient weaponry through stable supply routes.
This may explain why threats of retaliation have been somewhat muted.
The strongest words have come from Hezbollah, which is not surprising.
Full-scale war with Israel would mean the movement having to recall troops from Syria, which would be greatly damaging to Assad as it has been instrumental in a string of battlefield successes.
Tehran would potentially have to divert its military resources away from Syria and Iraq, not just to aid Hezbollah, but to secure itself against the risk of Israel carrying out its repeated threats to strike Iran.
As such, Assad and Tehran may be privately advising Nasrallah not to escalate the situation. Behind closed doors, Nasrallah himself might not need convincing. Even small-scale reprisals are a major risk as Israel could use them as a pretext to escalate.
'Axis of resistance'
However, not responding to repeated Israeli provocations will make Hezbollah and its allies look weak, particularly given their threats of retaliation. Their credibility as the self-proclaimed "axis of resistance" would be undermined.
This would be particularly true of Hezbollah, which was established specifically as a resistance movement against Israel.
Meanwhile, with Israelis going to the polls in March, acting tough prior to elections tends to be a vote-winner, so it serves Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's domestic standing to sabre-rattle, particularly if things are unlikely to get out of hand. 
From Israel's point of view, there has never been a better time to challenge Hezbollah. This highlights the strategic blunder of the movement's intervention in Syria, veering from its raison d'etre and leaving itself vulnerable against a sworn enemy that has yet to defeat it.
Hezbollah is in an unenviable position - it cannot afford to retaliate against Israel, but neither can it afford not to". Sharif Nashashibi is an award-winning journalist and analyst on Arab affairs. He is a regular contributor to Al Jazeera English, Al Arabiya News, The National, The Middle East magazine and the Middle East Eye.

Inside Story: Israel/Hizbollah, high stakes? 

Inside Story: A return to Israel Hizbollah hostilities?

"Hit me! Beat me! Kick me!" the masochist pleads with the sadist.There used to be a joke about a sadist and a masochist. 
The sadist smiles a cruel smile and slowly answers: "No!"
That, more or less, reflects the situation on our northern border at this moment.
Two Israeli drones have bombed (or missiled) a small Hezbollah convoy, a few miles beyond the border with Syria on the Golan heights. 12 people were killed. One was an Iranian general. One was a very young Hezbollah officer, the son of Imad Mughniyeh, a very high-ranking Hezbollah officer who was also killed by Israel, some seven years ago, in a Damascus car explosion.
The killing of the Iranian general was perhaps unintended. Seems that Israeli intelligence did not know that he, and five other Iranian Revolutionary Guards officers, were in the convoy. An Israeli army officer admitted this in a roundabout way. A second officer denied the statement of the first.
He did not apologize, of course. One cannot apologize when one does not officially admit to being the perpetrator. And, of course, Israelis do not apologize. Never ever. Indeed, one far-right party in the present election has turned this into an election slogan: "No apologies!"
The intended victim of the attack was the 25-year old Jihad Mughniyeh, a junior Hezbollah officer whose only claim to fame was his family name.
Immediately after the killing, the question arose: Why? Why now? Why at all?
The Israeli-Syrian border (or, rather, cease-fire line) has been for decades the quietest border of Israel. No shooting. No incidents. Nothing.
Assad the father and Assad the son both saw to this. They were not interested in provoking Israel. After the 1973 Yom Kippur War, which started with a huge Syrian surprise success and ended with a complete Syrian defeat, the Assads wanted no new adventure.
Even when Ariel Sharon attacked Lebanon in 1982, the Syrian troops stationed in Lebanon did not intervene. But since one of Sharon's war aims was to drive the Syrians out of Lebanon, he had to open fire himself to get them involved. That adventure ended with a Syrian success.
Any intention Bashar al-Assad might ever have had to provoke Israel (and it seems that he never had any) vanished when the Syrian civil war started, more than four years ago. Both Bashar al-Assad and the various rebel factions were fully occupied with their bloody business. Israel could not interest them less.
So why did Israeli drones hit a small convoy of Assad's allies – Hezbollah and Iran? It is very unlikely that they had any aggressive intentions against Israel. Probably they were scouting the terrain in search of Syrian rebels.
The Israeli government and the army did not explain. How could they, when they did not officially admit to the action? Even unofficially, there was no hint.
But there is an elephant in the room: the Israeli elections.
We are now in the middle of the election campaign. Was there, could there be, any connection between the election campaign and the attack?
You bet!
To suggest that our leaders could order a military action to increase their chances in an election borders on treason.
Yet It has happened before. Indeed, it happened in many of our 19 election campaigns till now.
The first election took place when we were still at war. David Ben-Gurion, the war leader, won a great election victory, of course.
The second election took place during the fight against the Arab "infiltrators", with almost daily incidents along the new borders. Who won? Ben-Gurion.
And so on. In 1981, when Menachem Begin ordered the bombing of the Iraqi nuclear reactor, somebody dared to suggest that the action was connected with the upcoming Knesset election. This gave Begin the opportunity for one of his greatest speeches. Begin was an outstanding orator in the European (and very un-Israeli) tradition.
"Jews!" he addressed his audience, "You have known me for many years. Do you believe that I would send our gallant boys on a dangerous mission, where they could be killed or, worse – fall into the captivity of these human animals – in order to gain votes?" The crowd roared back "No!"
Even the other side played their part. The Egyptians and Syrians launched their surprise attack on Yom Kippur 1973 in the middle of the Israeli election campaign.
After the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin in 1995, his heir, Shimon Peres, also faced an election campaign. During his short regency, he managed to start and lose a war. He invaded Lebanon and during the fighting a UN refugee camp was bombed by mistake. That was the end of the war and of Peres' reign. Binyamin Netanyahu won.
When last week's killing was announced, the country and the army were requested to prepare for war.
Along the border, tension spread. Massive troop deployments took place. Armored brigades moved north. "Iron Dome" anti-missile batteries were positioned near the border. All the media prepared the public for instant revenge actions by Hezbollah and Iran.
That's where the joke comes in. Netanyahu fully expected Hassan Nasrallah, the Hezbollah chief, to bomb Galilee in retaliation. Nasrallah just smiled one of his enigmatic smiles.
Revenge? Sure. But not just now. Some other time, perhaps. Some other place, too. Maybe in Bulgaria, where Israeli tourists were killed to avenge Imad Mughniyeh's assassination. Or even in Argentina, where the prosecutor investigating the destruction of two Israel-Jewish centers was found shot this week (by himself or by others.) The bloody attacks in Buenos Aires, 20 years ago, were attributed to Hezbollah and Iran after another Israeli action in Lebanon.
So why doesn't Nasrallah avenge the drone action now? When you count on an enemy's revenge action, it is very frustrating when it doesn't come on time.
To understand this, one must review the election campaign.
It is being waged by two large blocks – the right-wing led by the Likud and the center-left led by the Labor party. The left has gathered unexpected momentum by uniting Labor with Tzipi Livni's little faction, and now, incredibly, has overtaken Likud in the polls. Aside from the two blocks there are the Orthodox and the Arab citizens, who have their own agendas.
The two main blocks sail under different flags. Likud and Co. sail under the flag of Security. The public believes that Netanyahu and his allies are more trustworthy when it comes to war and keeping our army big and powerful. The public also believes that Labor and its allies are more effective when it comes to the economy, the price of housing and such.
This means that the outcome will be decided by which side succeeds in imposing its agenda on the campaign. If the campaign comes to be dominated by the issues of war and fear, the Right will probably win. If, alternatively, the main issue is housing and the exorbitant price of cottage cheese, the Left has a chance.
This is not a matter of particularly acute perception, but of general public knowledge. Every missile launched by Hezbollah or Hamas will be a missile for Likud. Every day of quiet on the borders will be a day for Labor.
It was therefore quite obvious to many Israelis that the sudden flair up on the northern border, caused by an unprovoked Israeli attack that makes no sense, was an election ploy by Netanyahu and his companions.
Many knew. But nobody dared to say so. The political parties were afraid of being seen as stabbing the army in the back. Accusing Netanyahu of risking a major war in order to win an election is a very grave matter.
The Labor party published a lame statement supporting the army. Meretz kept quiet. The Arab parties were busy with creating a united Arab list. The Orthodox couldn't care less.
Gush Shalom, of which I am a member, prepared to publish an unequivocal accusation.
And then the silence was broken from a totally unexpected quarter.
General Galant gave an interview in which he squarely accused the government of warming up the northern border for election purposes.
Galant? Incredible!
Yoav Galant was the chief of the Southern Command during the cruel Molten Lead campaign. After that he was appointed by Netanyahu as the new army Chief of Staff. But before the appointment could be consummated Galant was accused of expropriating public village land for his palatial home and had to back out. I always considered him an out-and-out militarist.
Two weeks ago, Galant suddenly reappeared on the stage as candidate No. 2 on the list of Moshe Kahlon's new center party with no ideology except bringing down prices.
Galant's statement caused an outcry, and he quietly retracted it. But the deed was done. Galant had opened the gate. A horde of commentators stormed through it to spread the accusation.
The campaign may never be the same again after Galant's gallant deed."

Uri Avnery, 24/01/15

Real News: The Making of Norman Finkelstein, reality asserts itself

III