As I passively watched, thru twitter, Gaza being destroyed and children being murdered by the hundreds in the name of such a “right to Israeli defense”, whatever that means given the actual scenario, I kept thinking about how could I help, and decided that I’d help by gathering some knowledge about the subject and sharing whatever I could have learned.
First, I must say that I’m an ignorant in international law, slightly dumb when it comes to world history and, up to ten days ago, totally alienated on the Israel /Palestine conflict.
Maybe that’s why what I’ve learned so far made me tremble; tremble just like you do when you’re watching a movie and, by the end of it, you discover that the good guy was, after all, the bad guy.
It is indeed very dangerous to the establishment when someone acquires knowledge beyond the mainstream media. When we do that, we face a different kind of true, a different kind of story, one that is not at all told us by the mainstream media.
Everything that is written below you will not see or read in the mass media.
To the facts now.
After reading documents and watching lectures about possible solutions to the dilemma Israel / Palestine I’ve discovered interesting things, which I’ll share with you. This text is basically based on information I’ve learned from the American Professor and Philosopher Noam Chomsky, the English Parliamentary George Galloway and Harry Ramy, an investigative reporter.
Another thing that I must always say prior to criticizing Israel is: I’m not against the creation of the State of Israel. I’m in for it (as long as it maintains its original given territory, of course). And my criticisms is related to the political behaviour of Israel. Not in any circumstances relate to the Jewish people or the Jewish religion or the Jewish culture. I should write this it in huge capital letters since the most frivolous arguments in favor of Natanyahu’s actions are always those which use ” you are saying that because you are against Jewish people.”
I evidently believe that the world is still full of anti-semitic people, and anti-islamic people, and anti-every-religion people, but it’s time to stop this mantra that chant that all criticism driven to Israeli is also a censure to Jewish people. To argue like that is coward once it tries to hide what should be the real debate, one that could perhaps lead us to a place of love and understanding.
First of all, let us understand what are those so called “peace agreements” between the two countries – Israel and Palestine.
Those agreements were drafted by the quartet United States, England, Russia and the UN, and then proposed to the two nations. In the most recent of them, in 2006, it was established that in order to seal the peace with Israel Palestinians must accept three conditions:
1. Recognize Israel
3. Accept all previous agreements
According to Harrys reports, repeated in lectures by Chomsky, the Palestinian leadership accepted all of them – which already knocks down the Israeli eternal regret that Hamas does not accept the existence of Israel. Hamas did, but we don;t know about that because it did not get media coverage.
After Hamas, speaking as a political party (that what Hamas is, a political party), accepted verbally, the parties came face-to-face to close the deal, and Israel and the United States said “we do not want to sign it anymore.”
Again, no media coverage for this.
Why did USA and Israel said that?
For a simple reason, revealed by Harrys: Palestine had, a few months before, finally turned into a place of unified political power, with Hamas and Fatah, the other Palestinian political leadership, uniting in one single group.
There was, of course, no reason why Israel and the U.S. had to jump off at the last minute, since all their demands had been accepted. But that was the excuse that seems to have been found, and, according to Chomsky, this is a tradition for decades: Israel and the United States call Palestinian leaders to the table, require conditions that are finally accepted, and then the allies pull out before signing it.
But you will not know about any of it by reading the mainstream media because it will always side with the ones that are winning the war, not with those who are losing it; so, to reach the truth, you need to dig and dig and dig, and then get to reliable thinkers to open up your mind.
I do not know about you, but, after reading all this, I was really surprised since everything I read in the mainstream media for decades tells me that Hamas does not accept the existence of Israel and that Palestine always runs of all attempts to reach a peace agreement.
Even more, we are always told that Hamas don’t recognize Israel and that is a shame, when the truth is that the right wing party of Natanyahu’s that is currently leading Israel also don’t recognize the existence of Palestine. Did you know about that? No. It’s news that don’t reaches us because it’s simply not good for public opinion to know about it.
When telling us the story of the 2006 “non signature”, Chomsky reminded us that there are politicians inside the Israeli Ministry who disagree with these conditions since they do not recognize the right of Palestine to exist, and they also reserve the right of Israel to use force to create a bigger State, one that goes from the Mediterranean to the Jordan River.
Oh oh oh, wait a minute.
So Hamas accepted the conditions, including that one that imposed Palestine to recognize Israel, and Israel said “thanks, but no thanks”?
And then, to have the agreement signed, two other conditions were imposed on Palestinians by Israel and the US.
The first was that the United States had to mediate all negotiations. It’s, of course, an absurd condition since the United States are partners of Israel. In the words of Chomsky, “for this role a neutral country with international credibility, such as Brazil, would have to be called up”.
The second condition was to accept that the (ilegal) Israeli settlements on Palestinian land could be expanded.
In other words: it was not enough that a whole new country had been created by decree within Palestinian territory, it was not enough that this new country had, on its own, increased its borders and crushed the previous occupant into a tiny piece of land; now it was necessary for Palestinians to recognize that this new country could continue to spread itself across the region the way they wanted best (and they way they are currently doing for decades is, of course, by conquering all the land with natural water supplly).
Even I, this complete ignorant, understand that these are conditions imposed by those who do not want to reach any agreement – far beyond, for those who want to keep the conflict going on since, after all, the conflict is only bad for the Palestinians. Israelis live in a developed country, with running water, electricity, theaters, cultural life, good restaurants etc – and profits a lot with wars, as we shall see.
Oh, yes, but they are constantly threatened by Hamas missiles. In the words of Chomsky, Israel can intercept how many missiles they want, when they want.
Truth is, we can not even start to compare the belic stockpiles of Israel and Palestine – or what’s left of Palestine.
But let’s move on.
A few months ago, the Gallup Institute of Research asked people which was the country that most threatened the world peace. The first shot, with a margin of miles to the second place, was the United States.
The result of the research has not been published by any American press (out of curiosity, the second place went to Pakistan). In other words, what was being proposed to Palestinians is that the agreement should be mediated by the most feared country in the world, and also partner of one of the parties.
Officially, the U.S. does not recognize these two new requirements for Palestinians to sign a peace agreement, but, in fact, they act to make clear that they do.
Chomsky gives an example.
In 2011, the UN Security Council asked for the end of the expansion of all Israeli settlements on Palestinian land. The detail here is that the settlements are no longer discussed – settlements that are illegal, since it’s occupation of Palestinian territory – but only its expansion. Well. The application had a veto. From who? From Barak Obama’s United States, which continues to provide military, diplomatic and ideological support for the occupations to keep on happening.
Shortly before the United States and Israel jump off the negotiating table in 2006, Palestine had just passed thru the first free election of the Arab world. But, according to Chomsky, problem was the election had a result that did not satisfy the two powers, or, in his words, the United States and Israel thought that the Palestinians voted wrong, and, for that, decided to punish them. How? By increasing sanctions and blocks, and, of course, with the resumption of military assaults over Gaza.
If we look at the map of the region over the years, we can see that Israel is, thru the years, clearly cornering the Palestinian population and disregarding the agreement sealed in Oslo in 1994 which ruled that Gaza and Cisjordan were Palestinian territories that could not be separated. In the current map, you can see there is a whole Israel between Gaza and Cisjordan, and Chomsky explains why.
By separating the territories, Cisjordan is completely isolated, and Gaza becomes the only contact of Palestine with the rest of the world. On this way, any autonomy that Palestine might have will not actually be representative.
But Chomsky calls for special attention to ultra-quoted “right to exist of Israel.”
“No state in the world has the ‘right to exist’,” he says. “States are power systems established by force and then recognized, but there is not such this ‘right to exist’ thing” .
He gives an example so no one can think that he is just picking on Israel. Mexico, he says, does not recognize the right to exist of the United States once the United States is sitted on half of Mexican territory, which was conquered by force. Like this there are many other examples around the world, but it is required from Palestine to recognize thru signing a document for the right of Israel to exist.
Still, against all odds, Fatah and Hamas, acting as a unified leadership, agreed on signing this document in 2006, but Israel and the United States changed their minds and decided that they wanted more. Now they require that Palestine assure to Israel’s right to exist not only as a state but as a Jewish state.
Did you had any idea of these things? Neither did I, since they are not reported by the mainstream media, which defends only the minds and souls of the greatest economic power groups.
Pause to go to Pakistan.
Pakistan calls itself an Islamic republic, but none country in the world officially recognizes Pakistan as an Islamic state, once everyone agrees that doing so would be a racist attitude.
Why, then, Palestine is obliged to recognize Israel as a Jewish state? Just recognizing as a state isn’t enough?
I do not know about you, but at this point I was already shaking with rage.
So what are the real options for reaching peace in the region?
The first and obvious, that one with which any citizen of good sense agrees, is creating a region with two states: Israel and Palestine, are giving to the Palestinian people the right to exist under a recognized flag.
But that does not matter to Israel, although it does to the rest of the galaxy.
The second is: Israel continues to act as it has been acting for decades and conquering more and more territory with its settlements and with the blessing of the United States.
Obviously the installation of such settlements eventually marginalize Palestinian population, but who cares for the poor people of Palestine, right?
As a curiosity, I will explain how a settlement is mounted: the Israeli army enters Palestinian land, announces “this is a military intervention and you have 24 hours to leave” and it’s done. Thereafter, luxury homes are built and occupied by Israelis in Palestinian territory, and walls are erected to separate the two races.
It remember Apartheid, right? Chomsky does not agree with the comparison.
He says that what is happening in Palestine is tremendously worse and explains that in South Africa the whites needed the blacks since they were 85% of the population and, therefore, represented the entire workforce. There was no interest in decimate them.
Israelis do not need Palestinians and, because of that, occupation is molded on colonial occupations, and we all know what happens to the original population when the colonists arrives. It happened to the American and Brazilian Indians, to the Aboriginal Australians and many others.
But then what to do so Palestinians are not extinct from the face of the world? What is the solution?
For Chomsky, the only solution is the U.S. to change sides, and there is no other. He explains that when the United States change sides, the game turns radically. So it was with the South African Apartheid, with the invasion of East Timor by the Indonesian and etc.
But when the United States change sides?
When public opinion can no longer be silented, as it was with Apartheid. Without this pressure from public opinion, the United States will remain the eternal partner of Israel, since there is too much money involved in this relationship, especially in the arm industry (industry that would be severely damaged when the conflict is over).
Therefore, the only possible solution to this conflict is for you, it’s for me and for you and for all the people to get involved. We have to scream and to hit the streets and to side with the Palestinian people.
This is not a jewish matter, or an islamic matter, or a religious or even a political matter – this is a human matter. It’s a matter of finding a way for these to nations to co-exist, for these two important cultures to live together and in peace. It’s a matter of stoping the genocide of the palestinian people. A matter of elevating ourselves to a place of meaning, and to grow as human beings. The pain of one is the pain of all.
For that we have to stand and make ourselves seen and heard. On the streets, in social networks, writing to congressmen and women, speaking to the media etc.. As Zapatist Subcommander Marcos said in 1994: “We apologize for the inconvenience, but this is a revolution.”
(Translated by Priscila Lopes)
Link to an excellent lecture by Noam Chomsky talking about all this and more: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UEpn68BZIOY