|
|
|
Putting Palestinian "Terrorism" into perspective
by
Baha Abushaqra
Palestinian activist Marwan Barghouti, General Secretary
of Fatah on the West Bank and an elected member of the
Palestinian Legislative Council, wrote earlier this year
to the Washington Post, "Want Security? End the
Occupation." His opinion, as you can tell, is not being
taken seriously by the Israeli lawmakers, who
conveniently locked him up, branding him and his Fatah
movement as "terrorist."
"Our enemies called
us terrorists. People who were neither friends nor enemies…also
used this Latin name, either under the influence of…propaganda
or out of habit ... They called us 'terrorists' to the end. And
yet, we were not terrorists ... It all depends on who uses the
term ...What has a struggle for the dignity of man, against
oppression and subjugation, to do with 'terrorism?' Our
purpose, in fact, was precisely the reverse of 'terrorism.' The
whole essence of our struggle was the determination to free our
people of its chief affliction -- fear...if you love your
country, you cannot but hate those who seek to annex it…if you
love your mother, would you not hate the man who sought to kill
her: would you not hate him and fight him at the cost, if needs
be, of your own life?"
These were not the words of Mr. Barghouti, or of the
spiritual leader of Islamic Jihad, rather, of revered former
Israeli Prime Minister, and, incidentally, former leader of
the (terrorist?) Irgun group, who personally led the
notorious Deir Yassin massacre, Menachem Begin, rebuffing
charges of terrorism against his militant gang, whom he
refers to as freedom-fighters (from his book, The Revolt, New
York, 1977).
To Begin's dual ethical standard, murder of innocent
civilians by Jewish (terror?) groups does not qualify as
"terrorism," rather, "a struggle for the dignity of man,
against oppression and subjugation." His observations of
course have profoundly ironic poignancy when applied to the
current Palestinian-Israeli conflict, especially the brutal
suicide bombings orchestrated by the various Palestinian
armed groups against Israeli targets.
Actually, characterizing the Palestinian attacks on Israeli
targets as "terrorism" has become a political de rigueur,
devoid of any objective reasoning. Take for example, though
perhaps an interposition to the substance of this commentary,
UN Secretary General Kofi Annan's response to the recent
Hebron attack (claimed by Islamic Jihad), which left 12
Israelis dead. According to Ha'aretz (17/11/2002), "All of
the dead were from the IDF, Border Police or emergency
security team of the settlers of Kiryat Arba and Hebron..."
Mr. Annan condemned the shooting incident as a "despicable
terrorist attack." We're talking settlers…occupied
territories, Mr. Annan! Ah, but Mr. Annan is a man of
flexible conscience, long on intent short on action.
Never mind this UN hollow sham (it is part of the problem,
you know). What needs to be asked is, do Jews, people, at
least deep down in their conscience, understand the raison
d'etre of the violence perpetrated by the various Palestinian
armed groups, which, alas, sometimes extends to the killing
of unarmed civilians?
Another Israeli premier, Ehud Barak, was more professed than
Begin. He said, “If I were a Palestinian, I'd also join a
'terror' group” (Ha'aretz, 3 June 1998), epitomizing the idea
that one person's terrorist is another's freedom fighter. But
why would Barak say that? Could it be that he concurs with
Leah Rabin, late Yitzhak Rabin's widow, when she said, "We
[the Jews] used terrorism to establish our state. Why should
we expect the Palestinians to be any different?" (Reuters,
Sep 11, 1997)
Of course Mrs. Rabin is flattering her Israel. Zionists still
use terror to perpetuate the occupation, only they now have
more PR-oriented terms to describe their actions, like
"self-defense" (yeah, shooting unarmed children and building
new settlements is self-defense. Get out!)
But, only as recently as 1976, Israeli politicians and
lawmakers had no shame in using the word "terror" to refer to
their sustained Judaization campaign in Palestine. Israel
Koenig, advisor to the Israeli Knesset, wrote in the Koenig
Memorandum: "We must use terror, assassination, intimidation,
land confiscation, and the cutting of all social services to
rid the Galilee of its Arab population." (Al Hamishmar
newspaper, September 7, 1976)
But this media spin/PR "self-defense" nonsense does not fool
too many people. "Right now, aren't the Israelis and the
Palestinians both terrorizing each other?" asked the
63-year-old media mogul Ted Turner, founder of CNN news
network, recently in an interview with the Guardian
newspaper. "The rich and the powerful, they don't need to
resort to terrorism...The Palestinians are fighting with
human suicide bombers - that's all they have. The Israelis...
they've got one of the most powerful military machines in the
world. The Palestinians have nothing. So who are the
terrorists? I would make the case that both sides are
involved in terrorism," Mr. Turner continued.
We understand what is driving Israeli terrorism --political
and religious Zionism. But, what is driving Palestinian
terrorism? Could it be despair, after enduring so much
injustice, for too long, as Mrs. Tony Blair recently
suggested, when she said on the matter, "As long as young
people feel they have got no hope but to blow themselves up
you are never going to make progress." (Ha'aretz June 19,
2002)
Or, is Palestinian "terrorism" a logical reaction,
consequence, to the provocative Israeli policies in the Holy
Land, as U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell recently
suggested when he said: "When you start knocking down
buildings with bulldozers, don't expect people not to respond
to this kind of activity. When you start announcing more
settlement activity, this does not create conditions that
would cause the other side to be less responsive or less
violent." (Ha'aretz, July 16, 2001). It is hard to imagine
that Mr. Powell was expecting Palestinians to respond by
writing letters to editors. Surely he is talking about
violent reactions.
The truth is, in my opinion, Palestinian terrorism (to
loosely use the term) is a result of all these factors:
instinctual struggle for freedom/independence, despair and in
reaction to the provocative Israeli policies (including mere
vengeance).
Actually, if you listen carefully to Israeli politicians
speak, you will realize that they do understand these
Palestinian grievances well. Listen to David Ben Gurion, the
first Israeli Prime Minister, profess: "If I were an Arab
leader, I would never sign an agreement with Israel. It is
normal; we have taken their country. It is true God promised
it to us, but how could that interest them? Our God is not
theirs. There has been Anti-Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler,
Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They see but one thing:
we have come and we have stolen their country. Why would they
accept that?" (Quoted by Nahum Goldmann in The Jewish
Paradox, p121). Little did Ben Gurion know that Arabs are
much more acquiescent than he thought, thanks to their "wise"
and "pragmatic" leaders.
So, as arrogant as he may be, Ben Gurion understands that it
is inevitable that Arabs hate Jews. After all, as he
confessed, Jews stole their lands (give me a break about the
"God promised it to us" bit). And, to borrow another Zionist
leader's words, "if you love your country, you cannot but
hate those who seek to annex it…if you love your mother,
would you not hate the man who sought to kill her: would you
not hate him and fight him at the cost, if needs be, of your
own life?"
Israeli opposition and Meretz leader MK Yossi Sarid thinks he
knows how to end the cycle of terror and bloodshed in the
Holy Land. He is onto something when he said (Jerusalem Post,
04/03/2002), in response to an attack on Israelis by
Palestinian militants, that the "terror wave would continue
as long as the occupation does." Or, in the words of
imprisoned Fatah activist Marawn Barghouti, before him, "Want
Security? End the Occupation."
Mr. Baha Abushaqra is a Media Activist with Palestine Media Watch.
Source:
by the same author:
More
in 'Perspective' or 'Archive'
|
|
|
