Veto on Palestinian lives
Wednesday, October 6, 2004, 00:17
No surprise from the US, but shame on the UK, Germany and Romania! The previous blog entry stated the obvious: it was highly unlikely that the US would dare to vote for a resolution condemning Israel. Apparently, it’s unbalanced! This begs the question: how many Palestinians must die before balance is achieved?

All casualties are a tragedy, but this one deserves a particular mention if only to illustrate how Israel tackles “terrorists.” Yesterday, a 13-year old Palestinian girl was shot 20 times (of which 5 bullets in the head) from the safety of an Israeli army observation tower. She had wandered from her normal path to school; the trigger-happy soldiers, apparently, thought she was about to “attack” them.

In addition to children, international civil servants in Palestine are also guilty until proven innocent. The Israeli army today arrested 13 UN employees for suspected links to terrorism! Israel first claimed they were carrying a rocket on their stretcher; they are now “reviewing” the case.

[ add comment ]
“Eye for eye” according to Likudnik algebra
Tuesday, October 5, 2004, 02:29
You do the math, if that’s what we have come to. After all, Israeli officials simply love to project their own casualties in terms of other nations’ larger populations.

4 Israelis killed last week (including 2 soldiers). Over 70 Palestinians killed and 648 wounded in the last five days (mostly unarmed civilians), as of this writing. But the month is still young; with 112 Palestinians killed in September, the potential is sadly huge for October.

Israel’s typically violent attack has been given an unbelievably arrogant code name: “Operation Days of Penitence.” In the Jewish faith, the ten days which fall between Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur (which ended recently) are days of penitence, during which people should be seeking God’s forgiveness for sins committed in the past year, searching their souls and apologizing to those they have hurt. Could Sharon be referring to next year’s days of penitence, when he might be repenting for his sins? Perish the thought.

Together, Sharon and his soul mate Bush, just like the Islamic extremists they abhor, have broken more divine commandments than they will ever have time to repent for, assigning godly attributes to their nasty actions. (Remember the original "Operation Infinite Justice" in Afghanistan?)

If Sharon’s attack on Gaza is called “Operation Days of Penitence,” then Bush’s onslaught in Iraq might as well be called “Operation Love Thy Neighbor.” Naturally, they both expect their victims to respond with “Operation Turn the Other Cheek.”

While Israel roams free in Gaza, the US has turned a blind eye, as usual. Western media has relagated the story to “other items in the news,” as usual. And the ever useful Arab League is trying to push for yet another resolution condeming Israel, yet another resolution which, in the unlikely event that an American administration doesn’t veto it, daring to displease an important constituency so close to the elections, will be openly flouted by Israel. As usual.

[ add comment ]
Some dead bodies are more newsworthy than others
Tuesday, October 5, 2004, 01:00
Guess which ones make the news.

On Sunday, one of the international news networks which regularly interviews me left a message which I could only return hours later. The producer explained that news had broken earlier in the day that two bodies had been discovered in Iraq, one of a beheaded man, the other of a woman who had been shot dead. They would have wanted my comments and analysis.

But by the time I had called back, the producer informed me that they turned out to be Iraqis.

“So you’re simply not going to cover the story then, obviously, since they're not foreigners,” I said.

“Point well taken,” he replied.

[ add comment ]
Look who's talking
Wednesday, September 29, 2004, 01:40
If it weren’t so irritating, it might have been amusing to hear one Arab ruler after another opine on the elections, or lack thereof, in Iraq. Notice how they rarely stop to ponder on the readiness of their own people for democracy, but I digress.

The latest authority on democracy to speak his mind was King Abdullah of Jordan, who told Le Figaro during his visit to France this week that elections could not (and should not) be held in Iraq under such circumstances. Really? What a bombshell. And how convenient for the US when its allies in the region now begin explaining how and when things should develop.

Abdullah didn’t miss the opportunity to blame Ahmad Chalabi (who’s been sentenced for embezzlement in Jordan) for dismantling the Iraqi army, an exploit for which Paul Bremer is really to be “credited.” The only way to fix this was to bring back not the generals, said Abdullah, but the middle ranking officers who could reconstruct the army and help bring stability back to Iraq.

He also (naturally) gave his support to an international conference on Iraq, as "requested" by the Iraqi government - no interim for him. (“Nous soutiendrons donc tout ce que voudra le gouvernement de Bagdad.”)

His comments on the Palestinians’ situation were most noteworthy, as he explained that they had succumbed to internal struggles and that the onus for building a state fell on them. (“A cause de leur combat fratricide, les Palestiniens sont tombés dans le piège que leur ont tendu les Israéliens.”)

An interesting sample of Jordan’s positions on a wide array of issues, for all French speakers who are interested in how the US recycles its demands for the region before they are passed on further down the line. Or you can read a brief account of the interview on the BBC's website.

[ add comment ]
Four more years? Hopefully not for the Palestinians
Tuesday, September 28, 2004, 23:42
It’s been four years, but few today found this sad anniversary worthy of mention. Since September 28, 2000, the day Ariel Sharon barged into the most sacred Muslim site of Palestine accompanied by 1,000 Israeli soldiers, Palestinians have been regularly and systematically killed (3,227 in four years, 64 this month alone) and injured (27,624). Even today, Israel killed a mentally-ill Palestinian man in Jenin.

The immediate, enraged reaction to Sharon’s provocation was dubbed the Al Aqsa intifada, an uprising by desperate Palestinians who had seen the years pass and Israel’s oppression increase, in spite of the “peace process” and agreements like Oslo which were supposed to bring them a fraction of their human and national rights but which were continuously flouted by Israel. During the years of “negotiation,” there were hardly any manifestations of Palestinian violence, a fact that Israel conveniently forgets to mention.

The Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs claims that “1,008 people died” in that same period because of Palestinian violence; reading the site in detail, however, reveals that this figure includes not only Israeli soldiers inside the Occupied Territories, who are legally distinguishable from unarmed civilians (as Israel likes to point out when it targets Palestinian “militants” and “terrorists”), but also includes Israelis killed outside Israel (not by Palestinians), and includes – surprise surprise –the three Americans killed in Gaza.

Still, Israeli civilians have paid a heavy price for the brutalities committed by their government, which has pushed its persecution of Palestinians to new levels. The latter are increasingly dispossessed and repressed, unable to see any hope when their society is falling apart, politically, economically and socially.

While most Anglo-Saxon media completely ignored this day and the tragic events of the last four years, Israeli media today spoke of those Israelis who have again dared to speak the truth and defy their superiors. Four Israeli military officers in an elite commando have condemned military tactics in the Palestinian territories, denouncing the “systematic harassment of the Palestinian population” which includes the widespread demolitions.

These officers knew what they risked professionally by condemning the Israeli government for its actions, but their integrity was more potent than their fear. When will the media, which technically faces no such constraints, follow suit?

[ add comment ]
Spot the difference
Sunday, September 26, 2004, 03:07
The casualties:
A woman is rushed to hospital after American jets made a “precision air strike” to kill “terrorists” in Fallujah on Saturday. A man is rushed to hospital (dying shortly afterwards) after an Israeli helicopter fired a missile into a refugee camp in Gaza on Saturday.

The rubble:
A child attempts to gather some belongings in a blanket after Israeli bulldozers razed her family’s house in Gaza on Saturday. Two men attempt to gather some belongings in a blanket after American jets flattened their house in Fallujah on Saturday.

[ add comment ]
And Bush campaigns for Al Qaeda
Sunday, September 26, 2004, 02:45
The British ambassador to Italy, Ivor Roberts, caused a fury when something he had said under the Chatham House rule (in a closed meeting) was leaked to the Corriere della Serra, which couldn’t wait to print it. “George W. Bush is the best recruiting sergeant for Al Qaeda. If there is anyone ready to celebrate his eventual reelection, it is Al Qaeda,” he said.

So what else is new? Many had already said more or less the same thing before, with few people protesting or finding it hard to believe. In fact, it was Gary Trudeau – as usual – who said it first and best in his Doonesbury strip of July 11, 2004.

[ add comment ]
6 million unregistered Americans abroad prevented from voting?
Friday, September 24, 2004, 16:12
So you thought it was mostly in Florida that you had to worry about your ability to vote? Wrong! As already announced in the International Herald Tribune on Monday, the Pentagon has begun to restrict international access to the official Web site intended to help overseas absentee voters cast ballots.

The Pentagon claims it is trying to protect the site from hackers. Nonsense, said an official who obviously chose to remain anonymous, to Salon. “The official -- a self-described Democrat who adheres to requirements of non-partisanship as a voting officer -- could see no explanation other than pure political trickery in the Pentagon's decision to block the FVAP Web site. ‘There is no way in hell that this is not a deliberate partisan attempt to systematically disenfranchise a large Democratic voting bloc,’ the official said.

The Salon article elaborates: “It's easy to see why the Bush administration might be worried about the prospect of huge numbers of American civilians living abroad exercising their right to vote. In efforts to register Americans living overseas, the official has come across a host of people who say they're signing up specifically to hasten Bush's defeat.”

I imagine everyone should be up in arms about this. Such a blatant contravention of the sanctity of the democratic electoral process should worry every American, in the US and abroad, every democrat, republican and independent. And why exactly is the Pentagon dealing with this issue in the first place? Americans, please beware!

[ add comment ]
Allawi campaigns for Bush in Congress
Friday, September 24, 2004, 15:14
Only 40 days before the American presidential elections, Iyad Allawi has officially signed up to the Bush-Cheney campaign, as expected, giving a speech in Congress that was just as worthy of a fiction prize as every other speech the Bush administration gurus have written before. The only thing missing was a statement from Dubya saying: I am George Bush, and I approve this message.

Allawi tried his best to adapt his rather unrefined mannerism to the picture of Iraqi utopia he was conveying, striving to make the words of Karl Rove’s team seem natural, but it’s clear there were many terms slipped in by the Bush campaign manager that he had never heard before. Naturally, this is also a problem with Bush.

It’s a pity that most Iraqis couldn’t watch the address live, being without electricity for long stretches of time, and thus couldn’t hear him as he thanked America for the amazing feat of invading and occupying Iraq, and as he described the imaginary progress and reconstruction now taking place there.

In fact, Iraqis might well have wondered what Allawi meant by “we’re succeeding.” If “they” are succeeding, what exactly was the plan? If it included turning Iraq into a bastion of violence, fear and despair, then Allawi is justified in boasting about it.

As always, it was Donald Rumsfeld who, somewhat like Ariel Sharon, was refreshingly candid when he explained the prospective Iraqi elections to a Senate committee hearing. "Let’s say you tried to have an election and you could have it in three-quarters or four-fifths of the country. But in some places you couldn’t because the violence was too great. Well, so be it. Nothing’s perfect in life, so you have an election that’s not quite perfect. Is it better than not having an election? You bet."

That, of course, is not a surprising attitude, given the Bush administration’s position on Florida’s election fiasco in 2000. Or on American voters' rights outside the US (more on that later). So be it.

[ add comment ]
Terrorists' new tactics
Thursday, September 23, 2004, 00:55
The debate on the tragic hostage situation in Iraq has been raging in Britain over the past couple of days. Should the government negotiate with the terrorists? Should it simply give in (leaving the interim Iraqi government to comply with the demands) while still pretending to be tough? Or should it abandon the hostages to their fate?

Two Americans hostages have already been murdered, and the Bush administration is in no mood to negotiate (not that it ever was), that much is clear. The British are living their first real emergency situation and seem uncertain about how to proceed. True, a British journalist was held recently, but he was released promptly after the intervention of Moqtada Sadr. Could this not indicate that having good relations with people of influence in Iraq can only help everyone involved? The Americans (and the British) do not think so: in the midst of this new crisis, they have launched a new attack on Sadr City in Baghdad.

The kidnappers, members of the group Tawhid wa Jihad, have demanded the release of all women prisoners from Iraqi jails. Lo and behold, the Americans and the British retorted that firstly, the issue of prisoners was under the Iraqi government’s control, and secondly, there were only two women remaining in Iraqi jails – two who happen to be Saddam’s top scientists, labelled by the media as Dr. Germ and Mrs. Anthrax. No independent organization can confirm this fact. Nor is these scientists’ potential danger really plausible.

(In the meantime, to remind ourselves of the brutality of Abu Ghraib, and the effect abuses there had on Iraqis – a story that has conveniently slipped off even the middle pages in the media - read this account of Huda Alazawi’s solitary confinement there, in Monday’s Guardian. This might help explain why imaginations in Iraq run wild at the thought of women’s emprisonment.)

Today, the interim Iraqi Justice Minister, apparently having interpreted the Anglo-British buck passing as a go-ahead for him and his colleagues to act, and as a reiteration of their “sovereignty,” declared that Dr. Germ was going to be released anyway – a decision supposedly taken on Sunday. If that were true, why wasn’t this announced earlier to try save the American hostages?

But the two American hostages had already been savagely murdered, and the Americans felt it was safe to show who was really the boss again. Furiously, they declared that the two scientists were under American custody, and that they would not be released. So we’re back to square one, and so much for Iraqi sovereignty. In the meantime, the British hostage’s direct appeal to Tony Blair is likely to remain unheard, as Blair will want to prove his determination not to negotiate. No matter the outcome, this will greatly affect his stature.

Very importantly, the terrorists seem to be following a new strategy. They are clearly already well acquainted with new media’s potential, using the Internet to communicate their demands and to display their gruesome actions, dressing their helpless captives in Guantanamo Bay style orange bodysuits.

Even more importantly, they have now begun to demand concessions that are technically feasible; rather than demanding an immediate end to the occupation, they now demand less major but more easily delivered results, such as the freeing of prisoners. While the overwhelming majority of Iraqis, like the overwhelming majority of people around the world, is outraged and sickened by the barbarity of their actions, the terrorists are managing to bring old issues (like Abu Ghraib or Um Kassar’s prisoners) back to the front pages.

So the questions go beyond whether or not to negotiate. Most governments do negotiate, usually through interlocutors, while pretending not to. But should governments publicize the extent of the efforts they are extending for the safety of their citizens? The French government did not hesitate to go to extreme lengths to try to secure the release of two French journalists, to no avail for the time being. The Philippino government did not hesitate to pull its troops out to save the life of one of its citizens. Are these governments, ultimately, not really the ones doing the job they were elected to do?

The argument that giving in to the terrorists will only encourage them to commit further atrocities holds little water; they have been doing their dirty work anyway.

What does hold water is the argument that terrorists are now using their despicable methods to confront issues that most Iraqis hold dear; the matter of prisoners is only the beginning, and there will likely be more demands that many Iraqis will find “reasonable” while objecting to the means This is true shock and awe. And it’s working.

[ add comment ]
Gaza's homeless and hopeless
Tuesday, September 21, 2004, 02:21
While the world continues to ignore the plight of Palestinians, Israel continues to raze their homes to the ground. This Palestinian family stands in the rubble of their destroyed house under the watch of an Israeli tank in the village of Al Mugrakha, south of the Jewish settlement of Netzarim, in the central Gaza Strip. (Photo from Associated Press)

[ add comment ]
A hierarchy of suffering
Monday, September 20, 2004, 23:46
Israel did it first of course, reserving for itself alone the position of Victim Number One and launching systematic propaganda campaigns against anyone daring to point out to its more obvious position as a top aggressor. Still, many (myself included, for example in this article) have dared to point out that Israelis do not hold the monopoly on suffering, in spite of all their efforts to portray themselves as victims of mythical proportions.

Now, as Gary Younge argues powerfully in The Guardian today, America is demanding that same right since 9/11, using victimhood as “the moral basis for redress, retaliation and even revenge in order to right any given wrong - real or imagined.”

It is time to re-examine the systematic abuses that the Bush administration, successive Israeli governments and other bullies have been allowed to get away with for so long. In the meantime, most of the world’s real victims remain nameless, and voiceless.

[ add comment ]
Roadmap to hell
Friday, September 17, 2004, 18:10
Ariel Sharon’s declaration on Wednesday that Israel will not follow the roadmap and continue to occupy the West Bank cannot be news for any serious observer of the region. Nor can, for that matter, Kofi Annan’s desperately futile (and late) statement on the illegality of the invasion of Iraq. But whereas the UN Secretary General has long been apprehensive about making his public verdicts unambiguous, fearing America’s wrath despite having being elected and paid precisely to preserve international law, the Israeli Prime Minister has never shied from shouting his foul plans over the rooftops.

You would not know this reading most Anglo-Saxon media, of course, but Israeli media has, as always, been much more forward in covering and analyzing its own government’s schemes.

Sharon, like his predecessors, never intended to abide by any international legislation and rulings on Palestine. UNSC resolutions 242 and 338, to mention only two amongst dozens of binding laws decreed by the international community, have been blatantly flouted by every successive Israeli government since their passage (1967 and 1973 respectively).

The most recent ruling by the International Court of Justice, regarding the construction of the despicable separation wall – a creeping, steady and illegal annexation of Palestinian land – has been openly defied as Israel as continues to expand its territory unlawfully, sending thousands more Palestinians into the hell of occupation and dispossession.

So where exactly are the breaking news? Spare us the surprised reactions to the latest admissions of Bush’s “man of peace.”

[ add comment ]
Picture of an illegal land appropriation in Palestine
Tuesday, September 14, 2004, 22:34
Would you allow your family’s olive groves to be uprooted by Israeli bulldozers, your land to be annexed so that a huge Israeli wall can rise on your fertile soil, and your people to be attacked with tear gas and sound bombs as they tried to protect it?

This old man from Deir Samit (West Bank) is being forcibly robbed of his land, his livelihood and his dignity by Israeli soldiers, but nobody will come to his aid. Would you have remained silent if it had been your grandfather?

(Photo from Associated Press.)

[ 1 comment ]
Israel to begin Gaza compensation payments
Tuesday, September 14, 2004, 18:16
Don’t be fooled by the title: the compensation payments are for the settlers, not the wretched Palestinians.

11 years after Oslo, which provided for Palestinian autonomy in “Gaza and Jericho first,” and for which three very undeserving figures received the Nobel Peace Prize, the Israeli government has just approved a settlement package to coax (or bribe) Israelis living in Gaza into leaving their illegal settlements – which had been championed by Ariel Sharon in the first place.

8,000 armed Israelis have lived in lavish settlements while Palestinians watched from afar, behind the barbed wires protecting settler-only roads – the Israeli equivalent of Apartheid’s “whites only.” 8,000 armed Israelis have defied international law for 37 years, openly flouting resolutions and conventions and building suburban-style homes with lush gardens, while Palestinians are mostly reduced to drinking dirty water from burst pipes on the ground. 8,000 armed Israelis have been sheltered by over 20,000 Israeli soldiers who stopped all other traffic when the settlers felt like going for a drive.

The families of these 8,000 armed Israelis will each get between $200,000 and $500,000 just for moving out of a place they should have never occupied … and possibly for moving into other lands (the West Bank, East Jerusalem or even the Golan Heights) they should never occupy.

The comfortable settlements, too good for mere Palestinians, will be razed to the ground by Israeli bulldozers.

The Palestinians, dispossessed and homeless for decades, will get nothing. Except for a small part of the land that was theirs to begin with.

[ add comment ]
Let freedom reign!
Tuesday, September 14, 2004, 16:06
This was possibly the most pathetic, corny and phony statement ever made by George W. Bush (even more than the idiotically provocative “bring’em on”), at least with reference to Iraq. On June 28, the US “handed over” (as if) “sovereignty” to an “interim government” appointed entirely by the CPA, triggering this far from impulsive note from Dubya: let freedom reign. Indeed. Paul Bremer had already hastily fled Baghdad, much like a thief afraid to be caught before the news spread beyond the Green Zone – the only part of Iraq really controlled by the present quasi-rulers, who are only able to witness the chaos in Iraq via their television screens.

This American-Iraqi partnership made of very strange bedfellows (including neocons, ex-Baathists and clergy sympathizers) has certainly allowed some sort of freedom to reign, to be fair: the freedom to bomb civilian centers indiscriminately, borrowing Israeli tactics and effecting "surgical strikes" on homes, crowds, ambulances and reporters; the freedom to lay siege on entire cities (like Fallujah and Najaf) while shelling them from the safety of helicopters, thus ensuring that helpless civilians are at the mercy of not only their missiles but also of a variety of common thugs, hardened religious extremists or terrorists roaming the streets and imposing their own laws within makeshift city-states spreading around Iraq like wildfire; the freedom to spread “democracy” in a rather selective manner, deciding who gets to remain armed (e.g. the Peshmerga and the Badr Army), and who doesn’t (e.g. the Mahdi Army), who gets to vote (the Green Zone?) and who doesn’t (“anti-Iraq areas”), and who gets to broadcast (Al Hurra) and who doesn’t (Al Jazeera … from which the government gets most of its news from the comfort of the Green Zone).

It is getting impossible to understand what exactly the Americans are thinking. Explaining why a helicopter fired on a burning Bradley on Sunday, killing scores of people, Major Phil Smith of the 1st Cavalry Division explained that “it was for the safety of the people around it.” They are certainly safe from further danger now.

This heart-wrenching account of Sunday’s events by Ghaith Abdul-Ahad in The Guardian today shoud be read, simply to begin imagining the magnitude of the situation. Then imagine similar scenes in other cities in Iraq, Afghanistan, Gaza and the West Bank. Then imagine the despair.

[ add comment ]
Hurricane Ariel, man-made disaster, forecasts civil war
Monday, September 13, 2004, 00:56
The kettle is calling the pot black, and vice versa. Ariel Sharon, commonly known as The Bulldozer (although Hurricane seems a more comprehensive nickname, given his wide-ranging capacity to obliterate anything or anyone he chooses) is now warning the “hard-liners” that their rhetoric could lead to civil war in Israel.

One would normally deduce from such an admonition that a lenient, law-abiding and peaceful Sharon was struggling with radicals in order to do the right thing and withdraw all Israeli troops and settlements from Gaza. How inspirational!

Of course, this whole supposed debate about an Israeli withdrawal from Gaza is far from being one. The majority of Israeli citizens are only too willing to leave Gaza. Some want to leave because they recognize that it was occupied illegally and that settlers have no right to live in luxurious, lush conditions in the midst of the world’s biggest ghetto. Others have far less altruistic reasons, believing that Israel cannot sustain this occupation on both “territories” and that it should therefore concentrate on the West Bank. The only people who disagree are the hard-liners who outrageously claim Gaza – and the West Bank, and a lot more land they call Eretz Israel - as their birthright.

Sharon has not asked all Israeli citizens about his Gaza plans, and the uproar from Likudniks (and other extremists) plays perfectly to the international media, showing Sharon struggling to make the “painful concessions” which are demanded by international law. How he must be enjoying this farce.

If a national referendum were to be held in Israel, Sharon and his groupies would have little else to say about the matter, and the withdrawal from Gaza would finally happen 37 years after the world demanded it. As for any unrest, the civil war Sharon really wants to see is in Palestine - a gift he will hopefully never receive.

[ add comment ]
The father, the son, and the poster
Saturday, September 11, 2004, 00:40
Propaganda by poster, and reform by succession. Sounds familiar? It should, if you are familiar with the Arab world. Not to be outdone by other countries, Egypt is increasingly abuzz with rumors that the Egyptian president’s 41-year old investment banker son, Gamal Mubarak, is poised to take the relay from his father. As can be expected, this is strenuously denied by all sides, but some people seem to be getting used to the idea, according to the BBC.

[ add comment ]
Likud’s war doctrine travels to Russia, after settling in the US
Friday, September 10, 2004, 18:30
In today's Guardian, Naomi Klein eloquently explains the Likudization of the world after September 11, and tears apart Israeli and American (and now Russian) claims that they are fighting the global Islamic terror threat – rather than Palestinians seeking to retrieve their homeland, or Chechens demanding independence.

Bush had turned to Sharon’s doctrine right after 9/11, adapting Likudnik political philosophy to an American situation. Now, Putin is seeking to jump on the bandwagon as well. This extract does not do justice to the whole piece, well worth reading, but poses an essential argument:

“There has indeed been a dramatic rise in religious fundamentalism in the Muslim world. The problem is that under the Likud doctrine there is no space to ask why this is happening. We are not allowed to point out that fundamentalism breeds in failed states, where warfare has systematically targeted civilian infrastructure, allowing the mosques to start taking responsibility for everything from education to garbage collection. It has happened in Gaza, Grozny and Sadr City.”

[ add comment ]
Disobedient Israeli soldiers: from traitors to saviors
Friday, September 10, 2004, 02:38
When a number of brave Israeli soldiers and pilots refused to serve in the Palestinian territories occupied by Israel since 1967, objecting to the brutality demanded of them and considering incursions outside Israel to be immoral and illegal (which they are according to international law), some Israelis – in particular Likudniks and right-wingers - went ballistic, calling them traitors and reminding them that carrying out orders was not an option for them. These courageous refuseniks were trashed and prosecuted, but more joined them; to date, 626 Israeli soldiers of conscience have joined the Courage to Refuse campaign.

When Sharon started hinting that he might eventually withdraw from Gaza, making it sound as if it were a generous concession when it is only a small part of what international law has been demanding of Israel for 37 years, the same people who maligned disobedient soldiers now beg them to do exactly that: disobey orders and refuse to dismantle Jewish settlements.

Calling the pullout a “crime against humanity,” the protesters (including Netanyahu’s father and his bureau chief) described it as the “ethnic cleansing of Jews from their homeland.”

One would snicker if the situation weren’t so tragic. In the last five weeks, 69 Palestinians have been killed by Israel, figures you would never know from watching ordinary news. Today, an Israeli army jeep ran over a 17-year old Palestinian – killing him for having thrown stones at that very jeep. Are such murders not eligible for the charge of crimes against humanity? The refuseniks would probably agree.

[ add comment ]
Iraqi people are being iradicated, says government official
Thursday, September 9, 2004, 11:05
It’s hard to believe it, but a member of the interim Iraqi government has finally deigned to mention the staggering number of Iraqi victims since the American-led invasion last March. Dr Amer al-Khuzaie, an Iraqi deputy health minister, despairs that many are buried without notification and deaths never registered, which makes it impossible to know the true figure of forgotten Iraqi casualties. (Most estimates are between 10,000 and 30,000 Iraqis killed, according to AP.)

"The Iraqi people are being eradicated. We must stop this haemorrhage, this bleeding," he told The Independent, reacting to news that 1,000 American soldiers had now died.

[ 1 comment ]
Poisoned by Putin for telling the truth on Chechnya
Thursday, September 9, 2004, 10:45
Thankfully, Anna Politkovskaya has recovered after being poisoned by the Russian secret service (a story I mention in my blog on Tuesday). She has not lost her resolve to report the truth, nor could her ordeal weaken her integrity and make her cower in submission. As usual, her article is a must-read if one wants to understand more about the mess resulting from the Russian government’s criminal involvement in Chechnya.

[ add comment ]
Botched Zawahiri jihad, and botched Kepel analysis
Thursday, September 9, 2004, 03:29
In his op-ed “Jihadists Failing to Win Muslim Minds,” an initially reassuring title, Gilles Kepel argues that Ayman Zawahiri, Al Qaeda’s top ideologue, “came up with the idea of using spectacular terrorism to shock the enemy and make the Muslim masses see the jihadists as knights.” He has failed miserably, says Kepel, stating the obvious, and explaining that this was a catastrophe for Islamic scholars (apparently without exception) as the jihad “backfired” and led to a “fitna.”

This is a gross simplification of Al Qaeda’s aims, which clearly go far beyond impressing the Muslim masses; their conversion is not a Qaeda priority, and Islamic movements have always known their appeal was limited. As for the implication that all Islamic scholars supported Zawahiri’s global jihad, it is baseless.

Kepel’s claim that the “U.S.-led coalition troops have pursued the war on terror to Iraq” greatly weakens his arguments (as does his absurd insinuation that the Palestinian issue is only one of jihad). America’s validations for invading Iraq have changed repeatedly, and Kepel seems to accept the least plausible (fighting terror) at face value.

Striving to categorize the latest terrorist atrocity, Kepel goes on to say that the jihadists “are looking desperately for new slogans and modes of action to trigger mass mobilization. This is the context for the North Ossetia massacre and the abduction of the French journalists in Iraq.”

Portraying the Beslan slaughter as a public relations exercise to win over Muslims is one of the most discreditable analyses to have emerged over the last few days. It shows a very limited understanding of the issues these terrorists have taken to extremes, and reduces their elaborate criminal planning to a gullible reading of Muslims’ propensity to toe the line.

Over the years, Kepel has made many insightful comments about Islamic groups; this was certainly not one of them. However, his account of the very great gap separating jihadists and the overwhelming majority of Muslims is spot on.

[ add comment ]
Bush and war psychology
Thursday, September 9, 2004, 00:54
“When war psychology takes hold, the public believes, temporarily, in a ‘mythic reality’ in which our nation is purely good, our enemies are purely evil, and anyone who isn't our ally is our enemy”. That’s how an essay by Chris Hedges explains the psychology of war, as brought to us by Paul Krugman. If it makes sense in America’s case, is it so difficult to understand that other nations might relate equally strongly to such notions?

[ add comment ]
Chechnya's tragic situation ... and the neocons' interest
Wednesday, September 8, 2004, 12:42
The Guardian has an interesting op-ed today on the neocons who are The Chechens' American friends, which may be news to many, and a piece by Ahmed Zakaev yesterday reminds us of the issues at stake in this ravaged country.

[ add comment ]
Comical Allawi’s ban on Al Jazeera is déjà vu
Tuesday, September 7, 2004, 12:58
The interim Iraqi government (the one installed by the CPA to establish democracy, including freedom of speech, in Iraq) had initially banned Al Jazeera for one month, claiming it incited violence and instigated attacks against authorities. Lo and behold, one month later, the violence had not ceased, even though Al Jazeera’s office was still closed.

Therefore, Prime Minister Allawi (not as funny as Saddam’s Information Minister Sahaf, but just as ridiculous) has now extended the ban "indefinitely," complaining that Al Jazeera had not responded to his charges One has to wonder how long it will take the terrorists, insurgents, dissidents and simple opponents of the government to completely stop whatever it is Al Jazeera was motivating them to do. In the meantime, no news is still not good news in Iraq.

[ add comment ]
Are Democrats getting back on track?
Tuesday, September 7, 2004, 12:41
John Kerry finally seems to be listening to a message that Clinton repeated until he was hoarse over a decade ago: it's the economy, stupid. Famed Clinton advisers (including the inimitable James Carville) have been brought in to rescue the Democrats’ disastrous campaign, steering it away from a self-destructive focus on Kerry’s Vietnam record, and ridiculous wavering on Iraq. Faced with two highly inapt candidates, Americans might only be choosing between bad and worse, but at least they can start having an option.

[ add comment ]
Russia’s brave journalists silenced – and poisoned
Tuesday, September 7, 2004, 02:22
The great Russian journalist Anna Politkovskaya was poisoned on her way to Beslan from Moscow, after two unsuccessful attempts to board previous flights. Her courageous and honest reporting from Chechnya has for years rubbed the Russian government the wrong way. While she recovers in hospital, many believe that she (and several of her colleagues) have been deliberately “prevented” from reaching Beslan and from reporting what they saw.

In October 2002, the Chechen rebels who had stormed a Moscow theater (an event which also ended tragically after the Russian forces launched an assault) requested her presence during negotiations with the government. She immediately left Los Angeles, where she was about to receive a Courage in Journalism Award from the International Women’s Media Foundation. She later wrote this very poignant article about her experience in the theater. Her reporting on Russia’s involvement in Chechnya is incomparable; may she still tell the world much more.

[ add comment ]
After the massacre in Beslan
Tuesday, September 7, 2004, 01:16
In the past few days, several news organizations asked me to comment on the awful hostage situation in Beslan, even before reports surfaced that some of the terrorists were Arab. The calls came from people knowing my area of expertise full well, who yet instinctively turned to people like me to analyze an area that is - geographically - far from the Middle East.

No matter where it happens, terrorism automatically conjures the Middle East and Islam, a notion that gets all too often substantiated by the revelation of the perpetrators’ origins, or the causes they claim to defend. I have found myself countless times in the seemingly impossible position of explaining my aversion to such acts of violence (especially suicide bombings) against unarmed Israeli civilians, while supporting the Palestinian cause full-heartedly. At the other end of the spectrum, it is frustrating to attempt explaining the context in which such attacks happen without being accused, ludicrously, of justifying terrorism.

This evening, a television report from Grozny, Chechnya’s demolished capital, showed gloomy residents who were simply at a loss for words, horrified by what happened in Beslan, and apprehensive about the consequences they might face from a Russian government and army whose brutality they have been enduring for over a decade. In front of a Moscow mosque, a few Muslim men hovered quietly, equally afraid; one of them angrily faced the camera and damned the terrorists, unable to comprehend how they could have attacked women and children.

The outrage in the Muslim world has been immense, but it is not the first time Muslims have reacted like this to terrorism. This time, however, Muslim condemnations were heard in the West.

In spite of the horror which fills us at the thought and sight of such actions, and leaving aside media and government propaganda of all sorts, we still must face the facts: terrorist acts are all despicable, and the fanatics who commit many of them are lost cases which can only be fought with every means available. But – and it is an important but – there are also those terrorists who consider themselves to be retaliating for similar acts of violence committed against their people, or who believe that this is the only option they have to coerce foreign governments into leaving them alone and taking them out of their misery. In such a state of affairs, something can still be done to stop the horror. Many governments (including the Russian and the Israeli) must be held accountable for the suffering they have inflicted on two sets of people: those who they govern lawfully, and those who they rule illegally and whose lives they have violated.

[ add comment ]
Chalabi's back
Monday, September 6, 2004, 00:07
Ahmad Chalabi gave an interview on Al Arabiya on Thursday, managing to sound like every Arab regime - and even the Bush administration - by blaming everyone for whatever has gone wrong – in this particular case, the attempt on his life which killed two of his bodyguards. It could be terrorists, Saddam loyalists, other parties, and foreign forces, he said. (Who else is left, especially when considering that members of the government could fall under any of these categories, depending on the source you ask?)

More importantly, the once very secular Chalabi gave another sign of his increasing proximity to Shi'a circles, by lamenting in detail the despicable living conditions in Sadr City, the slum of Baghdad formerly known as Saddam City inhabited mostly by poor Shi'a Iraqis.

In October 2003, Chalabi showed his sudden religiosity by siding with Sistani over the inclusion of Shari’a law in TAL (the Transitional Administrative Law). Now, he is championing the cause of Muqtada Sadr’s followers, having realized the considerable potential of their support.

Somehow, he seems to be getting stronger and has thwarted every American and Iraqi government attempt to sideline him. Watch out for more prophetic statements from Chalabi; remember, after the raid on his house, he asked the US to “let my people go.”

[ add comment ]

Back Next


Copyright © 2000- Rime Allaf. All rights reserved. | Legal | Privacy | Webmaster