The Situation in Gaza
I have been traveling and not able to spend as much time as usual scanning the news, but of course have followed the events in Palestine with dismay.
It is to be expected that a lot of comment in the United States on these events will be rife with racist attitudes and polemical dismissals. The Palestinians have long been demonized by the Western media, apparently for not going along quietly with their expulsion from their homes, the large scale theft of their land, and their reduction to an almost slave-like status of statelessness. Palestinians are not intrinsically more violent than anyone else, not essentially less able to administer or govern than anyone else. Few countries have not had civil wars or at least major civil conflicts. The question should be not "Why are Palestinians like that?"-- which is a racist question-- but what social and economic factors are driving the present conflict?
Why is it that so little analysis is offered of why things have developed as they have? Isn't anyone interested in the important differences between Gaza's economy and that of the West Bank? Gaza is much poorer and much more isolated from the world. Is it any big surprise that its population is more radicalized and might be drawn into supporting Hamas?
The Gazan population is being thrown into more misery by an Israeli blockade of electricity, fuel and even food. (Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert says that it will be a humanitarian blockade; if you believe that, I have a bridge over the River Jordan you can purchase inexpensively from me). UNRWA is warning against the blockade. With an unemployment rate of 50% and widespread malnutrition, caused by the ordinary everyday Israeli pressure on Gaza, the territory's population can't take much more extra deprivation without an immense human toll being exacted.
It seems obvious that Hamas will be overthrown in Gaza, jointly by Mahmud Abbas, Israel and the United States. But it seems unlikely that Mahmud Abbas will gain any genuine authority there if that is how he comes to power. And, the events of the past few days have driven a nail into the coffin of Bush's "democratization" program for the "Greater Middle East." The Haniyah Hamas government had come to power in free and fair elections, but was immediately boycotted, starved of resources, and actually often simply kidnapped by the Israelis; and is now being put out of office in a kind of coup. The people of the Arab world are not blind or stupid. If this is what the "Greater Middle East" looks like, it will too closely resemble, for their taste, the colonial 19th century, When Europeans dictated government to Middle Easterners.
If Bush and the Israelis couldn't live with a Hamas electoral victory, they should have exluded Hamas from running a year and a half ago. The Egyptians don't let explicitly religious parties contest elections, and a similar rule could have been made in Palestine. Holding an election, having people win it with whom you won't deal, and then overturning the election with militias, is a recipe for violence and instability. That's what happened in Algeria in the early 1990s, and it caused untold suffering.
The Israelis may be sighing a sigh of relief that the Palestinians are busy fighting one another for the moment. But what has happened is not good for Israel in the medium to long term, since I suspect it signals the end of the possibility of a viable Palestinian state. And, if you don't have a two-state solution, ultimately the likelihood is that Israel will be stuck with the Palestinians as citizens. The world is not going to look the other way forever as they are kept stateless, poor, landless and hungry.
posted by Juan Cole @ 6/19/2007 12:15:00 AM
|
Facebook
23 Comments:
Prohibiting explicitly religious parties from contesting elections would, of course, have interesting effects on political life in Israel as well.
Do you think Hamas will leave the Gaza for Syria and settle in Damascus? and Do you think Hamas will be completely debilitated in Gaza? Have you heard of the Underground Economy from Raising Yousuf?
Gaza And The Warsaw Ghetto
same place
different time
while the world stood by
genocide
live
I am surprised that there are no comments. From Jabotinsky's Iron Wall through Rafael Eitan's "drugged cockroaches scurrying in a bottle" the Palestinians have been hammered as no other colonized people. Like circa 1940's everyone is looking the other way and will deny knowledge of the extreme acts of colonialism and being committed against a people. No one would dare ask the Native Americans to recognize the 'right of the U.S. to exist'; it would be like requiring them to say that everything done to them was just and correct.
Ulysses
The NYT is running a story today that somewhat touches on the economic aspects of smuggling into Gaza. The story is focused on the Bedouin's on the Egyptian side of the border, but it does address the economic aspects driving the smuggling of arms into Gaza.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/19/world/middleeast/19rafah.html?hp
I hope you are right that the world will not look the other way forever. They say forever is a really long time. How many years has it been so far?
Thank you Juan, you open the minds of thousands that are being deceived by the corporate media. I hope you could get lots of financing to make a of Informed Comment and your words something that could reach all the people. Maybe you should think on doing videos of your comments and news... I cant live a day without reading IC. its like breathing. Thanks.
Juan,
Can Abbas succeed/survive with anything less that major dismantlement of settlements, elimination of travel restrictions and checkpoints, and something on Jerusalem?
Alpheus W. Jessup
The (sick) joke in the Middle East right now is the following: The two-state solution is happening: Gaza (ruled by Hamas) and the West Bank (ruled by Fatah).
Sarcasm aside, the only reason there are two competing governments right now is because Abbas could use a constitutional provision to set up an emergency cabinet. It can only rule for 60 days. Then, what????
Pascalecs
And, if you don't have a two-state solution, ultimately the likelihood is that Israel will be stuck with the Palestinians as citizens.
Israel's other option is a slow-motion expulsion. Make life so unbearable for the Palestinians that many of them emigrate.
Laney
SPIEGEL ONLINE - June 19, 2007, 01:42 PM
URL: http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,489257,00.html
'WE WANT THE CATHEDRAL, NOT MINARETS'
Far-Right Mobilizes against Cologne Mega-Mosque
By Anna Reimann
Firstly, the above article show the tensions that have been building in Germany for a number of years, now extending into decades concerning Islam in Germany and its adherents. When I was there in the early 1990ies, a mosque was built just North of Gross Gerau (by Frankfurt AM) that attracted throngs of believers on the various religous holidays, almost blocking the roads, averted by the 'road guards' that controlled the pedestrians. 'God,' 'Allah,' or even their opposites could not have helped anyone should an automobile have hit someone. I had some experience with this when a US Army neighbour in Ankara hit a kid in some outlying village and was whisked away from the country in a couple of days, rather than face the Turkish courts and probable jail time. Back in Germany, the Turks held a MASSIVE rally in the same town, beginning at the memorial to the torched synagogue (ca 1938), protesting the firebombing of a hostel in (I recall) Rostock (ca 1992-93). Needless to say, there is a strong presence in the country by Mussulmans, one that cannot be easily discounted, associated with the 'guest worker' programmes of the post-WW2 era.
Secondly, it's interesting that the 'Israelites' now have to seriously contend with Hamas, an entity, the creation of which was supported by the former, now having become a force in its own right, one with which to be contended. While it is far removed (so far) from the events in Germany and Cologne, forces for change do arise and have long-term effects on the political (in)stability of any region. But, as in Germany but - for obvious reasons - much more so, once the tide begins to shift, it may become irreversible, sort of like a human 'Katrina.'
Palestine itself occupies little of the 'Western' news if only because of who controls the media. Only terrorism seems to leak out of the region for public consumption, forgetting who really instituted the policies, programmes, and practices of terrorist activities in the region, perhaps on-going now if only by way of some state-sponsored sourcing that masquerades - as with the U.S. presence in Iraq - as some kind of force for law and order. Of course, who has the largest population and stockpile of weapons gets to define what 'law and order' really means, something becoming more and more ambiguous all the time.
The exclusion - for the most part - of Palestinian news not only obscures the issues but prevents another, different group from being seen as victims of some sort of oppression. As we know, the 'Israelites' have a corner on the 'victim' market (as has been recently seen in the Finkelstein tenure affair), all the while replicating their pre-WW2 experience through enforcing like circumstances on the indigenous Arabs with the creation of walls, ghettos, symbols, checkpoints, and the like. While the immigrants' claim to being 'Semitic' may be in doubt, the same cannot be said of the Arabs who've lived in the region for millennia.
Nudging the tone-arm on my broken record, the real 'anti-Semitism' may be coming from within, ignoring the facts of the matters at hand, creating at the same time a real public relations issue when the tide of opinions change. 'Anti-Semitism' is THE 'rule of law' in Palestine. Establishing legitimate Muslim communities in 'Western' countries brings about much potential for change, especially in a country like Germany that has had to pay for every wrong that has ever been wrought by mankind, perhaps the 'mother' country of victimhood of all sorts (it's always the 'mothers'' fault, no?).
We see, therefore, resistance to incorporation of those who have rights, legitimised either by invitation to an 'enlightened' country or by birth. Germany is an odd example in that it did succumb - twice - to the will of victorious nations, now having to submit (!) to the will of what might be termed as surreptitious invaders. Long kept at bay, the Ottomans (or their successors) are now seen as a force with which to reckon, allowing entry of a variety of others related if only by faith. Turkish inclusion in the European Union is just another political obstacle with roots in centuries'-old history.
The 'Israelites' have wrought something similar (perhaps due to their European origins) by permitting Hamas to gain legitimacy in a number of ways. The important consideration is the degree to which the organisation can be seen as legitimised by the people themselves, reinforced by outside - but similarly believing - nations, finding the avenues by which they might approach victimhood and the associated sympathy around the World. We can only wonder if the Europeans and Americans will take a like approach to controlling a religious organisation that might serve as front for more nefarious groups, bent on insidious ends. (See 'Related' below.)
Of course, the Moslems have everywhere to go while the captives of Zionism have nowhere to go, except in what has been carved out for them in Palestine. Support of the little country has not been accidental, given the pressures by the 'Western' nations to find a 'homeland' (since around 1917) for those the politicians of generations ago in a conveniently contrived construct designated as tolerable but not entirely acceptable. Chasing the 'Israelites' out of the Middle East AGAIN presents problems for everyone everywhere, not unlike what the Spaniards caused in 1492 (while all the news outlets were distracted by Columbus' voyages and discoveries) with the eviction of all Semites, Moor and Hebraicist, dispersing them to the four winds.
Perpetuating eternal victimhood has been one way to ensure a people's survival, something that those believing in Islam might use as their own strategy to their own advantage as time goes by. Long are gone the days when winners and losers were more distinctly defined, their roles accepted. In democratic countries, both have similar rights.
The democratisation of the World has blurred what was once recognised as the 'natural order,' that of the mighty making and having all the rights. This position may still survive through the United States' and its associated allies' imposition of 'Western' 'values,' the effects of which gradually erode as some nations recede into military obscurity. Western Germany is ripe as its position has declined following the end of the 'Cold War' and its consequent burden of having to deal with the 'new' Eastern provinces and the economic and social costs associated therewith.
'Clashes of cultures' are nothing new, except for those who might now be on the receiving ends. In olden imperial dayze, the struggles happened 'over there,' insulating 'civilisation' from the barbarians and others to be excluded from polite society. The effects of Palestine and Iraq are bound to have long-term consequences, putting the 'Wests'' strategies and tactics in view of the telescope, making any country wary of approaching intervention and internationalisation by imperialist forces heading 'East.' The forces for heterogeneity and against homogenisation will perpetuate the 'clashes,' harder and harder to manage so long as the World's population becomes similarly unmanageable.
As Bette Davis in her role in 'All About Eve' as Margo Channing said, "Fasten your seat belts. It's going to be a bumpy night."
Related:
http://www.travelandleisure.com/articles/culture-clash
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3055377.stm
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0105/p13s01-lire.html
http://www.davidproject.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=168&Itemid=1
So are you saying that you see the end of Israel as a Jewish state?
I'm not sure I grasp the logic of your final paragraph. Certainly the latest developments are a terrible setback to any two state solution. But what feature of them poses any less a setback to incorporating "the Palestinians as citizens"?
Are you suggesting that the elimination (or massive postponement) of a two-state solution will inevitably result in Israel's simply annexing the Palestinian territories (with Palestinian citizenship eventually tagging along?) Surely every Israeli to the left of Gush Emunim realizes how self defeating that would be.
Juan is suggesting that a one state solution will eventually be found, and that the status of the Palestinians/Arabs will improve within it.
True?
The problem with making a rule designed to exclude Hamas from running, as you suggest might have been done, is that the elections would have obviously been a farce because only corrupt quislings were being allowed to contest them. Knowing this, the Americans and Israelis didn't go there and hoped that, Abbas having been elected with 69% of the vote before, Fatah might actually win. And it was no landslide - 44-41 in the popular vote, so their reasoning came close to working. Hamas itself was surprised and unprepared for the results.
That Fatah, apart from some honest people like Marwan Barghouti, is a Vichy-style Judenrat is increasingly obvious. Abbas is openly being installed by the colonial overseers, after having been continually humiliated by them for years as he has kept on handing them their jar of vaseline. He and his crowd will never be considered legitimate now, and all the more as Hamas begins to publish the documentary evidence of their treachery that has fallen into their hands in Gaza.
It is increasingly obvious that the Americans and Israelis are intent on dispossession and genocide, just as quickly as PR considerations permit. How long can self-respecting Arabs be expected to tolerate the Judenrat governments that enable this? Quite a while so far, but it seems rash to count on that continuing forever, especially if, as I have seen, God keeps track of the innocent blood we shed along with the hairs of our heads.
History witnesses that evildoers of this kind, such as the Nazis, the Assyrians, and the Babylonians, prosper often in their violence, but never forever.
ultimately the likelihood is that Israel will be stuck with the Palestinians as citizens
Would that be a terrible thing? Maybe Israel would be "blessed" or even "saved" by this outcome.
Thank you so much for all you do in Informed Comment, and thank you for this post.
Fantastic analysis professor Cole, and keep it up.
There are obstacles to a one-state solution. The Israeli settlers have been hoping that some catastrophe will happen overseas and major Jewish immigration will happen in the millions, Israel will repeat its actions of 1948 and expel all the Palestinians by force, and that God will miraculously save them and make them the majority. A good portion of the Israeli public scoffs at those ideas, but the Settlers are committed to it and label those opposition as "Hellenists" (Jews who gave up Hebrew to learn greek and fit in)
The Palestinians are already a majority in the greater Israel empire. They don't have to wait 10 or 20 years. The country is already an apartheid state. The only reason Palestinians would probably not get a majority would be because a mast majority of their population are not of voting age, along with the power of the Vichy govt that will for sure persuade on behalf of their master in Israel and US that they will have to have to hang on to that false hope of a two state solution.
It seems that the grand plan is to present Abbas as the moderate alternative to Hamas, ruling over a successful (he'll have all that money being finally released by the US and Israel) West Bank, while in Gaza the downward spiral continues. Bush/Olmert seem to think this will make a difference, and bring Palestinians over to the Fatah side against Hamas.
It will never work. In such circumstances, Hamas will easily paint Abbas as a puppet of the U.S. and Israel who has sold out the Palestinians.
The one positive development is that Abbas, and a variety of other Arab voices both in and out of Palestine (and even a few Israeli ones), are calling on Israel to take this moment to release Marwan Barghouti, the one person who could lend Abbas and Fatah some much needed (Arab) street cred right now. Let's hope Israel gives serious consideration to the request.
Thanks Juan for your commentary. I was hoping you would mention Hamas' pragmatism following its electoral win last year. It wished to set up a national unity government, instituted an eighteen month ceasefire or truce and was prepared to discuss that old chestnut, peace based on the June 67 borders. Instead the rest of the world decided to support Israel's wholly unreasonable demands (the "right to exist" etc). When we look back what we should take stock of is the effect real democratic elections had in this context: they spawned an immediate willingness to negotiate and to reverse positions. The irony of course is that the Palestinians, irrespective of their politics or religious identity, have always compromised, while the Israelis have simply made demands which, if we abide by international law, are illegal demands (e.g. "compromising" on land that isn't even theirs to compromise on). As Juan correctly points out, how on earth will Arabs in general ever trust us agin after this fiasco.
As you say Prof. Cole, analysis of the reasons for the current state of affairs is desperately needed. It is as though the current situation in the Middle East dropped fully formed from Mars and "ooh....look at the evil of those Palestinians". No, there are obviously reasons why things are the way they are.......but then would we know when Paris Hilton was getting out of jail? j/k. Thanks again Prof. Cole for your indomitable work. Your karmic reward will be great.
I wonder if Bush & Co didn't get just what they wanted in the Palestinian election. Abbas pleaded with Condi Rice to approve canceling the elections because he was sure Hamas would win. Rice wouldn't agree. Why? Could it be because Abbas wasn't the kind of guy the US and Israel wanted to personify Palestinians? After decades of having the supposedly recalcitrant terrorist Arafat to blame for the failure of peace talks, what were they going to do with Abbas? He didn't fit the desired mould, couldn't easily be dismissed as not being a "partner for peace." But their problem would be solved by putting Hamas in charge. So let the elections be held as scheduled and hope for the best. And when the best happened, make it even better by sabotaging the new government. Can't deal with terrorists, you know. This may be overly cynical, but I'm not sure it's possible to be overly cynical anymore.
Post a Comment
<< Home