Palestine. Israel. Gaza. Rockets. Unrest. Death.
For the umpteenth time, the small strip of land known as Gaza in “Palestine” is under siege.This might not phase the people of gaza as much as it might if it happened elsewhere, given the constant trading of fire between israel and palestine that their everyday life is usually a battle of sorts, but the outside world should still be highly concerned. The thing is, they don’t seem to be-and I doubt they will be.
The current upheaval across the Middle East is (if this is even possible) more incendiary and dangerous than anything that has come so far out of the past Arab Spring uprisings. The protests in Bahrain, Kuwait and Jordan are worrisome as they would present a huge challenge to the status quo if their royal leaders were to fall. The Middle East is in such a mess internally that the last thing that was needed was an issue from the outside. Of course, that’s where one can count on good old Israel to add another dozen issues to the agenda.
Hamas leader Ahmed al-Jabari was killed by Israel. Rockets were then fired from Gaza into Israel. I fully disagree with Gaza’s action, but had Hamas succeeded in killing, for example, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel would have done a lot worse than just set off a couple of rockets. If Israel want’s to be so moral and just, than they should not have immaturely retaliated against Hamas as though this was a school playground fight. An eye-for-an-eye approach in a situation like this is not just or fair, but dangerous. Dangerous for civilians on both sides and dangerous for politics. What-honestly, what-does Israel hope to achieve with it’s retaliation attack on Gaza?
Or, as LeMonde asked, ou va Israel avec loperation militaire en Gaza? In its online debate with international director Gilles Paris.
LeMonde stated that Israel was only going to increase it’s shelling and retaliation, calling in 30,000 reserve troops. If Israel wants to play by the eye-for-an-eye rule, as they appear to be, then calling in 30,000 reserve troops is not the course of action one takes. Gaza does not have the manpower nor military power to match Israel, therefore Israel is using an excessive use of force.
This brings to mind Noam Chomsky’s words on the matter: ‘Israel’s “targeted killings” of suspects would be called “terrorist atrocities” if carried out by the wrong hands’ (p. 24) he said, and this situation couldn’t be a better example (see my example if Hamas had killed Netanyahu above; that would certainly be called a terrorist act). I really don’t understand the fairness in this. As of now, more than 20 Palestinians are dead and 3 Israelis have been killed, and the more than 130 raids that occurred Thursday night in Gaza has caused if not death than the destruction of homes belonging to people that have little means and even less reason for hope.
Egypt, already entrenched in its own constitutional stalemate and protests, now has the additional burden of playing peacemaker in the Gaza conflict, although it surely is playing a partisan role: Egypts ambassador to Israel has been called home since the shelling began. The rest of the Arab world has of course denounced the Israel shelling, and Europe has called for “une reponse proportionne” from Israel (it’s a little late for that, but thanks for trying). interestingly, france seems to be quite involved in the talks-president Francois Hollande has already been in talks with Egyptian president Morsi and Netanyahu-which is strange when you consider how Netanyahu was trying to plead the case of Israel and support even before this incident began. The USA, of course, has completely denounced he Palestinian action and supported Israel. As much as I hate when a country meddles in another’s business, there has to be more done than just denouncing this side or that side and calling for fairness. the colossal mess that is Israel/Palestine stopped being a domestic problem and became an international one the moment the zionists started seriously colonizing and taking over the land-after all, when Germany began to take over Europe during World War II, wasn’t that considered wrong, wasn’t it considered a breach on the occupied countries’ right to sovereignty and self-rule? Why, why why did the world take a blind eye on Palestine?
To conclude, I shall quote the Kremlin’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson Alexander Lukashevich (ironically enough Russia, which endorses Syria’s Bashar al-Assad and therefore encourages megalomaniac selfish government actually supported the Gazans in this situation):
“We believe that considering the fragile situation in the Middle East and the entire North African region, such large flare-ups of violence are fraught with dangerous consequences, including in other parts of the Arab world.”