|
|
|
|
|
alternative perspectives on the "war on terrorism"
|
An end to Israeli occupation will mean a just war
Withdrawal from Palestinian territories is now essential if a moral victory is to be achieved
Amos Oz, The Observer, April 7, 2002
Two Palestinian-Israeli wars have erupted in this region. One is the
Palestinian nation's war for its freedom from occupation and for its
right to independent statehood. Any decent person ought to support this
cause. The second war is waged by fanatical Islam, from Iran to Gaza and
from Lebanon to Ramallah, to destroy Israel and drive the Jews out of
their land. Any decent person ought to abhor this cause.
[The complete article]
SHARON SHOWS HIS CONTEMPT FOR AMERICA
COMMENT -- As President Bush calls on Israel to start a withdrawal
"without delay" from the Occupied Territories, Israeli forces continue a
massive assault on the refugee camps of Jenin, fire shells at Yasser
Arafat's compound in Ramallah, continue a fierce battle in Nablus, and
advance into Yatta, south of Hebron, and Qabatiya, north of Nablus. At
the same time, the BBC reports that, "Israeli officials insist the
Americans are not seeking an immediate withdrawal of Israeli forces,
which would only happen "after having cleaned up the nest of terrorists"
in the words of one spokesman."
Battle rages in Palestinian camp
BBC News, April 6, 2002
Israeli operations bring 'wanton destruction'
BBC News, April 5, 2002
Israelis say they will "finish the job," Palestinians cry "massacre"
Agence France-Presse, April 6, 2002
In Ramallah we founded Palestine
Ze'ev Sternhell, Ha'aretz, April 6, 2002
Had Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's Israel intended to grant the
Palestinians the gift they so desired, and tried to help them create a
national epic in the course of struggling for independence on the
battlefield - it could not have done otherwise. In the streets of
Ramallah and Qalqiliyah legends are now being created upon which
generations of haters of Israel will be raised. Tens of thousands of
children are dreaming of the day they will bear arms. Thanks to the
invasion of which he is the conductor, Ariel Sharon will be remembered
as the real founder of the Palestinian state. Thus he will go down in
history because of the fact that his real aim is not only rooting out
terror but breaking the Palestinian national movement.
[The complete article]
Sharon's military tactics should not surprise anyone
Fergal Keane, The Independent, April 6, 2002
Most rational commentators and the majority of the international
body politic agree that a solution must be based on the old formula of
land for peace. The Saudi proposal was simply a recognition of this
reality gilded with the offer of a broader regional peace. But this
presents Ariel Sharon with a choice no leader of his background would
want to face.
When he was cast into the political wilderness after the Sabra and
Chatila massacres, Sharon rebuilt his base with the help of the
settlers. He has been a driving force behind the colonisation of
Palestinian land. Is anybody asking themselves how a man with this
political debt, but also with his own passionate support for
settlements, is going to be party to destroying the settlers' dream?
Even if he were to undergo a miracle conversion to the idea, many in his
political constituency would denounce him as a traitor. Yet in the
absence of such a deal there will be endless war. No colonised people
will sit and watch their land being eaten away.
[The complete article]
Sharon tries to destroy all traces of Arafat rule
Suzanne Goldenberg, The Guardian, April 6, 2002
Two monuments to destruction awaited Palestinians when Ramallah
briefly came to life yesterday during the relaxation of the Israeli army
curfew: the wrecked compound of Yasser Arafat, and the battle-ravaged
headquarters of a powerful security commander.
The ruins provide compelling evidence that the Israeli prime
minister, Ariel Sharon, is not only pursuing a war against suicide
bombers - as he claims - but wants to erase history: the eight-year
interlude when Mr Arafat's Palestinian Authority had some control over
the West Bank and Gaza.
[The complete article]
Bush: We will get rid of Saddam
Julian Borger and Michael White, The Guardian, April 6, 2002
The prospects of a US-British war against Iraq remained on the
horizon last night as Tony Blair arrived in Texas for talks with the US
president, George Bush, about options for tackling Saddam Hussein. Mr
Bush, in an interview broadcast last night, signalled that even Iraqi
compliance with UN demands on weapons inspections might not be enough to
avoid war.
[The complete article]
YASSER ARAFAT
COMMENT -- Yesterday, President Bush rebuked Yasser Arafat by saying
that, "The situation in which he finds himself today is largely of his
own making. He's missed his opportunities, and thereby betrayed the
hopes of the people he's supposed to lead. Given his failure, the
Israeli government feels it must strike at terrorist networks that are
killing its citizens."
Part of the myth surrounding the claims about Arafat's failures is
the assertion (repeated almost daily on the editorial pages in the US
press) that Arafat "walked away" from Camp David in 2000 and sacrificed
an historic opportunity to make a lasting peace with Israel. While this
interpretation of the Clinton-Barak-Arafat talks was circulated around
Washington for a whole year, one of Clinton's own advisers eventually
set the record straight:
Adviser: Clinton exasperated with Barak during peace talks
Account disputes view that Arafat caused breakdown
Alan Sipress, Washington Post, July 18, 2001
Though President Clinton publicly blamed the Palestinians for the
failure of the Camp David peace summit last July, in private he became
exasperated with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak's negotiating
tactics, according to a key White House adviser. In an upcoming article
in the New York Review of Books, Robert Malley, Clinton's special
assistant for Arab-Israeli affairs, disputes the widespread view that
Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat was the sole culprit behind the
collapse of the Camp David talks, which was soon followed by a surge in
Middle East violence.
[The complete article]
Camp David: The tragedy of errors
Hussein Agha, Robert Malley, The New York Review of Books, August 9, 2001
In accounts of what happened at the July 2000 Camp David summit and
the following months of Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, we often hear
about Ehud Barak's unprecedented offer and Yasser Arafat's
uncompromising no. Israel is said to have made a historic, generous
proposal, which the Palestinians, once again seizing the opportunity to
miss an opportunity, turned down. In short, the failure to reach a final
agreement is attributed, without notable dissent, to Yasser Arafat.
As orthodoxies go, this is a dangerous one. For it has larger ripple
effects. Broader conclusions take hold. That there is no peace partner
is one. That there is no possible end to the conflict with Arafat is
another.
For a process of such complexity, the diagnosis is remarkably
shallow. It ignores history, the dynamics of the negotiations, and the
relationships among the three parties. In so doing, it fails to capture
why what so many viewed as a generous Israeli offer, the Palestinians
viewed as neither generous, nor Israeli, nor, indeed, as an offer.
Worse, it acts as a harmful constraint on American policy by offering up
a single, convenient culprit—Arafat—rather than a more nuanced and
realistic analysis.
[The complete article]
Not in our name
John Pilger, Daily Mirror, April 5, 2002
President George W Bush yesterday called on Israel to withdraw from
the Palestinian cities occupied by its forces during the last week. He
excused Israel's violence, but lectured the Palestinians and the rest of
the Middle East on the need for restraint and a lasting peace. "The
storms of violence cannot go on," said Bush. "Enough is enough."
What he neglected to say was that he needs a lull in the present
crisis to lay his own war plans; that while he talks of peace in the
Middle East, he is secretly planning a massive attack on Iraq.
[The complete article]
Don't sit by and watch Mideast murder
Amy Pagnozzi, Hartford Courant, April 5, 2002
Shame upon us all, for pretending we are merely witnesses of human
history instead of players in it. It's our billions of tax dollars that
have enabled the IDF to turn doctors into diggers, creating mass graves
in the parking lot of Ramallah Hospital for the patients they could not
save, due to the military's refusal to permit surgeons to operate upon
critically wounded patients. So fair warning: unless you want to
continue as an accomplice in a murder for hire plot, write your
president, your senator, your representative. Tell them this is not how
you want your tax money spent.
[The complete article]
From Warsaw to the West Bank
Sherri Muzher, Ramallah Online
Women throw hand grenades. Children fight like soldiers. Occupying
soldiers prevent food and medicine from the civilian population.
Buildings and homes are destroyed. Arms are smuggled. A relatively
unarmed civilian population fights one of the most powerful armies in
the world. Welcome to the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising of April, 1943.
[The complete article]
THE US-BACKED CAMPAIGN TO DESTROY PALESTINIAN RESISTANCE AND HUMILIATE THE PALESTINIAN PEOPLE
COMMENT -- Readers should note that Ha'aretz is one of the leading
newspapers in Israel. Why, we must ask, are Ariel Sharon and the
actions of the Israeli Defense Force, subject to severe criticism by the
Israeli press, while at the same time the editorial pages of the
American press express virtually unanimous support for Israel's
so-called "war on terror"?
Sharon buys time
Aluf Benn, Ha'aretz, April 5, 2002
U.S. President George W. Bush yesterday granted Israel a few more
days' grace to complete the Protective Wall offensive - until Secretary
of State Colin Powell arrives in the region - according to Jerusalem's
assessment of the American leader's speech. Powell called Prime Minister
Ariel Sharon yesterday afternoon to inform him of the main points of
the impending speech. Sharon put in a request "to buy time" for the IDF
mission in the territories. He dispatched Israeli Ambassador to the
U.S., David Ivri, to the White House with a message: Let us complete the
offensive and break the back of Palestinian terror; this would be the
most significant contribution toward peace. Sharon was pleased with
Bush's speech; the IDF offensive received presidential justification.
While Bush called on Israel "to halt incursions and begin [its]
withdrawal", he did not talk of an immediate withdrawal.
[The complete article]
Humiliation sows hatred
Editorial, Ha'aretz, April 5, 2002
It is impossible to ignore the nature of the operation, which was a
significant departure from the declared policy until now, in which a
distinction was made between those who deal in terror, who must be
vanquished, and the wider population, whom Israel did not want to engage
in conflict. This time, the IDF caused deliberate suffering and
humiliation to the broader Palestinian population. This cannot be
interpreted any other way: The government of Israel, through the IDF,
sought to use humiliation as a means of pressure or punishment. There is
no other way to understand those photographed scenes of hundreds of
people, bound and blindfolded, on their way to interrogations.
[The complete article]
'Nablus: where the real war begins'
Graham Usher, The Guardian, April 5, 2002
Early yesterday 200 Israeli tanks swept into Nablus, the largest and
most nationalist of Palestinian cities. The incursion took the number
of West Bank cities under Israeli control to seven of eight, holding 90%
of the Palestinian population - more than 1 million people - under
curfew and siege.
[The complete article]
ETHNIC CLEANSING
A black flag hangs over the idea of transfer
Tom Segev, Ha'aretz, April 5, 2002
An evil spirit is infiltrating public discourse: the spirit of
expulsion. The zealots among the settlers still mostly use the slogan
"Kahane was right," but the slogan "No Arabs - No Terror" is
representative of increasing numbers of spokesmen.
[The complete article]
Fear of wider conflict as army pushes on --
Bethlehem standoff goes on as troops enter Hebron
Suzanne Goldenberg, The Guardian, April 5, 2002
The Israeli army accelerated its offensive against Palestinian towns
and cities, thrusting into Hebron even as President George Bush called
for a withdrawal. The intervention came amid deepening fears that the
war could spill beyond the Jewish state and the occupied Palestinian
territories as Hizbullah guerrillas fired rockets across Israel's
northern frontiers for a third day. At least 70 Palestinians have been
killed in the week since tanks slammed into Yasser Arafat's headquarters
in Ramallah, and the army began its sweep across the West Bank, Israel
Radio said yesterday. By evening, only the desert town of Jericho
remained untouched.
[The complete article]
'America has no credibility'
Peter Beaumont, The Guardian, April 5, 2002
Reaction in Palestinian cities to Mr Bush's speech was marked by
hostility and scepticism. In Hebron Khalid Amayreh, an independent
journalist and commentator, poured scorn on the plan. "Mr Bush is
conspicuously ignorant of the situation in the Middle East," he said.
"All that he knows comes from the rightwing pro-Israeli extreme in US
politics. "If it is so urgent, why is secretary of state Powell coming
next week and not tomorrow?"
[The complete article]
Thinking ahead
After survival, what happens?
Edward Said, Al-Ahram, April 4, 2002
When a renowned and respected retired politician like Zbigniew
Brzezinski says explicitly on national television that Israel has been
behaving like the white supremacist regime of apartheid South Africa,
one can be certain that he is not alone in this view, and that an
increasing number of Americans and others are slowly growing not only
disenchanted but also disgusted with Israel as a hugely expensive and
draining ward of the United States, costing far too much, increasing
American isolation, and seriously damaging the country's reputation with
its allies and its citizens. The question is what, in this most
difficult of moments, can we rationally learn about the present crisis
that we need to include in our plans for the future?
[The complete article]
An American under siege in a West Bank refugee camp
Nancy Stohlman, Counterpunch, April 1, 2002
Each night I think to myself this is the most terrifying night of my life and each night it gets worse.
[The complete article]
'He kept bleeding'
Wounded die as Israelis restrict ambulances in Bethlehem
Keith B. Richburg, Washington Post, April 4, 2002
Demolished cars lined the narrow streets of Bethlehem. Shutters were
ripped from the shops. And inside the homes, where frightened residents
huddled for a second day, the dead shared space with the wounded.
[The complete article]
The widening possibility of war
Paul Rogers, Open Democracy, April 4, 2002
As Tony Blair prepares for his meeting with George Bush, the war in
Afghanistan remains unresolved and the Israeli/Palestinian conflict
worsens. Even so, the Bush administration remains intent on widening the
“war on terror” to Iraq, although the stresses being felt by the US
armed forces are becoming more apparent.
[The complete article]
Truce plan let Israel continue attacks
Furious Palestinians leak 'one-sided' US envoy draft
Brian Whitaker, The Guardian, April 4, 2002
Israel would be allowed to continue attacks on Palestinian
presidential buildings, security headquarters and prisons as part of a
Middle East "ceasefire" plan proposed by US envoy General Anthony Zinni,
it emerged yesterday.
[The complete article]
Violence and excuses in the Mideast
Michael Lerner and Cornel West, AlterNet, April 3, 2002
Many are calling for the Bush administration to intervene in the
Israeli-Palestinian struggle. And such intervention could help. Yet the
Bush administration is making no effort to conceal that its heart lies
elsewhere: in creating a coalition in the Islamic world that will
support forthcoming U.S. attempts to overthrow Saddam Hussein. Though
little evidence links Saddam to Osama bin Ladin or al-Qaeda, the White
House has used the cover of outrage at terror to legitimate a new war in
Iraq that will complete what the last Bush administration left
unresolved.
[The complete article]
Palestinians are blurry in the editorial frame
Norman Solomon, Media Beat, April 4, 2002
While quite properly calling for an immediate halt to the horrendous
suicide bombings, New York Times editorials are notably patient and
rather equivocal about bringing an end to Israel's occupation. In the
first paragraph of a March 30 editorial, the Times recommended "a
commitment to withdraw from occupied lands." In the closing paragraph,
the newspaper declared: "Israel must make clear that it recognizes the
need to relinquish the bulk of the territories it took in 1967."
Translation: Even at this late and bloody date, the New York Times
can't bring itself to forthrightly call for an immediate and total end
to the occupation. Instead, the paper resorts to ambiguity; Israel
should recognize the need to leave "the bulk of the territories." If a
foreign power had been occupying your home for 35 years, how would you
feel about the idea that it should "recognize the need" to leave most of
it -- merely remaining in control of, say, all the hallways and doors?
[The complete article]
The bloody battle of Bethlehem
Robert Fisk, The Independent, April 4, 2002
Rotting bodies in Bethlehem, Israeli soldiers surrounding
Palestinian civilians and militiamen in the place of Christ's birth,
unburied corpses in Ramallah – Israel's latest war is turning into a
human and political tragedy on a vast scale as the last physical symbols
of the Oslo peace agreement are destroyed. For two days, the suicide
bombers have been silent. But the coming weeks will decide the future of
the Holy Land for years to come.
[The complete article]
Inside hell
Muna Khleifi, The Guardian, April 4, 2002
Muna Khleifi lives in Ramallah, one of the Palestinian towns
besieged by Israeli soldiers. Here she describes a week of deprivation
and terror.
[The complete article]
Israel tightens its iron grip on one million Palestinians in West Bank
Suzanne Goldenberg, The Guardian, April 4, 2002
The Israeli army expanded its occupation to nearly all of the
Palestinian towns in the West Bank yesterday, pushing forward even as
international condemnation of its sweeping offensive reached a critical
mass. As more than 150 Israeli tanks rolled into the city of Nablus
firing shells late last night, the army stood on the verge of
controlling the lives of more than 1 million Palestinians, living in
West Bank cities and towns.
[The complete article]
Sharon is exploiting America's 'war on terrorism'
William Pfaff, International Herald Tribune, April 4, 2002
Israeli policy today rests on a wishful fiction, complicated by its
conflation of the facts and fictions underlying Washington's proclaimed
war on terrorism.
[The complete article]
Egypt cuts ties with Israel
Vatican criticises Israel today for "humiliating" the Palestinians
European Union calls on Washington to stand down as primary peacemaker
US hawks call shots on Mideast policy
Jim Lobe, Asia Times, April 4, 2002
The confusing signals from the office of US President George W Bush
over the escalating Israeli-Palestinian conflict reflect the ongoing
struggle between the radical hawks of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld
and the realpolitikers led by Secretary of State Colin Powell. As in so
many other major foreign-policy debates inside the Bush administration,
the radicals appear to be winning decisively, a victory that reflects
the relative strengths of Rumsfeld and his ally, Vice President Dick
Cheney, as well as the relentless pressure campaign waged by pro-Likud
forces to tie Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat to Bush's larger "war
against terrorism".
[The complete article]
Dispatches from Ramallah
AlterNet, April 2, 2002
Eyewitness acccounts of the Israeli invasion are pouring in from
Ramallah and Bethlehem every day. The following reports and testimonies
are being circulated on listservs and indymedia sites.
[The complete article]
For Sharon, meaning of 'victory' grows unclear
Lee Hockstader, Washington Post, April 1, 2002
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is not just a battle between two
peoples over one piece of land, it is a self-destructive contest of
national wills. In such a war, fanaticism is a potent weapon, and there
the Palestinians and their growing legions of suicide bombers have the
edge. "Palestinian terror has changed its face," wrote Nahum Barnea, a
widely read columnist in the Yedioth Aharonoth newspaper. "In 1982 it
was the job of professionals. Today it is popular sport, the grand
aspiration of thousands of Palestinian girls and boys. You can kill,
deport and deter professionals. There is no military way to fight
suicide bombers." Sharon says he thinks there is. In a brief televised
address tonight, he grimly told Israelis to prepare for "an
uncompromising war to uproot these savages, to dismantle their
infrastructure." But as Israeli terrorism experts have pointed out, the
infrastructure of suicide bombing requires little more than bomb-making
know-how and some very basic equipment. If an explosives belt can be
assembled in a work shed or a chicken coop or a garage, then destroying
the "infrastructure of terrorism" begins to sound virtually impossible,
more a slogan than a battle plan.
[The complete article]
Interview with Chomsky
ZNet, April 2, 2002
In-depth discussion on Israel/Palestine.
[The complete interview]
CONSERVATIVES MAKE WAR A PRECONDITION FOR PEACE
Drop peace effort, Right urges Bush
Ronald Brownstein, Los Angeles Times, April 3 2002
As President Bush struggles to define a consistent course in the
Middle East, a chorus of leading conservative voices has begun loudly
discouraging the administration from inserting itself into peace
negotiations--and instead is urging the president to give Israel a freer
hand to respond militarily to Palestinian suicide bombings.
[The complete article]
Armoured invasion brings no peace to Bethlehem
Robert Fisk, The Independent, April 3, 2002
If this is a war on terror, Jesus wasn't born in Bethlehem. The
first to die was an 80-year-old Palestinian man, whose body never made
it to the morgue. Then a woman and her son were critically wounded by
Israeli gunfire.
[The complete article]
Missing a peace
As Israelis and Palestinians escalate their war, they fail to see the new landscape around them
Jonathan Freedland, The Guardian, April 3, 2002
It would be nice to think we had reached rock bottom. But everything
you know about the Middle East steers you clear of such optimism:
things can always get worse.
[The complete article]
US IMPERIALISM
'It takes an empire,' say several U.S. thinkers
Emily Eakin, The New York Times, April 2, 2002
Today, America is no mere superpower or hegemon but a full-blown
empire in the Roman and British sense. That, at any rate, is the
consensus of some of the most notable U.S. commentators and scholars.
[The complete article]
Israel threatens action against CNN, NBC
Steve Weizman, Associated Press, April 2, 2002
Israel revoked the credentials of two Abu Dhabi TV journalists on
Tuesday and threatened legal action against CNN and NBC for ignoring
military orders and broadcasting from the Israeli-occupied West Bank
city of Ramallah.
[The complete article]
The war looks different abroad - and maybe so do the facts
Aviv Lavie, Ha'aretz, April 3, 2002
Israel looks like an isolated media island, with most of the
reporters drafted into the cause of convincing themselves and the reader
that the government and army are perfectly justified in whatever they
do. Some have actually been drafted - Yedioth Aharonoth has started
running a regular column by its reporter, Guy Leshem, who reports with
determination from the heart of the West Bank, straight from his
military reserve service. This is another step in erasing the line
between the defense framework and the editorial framework that is
supposed to report and criticize.
[The complete article]
DEMOCRACY
Peace and nuclear disarmament:
A call to action
Rep. Dennis Kucinich
If you believe that humanity has a higher destiny, if you believe we
can evolve, and become better than we are; if you believe we can
overcome the scourge of war and someday fulfill the dream of harmony and
peace earth, let us begin the conversation today. Let us exchange our
ideas.
Let us plan together, act together and create peace together. This
is a call for common sense, for peaceful, non-violent citizen action to
protect our precious world from widening war and from stumbling into a
nuclear catastrophe. The climate for conflict has intensified, with the
struggle between Pakistan and India, the China-Taiwan tug of war, and
the increased bloodshed between Israel and the Palestinians. United
States' planned troop deployments in the Philippines, Yemen, Georgia,
Columbia and Indonesia create new possibilities for expanded war. An
invasion of Iraq is planned. The recent disclosure that Russia, China,
Iraq, Iran, Syria, North Korea, and Libya are considered by the United
States as possible targets for nuclear attack catalyzes potential
conflicts everywhere.
These crucial political decisions promoting increased military
actions, plus a new nuclear first-use policy, are occurring without the
consent of the American people, without public debate, without public
hearings, without public votes. The President is taking Congress's
approval of responding to the Sept. 11 terrorists as a license to flirt
with nuclear war.
"Politics ought to stay out of fighting a war," the President has
been quoted as saying on March 13th 2002. Yet Article 1, Section 8 of
the United States Constitution explicitly requires that Congress take
responsibility when it comes to declaring war. This President is very
popular, according to the polls. But polls are not a substitute for
democratic process. Attributing a negative connotation here to politics
or dismissing constitutionally mandated Congressional oversight belies
reality: Spending $400 billion a year for defense is a political
decision. Committing troops abroad is a political decision. War is a
political decision. When men and women die on the battlefield that is
the result of a political decision. The use of nuclear weapons, which
can end the lives of millions, is a profound political decision. In a
monarchy there need be no political decisions. In a democracy, all
decisions are political, in that they derive from the consent of the
governed.
In a democracy, budgetary, military and national objectives must be
subordinate to the political process. Before we celebrate an imperial
presidency, let it be said that the lack of free and open political
process, the lack of free and open political debate, and the lack of
free and open political dissent can be fatal in a democracy.
[The complete article]
Press freedom crisis in the Occupied Territories
Committee to Protect Journalists, April 1, 2002
"We are deeply disturbed by Israel's evident desire to prevent
journalists from witnessing its current activities on the West Bank,"
Cooper said. "CPJ calls on all parties to the conflict to permit media
access to conflict areas and to fulfill their responsibility to
safeguard journalists in the field."
[The complete article]
A dozen journalists under gunfire in Ramallah
Reporters Without Borders, April 2, 2002
At least 11 journalists have come under gunfire and three of them
have been hit since the Israeli army declared Ramallah a "closed
military zone" and barred the media from the West Bank city, the first
such ban since the start of the second Intifada in September 2000. Three
others were expelled from the city, bringing to about 30 the number of
journalists Israeli troops have either fired on, expelled or arrested in
that time.
[The complete article]
Murdering Arafat?
Uri Avnery, Counterpunch, April 2, 2002
In the new myth that is being born before our eyes, Sharon is the
Pharaoh and we [the Israelis] are the ancient Egyptians. In the story
about the Exodus, the Bible lets God say: "I have hardened (Pharaoh's)
heart and the heart of his servants." After every calamity that befell
him, Pharaoh broke his promise to free the Israelites. Why? What was
God's purpose? He wanted the Israelites to become hardened by the
hardship, before they started on their long march. This is what is
happening to the Palestinians now.
[The complete article]
Israel is not America’s greatest ally
Michael Lind, ArabNews, April 2, 2002
Once again, conflict is raging between Israel and the Palestinians —
and once again, the US government can see fault only on one side. Even
as Israeli soldiers were demolishing his compound and threatening his
life, Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat was instructed by US
Secretary of State Colin Powell to end terrorism against Israel,
including that committed by groups Arafat cannot control. What passes in
the United States as an evenhanded stance is perceived, not only in the
Middle East but in Europe and throughout the world, as unquestioning
American support of bully tactics by Israel.
[The complete article]
Bush gives Israel wide latitude in offensive
Alan Sipress, Washington Post, April 2, 2002
By repeating his demand that Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat
denounce militant attacks against Israelis, Bush cast the latest Middle
East crisis in the context of wider American concerns about terrorism
and endorsed Sharon's definition of the dispute as a war on terrorists.
This keeps the administration firmly in line with Israel as it continues
to besiege Arafat in his Ramallah headquarters and move additional
forces into West Bank cities.
[The complete article]
Don't always trust what they tell you in the war on terror
Raymond Whitaker and James Palmer, The Independent, March 31, 2002
Downing Street said al-Qa'ida was using chemical weapons: it was
wrong. The Pentagon said Saddam Hussein was to blame for the anthrax
attacks on the US: it was wrong.
[The complete article]
Open letter to the commander of the Israeli paratroopers
Neve Gordon, AlterNet, April 1, 2002
This
letter by Israeli human rights activist and writer Neve Gordon was
published in the weekly Jerusalem newspaper Kol Ha'Ir. It is addressed
to Aviv Kohavi, Brigade Commander of the Israeli Paratroopers, and
describes the Israeli military incursion into the Balata refugee camps
in the West Bank.
Ariel Sharon's "war on terrorism"
The text of Ariel Sharon's address to the Israeli nation, made on Israeli television, March 31, 2002.
ROOTS OF THE ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN CONFLICT
No holiday there, no holiday here either
Gideon Levy, Ha'aretz, March 31, 2002
Nothing can justify the horrific massacre that was perpetrated by
Abdel al-Baset Odeh on Passover eve at the Park Hotel in Netanya, in
which 22 people were killed and 130 were wounded, just as nothing can
justify the massacre that was perpetrated by Baruch Goldstein against
worshippers in the mosque of the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron in
1994, in which 29 Palestinians were killed. But without this
constituting any sort of justification, it is essential to understand
that the roots of the present conflict, with the terrible massacres that
it has spawned, lie in a different Passover eve seder, in a different
Park Hotel.
It all began in Hebron on the eve of Passover in 1968. [...]
The settlement enterprise was founded in the Park Hotel in Hebron on
Passover eve 34 years ago. This great success story of Zionism has so
far realized its major historic purpose: thwarting any prospect of
reaching a peace agreement with the Palestinians. Today, the 200,000
settlers are the major stumbling block to an agreement, and they are
also an obstacle to the achievement of security in Israel. In fact,
today the settlements which Yigal Allon justified with the claim that
"they are there for security reasons" - have become the cause of a
mortal blow to the security of all Israelis.
[The complete article]
Report from Ramallah:
The Israelis took over my house
Maha Sbitani, Counterpunch, March 31, 2002
My husband opened the door and was confronted by huge guns pointed
at us. They pushed the door open and distributed themselves throughout
our house and office. Over 50 heavily armed soldiers were now in the
office and home (which are adjacent). We asked what they wanted and they
told us to shut up and sit down. I explained that I was American. They
said that they did not care what I was. I insisted that they leave the
house and told them as an American I protest to what they are doing.
They said, "This in no worse than what your country is doing in
Afghanistan."
[The complete article]
Last night the Israeli military tried to kill me
Jordan Flaherty, Counterpunch, March 31, 2002
I'm staying in the al azzeh refugee camp, in Bethlehem, along with
about twenty other international civilians. We're here to act as human
shields, because we've heard an Israeli invasion is imminent.
[The complete article]
America's mistaken time reference
Daoud Kuttab, AMIN, March 31, 2002
In dealing with the Arab-Israeli conflict, there seems to be a major
problem in deciding what the time reference is. Listening to the US
Secretary of state Colin Powel on Friday one gets the impression that
for America, history begins and ends with the last suicide bombing
against Israelis.
[The complete article]
Israel's state terrorism
Lev Grinberg, ZNet, March 31, 2002
What is the difference between State terrorism and individual
terrorist acts? If we understand this difference we'll understand also
the evilness of the US policies in the Middle East and the forthcoming
disasters. When Yassir Arafat was put under siege in his offices and
kept hostage by the Israeli occupation forces, he was constantly pressed
into condemning terror and combatting terrorism. Israel's
State-terrorism is defined by US officials as "self-defense", while
individual suicide bombers are called terrorists.
[The complete article]
200 international volunteers form human shield to protect Palestinian families
Peter Beaumont and Martin Wainwright, The Guardian, April 1, 2002
More than 200 international volunteers, including some 50 Britons,
deployed themselves in Ramallah and two refugee camps at Bethlehem last
night in an attempt to form "human shields" for Palestinian families.
The British contingent, ranging from a retired nurse from Kent to a
group of students from Manchester, joined Americans and Europeans
dispersed among houses close to Yasser Arafat's headquarters and Israeli
army tank formations near Bethlehem's Azar and Aida refugee camps.
[The complete article]
US ignores international mood and lays blame on Palestinians
Andrew Buncombe, The Independent, April 1, 2002
The US and Israel ignore appeals from Britain, Germany, France, China, Japan, Greece, Turkey, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan.
[The complete article]
Let there be justice for all, Mr Bush
The US's pro-Israeli bias must be tempered by European pressure to ensure a just peace agreement in Israel
Ian Gilmour, The Observer, March 31, 2002
The Bush administration has long known that for it to remain largely
passive while the Israeli-Palestinian conflict grew steadily worse
would sooner or later ensure an explosion. It also knew that Ariel
Sharon has never wanted peace with the Palestinians and never will - he
only wants their surrender and expulsion. As the speaker of the Knesset
said a few weeks ago, Israel now has 'a violent government out to
destroy the Palestinian authority to avoid giving up the settlements'.
Yet because the US believed that the Israelis would eventually win the
conflict, they gave Sharon a green light to be as brutal as he liked,
short of killing Yasser Arafat, the Palestinian leader. And despite
Sharon's record, Bush happily hobnobbed with him, while refusing to meet
Arafat.
[The complete article]
As two weak men act tough, the extremists impose their will
It began with teens throwing rocks. Now war looms
Peter Beaumont, The Observer, March 31, 2002
The road that leads to Arafat's compound is also the road that leads
to war. The question is: how did it come to this? One partial answer is
a prediction from the years before the Oslo peace process collapsed.
Both sides expected the greatest danger to arise when the leaders sat
down to discuss the most difficult issues that had been put carefully to
one side: a final settlement that would resolve once and for all
whether (and how many) Palestinian refugees would be allowed to return,
the status of Jerusalem and its holy sites, and how much of the
territories still under Israeli occupation would be returned.
[The complete article]
I saw the bodies, killed by a shot to the head
Israeli killings: Troops stormed Arafat's men's base - and Palestinians believe that what followed was an execution
Peter Beaumont, The Observer, March 31, 2002
What happened on the third floor of the Cairo-Amman bank at midnight
on Friday during Israel's occupation of the Palestinian city of
Ramallah can only be surmised. But in the few minutes after Israeli
soldiers stormed the Palestinian position, five men were wounded and
five men were put to death by the Israelis, each with a single coup de
grace to the head or throat.
[The complete article]
|
|
HOME
September 11 and the declaration of a "war on terrorism," has
forced Americans to look at the World in a new light. No one can afford
any longer to define the limits of their concerns by refusing to look
beyond this nation's borders. If the freedom that every American
cherishes, is not to become a freedom bound within a fortress, then
every American will need to understand and respect the needs and
concerns of the rest of the World. To this end, The War in Context
invites anyone with interest and an open mind to listen to the critical
discourse in which the policies and actions of the Bush administration
are now being questioned. This debate, which is engaging inquiring minds
inside and outside America, will hopefully inform the development of a
sustainable new world order - a world order in which America is as much
shaped by the World as is the World shaped by America.
|
|
|
