CNN Middle East News- Palestinian detainee in Israel now more than 50 days into hunger strikeIn December, Randa Adnan said, her husband weighed just over 200 pounds. Visiting him in an Israeli hospital this week, Randa said, she found her 33-year-old spouse, Khader Adnan, now weighs no more than 121 pounds. […]
- At least 137 reported killed as Syrian attacks escalateA Syrian opposition group reported at least 137 deaths at the hands of government forces Thursday as President Bashar al-Assad escalated a brutal assault against an opposition that wants an end to his regime. […]
- Human rights group calls for Iraq to end executionsA human rights group expressed alarm Thursday at the pace of executions in Iraq and called for Iraqi authorities to abolish the practice. […]
- Doctor in Homs: Everyone is waiting to dieThe bodies begin coming in before the sun rises to the sky. Some arrive with heads decapitated or their torsos split open like animals after slaughter. Or their limbs are mangled under the crush of rubble. […]
- Two killed amid gunfire at Yemen anti-election rallyTwo people were killed Thursday as hundreds of demonstrators marched in Yemen's southern province of Dhale protesting the upcoming presidential election, eyewitnesses told CNN. […]
- Palestinian detainee in Israel now more than 50 days into hunger strike
A Response on Questions about Gaza
This is a response I wrote for some questions about the situation in Gaza and I found that it is worthy to be posted:
First of all lets go back to the point in which Israel withdrew from Gaza two years ago. Israel withdrew from Gaza but put a complete siege on it and this siege became stricter since Hamas won the last Palestinian elections.
Now through all this time the Israeli attacks continued either by imprisoning more Palestinians (their number is more than 13 thousand men women and children) reoccupying parts of the west bank, political assassinations and other actions.
The dilemma is that inside the Palestinian authority we have two parts which are: The Palestinian parliament that includes a majority of Hamas and does not recognize Israel, and the other part is the Palestinian Presidential institution that tried to achieve something through negotiations but achieved nothing until today (Fatah movement)
Israel used its useless negotiations with President Mahmoud Abbas to justify the war on Hamas (that is resulting in a war on the whole Palestinian people). Now with regard to the Israeli duty to protect its citizens, I say that Israel should end the occupation, give back the Palestinians their demands that are the minimum that they ask for, and by doing this peace can be achieved and the security of the Israeli state can be obtained. In the nineties after the Oslo Peace agreement, the Palestinian authority prevented any attack on Israel in order to give a chance for the negotiations to take place.
These negotiations didn’t bring anything more than more checkpoints, more humiliation, more prisoners, and more assassinations. Some may say that in Camp David the Palestinians were given a good offer, and others may say that in White Plantation also Israel gave a good offer, but none of the offers did really bring a good solution for the Palestinian whole package.
The Palestinians say that the minimum that they can accept is the 1967 occupied lands, the refugees case, East Jerusalem a capital for Palestine, and an independent state. Neither Netanyahu, nor Olmert, nor Baraq, nor any other Israeli leader agreed on giving back all of these things.
Hama s launched simple missiles on the south while Israel used F16 fighting planes to strike refugee camps inside Gaza. There is no way to make a comparison between the two reactions. Killing 430 people that include a 40% population of women and children cannot be justified.
Now to answer your question: why the Palestinians elected Hamas with its program of using resistance to liberate occupied lands. Since 1992 the Palestinian former leadership failed to achieve the promises they gave to the people through negotiations and peace. No Palestinian State, no independence, No real sovereignty on the west bank and Gaza but instead a complete liberty for the Israeli forces to go in and out whenever they want, more humiliation, and more checkpoints, more settlements, more racism. This of course will oblige the people to go and vote for the devil in order to try to make a change.
The world must understand that the Palestinians are not like Ben Laden and the other terrorists. The Palestinians are under occupation and were never given their rights like any other human in the world. Our situation is similar to South Africa but the difference is that we want a state for us and the Israelis want a state for them alone while occupying the lands around this state to use is as a first line for defense (Like the soviets did in Eastern Europe in a way or another).
The last point I would like to discuss with you is about the solution that I also connect to President Obama.
The solution cannot be made without a foreign pressure on both sides. America is hegemony and the only power that can influence on the international community and countries’ policy. President Bush invested in the last attack on Gaza because he believed that the use of force will destroy Hamas. He did not think that these attacks will only push more people to believe in Hamas inside Gaza and the Arab world. President Obama should be committed to the Israeli Palestinian conflict and should do his best in order to create pressure to try to achieve something. However the political situation inside Israel and the Palestinian territories creates a challenge for President Obama. I see that Obama’s ideas may help in making an improvement in the area but this conflict will need a lot of time before it can be solved.
America has a duty to stop the violence and not encouraging it. The lack of wisdom in Bush’s administration made a war in Iraq, almost exploded the situation in Iran, and soon will create a revolution in the Arab world if it keeps on supporting Israel’s actions. Terrorism is any action made to gain political achievements, and making genocide by killing and putting a siege on a whole people to create a pressure on Hamas to surrender to the Israeli demands is similar to this.
For every Israeli and Palestinian from the peoples and not the leaderships try to believe in one thing and invite people to believe in it: War brings War, violence brings violence, and humans are worthy. I hope to see this end soon.
Send me back any other questions that anyone of you may have.
Firstly, thanks for such an informative piece of work.
My question is:
Do you think the International community will question the timing of this attack? Could this be an indication that under Obama things will change?
My thoughts are that:
This kind of operation is not decided upon overnight at the dining table. It needs a lot of planning, strategy and involves a lot of logistics.
I find it strange somehow that this aggression / response from Israel did not happen two months earlier. Could it be that they waited until GW Bush has completed his good bye tour of the Arab world.? Could it be that the Israeli government has indise information that they should act before GW Bush leave office knowing that his support would be guaranteed? Better still, could it be that Israel knows that the incoming President will not be so accomodating to their aggressive posture?
All food for thoughts and will be revealed in time.
Thanks
Dear Rashid
The timing of this attack is very important: it began in the time that almost all the international community is busy with the holidays and in vacation. Beside that i will give a piece of information about the late discussions inside the Israeli leadership regarding time; Israeli Prime minister Ehud Olmert told Ehud Barak that if Israel wants to enter ground army forces into Gaza.
This must be made and finished before next Monday because the united nations and the security council will be meeting and this may embarrass Israel and stop its actions. To look at this from a wider angle, one can say that Israel also chose to do its attack now before the arrival of President Obama with his Democratic party policy.
Although Obama made several statements in the past about supporting Israel, i believe that he will be better than bush for the Isaeli palestinian conflict, and beside that the public opinion in these days in the states wants to see peace achievements made by the government in the world.
We cant judge now, we need to wait.
that is so uninformative.. i wouldnt know where to start but in summary:
(a) hamas wasnt elected for their military strategy.. they were largely elected for their social services and perceived absense of corruption
(b) israel is not guaranteed security by mere acceptance of palestinain demands..
(c) who said palestinians shouldnt accept israels demands at the same time.. this one sided logic is the source of all middle eastern political problems if you ask me
(d) during the post oslo period ie 94 onwards the palestinian terror attacks did NOT stop.. on the contrary they increased..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Palestinian_Islamic_Jihad_suicide_attacks
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Hamas_suicide_attacks
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Popular_Front_for_the_Liberation_of_Palestine_suicide_attacks
and there were others..
gaza can and should turn to egypt to seek relief for aid and electricity and hamas should engage fatah to jointly seek egypts cooperation..
(e) your mockery of the gazan rockets is unfair.. they kill and harm and terrorise people.. i could just as easily argue that 430 dead out of 1.5 million is nothing (which is obviously wrong).. everyone deserves to live safely and every life is important..
anyway wishing peace on all of us..
take care man
i am just test comment luv add on
Lirun
Hope you are doing well
This is a comment back on yours
a. It is right that the social services and the corruption of the former government were reasons in electing hamas, but the fact that the negotiations did not bring real achievements is also an important reason that encouraged the palestinians to elect hamas and its ideology.
b. About security that i also connect to the period of Oslo. This is a conflict that is built on occupation. We can’t change the minds of the people in one day to switch from their belief in resistance to believe in Peace. This takes time. Beside that the Palestinian citizen never felt that he or she was given freedom and independence. The Oslo agreement was good for Israel too. Rabin wanted to get out of Gaza with any price. The Palestinians also benefited from Oslo in making a kind of authority for them. The problem is after Oslo and the change that happened in the Israeli leadership. I agree with you that there were attacks on Israel even in the time of Oslo, but you should remember that the Palestinian forces prevented a lot of them. Two years passed in complete peace, but when the negotiations brought no result, it was hard to convince the people not to support attacks on Israel.
c. Accepting Israeli demands: there is a difference between sitting with Israel and accepting its demands in the time that Israel too accepts Palestinians demands and to accept Israeli demands without getting anything back.
d. i disagree with you about the solution you give to the Palestinians to turn to egypt for help. If egypt and the palestinians accepted this, our case would have been forgot since a long time. According to all the laws the occupier is responsible of the occupied people. Our conflict differs from radical islam and terrorists. This land was occupied and the Israeli state was made on it. The Palestinians accepted to share this land with Israel and to be given back the 1967 lands, East Jerusalem, and a fair solution to the refugees case according to the International laws and decisions. There is a difference between terrorism and resistance for this people. Since Israeli support the Israeli army and call it the Israeli defence army, the Palestinians believe that they ahve the right to resist especially when war is launched on them.
I just want to make something clear my friend. I am completely against the killing of anyone and not only Palestinians in which they turn to become victims of war, violence, and conflict. I want to remind you that my vision to the solution may differ with Hamas and other Palestinian movements, but i want you also to know that i can’t say that it is okay to kill my people to bring security for 250000 israelis in the south, while one million and a half are being sieged and tortured in an ugly way.
I hope that you will understand me and not misunderstand me.
Take care
Lirun
As somone fron International Law background I would like to read something from you about Israel’s compliance to International Law. Its record in upholding decent moral and legal values. A lot of Israelis claim to be the only democracy in the region, could this be the reason why they chose to dismantle the elected government of Gaza. Bear in mind that they along with their patron in the USA did say tat they will accept the result of the Palestinian people. Gazza was placed under siege as an appreciation for their effort in electing a democratic government…remember.
Also I would like to hear your views on Israel’s continued occupation.
rashid.. ill do a more thorough answer and post it..
i believe i did post about this on http://www.lebanesebloggers.blogspot.com during the past war.. you could search there in the meantime.. but it may have been only about proportionality..
lirun´s last blog post..despite the war..
hey i found what i wrote back then.. consider this but replace it with hamas – a lot remains applicable.. mind you obviously here its more complex because we have the issue of border control and a non state entity..
matey i am not a human rights of military lawyer.. my international law study focussed largely on trade – however – i lets use our minds a bit with the knowledge that international law is a difficult and highly self contradictory body of rules that are in part based on treaties and in part based on customary international law..
the legal/moral doctrine of self defence has its limits – you are right.. however.. where this becomes more complex is how it fits in with the country’s obligation to protect its citizens from harm and assure its citizens a decent and peaceful home.. there are many laws at play here.. not only the laws of war..
to further complicate matters – the way that international law is interpreted is also subject to extreme variation..
in any event.. if we do examine the issue of proportionality – as one would under normal criminal law – i would suggest we first of all look at its parameters:
(a) the extent of the clear and present danger
(b) the extent of the damage
(c) the declared intentions of the aggressor
(d) the restraint the country claiming self-defence has exercised so far
(e) the consequences that the defending country would suffer by ceasing the actions at an earlier stage
looking at these – israel’s position would be, with respect to each item:
(a) 13,000 missiles purchased to destroy it and aimed at its territory backed by a constant stream of vicious messages and provocations.. would probably in itself qualify quite elaborate efforts to curb their deployment in its own right
(b) israel has suffered a continuous rain of rockets for 6 years.. this is a lot.. i dont think proportionality requires you to try to mirror your damage with your enemy and then stop.. but rather use self-help ie not wait for lebanon but rather apply force to kurb the continuation of the missiles landing in our territory – while the damage in lebanon exceeds the damage in israel in a tangible sense – i dont think this is necessarily a measure of proportionality.. because if this was the case then countries could take calculated risks by attacking other countries knowing that all that would happen is a =n equivalent loss in return..
(c) HA has been sending a very simple single barrel message that it seeks to destroy israel.. there is no question about HA’s intention.. it may have collateral intentions and objectives and strategies – however – its long term mission is unequivocal and has been publically declared over and over
(d) israel tried waiting for 6 years.. it severly compromised its most significant defence umbrella known as the deterance affect and tried to leave way for the lebanese internal politic to rectify the situation.. the world knew of the rockets hailed our way and israel bit its lip and tongue again and again – just as it did with iraq in desert storm.. if the intention of israel was merely to damage lebanon – israel would not have waited until now.. israel could have hit much harder and much more lethally when HA was still in nappies 6 years ago..
(e) by far the most crucial is this item.. in common law we call it the “but for” test.. but for israel’s actions – is there any other way that israel could assure its security at this point in time? well – now the world is saying – talk talk talk.. but only weeks ago when HA attacked israel lebanon made it clear that they had no power over HA and could not possibly be held responsible.. and for this reason could not be held accountable.. now by all accounts the lebanese government has only been weakening.. how can israel now trust the faible authority to be able to reign in the consistent aggressor that it is addressing.. its tough now when nasralla speaks of a ceasefire.. it would suggest that this item is resolved.. however.. lebanon trusted the HA enough to incorporate it into its politics and it was stabbed in the back brutally.. should israel – the sworn bloody enemy – be able to trust this body and in doing so neglect the safety of its citizens that it owes them under international and municipal law?
this is israel’s point of view as i would argue it from a self defence perspective..
it is important to keep in mind that lebanon did not approach the security council about HA’s ongoing activities in vilation of the infamous resolution.. Lebanon did not raise a single cry while israel was carrying the price for its political reformation.. this is not about revenge.. however – the international legal issues are long winded and complex and go way beyond the mere defence of the lebanese.. because the same law that the lebanese hinge on right now is the very same law that forces my government to effectively complete its mission of eradicating the risk to my country..
Furthermore.. this is merely examining the issues under treaties.. if we were to look at customary international law and consider how in our region violent conflicts are played out.. and how much force is typically used in the middle east to resolve conflict – we will never ever have a clear vision of what is right and wrong..
Conclusion:
international law is an impotent pile of bananas.. it does not offer solutions because it is so vague and every country is an independent administrator of its its own interests..
HOWEVER!!! this does not mean there are no solutions.. we are people first and foremost.. we all come from mothers who loved us and fathers who sought to feed us – none of us suffer alone.. our pain is echoed into many hearts each time one is hurt.. and as neighbours we cannot afford to ignore eachother’s pain..
i pray and hope that this will end quickly and inits place will come a long period of quiet that shall lead to a sustainable and fruitful peace..
lirun
telaviv
http://www.emspeace.blogspot.com
i should really give more thought to all of it.. i agree..
lirun´s last blog post..despite the war..
Howdy, i read your blog occasionally and i own a similar one and i was just wondering should you get a lot of spam comments? If so how do you prevent it, any plugin or anything you are able to advise? I get so much recently it’s driving me mad so any assistance is very much appreciated.