RANT: RIGHTS OF THE OCCUPIED

 

I WAS HAPPY TO SEE THERE IS NOW a ceasefire in the conflict between Israel and Hamas, and that the bombing has, for the moment, stopped. Palestinian deaths resulting from missiles and bombs the IDF (Israeli Defence Force) unleashed on Gaza during the 11-day siege stands around 248; Israeli records at least 12 people were killed from Hamas rockets. Good! Now we can relax and fuhgeddaboudit, forget about all that pesky “Middle Easternery” stuff. Who needs to watch that night after night on the news? Arabs fighting Jews! Jews fighting Arabs! Why can’t they  learn to get along?

AT LEAST the fighting is over. For now. Because the facts on the ground dictate peace won’t last, and we can expect more of the same in the future. I’m no expert, but the situation isn’t that difficult to understand:

Israel is a “settler-colonial” society (so is Canada, BTW) that has illegally occupied Palestinian land since WWII. Israel has relentlessly and unlawfully (according to numerous United Nations’ resolutions condemning its actions) acquired more and more territory belonging to the indigenous Palestinians in the West Bank and Israel proper, and has for more than a decade confined nearly two million Palestinians, in what has been described as the “world’s largest open-air prison”, to a tiny sliver of land known as the Gaza Strip. Jewish-American academic, scholar and fierce critic of Israeli policies toward the Palestinians, Norman Finkelstein, describes the miniscule size of Gaza as the length of a marathon run (approximately 25 miles) by “two Central Parks” (in New York City) wide.

Further, a recent Human Rights Watch report—for the first time—has called Israel an “apartheid state” because of its suppression of Palestinian rights and freedoms. Retired American colonel, Lawrence Wilkerson, who was Chief of Staff to Secretary of Defence Colin Powell during the Bush Presidency, also says that Israel is fast becoming an apartheid state, increasingly entrenched in an intractable and inherently unsustainable situation. Wilkerson says unless Israel drastically changes its policies and actions, in twenty years it “would be gone”, that the continued oppression of the Palestinian people will eventually lead to Israeli society becoming unworkable.  

Of course, there are a lot of moving parts to the story, not least of which is the United States position vis-à-vis Israel, and whether it will continue to give its unconditional support as it has, for example and shamefully, at the United Nations by blocking a proposed Security Council resolution criticizing Israel’s recent attacks on Gaza and demanding an immediate ceasefire. The Council was paralyzed in a deadlocked 14-1 vote, with America’s “no” vote blocking the resolution because it requires unanimous consent to be ratified. (As an aside, had toady Canada gained its much-coveted seat on the Security Council this session, the vote would have no doubt have been two opposed.)

 

However, it is interesting to note that American Secretary of State Antony Blinken, did not confirm Israel’s claim that the Hamas “control and command” infrastructure was ensconced in the AP (American Press) office tower that IDF forces bombed last week. One would normally expect America to automatically condone Israel’s attack on the Gazan high-rise, home to offices for a number of local and international news agencies. Does Blinken’s statement suggest there is some "light” growing between Israel and the United States, and that the US will go only so far in supporting Israeli policies? Is it a signal to Israel that they might have to “go-it-alone” from now on, that they will have to “shape up”, as Colonel Wilkerson puts it, and deal with their own problems? (Meaning Israel making peace with the Palestinians and, more broadly, its neighbours in the Middle East.) Overall, though, American policy towards Israel does not appear to be heading in this direction. On May 25, President Biden recommitted his country’s “unwavering” support, stating the United States will continue its $3B per year supply of military aid to Israel and that the Jewish state "has the right to defend itself.” But, what about the right of Palestinians to defend themselves against a force that has controlled their land since WWII. After all, under international law, an occupied population has  the right to defend itself.*

It’s a mixed bag to be sure, but this time, there is more international criticism of Israeli policies than in the past. And today (May 26) I heard on the news that the United States is contemplating opening a consulate in East Jerusalem to open a dialogue with the Fatah-run Palestinian Authority despite Israeli objections. Progress? Maybe.

 

BOTTOM LINE: It’s becoming all too obvious that Israel must end its occupation of Palestinian lands and grant Palestinians complete autonomy in a “two-state” solution (which, frankly, given the amount of Palestinian land Israel has already illegally absorbed into itself over the years, that route is all but blocked), or else grant them full rights as equal citizens in a shared, secular state. The status quo is no longer acceptable to a growing number of people inside Israel and beyond. If the Israeli government does not heed the warnings, it will become more isolated and increasingly be seen as a pariah state among nations. Time will tell.

 

Cheers, Jake. 

___________________________________________  

 

* In this 1982 General Assembly Resolution supporting "the right of peoples to self-determination and of the speedy granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples," the UN cites its concerns for the conflicts that were happening at the time in Angola, Namibia, South Africa, as well as Israel's invasion of Lebanon. The Resolution "reaffirms the legitimacy of the struggle of peoples for independence, territorial integrity, national unity and liberation from colonial and foreign domination and foreign occupation by all available means, including armed struggle..." [italics mine]