|
|
|
35 Years Late To Stop The War
by James Brooks
We're told today's
peace movement is the first mass effort in US history to stop a
war before it starts. And it's true the opposition has mushroomed
impressively, thanks especially to hard organizing work by
activists throughout the country. Yet despite our instant Web
sites and our listservs, our e-mail alerts and our digital
petitions, we are tragically late in waking up to the reality of
US war on the Middle East: It has already begun, and it has been
raging for decades.
Even if we can stop this
latest escalation of the war, as a movement we have yet to grasp its
scope, its history, even the true identities of its combatants and
victims. And that is why we are fighting a desperate, rearguard action
today, trying to head off the massacre of Iraq.
The road to the illegal US
occupation of Iraq began years ago, with our support for Israel's illegal
occupation of the Palestinian Territories. The madness we face now, the
vilification of Arabs, defiance of international law, plans for indefinite
occupation of another country, denial of Arab land rights; all these
delusions have deep roots, twisted in the dark subsoil of America's
alliance with Israel. The US has been waging a long-escalating war on Arab
interests for strategic control of the Middle East. And Israel has nearly
always been at the vanguard.
Of course, this is not a
popular interpretation of the facts. In fact, to recognize this reality is
to touch the "third rail" of US politics in foreign affairs. Veterans of
Congress note that you can't make more powerful enemies more quickly than
by expressing support for the Palestinians. It takes guts to go out and
say stuff like that. So we've heard precious little from the victims, shot
with American bullets from American guns, who could clearly explain the
link between US imperialism and Israeli policy.
Given the bleak consequences
of speaking the truth, it's far more convenient for politicians to agree
that the "conventional wisdom" regarding the "Arab-Israeli conflict" is
about as close as we can get to the truth. And, wouldn't you know it, the
media are less than a hairsbreadth away from being in complete agreement.
When we marched by the
hundreds of thousands against war on Iraq, only to find our numbers
divided by ten in the next day's newspaper or NPR report - when there were
reports! - we each got a small, foul taste of what the news business is up
to every day, while we are asleep.
If they lied to you about
Iraq, and Central America, and Southeast Asia, and every other war we ever
fought, do you think they're going to tell you the truth about our proxy
war on Palestine? Forget about it. If you haven't at least read up on it
from the Palestinian point of view, you, as an American, are likely to
know as much about Palestine as Bush's dead-eyed disciples know about
Basra.
It is this giant national
blind spot that encouraged our neglect of this terrible war until it got
almost completely out of control. It prevents us from seeing Bush's
intended conquest of Iraq for what is actually is; the re-opening of the
Eastern Front, a major escalation of America's Big Game in the Middle
East. Blind to our deep complicity in the long-raging Western Front
against Palestine, many of us did not understand the lengths to which US
power would go to acquire the local real estate.
Those who doubt that Israel
wages war on the Palestinian Territories should consult international law,
starting under "O" for "occupation". Then they should explain why the
settlement population has doubled since Israel signed the Oslo Peace
Accords. If this is not war, why are the Israel "Defence" Forces
systematically destroying the infrastructure of Palestine as we speak? Why
is the following repugnant policy more popular than ever in Israel today,
and why does the Israeli government explicitly refuse to repudiate it?
"Transfer [of Palestinians] is
what will make possible a comprehensive Jewish settlement
programme. Jewish power will increase our possibilities to
carry out the transfer on a large scale." -- Zionist leader
David Ben Gurion, 1937
"Transfer [of Palestinians] is
what will make possible a comprehensive Jewish settlement
programme. Jewish power will increase our possibilities to
carry out the transfer on a large scale." -- Zionist leader
David Ben Gurion, 1937
This is ethnic
cleansing. And it it is tragically succeeding in Palestine today,
with active US support. [1]
Those who doubt that this is
America's war should consider its enduring US sponsorship. It's hard to
miss, blind-spotted or not. Why else would Israel get the biggest chunk of
US foreign and military aid, year after year? Because wars of attrition
take time, and a lot of money. Why else has the US vetoed every serious
effort by the UN Security Council to solve or moderate the "conflict"?
After decades of over-the-top support for Israel's war, isn't it obvious
that it's our war, too? Would the heart of US power fix so firmly on such
a bad idea, unless it were vital to its larger strategy? These people do
not make wars to satisfy popular demand. I'm sure you've noticed.
Consider the policy changes
the US and Israel are engineering at this very moment, while the world is
focused on Iraq. Ariel Sharon stood "committed" to a "modified road map to
peace" and a Palestinian state. On that platform he formed a government
limited to the most hard-right and hands-on of the militant Zionists, the
very spear throwers of Israeli expansionism. And as soon as his new junta
was declared official, he announced that, too bad, his new allies will not
accept his "commitments". So there will be no Palestinian state, and no
"road map", either. Tanks do not require roads.
Why would Bush, who supposedly
made history by advocating a Palestinian state, accept this? Because to
him, "Palestinian state" means about the same thing as "compassionate
conservatism" - an empty phrase that gets you by, until you don't need it
anymore. How else to explain the outcome of his actual policy, the last
two years of unending hell in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip? What was
the main import of his famous "vision for peace" speech? Answer: It staked
out the US claim to disenfranchise the Palestinian people. Why did the
White House let Colin Powell play peacemaker-of-the-month last spring,
then undercut him every step of the way? To prove that it will never work?
Speaking of things that never
work: Why have more than three decades of US "peacemaking" proven such an
unmitigated failure? We clearly hold every last card in the deck, yet we
simply can not get the parties to agree? A schoolchild could see through
this ruse, yet it is the essence of American conventional wisdom on the
Middle East.
In reality, the Western Front
has always been the spear point for American interests in the region.
Propped up by our massive aid, Israel projects US power-by-proxy in the
Middle East, at many strategic levels. It thoroughly dominates its Arab
neighbors with weapons of mass destruction, even more so than the US
dominates the world. Israel provides a forward base par excellence
for US military and intelligence activity. The two nations have grown so
close, they are now virtually joined at the hip. Israel now enjoys
unprecedented access to the highest levels of US military and intelligence
planning, making even the British jealous of its unique inside track in
Washington.
There are other, less tangible
aspects to Israel's strategic importance to US power, ones coming to the
fore today. One is Israel's inexhaustible utility as an excuse to fight
the war on terror. Like a fist thrust into the gut of Arab and Islamic
self-respect, Israel is the ultimate provocation, the bait that draws the
prey. Israel is like a wild one-eyed jack up our sleeve, handy to have
whenever the "terror card" must be played.
Closely related is the utility
of Israel's endemic anti-Arab racism. We Americans have not have imbibed a
half-century of pro-Israel propaganda without also swallowing a few
gallons of subtle, and not-so-subtle, anti-Arab and anti-Islamic ideology.
Those who think the current hysteria started with September 11 have simply
been looking at the blind spot. Contingency plans to round up Arabs in
America and throw them in detention camps have been around since the
Reagan administration. Secret evidence, illegal deportation, and the
suspension of due process are nothing new; the Federal government has been
quietly using these draconian tools against Palestinians and other Arab
activists for years.
However long the Bush
administration chooses to fret and mewl about Sharon's latest move, its
implicit acceptance will ensure that war and ethnic cleansing will
continue, all along the Western Front. Almost as if someone wanted it that
way.
If the classic pattern holds,
US policy will "grudgingly" adapt to Israel's bold move, just as it has
accepted the settlements, the annexation of Jerusalem, the endless
anti-civilian warfare, in fact just about anything that extends and
deepens the war on the Western Front. Will Ari Fleischer announce someday
that "we are forced to accept the difficult reality that the terror will
never end as long as Palestinians insist on camping at Israel's doorstep"?
Every tacit acceptance of
Israel's theft of Palestinian land and water has been a step down the
highway to Baghdad. Every daily suppression of Israel's brutality, every
empty denial of its obvious crimes has been another lurch toward today's
rampant militarism. We've been looking at blatant apartheid and a war of
acquisition and calling it "a Western democracy acting in self-defense."
What fertile ground for a godly cynic like Bush!
Because we were blind to our
complicity with Israel, we missed our cue way back in the Reign of Reagan,
when the Zionists and the most hawkish of today's neo-conservatives began
to mingle their venom in earnest.
And because we never stood up
for Palestine, we didn't stand up for our own democracy. After years of
placidly swallowing bitter lies about the crushing of Palestine, we've
been judged ready to tackle the main course; the war on terror, the
disposal of international law, the erosion of our rights for "national
security", and the occupation and subjugation of the entire Middle East.
The goal? To finally take
direct control of the object of America's Middle East obsession, the
glittering prize that blinds us to the humanity of the people who own it:
the future of the dwindling global oil supply, the secret to the economic
domination of the planet.
Trying to stop the war on Iraq
while ignoring the current catastrophe in Palestine is like trying to pull
weeds by their tops; it may soothe your nagging conscience for awhile, but
the roots of the problem will only grow deeper.
Note:
-
[1]
Israeli Military Intelligence commander Maj. Gen. Aharon Ze'evi
recently told a Knesset Committee that war on Iraq will "have a
moderating effect" on Palestinians, who will fear "Israeli
reaction that could lead to a large-scale action such as the
occupation of large areas in Gaza or mass expulsions to
Lebanon." [emphasis added] 'Intelligence chief
promises Iraq war will calm territories, maybe North as well',
Ha'aretz English Online, March 5, 2003
http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=
James Brooks of Worcester, Vermont, is an independent researcher,
writer, and former business owner. His recent articles have been
published by several Web sites covering the Middle East,
investigative journalism and alternative politics. Currently
Brooks serves as webmaster for
Vermonters for a Just Peace in Palestine/Israel and publishes
News Links, a free, once-daily (Mon-Sat) e-mail digest of in-depth
Middle East news and commentary.
by the same author:
|
|
|
