Wiped off the map
http://www.democratsdiary.co.uk/2005/10/wiped-off-map.html
Iranian
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has caused a political
storm by calling for Israel to be "wiped off the
map". Thehardline authoritarian President was
speaking in front of 3,000 students at a conference in Tehranentitled
The World without Zionism.
The
west reacted angrily to Ahmadinejads statement. The
British Foreign Office described it as
sickening. The White House said that it
"underscores the concerns we have about Iran's
nuclear operations". Israel's Vice-Prime Minister
Shimon Peres called for Irans expulsion from the
UN, saying that the remark "contravenes the United
Nations charter and is tantamount to a crime against
humanity.
Whilst
this reaction might sound like moral outrage, it can
hardly be described as such. The term moral
outrage describes anger provoked by the violation
of some ethical principle. To allow ourselves to be
morally offended by one nations president calling
for another country to be wiped off the map
we must first have ensured that our own actions do not
contravene the same operative ethical principles. In this
respect, every citizen of the UK, the US and Israel has a
very long road to travel.
In
1947, the UN decreed that historic Palestine should be
partitioned, with 56 percent of the land going to the
600,000 strong Jewish population and the remaining 44
percent going to the 1.2 million strong Arab population.
Earlier, in 1938, the Zionist leader David Ben-Gurion,
later the first Prime Minister of Israel, wrote, "[I
am] satisfied with part of the country, but on the basis
of the assumption that after we build up a strong force
following the establishment of the state -- we will
abolish the partition of the country, and we will expand
to the whole Land of Israel". In the 1947-49
Arab-Israeli war, around 800,000 Palestinians were
ethnically cleansed from their historic homeland by
Israeli forces subjecting them to assasinations, rapes
and massacres. Israelseized about 78 percent of the
British 'Mandate' Palestine by force of arms, with Egypt
and Jordan taking the remainder. The Palestinian state
decreed by the international community had been forcibly
wiped off the map, to use Ahmadinejads
phrase. Successive Israeli governments ensured that it
was never to emerge.
Does
calling for the elimination of a state constitute a
crime against humanity, as Shimon Peres contends?
If so, then Ahmadinejad would be joined in the dock by
every Israeli official who has not only advocated but
effected the policy of expansionism that continues to
prevent a Palestinian nation state from emerging. The
list would be long and illustrious. In 1936 Ben Gurion
said that "the boundaries of Zionist aspirations are
the concern of the Jewish people and no external factor
will be able to limit them". Moshe Dayan, famed
military commander and later an Israeli government
minister told the youth of Israel that expansionism was a
continuous enterprise. "You have not started it, and
you will not finish it!". Elsewhere, he said that
"[Israel] must see the sword as the main, if not the
only, instrument with which to keep its morale high and
to retain its moral tension. Toward this end it may, no -
it must - invent dangers, and to do this it must adopt
the method of provocation-and-revenge...And above all -
let us hope for a new war with the Arab countries, so
that we may finally get rid of our troubles and acquire
our space".
Since
1967 Israel has held further occupied territory in open
defiance of international law. It has built vast
settlements on that land and frepressed the occupied
population with a ferocity that has been savage in the
extreme(more of which in a moment). In spite of this
Shimon Peres has, with considerable self-restraint, never
described Israels actions as crimes against
humanity, or conceded its right to be a part of the
United Nations, whose laws it treats with utter contempt.
The
outrage displayed by western politicians at
Ahmadinejads denial of Israels right to exist
was nowhere to be seen when Dov Weisglass, one of the
principal advisers to Israeli premier Ariel Sharon, set
out his governments strategy to prevent the
creation of a Palestinian state in an interview last
year. Weisglass was describing the policy aims behind the
fraudulent Gaza withdrawal plan. Recounting the
interview, Le Monde
Diplomatique
noted that "according to Weisglass, Sharon decided
to give up Gaza, which he had never considered as a
national interest, to save the settlements in the West
Bank and, more important, to prevent any negotiated
agreement with the Palestinians".
In
the interview, Weisglass left very little to the
imagination: "There was a very difficult package of
commitments that Israel was expected to accept. That
package is called a political process. You know, the term
`political process'
is the establishment of a
Palestinian state
. [its] the evacuation of
settlements, it's the return of refugees, it's the
partition of Jerusalem
we succeeded in taking that
.. and sending it beyond the hills. Effectively, this
whole package that is called the Palestinian state, with
all that it entails, has been removed from our agenda
indefinitely.
Did
the stated intention of keeping Palestine off the map
indefinitely cause the White House any of the
concern it expressed this week at the remarks
of the Iranian President? Hardly. Weisglass boasted that
he had achieved all this with authority and
permission. All with a presidential blessing and the
ratification of both houses of Congress.
Israel
enacted the plan, making a great show of leaving 19 sq
miles in Gaza and evacuating 8,500 illegal settlers,
whilst expropriating 23 sq miles in the West Bank Land
and introducing 14,000 illegal settlers there. The land
grab would also involve, Sharon and Weisglass declared,
the permanent annexation of the whole of Jerusalem,
including the Arab eastern segment. Far from finding this
whole charade sickening as the UK Foreign
Office described Ahmadinejads remarks, Tony Blair
wrote to Ariel Sharon, saying I greatly admire the
courage with which you have developed and implemented
this policy.
Despite
Israels continued expansionism, open dismissal of
Palestinian self-determination, brutal treatment of
civilians in the occupied territories and total rejection
of international law, the Blair government expresses its
admiration for Sharons
courage far more profoundly than with warm
words alone. The historian Mark Curtis, formerly of Chatham
House and a specialist in British foreign policy, notes
that [UK] arms exports [to Israel] doubled from
2000 to 2001, reaching £22.5 million as Israel stepped
up aggression in the occupied territories. Supplies
included small arms, grenade-making kits and components
for equipment such as armoured fighting vehicles, tanks
and combat aircraft. [The UK] has recently supplied Israel
with machine guns, rifles, ammunition, components for
tanks and helicopters, leg irons, electric shock belts,
tear gas and categories covering mortars, rocket
launchers, anti-tank weapons and military
explosives.
The
contribution of Britains principal ally, the United
States, hardly requires any review. By one estimate, US
support for Israelbetween 1973 and 2002, military and
otherwise, totalled $1.6 trillion, over $5,700 per head
of population, more than twice the cost of the Vietnam
War.
Short paragraph extracted from an anti-iran
rant received:
Israel has good levers for applying pressure
on Iran, which can be very bothersome - for
example, by aiding Kurds and the mujahideen in
its territory who oppose the regime. Similarly,
the Iranians suspect that the British are
operating in the Khuzistan region in southern
Iran, a region with a predominantly Arab
population.
|
Moral
outrage on the part of Britain and the US was
conspicuously absent, as the weapons they had sold to Israel
were put into murderous effect during the early years of
the second intifada. US historian Norman
G. Finkelstein
describes the conduct of our Israeli ally: To
repress Palestinian resistance, a senior Israeli officer
in early 2002 urged the army to "analyze and
internalize the lessons of
how the German army
fought in the Warsaw ghetto." Judging by Israeli
carnage in the West Bank culminating in Operation
Defensive Shield - the targeting of Palestinian
ambulances and medical personnel, the targeting of
journalists, the killing of Palestinian children
"for sport" (Chris Hedges, New York Times
former Cairo bureau chief), the rounding up, handcuffing
and blindfolding of all Palestinian males between the
ages of 15 and 50, and affixing of numbers on their
wrists, the indiscriminate torture of Palestinian
detainees, the denial of food, water, electricity, and
medical assistance to the Palestinian civilian
population, the indiscriminate air assaults on
Palestinian neighborhoods, the use of Palestinian
civilians as human shields, the bulldozing of Palestinian
homes with the occupants huddled inside - it appears that
the Israeli army followed the officer's advice. When the
operation, supported by fully 90 percent of Israelis, was
finally over, 500 Palestinians were dead and 1500
wounded.
Finkelstein
quotes a Human Rights Watch report on the Israeli assault
on the Jenin refugee camp in April 2002. According to the
report, a "thirty-seven-year-old paralyzed man was
killed when the IDF [Israel Defense Forces] bulldozed his
home on top of him, refusing to allow his relatives the
time to remove him from the home"; a
"fifty-seven-year-old wheelchair-bound man
was
shot and run over by a tank on a major road outside the
camp
even though he had a white flag attached to his
wheelchair"; "IDF soldiers forced a
sixty-five-year-old woman to stand on a rooftop in front
of an IDF position in the middle of a helicopter
battle."
An
Israeli soldier who operated a bulldozer in the assault
on Jenin breathlessly described the experience: "I
wanted to destroy everything. I begged the
officers
to let me knock it all down, from top to
bottom. To level everything
. For three days, I just
destroyed and destroyed
. I found joy with every
house that came down, because I knew that they didn't
mind dying, but they cared for their homes. If you
knocked down a house, you buried 40 or 50 people for
generations. If I am sorry for anything, it is for not
tearing the whole camp down.
I had plenty of
satisfaction. I really enjoyed it."
Tony Blair has expressed
"revulsion" at the Iranian president's
assertion that he wanted Israel "wiped off
the map". Mr Blair told an EU summit at
Hampton Court, near London, that he had
"never come across" comments like those
made by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Wednesday. He
added that Iran, suspected of having a nuclear
weapons programme, could soon be considered a
"real threat". But Iran later accused
the West of turning a blind eye to what it called
Israel's "crimes". EU leaders earlier
issued a joint statement saying they condemned Mr
Ahmadinejad's remarks. BBC political
editor Nick Robinson said Mr Blair's comments
carried the "implicit threat of military
action".
|
As
pressure builds on Iran over its nuclear weapons
programme, the remarks made by President Ahmadinejad will
be seized upon as evidence of Irans pathological
depravity, and justification for the increasingly
menacing stance the USand the UK are taking towards it.
Tony Blair expressed his revulsion at the Iranian
Presidents statement. Saying that he had never
heard of the president of a country saying they wanted to
wipe out another country, Blair added: "Can you
imagine a state like that with an attitude like that
having a nuclear weapon?". The Prime Minister is of
course well aware that he has no need to use his
imagination. His government arms and otherwise backs just
such a country: Israel.
Ahmadinejads
remarks were offensive indeed. But if our disgust is to
rise anywhere above the level of mere hypocrisy we should
first acknowledge, reverse, and atone for the material
support we have given to those who deny a peoples
right to self-determination, not just in word, but in
savage bloody deed.
|