Al-Quds Divided: The Politics of Hatred

Ammara:

Welcome to Chowk.

You almost echo Edward Said. Though, lately due to his illness perhaps he is more brutally frank. And eloquent and passionate as always.

In conclusion you say, “But what is certain is that Israel’s continuous and unchecked flouting of international law would be the biggest IRONY in the face of the WORLD COMMUNITY’s ambitious agendas in the name of peace for the next millenium.” (my caps)

Reality check:

Irony? What irony? Read ‘fact’ ----jis ki laathi oos ki bhaiNs.

World Community should be read as Hazrat Amreeka.

And ‘ambitious agenda’ should become crystal clear if we read THEIR self interest. And tread accordingly.

Success in the present uni-polar world --- atleast till the dust settles in the Russian sphere -- and the China/Japan/Indian sphere in the next quarter century or so --- will depend on how well the ROW (rest of the world) reads Hazrat’s lips ---- and adjusts their interests.

Till then we should get used to knots in our stomachs and the utter despair and helplessness caused by images such as that young child dying in the sniper fire by those who claim moral superiority and the laathi in the name of the same Lord. Aye Khuda, kahaN hay tou?!


Over to you Feroz, our resident IR fellow...

regards,

temporal

My Dear Ms. Durrani:

You undercut your own argument by making Rabbi Kahane your `evidence` of Israeli intolerance. He was regarded by most Israeli`s as a dangerous lunatic and did not, I believe, function in any official capacity in the Israeli government. For every one of his rants against Arabs, I am sure that Zionists can find a hundred by various Arab Imams, Sheikhs and what-nots.

Israel`s is not a particularly tolerant or enlightened colonialism but then its track record on such things is much better than that of the regional Arab (and non-Arab) powers. Ask the Kurds about how `nice` are the various regional governments. Or the Bahais. Why do Druze serve in the Israeli Army? Or how about the Copts in Egypt? The list is endless! Why is it that all the Muslim/Pakistani commentators (I assume you are Pakistani) are the firt to cast stones at the Israelis and the West and conveniently ignore our own, much worse, sins?

But enough about this. On to the issue at hand. The US was never an impartial peace-broker so its role cannot seriously be said to have been undermined. The issue is very simple actually: given the complete weakness of the Palestinian position, what can Arafat hope to walk away with from the bargaining table?

Not a whole heck of a lot. He will have to be content with whatever scraps the Israelis throw his way. The only `solution` is for him to declare another Intifada, accept several hundred if not thousand Palestinian casualties, and wait for the West to, finally, put the squeeze on the Israelis. This will eventually happen as their policy makers feel more and more guilty about the daily beatings and shootings they will see on their TV screens. Its kind of rough on the dead and beaten Palestinians, but hey so is life in the Occupied West Bank and other territories (including the ``liberated`` ones). Nothing else is going to work.

So why doesn`t Arafat do this? Because he realized that if he condones such a move, he will be the first casualty of it. Hamas and the other fundamentalist-extremist groups will take over control of the Intifada and Arafat and all his corrupt cronies will be out. So he prefers to try to beg and plead his way into a deal that will allow him to save himself. The Israelis realize this and think they can use him to crush Hamas and the other beardos because it is as much to his benefit to do so as it is to theirs. They are not willing to give him much in exchange for it, so the issue is really one of bargaining over the going wage rate.

Lets face it. There is nothing `fair` about this world and even less about interstate relations. Power is all that anyone cares about--although the West will, eventually, reluctantly, kicking and screaming and trying its best to weasel out of it, do something that at a long distance and through not very clean lenses, look like the right thing. But hey, thats still much better than what we would do. So they are still better than us! How about that!

Re: Ammara

First of all welcome to Chowk!

I detected a note of anguish in your article as if you really wanted fairness to win over injustice!

American self interests are closely tied with Israeli security interests and American will never compromise the physical security of Israel to appease some Arab nations. I think that Temporal is right and if a person understands American foreign policy egoism, the ebb and flow of weltpolitik makes perfect sense. American foreign policy is dedicated to the proposition that America is primius inter pares in IR and UN not withstanding, Washington is the place where the rules of the game are decided!

Before you cry, ``murder most foul`` please remember that United States, though it may preach Wilsonian democracy in its foreign affairs, practices Metternichian realism.

This will never change and the American interests will always come before the welfare of the world!

Ciao!

Dear Ms. Durrani,

I think Middle East peace process is on right tracks. Both parties understand that the process is now irreversible. The hurdles and a string of impasse that you mentioned in your article are a part of a process to reach a mutually agreed final Social Contract.

So far Mr. Arafat has been using the Palestinian State card very wisely, which I think, is the only political card that he has other than the street power. The good thing is that he will always have this card.

Your concerns about peace without justice are notable. Logically, there wont and there cant be peace without justice. So it does not matter if US is a impartial broker or not. It is just as simple as that.

Miss Ammara Durrani:

Welcome to the Chowk! Permit me to first react in light of the following passage. You wrote:

``As Fred Halliday points out, the Arab-Israeli conflict is multi-dimensional. It involves conflicts of confession, settler-native antagonism, territorial claims, nationalistic rivalries, theological differences and finally interstate tensions. Because of these complexities it would be too simplistic to see it in the context of a universal conflict on the lines of Huntington’s ‘clash of civilizations’ or the Islam vs. the West theory. Rather it needs to be studied within a broader structure of international processes.``

In this passage, it is not clear where Professor Halliday`s views end and your own start. If the entire passage represents Halliday`s views, I really wonder why he would limit the study of Palestinian-Israeli conflict to only broader structure of international processes. I wonder if a global-local dialectical analysis would have much relevance to the issue at hand. Am I trying to create an unnecessary tension in your/his analysis?

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

P.S. I must admit, I have not yet read your entire (short) article.

A well written article on a forgotten issue on Chowk. Please dear Madam, also comment on the possible repercussions of announcing a Palestinian state at this point in time.

Thankyou

Yasser Latif Hamdani

Feroze K

I agree with your analysis. America follows the Woodrow Wilson principle only in name... it follows a most Machiavellian course not just metternichian realism in reality.

Yasser

re fuzair #2:

I disagree with your assessment of Arafat and his cronies who`ll have to settle for scraps out of this whole imbroglio. Israel desperately needs some sort of legitimacy on the other side of the bargaining table. Notwithstanding that well-spoken woman from the Palestinian side, Arafat for all practical purposes is the only man who can bestow respectability on any compromise that is ultimately reached from both sides. Negotiations with Hamas or other factions of the PLO are Israel`s worst nightmare. Add to the mix Arafat`s fragile health, the growing ascendancy of the religious right in Israel and the tenous hold of its Prime Minister and the situation is not as hopeless as one might think.

later

-sac

The secret to peace is not just ``justice.`` Even more fundamental is both sides agreeing on the basic nature of the situation. It can be argued (and it has been) that the real reason why there was peace between Germany, Japan, Italy, the USA, and Western Europe at the end of WWII was that everyone agreed on the facts:

A) Japan, Germany, and Italy had *lost * the war.

B) The USA and the Allies had *won * the war.

C) Open fascism was a refuted ideology considered doomed to failure.

D) The USA and Allies were fundamentally more powerful and productive than the Axis powers.

E) The future of the former Axis powers was tied to the fortunes of the Allies.

The importance of this fundamental sort of agreement is easy to miss. For the most part, after the war, the people in the Axis powers were not secretly fuming that ``foreign conspiracies`` had robbed them of a victory. They did not continue to believe that fascism was the one true way of the world. They did not look backwards and say that ``if only all us former fascist countries can work in a united fashion, these Allies would be doomed before our rightousness.``

In the ``Middle East`` (odd term, eh?), there seems to be no such realism. At times it seems the Arab countries and people do not realize that they are on the weaker and losing side. Until that happens, I fear more war and conflict is inevitable.

I`m not saying that USA/Israel are justified in being overbearing or ``rubbing salt in wounds.`` After all, we know what happened after WWI when the victors were too harsh. But the losers need to understand that they in fact lost and so need to move on.

.......... maybe i am missing someting here ... though not much of a cartographer, the last time i looked at the map, Israel was this tiny strip of land sandwiched between the Arabs from Morocco to Iraq and Arab-wannabes from Iran to Indonesia and Kazakistan to Baluchistan .............. so how come a billion Arabs, quasi-Arabs and semi-Arabs cannot take care of this annoying gnat .... but then if i remember Gideon correctly - David was a Jew and Goliath an Arab ........

.............so let`s blame it on the CIA, the Zionist lobby and those idiots inside the beltway - Ya Allah Kufar go Gharq Kar ! Ya Allah Falestine ko Azad Kar ! Ya Allah Islam key Dushmano ko Tehas Nehas Kar !Ya Allah Kufar ka Mon Kala Kar ! ............ ever since I was a child I have chanted these prayers at least twice a year at the GHQ grounds behind great Momins like Ayub Khan, Yahya Khan, Bhutto, Hazrat Zia (RUA), Sir GIK and hopefully this December I get to repeat the same prayer behind the CEO ....... what else can we do ?

RE: Sahai # 9

Dear Sahai,:

I think your post is a bit too hard and judgmental. I do not agree with the thrust of your post that the acceptance of a fact that one has ``lost`` is a reason enough to make peace with oneself and with others. The acceptance of the formula for peace by the mainstream Arab politics is indicative of the mindset that they have ``accepted`` the fact that they have ``lost``. It may also be translated that the mainstream has agreed on the fact that the peace must take precedence over the morality of the issue. But it cannot be translated that they have agreed to further injustices too. The peace without justice is not possible-especially when one party has sacrificed everything for it-land, lives, the future of several generations, their livelihood, and now they have put the morality of the issue on line too. If justice is still denied then we know that, all it takes is a little guy with a funny mustache.

What is the difference between an Arab and a Muslim???

good article Ammara.

As for Israel and Palestine, it`s a play of power and political interest. Israel is Uncle Sam`s adopted child.

Besides sanctions in Iraq, military surveillance, and Kuwaiti servants, what other way does this superpower control the sitation in the Middle East? By pulling Israeli strings.

Besides, a Muslim life isn`t worth all that much to the US. Until the problem escalates to mass genocide, the US will watch the show and feign grief.

Same thing happened to the Jews during the Holocaust. It`s political voyeurism.

Ammara:

You questioned the impartiality of America as a peace-broker. When it comes to self interests, (political, social, economical, strategical - doesn`t really matter), impartiality is a blurred concept regardless of who is concerned. And no matter how many lives are at stake. Of course, things would have been different had Palestine been in a position to whet the American appetite for more with something that would have gone down well with the rest of the meal.

As far as the role of the Arabs are concerned, (esp. Middle Eastern), they`re very shrewd businessmen. And business is a separate entity to religion.

Thank you for an interesting read. Hope to read more from you.

- Lubna

Both Jews & Arabs are right & both are wrong. Jersusalem is a holy place for Jews, Christians & Muslims. When people fight & hate each other for the greater glory of religion & God, it is no wonder God will never grant them peace. They have made Holy ground hell on earth. All parties involved have more than earned their misery. They deserve to wallow in it.

shankar #15, ``When people fight & hate each other for the greater glory of religion & God, it is no

wonder God will never grant them peace.``

Interesting concept! But do you think Palestinians are fighting for greater glory of God alone? They are fighting for the right to have their own nation, their land, their identity which THEY DESERVE because they have been living on that land for ages. They shouldn`t have to fight for it, it is theirs.

I can see the parellels between Kashmiris and Palestinians. These people are suffering endlessly for their identity and land, at the hands of power hungry political regimes. No Mullah, no Zionist Rabbi is suffering in Israel. It`s the innocent civilians.

A Palestinian state on the West Bank and Gaza is a nightmare. These ex-terrorists can hardly run the little piece they are lording over in Gaza right now. Heck, they treat dissent with a brutality which is comparable to the worst Israeli actions. Give them a bigger piece and they will become the slave-masters of the rest of the Arab population there. Give them Jerusalem and they`ll probably blow it up like they use to regularly blow up airplanes.

Arabs and their lackey poorer Muslim nations will need to heed the the late HS Suhrawardy`s statement: Israel has come to stay. And she intends to stay with her historic capital of Jerusalem. Once the rabid emotionalism is settled thw world will realise what a mistake it is turn Jerusalem over to the PLO.

Scout,

{{They are fighting for the right to have their own nation, their land, their identity which THEY DESERVE because they have been living on that land for ages. They shouldn`t have to fight for it, it is theirs.}}

Even most Israelis accept that. They dont have a problem about the West Bank or Gaza. The sticking point is Jerusalem. Nobody wants to share it. Ideally Jerusalem should be a soverign state within a state (perhaps like Vatican City), but with the difference that it should be shared by all 3 religions.

Re: Shankar # 18

I think that we should turn the Big J into a theme park and charge a daily fee for the riot du jour! :)

Let us nuke Middle East - Moses was given a lemon; we have the land, but where is the promise part? :) LOL

Ciao!

re sigalph #17:

``Give them Jerusalem and they`ll probably blow it up like they use to regularly blow up airplanes.``

Spoken like a true curranta. Now you have really handed in your passport. Welcome aboard.

later

-sac

shankar #19, ``The sticking point is Jerusalem. Nobody wants to share it. Ideally Jerusalem should be a soverign state within a state (perhaps like Vatican City), but with the difference that it should be shared by all 3 religions.``

Everything was just fine until they Brits stuck their trouble making noses into the area.

Turning Jerusalem into a sovereign state?

Now that`s a noble idea. But then, Christians, Jews, and Muslims all think they are the best things to happen to this world. These three religions are not good at sharing, not anymore at least.

Who knows though, if Jerusalem isn`t destroyed in the near future, maybe your idea will come into shape. I sure hope so for the sake of the people living there, not because of religious significance, for I believe God is everywhere you want Him to be.

sigalph235 #17

``Arabs and their lackey poorer Muslim nations will need to heed the the late HS Suhrawardy`s statement: Israel has come to stay. And
she intends to stay with her historic capital of Jerusalem``

sigalph,
I read you posts with interest, and usually find them quite balanced and sensible. However, I have to disagree with you here. Ok, lets talk about Mr. Suharwardy`s statement.

Well, there are claims by Aboriginal Australians over much of Australia including the Sydney harbor, the opera house and the home bush bay where Olympics took place… Their historical claims are based on 60,000 years of continued presence in this continent, and living off the Land that they claim. Most ``civilized`` Europeans, who have only been here for 200 years, laugh at their claims.

And if we apply Mr. Suharwardy`s logic, then what is wrong with Iraq, historically, claiming Kuwait to be part of Iraq? … And what about such claims in Balkans, and parts of Europe? the list will go on and on. I need to look at the context of Mr. Suharwardy`s statement to truly appreciate it. However, your conclusions based on his statement are certainly flawed.

I urge you to look at the plight of Palestinians from a humanistic point of view. Even if there is resentment against ``Muslims`` in your heart, which is apparent from your bitter post, you should have the decency of acknowledging the facts. Millions of Palestinians have been made homeless, and have been forced to live as refugees since the arrival of Jews from Europe and elsewhere to this land that they (Jews) ``historically`` claim to be theirs. You should have the decency to acknowledge decades of oppression which palentinians have endured which includes horrific brutility on the part of Iraelis such as the massacres of Palestinians in sabra and shatila where the Israeli soldiers massacred women and children. You looked at handful of terrorists who blow up planes and decided to condemn the entire Palestinian nation and the entire population of Muslims in the world? I don`t think that terrorist actions of handful of Mukti Bahinis made it halal for Pakistani Army to massacre poor Bengali civilians - men, women and children.

On one hand you condemn Pakistani army, but on the other hand you smile, and urge the Israeli soldiers on for essentially similar actions to what Pakistani army was guilty of in formerly East Pakistan.

ISRAEL 101 - A basic course for (intellectualy) handicapped or those who have just landed on the `third planet from the Sun`

By Charley Reese of The Sentinel Staff Published in The Orlando Sentinel February 8, 1998

Just so you can keep up with the perpetual crisis in the Middle East, here is a quiz to test your knowledge:

Question: Which country in the Middle East has nuclear weapons? Answer: Israel.

Q: Which country in the Middle East refuses to sign the nuclear non-proliferation treaty and bars international inspections? A: Israel.

Q: Which country in the Middle East seized the sovereign territory of other nations by military force and continues to occupy it in defiance of United Nations Security Council resolutions? A: Israel.

Q: Which country in the Middle East routinely violates the international borders of another sovereign state with warplanes and artillery and naval gunfire? A: Israel.

Q: What American ally in the Middle East has for years sent assassins into other countries to kill its political enemies (a practice sometimes called exporting terrorism)? A: Israel.

Q: In which country in the Middle East have high-ranking military officers admitted publicly that unarmed prisoners of war were executed? A: Israel.

Q: What country in the Middle East refuses to prosecute its soldiers who have acknowledged executing prisoners of war? A: Israel.

Q: What country in the Middle East created 762,000 refugees and refuses to allow them to return to their homes, farms and businesses? A: Israel.

Q: What country in the Middle East refuses to pay compensation to people whose land, bank accounts and businesses it confiscated? A: Israel.

Q: In what country in the Middle East was a high-ranking United Nations diplomat assassinated? A: Israel.

Q: In what country in the Middle East did the man who ordered the assassination of a high-ranking U.N. diplomat become prime minister? A: Israel.

Q: What country in the Middle East blew up an American diplomatic facility in Egypt and attacked a U.S. ship in international waters, killing 33 and wounding 177 American sailors? A: Israel.

Q: What country in the Middle East employed a spy, Jonathan Pollard, to steal classified documents and then gave some of them to the Soviet Union? A: Israel.

Q: What country at first denied any official connection to Pollard, then voted to make him a citizen and has continuously demanded that the American president grant Pollard a full pardon? A: Israel.

Q: What country on Planet Earth has the most powerful lobby in the United States, according to a recent Fortune magazine survey of Washington insiders? A: Israel.

Q: Which country in the Middle East is in defiance of 69 United Nations Security Council resolutions and has been protected from 29 more by U.S. vetoes? A: Israel.

scout,

{{Now that`s a noble idea. But then, Christians, Jews, and Muslims all think they are the best things to happen to this world. These three religions are not good at sharing, not anymore at least.}}

Well, thats why I said they deserve to wallow in their misery:)

To be fair, though, its not just Christians, Jews & Muslims that think they are the best thing that happened to this world. Fundamentalists of EVERY religion feel their way is the best or only way to salvation. Sometimes I feel religion should be banned in this world. It is the one concept that has caused the most amount of hatred in mankind.

But then that wont stop human nature. We`ll find other ways to hate each other.

The fathers of psychoanalysis were mostly non practising Jews. But their ``schools of thoughts`` caused divisions. Eg, Freudeans & Jungians did`nt talk to each other. Ah, what the heck, maybe the world would be a better place if there was a total nuclear holocaust & some other species dominated this planet after humans become extinct.

After all dinosaurs ruled earth for 65 million years. Most people dont think humans will last for another thousand yrs.

Cheers

Urtruly #23,

Maybe we should send that list to Washington?

Great post by the way.

same goes for fairdinkum #22,

good points!

Protest against Israeli atrocities tommorow at 5 pm at Times Square NYC

Protest At Rutgers next Wednesday .........

Hope to see you all there !

Yasser Hamdani

Israel: obstacle to peace

By Ammara Durrani

The recent Arab-Israeli clashes are worse than anything seen during the Intifada of 1987-1993. As their death toll continues to rise, the Palestinians have started calling these events as the beginning of the battle for Al-Quds - a battle between guns and stones, and fought with rage and hatred.

rest at:

http://www.dawn.com/2000/10/06/op.htm#3

AAM-UL-FEEL; THE YEAR OF THE ELEPHANT

All day today I have been thinking about Mohammed Rami ad-Dorra. For some of us it might be just another name; the 8 year old who was murdered right in front of his father and the whole world three days ago.

Please forgive my jay walking today; I cannot focus my mind on anything. I have no idea where to start this post. The focus keeps on shifting from Mohammad to Commander Laila Khalid to firefly Nada Al Husseini; George Habash to Yasser Arafat; Hamas to Fatah; Amal to Hizballah; Popular Front to PLO; Yasmin Shaheed to Yehya Ayyash Shaheed.

I also think of the little birds like Mohammed; the Children of Paradise; Our 8 or 9 year old Ghazi Salahuddins, our Tipu Shaheed,and our Ali Asghars of this time. Who could have thought that these little Ababeels could bring the Abraha of this time to his knees with their slingshots?

Our little angels! we believe in you. Now that you are closer to Him, please tell Him not to judge us all from the few among us who can blow their trumpets and drums louder than our voices. They tell me that your Jihad is useless; it has nothing to do in this day and age. They tell me that, ``it is economy stupid``. May be I am stupid. Perhaps I ask stupid questions. When I ask them how many dollars it costs to buy freedom they laugh at me. When I ask them which stock exchange deals in ``self-determination`` they wink at each other. When I ask them which ATM dispenses off ``self-respect to a nation`` they look the other way. May be I am stupid.

They tell me His word is old and useless now. It should be discarded just like their old shoes and clothes that they throw out in the United Way canister on a sunny weekend. I wonder if they have thrown their mothers and fathers in those canisters too since they are old and fragile and useless too?

My fallen angels! my Mujahids! Tell Him that Abraha has brought his army again. Is it the year of the Elephant again?

re fairdinkum 22

you claim ``...massacres of Palestinians in sabra and shatila where the Israeli soldiers massacred women and children. ``

A check at history will reveal that the said massacres were carried out by the Phalangist militia of the Gemayel brothers while it was finally halted only when the Isrelis intervened to stop the Arabs slaughtering the Arabs. It is not surprising that the 30,000 Syrian forces didn`t lift a finger to stop the Phalangists: after all the Lebanese Phalangist militia was practically created by the Syrians in 1976 as a counterweight to the Druze/PLO alliance in the civil war. And the Syrians were only too happy to continue the massacre in the same two camps and at Brouj al Brajneh the next year. Of course, it is quite okay when the SYrians kill, isn`t it?

As for comparing the Mukti Bahini to the PLO thugs, give me ONE example where the Mukti Bahini blew up third party innocent victims at foreign airports? Or hijacked planes? Or blew up buses full of school children? Or kill Pakistani athletes in the Olympics?

And for goodness sake, get real about comparing the IDF with the Pakistani Eastern Command. A million(three million by Bengali estimates) dead, two hundred thousand women violated, half the university professoriat butchered in cold blood? That happened in Dhaka, not in Tel Aviv or Beirut.

Good. Then a question naturally pops up in ones mind.What should we call a person who wrongfully accuses others of doing something that they didnt? Should we call him a ``liar`` or he gets to keep his status de jure of an ``accuser``?

sigalph235 #29

Dear Sigalph,

You say:

``Of course, it is quite okay when the SYrians kill, isn`t it?``

No, it is not okay to kill innocent men, women and children...and that was the whole point of my post #22. I guess you missed it in the flood of emotions. Your assertion that massacres in sabra and shatila camps were carried out on behalf of Syrians, and Israelis only intervened to stop the bloodshed is questionable. Perhaps we are looking at two different versions of history.

Palestinians have endured a lot more oppression than Bengalis – no comparison between PLO and Mukti Bahenis of course… The situation of Bengalis and Palestinians is also different. Palestinians have lost everything – their country, their homes their businesses their families their culture… They have been living as refugees for decades. In such situations there is always a possibility of splinter groups resorting to violence to get world attention. Look at the situation in Northern Ireland. However, despite what IRA did, Jerry Adams is still invited to participate in peace talks. Political wing of IRA has been a part of mainstream political process – and all this with the blessings of none other than US of A.

It seems that you have a dictionary written by an Israeli :) …..only those acts of violence that PLO or its splinter groups have committed are included in the definition of terrorism. I might have to pull out a dictionary written by Gen. Tikka Khan …:)

As for the atrocities committed by Pakistani army in East Pakistan (former), please have a look at my comments re HRC report... No human being deserves to get shot, or raped, or made homeless or forced to live as a refugee. Perhaps, you are young and emotional, but you will eventually find out, and understand (I hope you will) that the misery of human beings (including Palestinians/Muslims) is not something one should make fun of. Not all Arabs deserve to get killed. Not all Muslims are bad people.

Re: Sabra and Shatila massacres

``Israel invaded southern Lebanon in June 1982 (the ``Peace for Galilee War``), instructing the largely Christian Lebanese Phalange faction - which had received ISRAELI ARMS and TRAINING - not to participate in the fighting; if Phalangist misbehaviour occurred, it would be dealt with by the Israel Defence Force. In August the Phalangist leader (and president-elect of Lebanon), Bashir Gemayel, was assassinated, and Israeli forces moved into West Beirut. They agreed that the Phalangists, rather than themselves, would enter the refugee camps at Sabra and Shatila, where, after the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) fighting forces had been evacuated from Beirut by an international flotilla, many Palestinian women, children, and old men were seeking refuge.

There was some opposition to this proposal among Israeli senior officers who feared a ``bloodbath``; but it was eventually settled that the Phalangist forces would enter the camps, having been warned by Israeli commanders not to harm the inhabitants. Nevertheless, the Phalangists carried out a series of massacres of the inhabitants. Eventually, the Israeli authorities established a Commission of Inquiry presided over by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and the Kahan Report was produced`` (Leslie C Green - the Kahan report)

The whole report is available at :

http://www.hebron.com/massacres/sabra/massacres-sabra-kahan-commision.html

And this is Israeli version of the events that took place...not a PLO version...not an Arab version ... not a Muslim version...

No where in the report is Syria mentioned as a party (directly or indirectly) to the crime against humanity at sabra and shatile refugee camps. Israeli senior officers despite knowing what the intentions of Phalangists were, allowed them to enter the camps where WOMEN AND CHILDREN were seeking refuge.

How could this happen without the approval of Israeli forces who were in direct command of Phalangists at that time?

I repeat ISRAELIS WERE IN DIRECT COMMAND OF PHALANGISTS(Christian Lebanese militia) AT THE TIME OF SABRA AND SHATILA MASSACRES.

Re: Sabra and Shatila massacres

Yoram Binur, a Jew who was served in the Israeli army, writes:

``Tales of torture, murder, rape, and pillage perpetrated by the Christian Phalangists against the Palestinian population were routine and were doubtless known to the Israeli Intelligence officers who supervised the Phalangists. Years later, when the committee investigating the massacres at Sabra and Shatila refugee camps interrogated Ariel Sharon, Rafeel Eytan, and others, they claimed that they had no way of knowing that the Christian Phalangists would commit such atrocities. I could only laugh in the face of such blatant lies.``


Binur, Yoram., My Enemy, My Self (New York: Doubleday, 1989) p. 37

Re: Terrorists, Terrorism and Thugs

“Yitzhak Shamir was originally a member of a Jewish terrorist group called the Irgun, which was headed by former Prime Minister Menachem Begin. Mr. Shamir later moved over to the even more radical Stern gang.
Whether Mr. Arafat ever specifically sanctioned an act of terrorism against unarmed civilians is disputed. Israel, and the US government, assume he has. PLO spokesmen say that terrorist acts committed by Palestinians or their friends and sympathizers among other Arab communities have been done by fanatical individuals or groups over which Arafat has no control.
That Shamir and Mr. Begin have been leaders of terrorist bands that committed many atrocities is beyond question. Shamir himself has defended the various assassinations committed by the Irgun and Stern gangs on the ground that ``it was the only way we could operate, because we were so small. So it was more efficient and more moral to go to selected targets.`` The selected targets in those early days of the founding of the state of Israel included Lord Moyne, British resident minister in Cairo in 1944, and the Swedish count, Folke Berndotte, on Sept. 17, 1948. Not all Begin and Shamir targets were so precise. The first act of terrorism in the long Arab-Israel wars, which involved many victims, was the bombing of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem on July 2, 1946. Many women were among the 91 people killed.
On April 9, 1948, a combined force of Irgun and Stern gangs committed ``a particularly brutal massacre of some 250 Arab residents [of the village of Deir Yassin], many of them women and children,`` according to Evan M. Wilson, author of ``Decisions on Palestine.`` Accounts by Red Cross and United Nations observers who visited the scene said that the houses were first set on fire and then the residents were shot down as they came out to escape the flames.
In a book titled ``Taking Sides,`` published by William Morrow and Co., Inc., author Stephen Green tells of the ``Lavon Affair,`` which shook more than one Israeli Cabinet. The affair began in June 1954, with the planting of ``a ring of spies [``moles``]`` in Cairo, ordering it to begin sabotage operations against selected Egyptian, British, and American targets. The Alexandria post office was firebombed on July 2. On July 14, the US Information Agency offices in Cairo and Alexandria were damaged by fire started by phosphorus incendiary devices, as was a British-owned theater.
Members of the spy ring were caught, and they confessed. They had been planted by Modiin, the Israeli military intelligence organization. The purpose, presumably, was to sabotage Egyptian relations with the US and Britain. Various commissions of inquiry into the affair conducted in Israel were never able to decide whether or not Israeli Defense Minister Pinchon Lavon authorized the operation.
On Oct. 14-15, 1953, an Israeli force attacked the unarmed Arab village of Kibya, in the demilitarized zone, killing 53 civilians. The details were so gruesome that the US joined in a UN condemnation of the Israeli action and, for the first and only time, suspended US aid to Israel in reprisal.
Israeli armed forces invaded Lebanon on June 6, 1982. Arab casualties vastly outnumbered Israeli casualties. During the invasion, there were brutal massacres of Arabs at Sabra and Shatila camps for which the Israeli High Court held Israeli military officers responsible. “

Joseph C. Harsch
The Christian Science Monitor (Nov. 1988)

Immediately following the establishment of Israel, the three underground terrorist organizations established under the mandate period —the Hagana led by David Ben Gurion, the Irgun Zvei Leumi led by Menachem Begin, and the Stern Gang led by Yizhaq Shamir — all combined forces and started to dispel and drive out the Arabs. The massacre of innocent women and children at Dier Yassin speaks for itself as to how they went about accomplishing this task. The Deir Yassin savagery was later described by Menachem Begin as:
``not only justifiable but there would not have been a state of Israel without the victory at Deir Yassin.``

On February 20, 1989, Alice F. Smith wrote in the Time Magazine:

``What manner of man would retaliate against a stone-throwing child by shooting him in the back as he ran away? What manner of government would retaliate by fining already poverty stricken parents $1000, demolishing their home, and confiscating their meager possessions? What manner of people are these arrogant settlers who think they have a God given right to commit such atrocities and still cry for more? What manner of people are we that we permit our government to give away billions of the American tax-payers’ dollars to Israel every year, enabling it to continue to subjugate the Palestinians?``

Recalling all the brutalities on the part of the Israeli government, Paul Findley, a former U.S Congressman for 22 years, says:

``As an American, I hang my head in shame, because I know that America is the pipeline without which Israel could not inflict such punishment upon those poor people in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.``

Deedat, Ahmed and Findley, Paul. Is Israel Set-Up For Destruction? (Cape Town; IPCI, 1989)

The world could not understand the hatred displayed by the Palestinians against the Jews. Yoram Binur explains the hatred:

``For 20 years, the Palestinians lived among us. During the day we were the employers who profited by their cheap labor and exploited them for all they were worth; in the afternoon we were the police; in the evening we were the soldiers at the roadblock on their way home; and finally, at night, we were the security forces who entered their homes and arrested them``

Binur, Yoram., My Enemy, My Self (New York: Doubleday, 1989) p. 196

Re: Sabra and Shatila massacres

According to International Red Cross sources, the number of people massacred were around 2,750. But author Amnon Kapeliouk places the figure between 3,000 and 3,500 to include:

(1) those buried in mass graves whose number cannot be ascertained;

(2) those who were buried under the ruins of houses;

(3) those who were taken alive to an unknown destination but never returned. The bodies of some of them were found by the side of the roads leading to the south (Amnon Kapeliouk, ``Sabra and Chatila,``pp93-94).

``While the actual operation was carried out by the Lebanese Phalangists, responsibility for the massacre rests on the shoulders of the Israelis who armed and paid them, and lit the skies above the camps with flares as the killing went on through the night, and who had planned the massacre. It also rests on the United States, which undertook to guarantee the safety of the inmates of the two camps after the PLO had departed from Lebanon (Bitter Harvest). Former Under-Secretary of State George Ball commented on the subject as follows:

``In America our nation’s responsibility for the whole tragic incident has gone largely unnoticed, yet the facts are clear enough. We put our own good faith behind Israel’s word of honor, otherwise the PLO would never have agreed to leave. The PLO trusted America’s promise that the Palestinians left behind would be safe-guarded. When America promised ‘to do its utmost’ to ensure that Israel kept its commitments, they took that commitment at face value. They would never have trusted an Israeli promise, but they trusted us. We betrayed them. (George Ball, Error and Betrayal in Lebanon, p.57)

``After that the Israeli soldiers would claim that they did not know what was happening. They did not hear the screams and shouts of people being massacred. They did not see wanton murderer of innocent people through their telescopic binoculars`` (From Beirut to Jerusalem). What they saw in Sabra and Shatila camps was only nests of terrorist children and terrorist women and old men that needed to be destroyed. They did not even know that almost one quarter of the camps neighborhood was inhabited by the hapless Lebanese Shiites who bought the dismal shacks from Palestinians who were able to make it in other places.

When the United Nations adopted a resolution to condemn Israel for using the world prohibited (cluster bombs), the US representative in the Security Council used the veto three times between June and August 1982 to prevent the adoption of any resolution against Israel.

shankar #24, ``Sometimes I feel religion should be banned in this world. It is the one concept that has caused the most amount of hatred in mankind.``

I agree, ban organized religion and let individual spirituality flourish.

``But then that wont stop human nature. We`ll find other ways to hate each other. ``

I`m sure the other ways would be less cruel.

Can`t compare the evils of religious hatred (Holocaust, genocide of Muslim Bosnians, Hindu caste killings, Bin Laden terrorism etc...)

to other forms of hatred in the world.

fairdinkum

At least Israel formed an inquiry commission and her soldiers and statesmen spoke out against her alleged atrocities while others, like the late Begin, were finished politically. The Americans had a press, which you quote, that regularly lashes out at US support of Israel.

Now pray tell, who amongst the PLO and the Arabs has spoken out against Palestinian terrorism? Nor do I recall hearing too many Syrian judges condemn Assad`s destruction of Hama. May be I missed the issue of the Libyan newspaper which criticised Moammar Gaddafi`s support for global terror groups.

Imperfect as it is, Israel remains the only democracy in the Middle East. Her human rights record is not good at all. But she needs no lecture from Palestinians or most other Arabs on that issue. Where was the outrage when Assad`s army crushed mosques, homes, and people in Hama? Did you know that far more people were killed there than at Sabra and Shatila?

Condemning Israel and the Jews is a favourite pastime of pseudo-intellectuals of the Muslim world. All that righteous energy over the fifty years could have been put to much effective use in improving the conditions of the people in Pakistan,Bangladesh, and the Sudan. The money so lavishly given to terror groups in Syria and Iraq could have helped feed the starving masses in Ethiopia and Somalia. But these were not the `sexy` issues for the sheikhs. The PLO and Israel was.

And yet there have been bold leaders who have broken away from this slavish `groupthink` mentality. Jordan and Turkey and Egypt come to mind.

And, by the way, Israel has left Lebanon? When will Syria? Or is Israeli occupation of Lebanon more morally offensive than the SYrian one?

If I have a dictionary written by an Israeli, you probably don`t have one at all.

So the Israelis forced Palestinians out of their homes and took their land. Is it worth it to keep fighting, year after year? Is land worth even one life as long as you have somewhere to live? Here is an alternative vision for the Palestinians: Achieve ascendancy in the knowledge-intensive economy, and let history judge who was right and who was wrong. Land does not matter any more.

tahmed321, ``So the Israelis forced Palestinians out of their homes and took their land. Is it worth it to keep fighting, year after year?``

So what you`re saying is, it`s okay to be oppressed and not fight for what is rightfully yours? What about your identity? Should we (desis) have not fought with the Brits for our land? We should have just grinned and bore the pain of having our land snatched away?

No one likes to fight, and the Palestinians have due reason to.

``Is land worth even one life as long as you have somewhere to live?``

Yeah sure, you`ll find a place to live. Where else will oppressed people go? But will it be what they deserve?

The very creation of Israel was for the Jewish people to have land they could call their own.

IF land wasn`t so important as you say it`s not, couldn`t the Jews have lived anywhere? Why in the Middle East?

Think before you make such false ``righteous`` statements.

Scout #39

Good thinkin`. Israel is actually a humane version of `the Final Solution` that Europe had in its mind for a while.

In response to sigalph35 (Reply # 17)

Dear sigalph235:

Although I am satisfied with Fairdinkum’s rebuttal (Reply # 22), I want to react to a small part of your post.

Your statement: “Give them [Palestinians] Jerusalem and they`ll probably blow it up like they use to regularly blow up airplanes.”

Comment: Sigalph235, I feel sorry for your interpretation of human history. Your definition and application of the notion of terrorist is, my view, neither unambiguous nor just. Please consider the following from Chomsky:

“. . . after the massacre of Palestinians praying at the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron by Baruch Goldstein, a still more punitive curfew was imposed – on Palestinians. The purpose was “to protect the Jewish settlers from revenge.” Ori Nir reported, describing how “the Israeli occupation redoubled the oppression” of Palestinians, destroyed the market that was the center of Hebron’s economy, and closed roads to Palestinians though not Jewish settlers, who were left free to rampage, destroy, and humiliate the Arab population at will, an “insane reality” enforced by the military that “subordinates their lives to the settlers interests.” A year later, the Arab population was again locked up under 24-hour curfew for four days so that settlers and 35,000 Jewish visitors could travel through the city undisturbed by an Arab presence during the Passover holidays, having picnics and dancing in the streets under the protection of extra military forces. The settlers and visitors used the opportunity “to insult the Palestinian imprisoned in their houses and to throw stones at them if they dared to peek out of the windows at the Jews celebrating in their city.” The celebration was brought to a close “by settlers rampaging through the Old City, destroying property, and smashing car windows . . . in a city magically cleansed . . . of Palestinians, . . . effectively jailed for days in their homes” but able to watch the “merry dances of settlers” and the “festive processions” on TV while “commerce, careers, studies, the family, love – all are immediately disrupted,” and the medical system was paralyzed” so that “many sick persons in Hebron were unable to reach hospitals during the curfew and women giving birth could not arrive in time at the clinics” (Chomsky, 1996, “World Orders Old and New,” pp. 278-79).

Terrorism is a socially constructed concept. A discourse on terrorism needs to be grounded in a universally accepted set of values. Are you sure that you apply the concept of terrorism consistently across the board – people, places, and periods?

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

sigalph235 #38
Dear Sigalph,
On the issue of terrorism, I think the facts are there for you to see. Bilal has quite eloquently summarized the whole matter in his following statement:

“Terrorism is a socially constructed concept. A discourse on terrorism needs to be grounded in a universally accepted set of values. Are you sure that you apply the concept of terrorism consistently across the board – people, places, and periods?” ahmadb #41

I, however, would briefly comment on some of your statements. Also, if you wish, I am happy to discuss the Syrian involvement in the Middle East crisis with special emphasis on Syria’s role in Lebanon.

You say:

“Imperfect as it is, Israel remains the only democracy in the Middle East. Her human rights record is not good at all. But she needs no lecture from Palestinians or most other Arabs on that issue…”

That Arab/Muslims nations of Middle East are not democratic, and whether or not Israel is a true liberal democracy is an entirely different issue. You maintain that the human rights record of Israel is not good at all…and yet we shouldn’t condemn her on crimes against humanity because Israel is a democracy? I am afraid you are confusing the two issues here.

You say:

“Condemning Israel and the Jews is a favourite pastime of pseudo-intellectuals of the Muslim world. All that righteous energy over the fifty years could have been put to much effective use in improving the conditions of the people in Pakistan,Bangladesh, and the Sudan. The money so lavishly given to terror groups in Syria and Iraq could have helped feed the starving masses in Ethiopia and Somalia. But these were not the `sexy` issues for the sheikhs. The PLO and Israel was.”

If you are interested in debating the matter you brought up in your post #17, I urge you to remain focused on the issue at hand. Avoid making gross generalizations, and blanket statements. Substantiate your statements with facts and references. Speculative statements must, at least, be backed with sound and reasoned arguments.

My heart goes out to the Palestenians, who have to fight against a superior Israeli army with stones. The fact that these young Palestinians continue to persist by hurling stones against guys armed with Uzi submachine guns only highlights their frustration & determination to fight a just cause with violence, with no hopes of ever winning.

If we step back for a moment & consider some realism, there is no way these poor Palestinians can ever hope to win by this strategy--no matter how noble their cause. In fact, it only hardens the determination of the opponent. Barakh, who is perhaps a lot more commited to genuine peace than , say, Nathanyahu or Sharon , responded by giving a two day ultimatum.

If there is a dispute between 2 parties, BOTH contribute to the problem. There is no point in arguing who`s fault is greater because then the problem will never be solved. Each side then becomes more hurt, self righteous & intansigent. In that respect Kashmir & Palestine are very analogous.

The only hope that the weaker party has to win against a superior adversary, is to recognise some stark realities of the ``laws of fighting against oppressors``. Mind you, ``laws`` can be unfair or unjust (eg, I dont like the way my taxes are being spent). But whether we like it or not, we cause greater hardship on ourselves if we disobey them.

So, to apply the above para to the Palestinian problem, the Palestinians should first recognise the following realities or ``laws``:

1)There is NO way they can hope to vanquish the Israelis by violence, whether that is by throwing stones or performing acts of terrorism. I will argue that the combined military might of the Arab world wont vanquish the Israelis. They`ve tried it before & havent won.

2) The US will NOT stop supporting Israel. There is no point crying about US hypocracy because that wont make a damn bit of difference in the US foreign policy, not matter whether Gore or Bush wins. As long as the Israelis make a claim that they have a right to defend themselves (even against stones), the US will support them.

3)Jerusalem HAS to be shared by all 3 religions because all 3 have some of their most sacred sites there.

So do the Palestinians have ANY hope of winning? I will propose a solution, eventhough many will jump at it & denounce it as ``corny`` or ridiculous. IMHO, that is the only hope Palestinians have to prevail.

Firstly, Arafat should denounce ALL forms of violence, including stone throwing. Secondly , all Palestinians should cease that form of protest. Then continue to provoke the Israelis relentlessly with civil nonviolent disobedience. There is not a damn thing Israel could do in such an event. They dont have that many jail cells to incarcerate all the Palestinians. The world press will only be too happy to show the Israeli army beating or shooting at Palestinians who wont resort to violence. Nothing will ``terrorise`` the Israelis more! Even American Jews will pressure the Israeli govt to back down.

This Gandhian method has proven itself not just in British India, but was used very effectively by Martin Luther King himself. By doing so, world opinion turns against the superior force & shows them to be the evil bully that they are. I will argue that if Kashmiris also adopt that method, it will give their cause much more success than a million mujahadeen.

OK, now throw all the stones at me ,if you want:)

Well one more time despite the fact that who started this bloodshed, all US politicians and media pundits are trying to save Israel`s face and blaming it entirely on Arafat. Barak is going to every cable and network station to give head job and propagate lies. Things are hopeless for palestinians, the ultimatum will not be accepted by them - which means more bloodshed for them.

If only US like many other countries of UN tried

to be fair, we would have chance.

Ordinary people will believe whatever media says unless it effects them personaly. I think greatest weapon arabs have is their oil,

with it they can crash markets and send their message to ordinary people.

fairdinkum: You quoted the standard line on most media outlets in the USA.

[“Imperfect as it is, Israel remains the only democracy in the Middle East. Her human rights record is not good at all. But she needs no lecture from Palestinians or most other Arabs on that issue…”]

The democracy in Israel is undeniable and actually does not need any discussion here. One should condemn violence by democratic/ undemocratic, Israelis or Arabs like Hafez Al-Asad or Saddam Hussain. But I will strongly criticize Israel here because roughly 50 cents of every 1000 dollars I earn go to Israel as aid which is not a loan. I never gave any money to most Arabs directly or indirectly (except Egypt who also gets 30 cents of my every 1000 dollar earning).

In the case of Israel, the problem is more or less old-style colonialism. While many Arab rulers have been ruthless using brute force, the western colonizers in the past and Israel go about doing it systematically, over time, marketing democracy and constant comparison with other dictators in the area. The question one asks is why have they chosen to live in a bad neighborhood. They were Europeans, descendants of Europeans, used their own mythology to claim and successfully acquire a piece of land in the bad neighborhood.

Having said all this, they have done relatively decent job in turning that piece of land into a modern country which not only threatens its weak neighbors but also spreads jealousy among non-Jews. Although the current prosperity and modern state is in large part subsidized by US and German money but still it is remarkable achievement. Moreover, Jewish people have done excellent job for USA in business, government, education, arts and culture and US support for Israel is, in part, a reflection of it. But still the violence perpetrated by Israel against Palestinians must be condemned and US government must use her leverage vis-s-vis Israel, to stop violence against Palestinians.

I believe, this will continue for 5-10 generation more. Israel is a kind of artificial country, and can not sustain another 100-150 years. Their population is at a stand still and water resources scarce. I think it was a mistake by zionists to put all their eggs in one basket. Any natural disaster or prolong wars against its neighbors will ruin any chances for long-term survival. Ultimately, the remaining (mostly sephardics) will mix up and learn to live with their neighbors while rest will move on to greener pastures of the west, Australia and New Zealand.

scout #39 Fighting for freedom is one thing, fighting for land is another. To win the fight for freedom, you must know what is freedom and you must know who the enemy is. In the fight for freedom, in Pogo`s eternal words, ``we have met the enemy, and he is us``. In the fight for land, as in the fight for toys as children, the enemy is your own sweet brother or sister.

Now put this in your pipe as you execute battlefield maneuvers from your armchair, and smoke it.

P.S. and excuse me for posting an incomplete copy of this post earlier, if that happened.

A few InterActors! have been consistently using the InterAct! space to post messages that have no connection with either the article or the ongoing discussion. In the interest of other readers and writers please refrain from doing this as it diminishes the value of this valuable space. To announce and or voice opinions that are not related to the posted articles you should use the Speakers Corner and the Chowk Forum`s. From our end we will soon provide a service that can allow your to post your impromptu emotions and opinions.

Thank you.

SameerJB #46

Sameer,

I did not quote that line...it was sigalph235 who tried ``the only democracy in Middle East`` trick on me :) True it’s an old, and much used line in western media to shift the attention of American people/world from Israel’s crimes against humanity to ``democratic Israel in the midst of savage Arabs.`` In the past it sold like hot cake...but I think times have changed. People are sick and tired of Israel’s ‘spoilt child of the west’ status. US instead of using veto merely abstained from voting when UN Security Council adopted a resolution to condemn Israel for using excessive force against Palestinian population.

As for the long-term viability of the state of Israel, well, you make some good points.... I haven`t thought along these lines... Progress and prosperity of Israel is not only subsidized by US taxpayers, in large part, it is also subsidized by the sweat and blood of Palestinians.

Ever since the mid-1980s I had proposed to the PLO leadership and to every Palestinian and Arab I met that the PLO quest for the President`s ear was a total illusion since all recent Presidents have been devoted Zionists, and that the only way to change US policy and achieve self-determination was through a mass campaign on behalf of Palestinian human rights, which would have the effect of outflanking Zionists and going straight to the American people.

Edward W Said.

The rest at: http://www.dawn.com/2000/10/08/op.htm#2

re fairdinkum 42

`You maintain that the human rights record of Israel is not good at all…and yet we shouldn’t condemn her on crimes against humanity because Israel is a democracy? `

Please refrain from deliberately misrepresenting me. I have never said that Israel shouldn`t be criticised. I have emphasized that such criticism should not be in a vaccuum. In other words, intellectual honesty will demand that those who put Israeli actions under the microscope should do the same to the activities of the PLO, the Hamas, and each and every Arab country in the neighborhood. If Israel is to be blamed, say, for murdering Palestinians in Lebanon, Syria should not be spared either. If Muslims can feel outraged at the desecration of the Al-Aqsa mosque, they can feel similar outrage at the destruction of dozens of mosques by Hafez al Assad in Hama.

If Israel being a democracy is a `standard US media line`, as one person pointed out, so what? The question is not whose line it is but whether it is true!

The question of Israel`s democracy is an integral part of the any discussion for MidEast peace. In the early nineteenth century Immanuel Kant pointed out that democracies generally don`t go to war with each other. Two hundred years later, that hypothesis still largely holds true. After all, for those who can kill their own people with impunity, killing others is even less problematic. This is perhaps the mindset of the likes of great peacemakers like Saddam Hussein and the late Hafez el Assad.

tahmed321 #43,

``Fighting for freedom is one thing, fighting for land is another.``

Who was talking about freedom? But since you brought it up, what`s wrong with fighting for freedom from oppression, and in Israel`s case, it`s oppression by land.

``To win the fight for freedom, you must know what is freedom and you must know who the enemy is. In the fight for freedom, in Pogo`s eternal words, ``we have met the enemy, and he is us.``

Pogo (whoever that is) can philosophize as much as he wants to, the matter is not as simple as a bunch of feel good words.

``In the fight for land, as in the fight for toys as children, the enemy is your own sweet brother or sister.``

Sweet brothers and sisters don`t kill innocent children with machine guns. Which cloud are you sitting on?

`` Now put this in your pipe as you execute battlefield maneuvers from your armchair, and smoke it.``

You think that speaking against Israeli atrocities

is executing battlefield maneuvers?

Please get off the cloud, leave Pogo Shogo there, and get back to the harsh realities of this world.

re fairdinkum 42

`You maintain that the human rights record of Israel is not good at all…and yet we shouldn’t condemn her on crimes against humanity because Israel is a democracy? `

Please refrain from deliberately misrepresenting me. I have never said that Israel shouldn`t be criticised. I have emphasized that such criticism should not be in a vaccuum. In other words, intellectual honesty will demand that those who put Israeli actions under the microscope should do the same to the activities of the PLO, the Hamas, and each and every Arab country in the neighborhood. If Israel is to be blamed, say, for murdering Palestinians in Lebanon, Syria should not be spared either. If Muslims can feel outraged at the desecration of the Al-Aqsa mosque, they can feel similar outrage at the destruction of dozens of mosques by Hafez al Assad in Hama.

If Israel being a democracy is a `standard US media line`, as one person pointed out, so what? The question is not whose line it is but whether it is true!

The question of Israel`s democracy is an integral part of the any discussion for MidEast peace. In the early nineteenth century Immanuel Kant pointed out that democracies generally don`t go to war with each other. Two hundred years later, that hypothesis still largely holds true. After all, for those who can kill their own people with impunity, killing others is even less problematic. This is perhaps the mindset of the likes of great peacemakers like Saddam Hussein and the late Hafez el Assad.

tahmed321 #43,

``Fighting for freedom is one thing, fighting for land is another.``

Who was talking about freedom? But since you brought it up, what`s wrong with fighting for freedom from oppression, and in Israel`s case, it`s oppression by land.

``To win the fight for freedom, you must know what is freedom and you must know who the enemy is. In the fight for freedom, in Pogo`s eternal words, ``we have met the enemy, and he is us.``

Pogo (whoever that is) can philosophize as much as he wants to, the matter is not as simple as a bunch of feel good words.

``In the fight for land, as in the fight for toys as children, the enemy is your own sweet brother or sister.``

Sweet brothers and sisters don`t kill innocent children with machine guns. Which cloud are you sitting on?

`` Now put this in your pipe as you execute battlefield maneuvers from your armchair, and smoke it.``

You think that speaking against Israeli atrocities

is executing battlefield maneuvers?

Please get off the cloud, leave Pogo Shogo there, and get back to the harsh realities of this world.

Insight into pushes and pulls on US foreign policy in a different region:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A35827-2000Oct8.html

re:SameerJB #46

I agree with your points. A few more points I`d like to your comments are:

``The democracy in Israel is undeniable and actually does not need any discussion here. One should condemn violence by democratic/ undemocratic, Israelis or Arabs like Hafez Al-Asad or Saddam Hussain. But I will strongly criticize Israel here because roughly 50 cents of every 1000 dollars I earn go to Israel as aid which is not a loan. I never gave any money to most Arabs directly or indirectly (except Egypt who also gets 30 cents of my every 1000 dollar earning). ``

There hasn`t been a serious downturn in the US economy since the Great Depression (Recessions are minor issues). Whenever such an event does happen rest assured that Israel will have to find ways of fending for itself financially.

Israel knows that it`s American subsidies can`t continue forever, which is why it was especailly interested in establishing ``peace`` with it`s Arab neighbours. It needs to establish trade with those countries bordering it so that it can survive in the future. U.S knows this too which is one of the many reasons on why it`s promoting this peace process.

I agree that in the longterm existence of Israel looks quite bleak. They`ve had a lot of help to exist as long as they have but their enemies aren`t going away anytime soon. It`ll be VERY difficult for such a small state to exist over the long term. They have no natural protection such as mountains or thick forests. Natural resources are non-existent. And their population and geographic size is miniscule compared to it`s neighbours.

``In the case of Israel, the problem is more or less old-style colonialism. While many Arab rulers have been ruthless using brute force, the western colonizers in the past and Israel go about doing it systematically, over time, marketing democracy and constant comparison with other dictators in the area. The question one asks is why have they chosen to live in a bad neighborhood.

They were Europeans, descendants of Europeans, used their own mythology to claim and successfully acquire a piece of land in the bad neighborhood. ``

Throughout history they have experienced a cycle of becoming economically and politically influential to a level of wielding influence far beyond their numbers in whichever country they live. Eventually the majority population doesn`t like this and decides to purge them from their positions of power. Happened in Germany 50 years ago, Russia 80 years ago, Spanish inquisition targeted both Jews and Muslims. After all of these experiences, one could naturally come to the conclusion that the best way to avoid future massacres is to form ones own state and thus be free from possible ethnic cleansing in the future.

Not a bad idea... Only question is why the heck did they decide thousands years after being kicked out of the Holy Land through conquest that Palestine is where they will forceably build thier new modern nation for Jews-right in the middle of literally millions of potentially hostile Arabs?

If the Europeans and Americans truly only had the best interest of the Jews in mind in terms of saving them from future genocide than why did they not cede a part of their own unused land for them to start their own state? The tiny strip of modern Israel is less than 1% of most of these countries in terms of land. After all culturally the European Jews would be able to adjust in any of these places far more easily than in the middle of the Middle East.

Perhaps the Europeans were not being as altruistic as they claim to be and took the growth of Zionism as an easy way to relocate the Jews of their own free will out of their own backyards? After all these are the same nations that had a habit of ethnically cleansing them every so often...

The irony in all of this is for the Jewish people is that they formed a nation state to escape future genocides. However by forcing themselves into Palestine and creating sworn enemies of the Arabs they risk another serious bloodbath in their own nation state whose scale would rival the previous genocides they`ve experienced.

Regards,

Fozia

If I were OverLord of the World, I would give all claimants to Jerusalem exactly one year to figure out mutually acceptable arrangements that guaranteed the rights of all residents of the city, the safety of the holy sites, and the freedom and safety of all pilgrims to visit these sites.

If they couldn`t figure it out in one year, I would evacuate all the people from the city, pulverize the top 10 meters of the surface to fine dust until there is no trace of humans ever having inhabited the place.

If you count the number of wars and people killed for one city, I think you will find that Jerusalem may be more dangerous than any nuclear bomb. A humanity that cannot handle this with care must be deprived of it.

-arun gupta

shankar #44 You write that ``Then continue to provoke the Israelis relentlessly with civil nonviolent disobedience. There is not a damn thing Israel could do in such an event. They dont have that many jail cells to incarcerate all the Palestinians`` This is certainly a better solution than simply continuing to bang heads against a wall.

I thought I had presented an even better solution in my earlier post: Forget past injustices, and focus on getting education and improving your economic conditions. Even nonviolent disobedience has a cost in terms of taking the focus away from the real problem: economic and social underdevelopment. As we have found in Pakistan and India and Bangladesh, simply getting rid of British control did not lead to nirvana: Only the handful of ``elite`` benefitted in terms of political control, while poverty and misery remains the lot of the vast majority in these countries.

Scout: You dont know who Pogo Shogo is and advise me to see reality. Pogo incidentally is just a cartoon character, and the quote I made is from one of his comic strips and has become quite popular in the US. If you dont like Pogo Shogo, let me quote from Sheikh Peer: ``The fault, dear Brutus, is not in they stars but in thyself``. Or Anonymous: ``If you cant fight them, join them``. Or another one from Anonymous Venonymous: ``The definition of insanity is to continue to do the same thing, each time expecting to get a different result``. I would suggest you - and the Palestinians - need to get real.

tahmed321 #55,

Like Sheikh Peer! Agree with you completely. There are times when one has to act as a bania- for the lack of a better terminology on this site- i.e.,recognize losses, protect whatever little you still possess, and move on for bigger and better things. Keep bleeding may be courageous though foolhardy, and an injustice to own`s future generations. There will always be cheerleaders on the side-lines, but very few bleeders to keep company or the fellow heaven-travellers. Dying for real estate is the worst excuse!

Kant.....

macgupta and others:

Condensed from ``It`s Mine!`` - a children`s fable by Leo Lionni (author of many children`s books).



In the middle of a pond there was a small island. On the island lived three quarrelsome frogs. They quarreled and quibbled from dawn to dusk.

``Stay out of the pond!`` would yell one. ``The water is mine.``

``Get off the island!`` would shout another. ``The earth is mine.``

``The air is mine!`` would shout the third.

And so it went.

One day a large toad appeared before them.

``I live on the other side of the island,`` he said, ``but I can hear you shouting `It`s mine! It`s mine! It`s mine!` all day long. There is no peace because of your endless bickering. You can`t go on like this!``

With that the toad turned around and hopped away. No sooner had he left than the frogs started quarrelling again - over worms.

Suddenly the sky darkened and thundered. Rain filled the air, and the water turned to mud. The island grew smaller and smaller as it was swallowed up by the rising flood. The frogs were scared. Desperately they clung to the few slippery stones that still rose above the wild, dark water. But soon these too began to disappear. There was only one rock left and there the frog huddled, trembling from cold and fright. But they felt better now that they were together, sharing the same fears and hopes. Little by little the flood subsided. The rain fell gently and then stopped altogether.

They then realized that the large rock that had saved them was no rock but the toad.

``You saved us!`` shouted the frogs when they recognized him.

The next morning the water had cleared. The sun was out and the frogs joyfully jumped into the pond swam all around the island. Together they leaped after the butterflies that filled the air. And later, when they rested in the weeds, they felt happy in a way they had never been before.

``Isn`t it peaceful,`` said one frog.

``And isn`t it beautiful,`` said another.

``And do you know what else?`` asked the third.

``No, what?`` the others asked.

``It`s ours!`` she answered.

Fozia: That was one fine response. You have concisely put the finger on some of the most important issues with respect to Palestinian-Israel conflict. One just can not discuss the current crisis in all fairness without knowing and taking into consideration of many facts about Jewish history, religion, diaspora, origins and the creation of Israel. Just couple of additional points:

The concept of nation is usually associated with a combination of similarity of race, culture, history or geography. In case of Jewish nation, neither race nor geography is there to support the concept. Even history in support of their nation is only true if you accept their interpretation of history. Just like a Hindu does not have to believe in the history described in Quran, a non-Jew does not have to accept the history describe in the Old Testament. There were always a number of tribes living in what we now call Palestine. Jews were a minor tribe in the sea of Cannanites and Maobites, Aranites to the north and Babylonian and Assyrian to the east. Descendants of many other tribes can have equal, if not more, claim to that land based on more than 2000-year-old biblical accounts of history.

Religion associated with geography can be used for a nation-state concept, as in the case of Pakistan but remember; Pakistan does not belong to Islam, Pakistan belongs to Pakistanis. Similarly, Sikhs can think themselves a nation by virtue of living almost exclusively in a particular area with a particular culture. Same can not be said of Muslims, Christians, Jews, Buddhists or Jains.

Jews, living among different cultures were loyal and contributed well in the cultures they lived in. But their concept of Jewish nation hurt them time and again because dominant culture of the land considered it nation within a nation and the element of jealousy was also there since Jews would prosper more on the average than the rest. Now this Jewish nation concept is extrapolated into Jews as one race, descendants of the original migrants from Palestine 2000 years ago. This point is generally not acceptable outside the media outlets. The intermarriages, back and forth conversions and at least once, a whole tribe converting to Judaism and later on spreading all over Russia, Ukraine and Poland are well known historical facts. In fact, it is holocaust: the reason for Israel’s existence.

The other issue deals with Israel’s vulnerability. Only thing I might add to the geographical factors you described is the future of International relations with China and India playing a significant role in the next century. Israel is already trying hard to improve relations with both of these countries but neither of them are expected to tilt towards Israel as much as USA. If Arabs can get their act together through democratization, education and sound economical initiatives; they might have more to offer to China and India than Israel. In the meantime, Israel is a democracy, powerful and prosperous. Muslim countries should recognize it as an independent state—until it ceases to exist.

Regards,

Sameer

Re: Harimau #369

Gen. Jacobs, I believe, made Lt. Gen.; I believe he and Gen. Niazi were coursemates (or at least colleagues) from WWII. You might have also mentioned that a Muslim was Chief of the Air Staff of the IAF and there have been several non-Hindu Indian Army COASs (Rodriguez, Manekshaw) and some of the ostensibly Hindu COAS were actually aboriginial nominal Hindus (Coorgis such as Cariappa and Thimmaya, although both were true Pukka Saabs, a compliment not an insult). I believe a Hyderabadi Muslim, S. M. Zaki, made Lt. Gen., in the Indian Army.

In our less obscurant days (the pre-Bhutto/Zia years), we Pakistanis were also mildly liberal as far as not persecuting our religious/ethnic minorities were concerned. I would like to mention, for example, such names as Justices Cornelius and Dorab Patel, Sir Zafarullah, Air Vice-Marshall Eric Hall, etc. I would also like to give honorable mention to Gen. Azam for sentencing Maulanas Maududi and Sami-ul-Haq, these learned men, to death for incitement to murder in the Lahore Qadiani riots in the 1950s. A cowardly civilian government commuted their sentences and then released them.

Since the 1970s, Pakistan`s track record on minority treatment is considerably worse than Indias, no matter what rabid Indophobes might say. However, all hope is not lost as Gen. Pervez Musharraf is in some ways a throwback to the more liberal days--although he has not had the nerve to live up to his initial impulses--did resist obscurantist demands and elevated Mr. Justice Bhagwan Das, a Sindhi Hindu, to the Supreme Court.
Perhaps his latest statements means that he has finally had enough?

Regards.

tahmed321 #55

``Forget past injustices, and focus on getting education and

improving your economic conditions.``

If only! It is not easy to work on improving yourself when you are feeling cornered. West Bank and Gaza are very poor especially compared to Israel and those who are in a position to help - such as the oil-rich Arab states - seem to want the conflict to continue. Many Israelis, while wanting peace, still seem to hate the Palestinians. Palestinians are the Gypsies of the Arab world - distrusted, reviled and used by everybody. The secular Israelis seem to recognize the need to live with a Palestinian state alongside but even they think Palestinians are a violent, irrational lot. The Friday prayers aren`t exactly helping either - teaching the kids over and over again that Jews ought to be driven into the sea! How are the Palestinians to improve themselves?

I consider Arafat a great man (he has his shortcomings) but he should make way for a new leader who wants to improve the lives of the Palestinians and help the new state take root.

I am extremely saddened by what`s going on. I support the Palestinian cause and also have many Israeli friends. Hope sanity will prevail.

SameerJB: Arthur Koestler, in his book ``The Thirteenth Tribe`` makes a case for modern day European Jews to have descended from a people who lived around the Black Sea area who were pushed into Hungary and then to other parts of Europe by the invading Mongols. And so he concludes, as I recall, that European Jews could not have been the descendants of the Jews who had to move out of Palestine 3000 years ago due to the Diaspora. Not that it matters one way or another, I think, since the argument is a bit academic in any case. The important thing is that the continuing bloodshed represents a failure of political leaders of the Arabs and of the Israelis to do their job - which for a politician should be, IMHO, to resolve conflicts once and for all in a reasonable and statesmanlike manner. (But then, the same could be said for Indian and Pakistani leaders too, IMHO again).