Join News Letter

Iraq War

Peak Oil

Climate Change

US Imperialism

Palestine

Communalism

Gender/Feminism

Dalit

Globalisation

Humanrights

Economy

India-pakistan

Kashmir

Environment

Gujarat Pogrom

WSF

Arts/Culture

India Elections

Archives

Links

Submission Policy

Contact Us

Fill out your
e-mail address
to receive our newsletter!
 

Subscribe

Unsubscribe

 

Israel's Superiority Isn't Moral

By Jeff Berg

29 July, 2006
Countercurrents.org

In comments to James Laxer blog posting of July 27, 2006, ‘The Globe & Mail is a Rag’ http://tinyurl.com/s47sa someone going by the unlikely pseudonym of 'Lord Kitchener' wrote that ..."given that one side is a democracy surrounded by enemies and the other is a terrorist organization, I'd say the media (the Globe and Mail included) have been REMARKABLY balanced." & “I'm becoming infuriated at people who think that it's passing strange that anyone would suggest that perhaps democratic Israel might be morally superior to the terrorist group on their border that is bent on destroying them utterly and completely, and feel that perhaps we're being too hard on Hezbollah."

The reason that I bring up this utterly obscure commentary is that both of these statements are very much in keeping with what the punditocracy in Canada tries very hard to pass off as received opinion and the majority view. The following analysis will attempt to show that the facts argue that these views are neither balanced nor the majority view. And why instead these statements and their like mark LK and the pundits who share his sensibility as clearly as Stephen Harper’s, Canada’s Prime Minister, "measured response" comment marked him.

The claim of Israel's moral superiority to her neighbours is as common as America’s claim to being freedom’s global champion and bears about as much relation to the "facts on the ground". (see Thomas Carothers on America’s ‘democracy enhancement projects’.) That LK views this superiority as incontestable fact goes a long way to explaining why he finds the Globe & Mail balanced. The irony for those of us who are actually interested in a non-partisan analysis of the Middle East that includes the historical context and Israel’s difficult position there is of course that it is the very reasons that damn Israel morally that are the principal reasons for so many conflicts in the region. today and why she feels herself perpetually embattled.

Simply put Israel is an occupying force and until it ceases to be an occupying force it has no superior moral standing no matter how superior to its neighbours she may be in certain social justice areas. It is also not immaterial to note that over the last three decades Israel has militarized its economy to such an extent that she now qualifies in a very real sense as a modern day Sparta. During that time she has made a litany of very profound right turns and pro-corporate militarism and business decisions that have seriously eroded social justice within the country. The Israel of today bares less than a passing resemblance to the nation state that she was in the first three decades of her existence.

And as to balance on this issue it surely cannot be immaterial to anyone with an understanding of the history of the region that it was Israel that invaded Lebanon in 1982 and occupied it for 18 years not vice versa. Imagine if you can that the Americans had invaded Ontario because, oh I don’t know there was an Al Qaeda cell here that was responsible for 9/11 and was planning other attacks, and the American response was to smash Toronto, Pearson airport, our major highways, bridges, power station, fuel depots, and then occupy Southern Ontario for 18 years in order to create a “buffer for the purpose of defense”. Add to this that this military smashing of precious infrastructure was difficult for us to replace because well with the war and all we just didn’t seem to get as much tourism as we used to for one thing. And for another a whole lot of international capital that we used to be able to access no longer seems to find us such a safe haven for investment anymore. And then of course we would have to cope with the fact that a whole lot of our best and brightest and richest would decide that discretion is in fact the better part of valour and that “Vancouver isn’t really as rainy as they say it is you know.” And finally to make the analogy complete add to this that the U.S. was occupying the land of our brother’s in Quebec. She had sent her tanks in with Trudeau’s during the FLQ crisis in order to help us “restore stability” and to guarantee U.S. security and they had not only never left but had instead installed hundred’s of thousands of settlers on much of the best land available.

How would our citizenry react? Would perhaps some of us become radicalized to the point of committing irrational and likely, given the balance of forces, counterproductive acts? Would the grinding poverty that resulted from the massive destabilization of our society and economy not create a substantial minority of young and radicalized martial men? And what if you add to this equation that the Americans had also decided to take control of the vast majority of our water resources because well they very much needed them and this did irreparable harm to our economic fortunes and our ecosphere.

“Prior to the Six Day War, Israeli land encompassed only three percent of the Jordan River Basin, though in 1964, the enterprising state had already constructed an elaborate conveyance network of canals, pumping stations, reservoirs and pipelines, integrating them into a national water system which diverted 75 percent of the Jordan's flow for Israel's use. After the 1967 War, Israel claimed full control of the Jordan's headwaters. While Israel shares some of the flow with Jordan and Syria, the Palestinians are forbidden any water from the river, forcing them to rely on groundwater pumped from aquifers and springs or delivered, often sporadically, by truck.”-Richard Harth ‘Squeezing the last drops from Palestine’

How do you think our young males would react to our much reduced circumstance? How would the thinking be changed within our military? How would it change our political culture and the kind of people that could get elected? How would it tilt the platforms of every party including the NDP? (the Green’s would disappear overnight. Long term rationalism being the very first casualty of every war even ahead of truth.)

Is this difficult to see? Is it unbalanced to bring up that Lebanon has absolutely no, that is right none, zero, nada, zilch, possibility of being an existential threat to Israel but that the reverse is very much not true. A fact that is very precisely being borne out by the difference in damage being sustained by the two countries in the current conflict, just as it was in the last. I must say that I am also very much less sanguine than Mr. Laxer about Israel’s incapacity for eradicating Palestine. From what I can tell, in terms of viability at least, this has already been accomplished and there is now a strong probability that Palestinian society will never recover from the devastation that has been wreaked upon them by Israel’s occupation. What this will ultimately mean politically speaking twenty years down the line much less a hundred is unknowable. What is knowable is that for the children of Palestine, and now quite likely the children born to southern Lebanon, like the children of Iraq and Nicaragua, irreparable neurological damage for a great many is guaranteed.

Israel has spent countless billions of dollars to create a military superpower so vastly superior to her neighbours that no politician of any stripe in the region has even the slightest glimmer of a hope of support by his ruling elites if he does not campaign on the basis of doing something about this tremendously destabilizing imbalance. Israel’s leaders and apologists constantly bray about the existential threats that surround her but it was Iran not Israel that had her burgeoning secular and economic nationalism movement ground into dust under the jackboot heel of a military kleptocracy. This brought to her and her people “thanks” to Kermit Roosevelt’s CIA/MI5 engineering of the installation of the military thug that was Mohammad Reza Pahlavi and his terror police the SAVAK.

The ensuing 26 years of relentless repression, cruelty and inequality leading directly, just as it would here, to a radicalization of the youth of the country who as a result of the being blocked from every other avenue towards social justice took to religious zealotry as a way to galvanize opposition to the vicious injustices being perpetrated daily.. (It’s much easier to get people to throw away their lives if you first convince them A) there is a next one and B) throwing this one which is pretty lousy anyway will lead the next one to being vastly superior.) It is hard to say what form our youth’s rebellion would take here. Sufficed to say it wouldn’t likely end at leafleting. It also not inconsequential when talking about Iran and her ‘paranoia’ that it was she and not Israel that saw herself under attack for eight years by one of her neighbours the result being the suffering of massive casualties: the Iraq-Iran war cost over 1 million lives. Would we as a people have forgotten that the rest of the world not only failed to end this war of aggression but condoned and was complicit in the murder and destruction of the things that make life worth living? (damage estimated at $1.19 trillion) Would we have forgotten that many of them supplied arms to both sides so as to augment both profit and mayhem? Would we have forgotten that this was a war encouraged by America’s leadership because we had finally overthrown the dictator that she had imposed on us? Are we to be so ahistorical that we discount “the longest conventional war of the 20th Century” from our understanding of this region and its people? This war after all ended less than twenty years ago. Few among those that are alive in Iran today would not have the memory or association of a lost a blood relation or friend.

Israel is the state that brought nuclear proliferation to the region and possesses somewhere on the order of 200 nuclear warheads mounted on missiles with a range sufficient to taking out any of the capitals of any of her neighbours. How can anyone, even those with only the tiniest tincture of balance on this issue, not see that this bit of martial planning on the part of the Israeli state guarantees that their will in perpetuity be at the very least cliques within the military of all of her neighbours who will do anything they possibly can to “balance” this equation. One second’s worth of thought about what Israel would do if the position was reversed is enough to confirm this obvious verity.

And again balance demands that one take note that there is one fact that has pierced straight to the heart of the region through the fog of this U.S. and now Israeli war. There is one thing and one thing only that can guarantee that the U.S. Marines or the IDF and the Coalition Provisional Whatever will not be setting up shop in your main palace: Nuclear Weaponry. If the invasion of Iraq was not enough to get this message across I am sure all concerned found it highly instructive how Pakistan has been treated even after it was found that the father of her nuclear arms industry has been spreading the technology for same into highly dubious hands. Not exactly the object lesson that Wolfowitz and Perle claimed would be raised along with a statue of GWB in the public square of Baghdad.(Perle said he “would not be surprised” if there a GWB statue raised within a year of ‘liberation’.)

Quite frankly there is very little high ground left morally speaking when it comes to the problems of the Middle East and the endless rounds of violence and repression that seem to be the tragic daily staple for its people. What is left if just barely is international law. And while America is able to shield Israel and herself from Security Council resolution after Security Council resolution, and both America and Israel routinely ignore both the Security Council and the International Court of Justice with seeming impunity, the facts and international judgement remain.

It is Israel and America that are the occupiers not Lebanon, not Syria, not Iran. It is Israel and America that are by far leading the arms race in the region and in the world and the only ones that present an existential threat to the countries of the region. It is Israel and America that are the ones that are using military might to gain access to extremely valuable resources and classifying the theft as “national interest”. It is Israel and America that are the rogue states in terms of international law and in terms of international opinion.

It is truly said that today there are only two superpowers in the world the U.S. and public opinion. And until Israel and America cease their occupations and rejoin the international community, until they decide to side with the angel’s wing instead of the Pentagon’s wings, both America and Israel no more have a right to claim moral superiority over Hamas or Hizbollah than the British had a right to consider themselves morally superior to Michael Collins and the Sinn Fein or George Washington and the Continentalist Army.



Google
WWW www.countercurrents.org

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Search Our Archive



Our Site

Web