The Blanket

The Blanket - A Journal of Protest & Dissent

Israeli State Terror

Anthony McIntyre • 16 July 2006

In other circumstances it would beggar belief that the kidnapping of a solitary soldier could result in such massive destruction as has been witnessed in both Gaza and the Lebanon. The disproportionality of the response gives rise to imagery of Nazi retaliatory action in Czechoslovakia. But where Israel is concerned, as the state of the self-appointed chosen people, its self-righteous desire to punish those who irk it is now well established.

It is not as if Israel has never engaged in the very activity it now seeks to ruthlessly persecute others for; civilian populations whose culpability amounts to nothing apart from residing in countries where those who kidnap Israeli military personnel also live. Arik Diamant, a former Israeli soldier has written in response to current Israeli aggression:

It's the wee hours of the morning, still dark outside. A guerrilla force comes out of nowhere to kidnap a soldier … A smash in the face with the butt of the gun and the soldier falls to the ground, bleeding. The kidnappers pick him up, quickly tie his hands and blindfold him, and disappear into the night … An entire nation is up-in-arms, writhing in pain and worry … Nobody knows how the soldier is: Is he hurt? Do his captors give him even a minimum of human decency, or are they torturing him to death by trampling his honour? The worst sort of suffering is not knowing. Will he come home? And if so, when? And in what condition? Can anyone remain apathetic in the light of such drama? ... This description, you'll be surprised to know, has nothing to do with the kidnapping of Gilad Shalit. It is the story of an arrest I carried out as an IDF soldier, in the Nablus casbah, about 10 years ago. The "soldier" was a 17-year-old boy, and we kidnapped him because he knew "someone" who had done" something.

Given the crimes perpetrated against Palestinian non-combatants Israel is hardly qualified to adopt the posture of David smiting Goliath in a bid to redress some horrible imbalance - the capture of the Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit. Its bullying, menacing manner has destabilised the Middle East for decades. Subsequent, to the kidnapping of Gilad Shalit, over the top actions by Israel in response to the kidnapping of two more of its soldiers has in the words of the Irish Times 'brought the Middle East to its most dangerous level of instability in recent times.'

Hamas prime minister Ismail Haniyeh called for a general ceasefire: 'in order to extricate ourselves from the current crisis, all sides must restore calm and mutually end all military operations.' The response of the Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert was as belligerent as it was terse: 'we're talking about a war that will continue for a long time.'

Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal has put forward a plausible solution - swap the captured soldiers for Palestinian political prisoners held in Israeli prisons. Again, Israel has refused, Olmert fulminating that 'trading prisoners with a terrorist, bloody organisation such as Hamas is a major mistake.' Israel's inflexibility is not born out of panoramic humanitarian concern but is premised on its desire to establish its moral authority in the region; that its actions alone may be deemed legitimate. This completely sidelines the illegal occupation of Palestinian territory which in itself ensures that armed conflict will remain a staple part of the region's violent politics.

Whether Olmert likes it or not, Hamas is the democratically elected government of Palestine. That it ever came to be the governing party is inextricably linked to Israeli policy. Its landslide victory was achieved because it more than its rivals showed a willingness to resist an oppressive government which continues to flout UN resolutions in its violation of Palestinian rights.

Olmert has stated that his government has 'no particular desire to topple the Hamas government as a policy. We have a desire to stop the terrorists from inflicting terror on the Israeli people.' Outside the coterie of George 'Wouldn't he' Bush whose policy of almost unconditional backing for Israel is a factor in the interminable conflict, this position will find few takers. Bush's defence of the terrorist attack by Israeli forces on Beirut's civilian airport is nothing short of outrageous.

The Irish Times has argued that the combination of Hamas and Hizbullah, is viewed by Israel as a movement which represents 'the most malign and genocidal forces in the Middle East: extremist, jihadist and terrorist, opposing Israel's existence in principle, rejecting a peace process and indelibly bound up with Islamic extremism.' This is a classic case of creating a context which jars awkwardly with facts on the ground. Israel has used brutally aggressive measures to ensure its hegemony within the Middle East long before this definition of the problem emerged.

Israel seems to be masking the real reasons for its current military aggression. It insists that it is merely employing pressure for the purposes of compelling the governments of the violated states to crack down on those responsible for taking military action against Israeli soldiers. However, Israel seems to be deliberately calibrating its military actions as part of a wider strategic plan, the objective of which is to create the circumstances in which Syria and ultimately Iran may be targeted. Some Israeli generals and US neo conservatives are singing from the same pious hymn sheet to the tune that Syria and Iran are the devils. Framed in this context the motives of President Bush seem geo-strategic rather than that of coming to the defence of an old friend under pressure.

Israel seems determined to destroy the civilian infrastructure of those neighbours not yet acquiescent in the current world order which legitimises Israeli Middle East regional hegemony within that order. It is indifferent to the long-term suffering and misery of those civilians displaced physically and psychologically by its actions.

The rights of Israeli civilians not to be killed are the same as those civilians in Lebanon and Gaza. Consequently, Irish foreign minister Dermot Ahern has said that 'Israel has a legitimate right, and a duty, to defend its citizens, but not at the expense of the lives and the welfare of Palestinian and Lebanese civilians.' The savage wiping out of entire families is hardly commensurate with any measured military response. If Israel thinks the sight of funerals for such victims winding their way through the occupied territories will somehow lessen the urge to repay Israel in kind, the history of the Middle East is replete with enough bloody examples to make it clear that such thinking is grossly misplaced.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Index: Current Articles + Latest News and Views + Book Reviews + Letters + Archives

The Blanket - A Journal of Protest & Dissent


 

 

There is no such thing as a dirty word. Nor is there a word so powerful, that it's going to send the listener to the lake of fire upon hearing it.
- Frank Zappa



Index: Current Articles



19 July 2006

Other Articles From This Issue:

Dupe Process
Anthony McIntyre

Heatwave Won't Affect Cold Storage
Dr John Coulter

Hanson's Handouts
John Kennedy

Israeli State Terror
Anthony McIntyre

Judgement Day
John Kennedy

Israel, US and the New Orientalism
M. Shahid Alam

The Right, the Need to Resist
Mick Hall

An Invitation to My Neighborhood
Fred A Wilcox

Prison Fast
RPAG

Death Brings Fr Faul
Anthony McIntyre

Risking the Death of Volunteers is Not the IRA Way
Brendan Hughes

Principles and Tactics
Liam O Ruairc

The Framing of Michael McKevitt: Preliminary Hearings Cont'd.
Marcella Sands

The Framing of Michael McKevitt: Rupert's Reward
Marcella Sands

The Framing of Michael McKevitt: Rupert's Inconsistencies
Marcella Sands

Blast from the Past
John Kennedy

An Elegant End
Seaghán Ó Murchú

West Belfast - The Past, the Present and the Future
Davy Carlin


9 July 2006

Father Faul Saved Many Lives
Richard O'Rawe

Richard O'Rawe, PSF, and Events in 1981
Gerard Foster

Looking Back on 1981
Anthony McIntyre

Haughey and the National Question
Maria McCann

Brits Not to Blame for Haughey
David Adams

Greenfest
John Kennedy

Euston Manifesto: Yesterday's News
Mick Hall

Considering A Multi-Faceted Approach to the Middle East
Mehdi Mozaffari

Book Better Than Its Title
Seaghán Ó Murchú

Crowning Mr Unionist
Dr John Coulter

Extra Time Will Not Be Decisive
David Adams

'Pretty Much a Busted Flush'
Anthony McIntyre

Orangefest
John Kennedy

Just Books Web-launch
Jason Brannigan

The Framing of Michael McKevitt: Omagh, David Rupert, MI5 & FBI Collusion
Marcella Sands

The Framing of Michael McKevitt
Marcella Sands

The Framing of Michael McKevitt: Preliminary Hearings
Marcella Sands

Jury Duty Free State
Dolours Price

Even the Obnoxious
Anthony McIntyre

 

 

The Blanket

Home

 

 

Latest News & Views
Index: Current Articles
Book Reviews
Letters
Archives
The Blanket Magazine Winter 2002
Republican Voices