<html>
<body>
<font size=3><a href="http://www.counterpunch.org/" eudora="autourl">
http://www.counterpunch.org/<br><br>
</a></font><font face="Verdana" size=2 color="#990000">January 13,
2009<br><br>
</font><h1><font face="Times New Roman, Times" size=4><b>Seeing Through
the Lies <br><br>
<br>
</i></font><font face="Times New Roman, Times" size=5 color="#990000">The
Facts About Hamas and the War on Gaza
</b></font></h1><font face="Times New Roman, Times" size=4>By NORMAN
FINKELSTEIN <br><br>
</font><font face="Verdana" size=6 color="#990000">T</font>
<font face="Verdana" size=2>he record is fairly clear. You can find it on
the Israeli website, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs website. Israel
broke the ceasefire by going into the Gaza and killing six or seven
Palestinian militants. At that pointand now I’m quoting the official
Israeli websiteHamas retaliated or, in retaliation for the Israeli
attack, then launched the missiles. <br><br>
Now, as to the reason why, the record is fairly clear as well. According
to <i>Ha’aretz</i>, Defense Minister Barak began plans for this invasion
before the ceasefire even began. In fact, according to yesterday’s
<i>Ha’aretz</i>, the plans for the invasion began in March. And the main
reasons for the invasion, I think, are twofold. Number one; to enhance
what Israel calls its deterrence capacity, which in layman’s language
basically means Israel’s capacity to terrorize the region into
submission. After their defeat in July 2006 in Lebanon, they felt it
important to transmit the message that Israel is still a fighting force,
still capable of terrorizing those who dare defy its word. <br><br>
And the second main reason for the attack is because Hamas was signaling
that it wanted a diplomatic settlement of the conflict along the June
1967 border. That is to say, Hamas was signaling they had joined the
international consensus, they had joined most of the international
community, overwhelmingly the international community, in seeking a
diplomatic settlement. And at that point, Israel was faced with what
Israelis call a Palestinian peace offensive. And in order to defeat the
peace offensive, they sought to dismantle Hamas. <br><br>
As was documented in the April 2008 issue of <i>Vanity Fair</i> by the
writer David Rose, basing himself on internal US documents, it was the
United States in cahoots with the Palestinian Authority and Israel which
were attempting a putsch on Hamas, and Hamas preempted the putsch. That,
too, is no longer debatable or no longer a controversial claim. <br><br>
The issue is can it rule in Gaza if Israel maintains a blockade and
prevents economic activity among the Palestinians. The blockade,
incidentally, was implemented before Hamas came to power. The blockade
doesn’t even have anything to do with Hamas. The blockade came tothere
were Americans who were sent over, in particular James Wolfensohn, to try
to break the blockade after Israel redeployed its troops in Gaza.
<br><br>
The problem all along has been that Israel doesn’t want Gaza to develop,
and Israel doesn’t want to resolve diplomatically the conflict, both the
leadership in Damascus and the leadership in the Gaza have repeatedly
made statements they’re willing to settle the conflict in the June 1967
border. The record is fairly clear. In fact, it’s unambiguously clear.
<br><br>
Every year, the United Nations General Assembly votes on a resolution
entitled “Peaceful Settlement of the Palestine Question.” And every year
the vote is the same: it’s the whole world on one side; Israel, the
United States and some South Sea atolls and Australia on the other side.
The vote this past year was 164-to-7. Every year since 1989in 1989, the
vote was 151-to-3, the whole world on one side, the United States, Israel
and the island state of Dominica on the other side. <br><br>
We have the Arab League, all twenty-two members of the Arab League,
favoring a two-state settlement on the June 1967 border. We have the
Palestinian Authority favoring that two-state settlement on the June 1967
border. We now have Hamas favoring that two-state settlement on the June
1967 border. The one and only obstacle is Israel, backed by the United
States. That’s the problem. <br><br>
Well, the record shows that Hamas wanted to continue the ceasefire, but
only on condition that Israel eases the blockade. Long before Hamas began
the retaliatory rocket attacks on Israel, Palestinians were facing a
humanitarian crisis in Gaza because of the blockade. The former High
Commissioner for Human Rights, Mary Robinson, described what was going on
in Gaza as a destruction of a civilization. This was during the ceasefire
period. <br><br>
What does the record show? The record shows for the past twenty or more
years, the entire international community has sought to settle the
conflict in the June 1967 border with a just resolution of the refugee
question. Are all 164 nations of the United Nations the rejectionists?
And are the only people in favor of peace the United States, Israel,
Nauru, Palau, Micronesia, the Marshall Islands and Australia? Who are the
rejectionists? Who’s opposing a peace? <br><br>
The record shows that in every crucial issue raised at Camp David, then
under the Clinton parameters, and then in Taba, at every single point,
all the concessions came from the Palestinians. Israel didn’t make any
concessions. Every concession came from the Palestinians. The
Palestinians have repeatedly expressed a willingness to settle the
conflict in accordance with international law. <br><br>
The law is very clear. July 2004, the highest judicial body in the world,
the International Court of Justice, ruled Israel has no title to any of
the West Bank and any of Gaza. They have no title to Jerusalem. Arab East
Jerusalem, according to the highest judicial body in the world, is
occupied Palestinian territory. The International Court of Justice ruled
all the settlements, all the settlements in the West Bank, are illegal
under international law. <br><br>
Now, the important point is, on all those questions, the Palestinians
were willing to make concessions. They made all the concessions. Israel
didn’t make any concessions. <br><br>
I think it’s fairly clear what needs to happen. Number one, the United
States and Israel have to join the rest of the international community,
have to abide by international law. I don’t think international law
should be trivialized. I think it’s a serious issue. If Israel is in
defiance of international law, it should be called into account, just
like any other state in the world. <br><br>
Mr. Obama has to level with the American people. He has to be honest
about what is the main obstacle to resolving the conflict. It’s not
Palestinian rejectionism. It’s the refusal of Israel, backed by the
United States government, to abide by international law, to abide by the
opinion of the international community. <br><br>
And the main challenge for all of us as Americans is to see through the
lies. <br>
<b>Norman Finkelstein</b> is author of five books, including
<a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1859844421/counterpunchmaga">
Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestine
Conflict</a>
,<a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0520245989/counterpunchmaga">
Beyond Chutzpah</a> and
<a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/185984488X/counterpunchmaga">
The Holocaust Industry</a>, which have been translated into more than 40
foreign editions. He is the son of Holocaust survivors. This article is
an edited extract of the views of Finkelstein given at
<a href="http://www.democracynow.org/"><b>DemocracyNow.org</a></b>. His
website is
<a href="http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/"><b>
www.NormanFinkelstein.com</a></b> <br><br>
<br>
</font><x-sigsep><p></x-sigsep>
<font size=3 color="#FF0000">Freedom Archives<br>
522 Valencia Street<br>
San Francisco, CA 94110<br><br>
</font><font size=3 color="#008000">415 863-9977<br><br>
</font><font size=3 color="#0000FF">
<a href="http://www.freedomarchives.org/" eudora="autourl">
www.Freedomarchives.org</a></font><font size=3> </font></body>
</html>