Democratic Palestine : 23 (ص 28)
غرض
- عنوان
- Democratic Palestine : 23 (ص 28)
- المحتوى
-
blind condemnation only serves to ex-
acerbate the problem of «terrorism.»
The context that the American audience
had not the chance to take into con-
sideration was that the Ma’alot «ter-
rorist» attack was preceded by «weeks
of sustained Israeli napalm bombing of
Palestinian refugee camps in southern
Lebanon»2 killing over 200. This
crucial context is not justification, but
an explanation; an explanation that is
too often edited out for the purpose of
efficating public opinion.
Israel’s leading partner or, I’m more
inclined to say, conspirator is the
United States (the U.S. is the de-facto
representative for the Western world;
therefore, we may deduce, in a more
abstract sense, that the conspiracy
against the Arab people and more
specifically the Palestinians is
Western-Israeli). This «special» rela-
tionship is a dialectical process that
opts to keep the Palestinians under a
canopy of oppression.
Undoubtedly the most powerful
lobby in Washington is AIPAC
(American Israel Public Affairs
Committee). AIPAC is the principle
architect of the systematic «pro-Israel»
policy in the Congress, Executive
branch and the Pentagon (remember
that AIPAC is but one element in the
larger picture of Zionist influence in the
West). From 1948 to 1981, the U.S. has
poured $42 billion (this includes public
and private aid) into Israel. For fiscal
year 1978 to 1982, Israel received 48%
of all U.S. military aid and 35% of
U.S. economic aid, worldwide. In 1983,
the Reagan administration requested
almost $2.5 billion out of a total aid
budget of $8.1 billion (this included
$500 million in grants and $1.2 billion
in low-interest loans).3 There is strong
evidence that the 1982 invasion of
Lebanon («Operation Peace for
Galilee») was backed by the United
States, as Meir Pail writes: «All signs
indicate that the U.S. gave reasonable
political backing to the IDF [Israel
Defence Forces] invasion of Lebanon,
even when it became clear that it was
delivering a heavy blow both on land
and air to the Syrians in Lebanon.»4
Pentagon figures «reveal a massive
surge of military supplies from the U.S.
to Israel in the first three months of
[1982].»> Note that the invasion began
on June 6, 1982. In 1982, military aid
to Israel was almost 50% greater than
the preceding year. It is indeed an un-
fortunate tragedy that the U.S. pours
28
billions of dollars into Israel (an il-
legitimate entity that continues to
deprive another people of their fun-
damental right of self-determination on
their homeland-Palestine).
The United States supplies Israel with
state-of-the-art technology to be used
unconditionally for the destruction of a
whole people-the Palestinians.How do
millions of defenceless Palestinians de-
fend themselves against F14’s, F15’s,
smart bombs... etc? Would the label of
«barbarism» apply to Israel when they
advertize a bomb being drepped over
defenceless people with the caption
saying: «Bombs you can count on to d9
what they’re supposed to do. That’s the
only kind of bomb we make.»®
Hitherto, I used the term «terrorism»
in quotes for a good many reasons. The
term has no clear definition; there is no
absolute standard by which one can
juxtapose a particular act of violence to
determine if it is «terrorism» or not.
Each definition is a function of political
means or ideological ends. The U.S.
constructs a Manichean definition to
depict those who confront her foreign
policy as «terrorist.» According to
Washington, «Terrorism in any cause is
the enemy of freedom» and unless
punished by «democracies» who have a
«moral right» to do so, the foundations
of «civilized» society will be under-
mined.’ Such rhetoric, when analyzed
critically, is grossly naive and
ethnocentric. Moreover, the underlying
assumption behind the term «civilized
society» is that there are certain
societies who are «uncivilized,»who
harbor «uncivilized» individuals that
commit «terrorist» acts. Israel, on the
other hand, is an ally of the U.S. and,
therefore, enjoys linguistic immunity. I
have also used the term «terrorism» in
US demonstration against state terrorism
ee &
}S, WARS
OM Le 3ANON
i SA LADO
quotes, so that I may _ describe
American-Israeli-Palestinian violence
without using connotative terms.
When Palestinians employ violent
means in their struggle against Israel
and, granted, this violence is at times
directed towards civilian population
(the PLO, Palestine Liberation
Organization, has _ repeatedly con-
demned violence directed towards
civilians), we may condemn such acts
morally and politically, but condemna-
tion does not explain why such violence
occurs and how we can prevent them.
We need to analyze the causal forces
that underlie «terrorism.» The socio-
anthropological conditions in which the
Palestinians live is a variable usually
overlooked. The Palestinians have been
forced off their land; disenfranchized,
defamed and denied their fundamental
and human right of self-determination.
The Palestinians in Lebanon live under
constant Israeli raids that have become
banal «retaliation» for Western-Israeli
media. The Palestinians in the West
Bank and Gaza Strip cannot vote or
express themselves freely; they are
dehumanized in their own home-
Palestine. In short, life for the Palesti-
nians has become nihilistic. When a
Palestinian witnesses his whole family
massacred by Israeli bombs, supplied
by the United States, his rational mode
of reasoning ultimately loses out to ir-
rational behavior. Let us term this form
of violence oppressed-based-violence.
Oppressed-based-violence is a socio-
political disease created by the op-
pressor, maintained by the oppressor
and can be eliminated by the oppressor.
When the U.S. and Israel use ultra-
technology to destroy other people, that
is terrorism with all of its connotation.
Terrorism is those who are in power
(the U.S. and Israel) employing violent
means to keep those who oppose them
in a subaltern position, and posturing
to be «civilized.»
1. E.H. Hutchison, Violent Truce, Devin-Adair,
New York, 1956.
2. Edward Said, Question of Palestine, pp. 172,
149.
Noam Chomsky, The Fateful Triangle, p. 10.
. Meir Pale, A Military Analysis.
. Claudia Wright, New Statesman, Aug. 20, 1982.
. Aharon Abramovitz, Ma’ariv, Aug. 20, 1982.
. Address by George Shultz, Secretary of State,
«Terrorism and the Modern World.»
Washington: Bureau of Public Affairs,
Department of State, Current Policy No.629,
October, 1948.
INW PW
* Qibya is in the West Bank, Palestine. At that
time, it was under Jordanian jurisdiction. © - هو جزء من
- Democratic Palestine : 23
- تاريخ
- أبريل ١٩٨٧
- المنشئ
- الجبهة الشعبية لتحرير فلسطين
Contribute
Position: 73769 (1 views)