[News] The Historical Perspective of the 2014 Gaza Massacre
Anti-Imperialist News
news at freedomarchives.org
Mon Aug 25 11:12:22 EDT 2014
The Historical Perspective of the 2014 Gaza Massacre
By Ilan Pappé
21 August, 2014
*http://www.pipr.co.uk/all/the-historical-perspective-of-the-2014-gaza-massacre/*
People in Gaza and elsewhere in Palestine feel disappointed at the lack
of any significant international reaction to the carnage and destruction
the Israeli assault has so far left behind it in the Strip. The
inability, or unwillingness, to act seems to be first and foremost an
acceptance of the Israeli narrative and argumentation for the crisis in
Gaza. Israel has developed a very clear narrative about the present
carnage in Gaza.
It is a tragedy caused by an unprovoked Hamas missile attack on the
Jewish State, to which Israel had to react in self-defence. While
mainstream western media, academia and politicians may have reservations
about the proportionality of the force used by Israel, they accept the
gist of this argument. This Israeli narrative is totally rejected in the
world of cyber activism and alternative media. There it seems the
condemnation of the Israeli action as a war crime is widespread and
consensual.
The main difference between the two analyses from above and from below
is the willingness of activists to study deeper and in a more profound
way the ideological and historical context of the present Israeli action
in Gaza. This tendency should be enhanced even further and this piece is
just a modest attempt to contribute towards this direction.
AD HOC SLAUGHTER?
An historical evaluation and contextualization of the present Israeli
assault on Gaza and that of the previous three ones since 2006 expose
clearly the Israeli genocidal policy there. An incremental policy of
massive killing that is less a product of a callous intention as it is
the inevitable outcome of Israel's overall strategy towards Palestine in
general and the areas it occupied in 1967, in particular.
This context should be insisted upon, since the Israeli propaganda
machine attempts again and again to narrate its policies as out of
context and turns the pretext it found for every new wave of destruction
into the main justification for another spree of indiscriminate
slaughter in the killing fields of Palestine.
The Israeli strategy of branding its brutal policies as an /ad
hoc/ response to this or that Palestinian action is as old as the
Zionist presence in Palestine itself. It was used repeatedly as a
justification for implementing the Zionist vision of a future Palestine
that has in it very few, if any, native Palestinians. The means for
achieving this goal changed with the years, but the formula has remained
the same: whatever the Zionist vision of a Jewish State might be, it can
only materialize without any significant number of Palestinians in it.
And nowadays the vision is of an Israel stretching over almost the whole
of historic Palestine where millions of Palestinians still live.
This vision ran into trouble once territorial greed led Israel to try
and keep the West Bank and the Gaza Strip within its rule and control
ever since June 1967. Israel searched for a way to keep the territories
it occupied that year without incorporating their population into its
rights-bearing citizenry. All the while it participated in a 'peace
process' charade to cover up or buy time for its unilateral colonization
policies on the ground.
With the decades, Israel differentiated between areas it wished to
control directly and those it would manage indirectly, with the aim in
the long run of downsizing the Palestinian population to a minimum with,
among other means, ethnic cleansing and economic and geographic
strangulation. Thus the West Bank was in effect divided into a 'Jewish'
and a 'Palestinian' zones -- a reality most Israelis can live with
provided the Palestinian Bantustans are content with their incarceration
within these mega prisons. The geopolitical location of the West Bank
creates the impression in Israel, at least, that it is possible to
achieve this without anticipating a third uprising or too much
international condemnation.
The Gaza Strip, due to its unique geopolitical location, did not lend
itself that easily to such a strategy. Ever since 1994, and even more so
when Ariel Sharon came to power as prime minister in the early 2000s,
the strategy there was to ghettoize Gaza and somehow hope that the
people there --- 1.8 million as of today --- would be dropped into
eternal oblivion.
But the Ghetto proved to be rebellious and unwilling to live under
conditions of strangulation, isolation, starvation and economic
collapse. There was no way it would be annexed to Egypt, neither in 1948
nor in 2014. In 1948, Israel pushed into the Gaza area (before it became
a strip) hundreds of thousands of refugees it expelled from the northern
Naqab and southern coast who, so they hoped, would move even farther
away from Palestine.
For a while after 1967, it wanted to keep as a township which provided
unskilled labour but without any human and civil rights. When the
occupied people resisted the continued oppression in two intifadas, the
West Bank was bisected into small Bantustans encircled by Jewish
colonies, but it did not work in the too small and too dense Gaza Strip.
The Israelis were unable to 'West Bank' the Strip, so to speak. So they
cordoned it as a Ghetto and when it resisted the army was allowed to use
its most formidable and lethal weapons to crash it. The inevitable
result of an accumulative reaction of this kind was genocidal.
INCREMENTAL GENOCIDE
The killing of three Israeli teenagers, two of them minors, abducted in
the occupied West Bank in June, which was mainly a reprisal for killings
of Palestinian children in May, provided the pretext first and foremost
for destroying the delicate unity Hamas and Fatah have formed in that
month. A unity that followed a decision by the Palestinian Authority to
forsake the 'peace process' and appeal to international organizations to
judge Israel according to a human and civil rights' yardstick. Both
developments were viewed as alarming in Israel.
The pretext determined the timing -- but the viciousness of the assault
was the outcome of Israel's inability to formulate a clear policy
towards the Strip it created in 1948. The only clear feature of that
policy is the deep conviction that wiping out the Hamas from the Gaza
Strip would domicile the Ghetto there.
Since 1994, even before the rise of Hamas to power in the Gaza Strip,
the very particular geopolitical location of the Strip made it clear
that any collective punitive action, such as the one inflicted now,
could only be an operation of massive killings and destruction. In other
words: an incremental genocide.
This recognition never inhibited the generals who give the orders to
bomb the people from the air, the sea and the ground. Downsizing the
number of Palestinians all over historic Palestine is still the Zionist
vision; an ideal that requires the dehumanisation of the Palestinians.
In Gaza, this attitude and vision takes its most inhuman form.
The particular timing of this wave is determined, as in the past, by
additional considerations. The domestic social unrest of 2011 is still
simmering and for a while there was a public demand to cut military
expenditures and move money from the inflated 'defence' budget to social
services. The army branded this possibility as suicidal. There is
nothing like a military operation to stifle any voices calling on the
government to cut its military expenses.
Typical hallmarks of the previous stages in this incremental genocide
reappear in this wave as well. As in the first operation against Gaza,
'First Rains' in 2006, and those which followed in 2009, 'Cast Lead',
and 2012, 'Pillar of Smoke', one can witness again consensual Israeli
Jewish support for the massacre of civilians in the Gaza Strip, without
one significant voice of dissent. The Academia, as always, becomes part
of the machinery. Various universities offered the state its student
bodies to help and battle for the Israeli narrative in the cyberspace
and alternative media.
The Israeli media, as well, toed loyally the government's line, showing
no pictures of the human catastrophe Israel has wreaked and informing
its public that this time, 'the world understands us and is behind us'.
That statement is valid to a point as the political elites in the West
continue to provide the old immunity to the Jewish state. The recent
appeal by Western governments to the prosecutor in the international
court of Justice in The Hague not to look into Israel's crimes in Gaza
is a case in point. Wide sections of the Western media followed suit and
justified by and large Israel's actions.
This distorted coverage is also fed by a sense among Western journalist
that what happens in Gaza pales in comparison to the atrocities in Iraq
and Syria. Comparisons like this are usually provided without a wider
historical perspective. A longer view on the history of the Palestinians
would be a much more appropriate way to evaluate their suffering
vis-à-vis the carnage elsewhere.
CONCLUSION: CONFRONTING DOUBLE-STANDARDS
But not only historical view is needed for a better understanding of the
massacre in Gaza. A dialectical approach that identifies the connection
between Israel's immunity and the horrific developments elsewhere is
required as well. The dehumanization in Iraq and Syria is widespread and
terrifying, as it is in Gaza. But there is one crucial difference
between these cases and the Israeli brutality: the former are condemned
as barbarous and inhuman worldwide, while those committed by Israel are
still publicly licensed and approved by the president of the United
States, the leaders of the EU and Israel's other friends in the world.
The only chance for a successful struggle against Zionism in Palestine
is the one based on a human and civil rights agenda that does not
differentiate between one violation and the other and yet identifies
clearly the victim and the victimizers. Those who commit atrocities in
the Arab world against oppressed minorities and helpless communities, as
well as the Israelis who commit these crimes against the Palestinian
people, should all be judged by the same moral and ethical standards.
They are all war criminals, though in the case of Palestine they have
been at work longer than anyone else. It does not really matter what the
religious identity is of the people who commit the atrocities or in the
name of which religion they purport to speak. Whether they call
themselves jihadists, Judaists or Zionists, they should be treated in
the same way.
A world that would stop employing double standards in its dealings with
Israel is a world that could be far more effective in its response to
war crimes elsewhere in the world. Cessation of the incremental genocide
in Gaza and the restitution of the basic human and civil rights of
Palestinians wherever they are, including the right of return, is the
only way to open a new vista for a productive international intervention
in the Middle East as a whole.
/Ilan Pappé is an Israeli historian at the University of Exeter, UK./
/His books include/ The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine /(2007) and/ The
Idea of Israel/(2014)./
--
Freedom Archives 522 Valencia Street San Francisco, CA 94110 415
863.9977 www.freedomarchives.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://freedomarchives.org/pipermail/news_freedomarchives.org/attachments/20140825/9e0cf799/attachment.htm>
More information about the News
mailing list