Extrajudicial assassinations by Israel set the Palestinian-Israeli arena again aflame
Saleh Al-Naami, Al Ahram Weekly, 20 - 26 March 2008, Issue No. 889
Mohamed Shehada, head of Islamic Jihad's military wing in the West Bank and one of the most prominent men wanted by Israel, returned last Wednesday to the rubble of his family's home in Bethlehem. Bulldozers had destroyed it three days earlier. He went, in the company of four other resistance fighters wanted by Israel, only after feeling reassured by an unannounced truce reached between Israel and Palestinian resistance factions via Egyptian mediation. As the five were preparing to leave the site, they were hit by a hail of bullets shot by 12 members of a special undercover unit that is one of the elite death squads of the Israeli army in the West Bank. All five were killed.
The scene as viewed on television shook the Palestinian public and put an end to seven days of calm in the Palestinian-Israeli arena. During that period, resistance movements had halted operations, particularly in the Gaza Strip where they committed to not firing rockets on Israeli settlements near the Strip. Yet Israeli Minister of Defence Ehud Barak spoke proudly of the assassinations, saying, "Israel is committed to pursuing Palestinian resistance fighters who have been involved in operations that have struck Jews." Official Israeli spokespersons stressed that the truce could not imply halting assassinations of members of the resistance in the West Bank.
There is no dispute among Palestinian and Israeli commentators over
one fact: that through the assassinations in Bethlehem, Israel wanted
to impose new rules in the game with Palestinian resistance factions.
Avi Sekerov and Amos Harel, commentators in Haaretz newspaper,
stressed that the person who ordered the operation realised that it
would lead to an explosion of the security situation in the Gaza Strip
and would take matters back to square one.
Israeli Deputy Defence Minister Matan Vilnai announced: "We will not
allow the Palestinians to determine for us the timing, location, or
conditions of security operations we see as serving Israeli
interests." Vilnai added that the most that Israel could commit to was
halting its operations in Gaza in return for an absolute end to the
firing of rockets.
Observers in Israel also point to the role of political and personal
considerations in motivating Israeli leaders to escalate the
situation. Akifa Elder, an Israeli political commentator, holds that
Barak, who heads the Labour Party, intends to compete in the upcoming
legislative elections for the post of prime minister against
right-wing opposition leader Benyamin Netanyahu. "Barak wants to
exploit his position as the minister of defence to display himself to
Israeli public opinion as a decisive political and security leader by
issuing instructions to execute more military operations that catch
attention," he said.
Barak's role in destroying efforts at a truce has been discussion
material for the Israeli media. Israeli writer and intellectual Gideon
Levy says that Barak works with all his might to destroy efforts at a
truce. "Barak hasn't talked about peace for a long time, and he surely
doesn't believe in the peaceful efforts made by Olmert. In fact, he
does all he can to destroy what little remains of them," he wrote in
Haaretz. He added: "Whenever a ray of hope is seen for reaching a
truce agreement, Barak has rushed to issue orders for stupid and
dangerous assassinations, as happened in calm Bethlehem, just to set
the situation aflame again. When the Palestinians stop firing
missiles, Barak does all he can to resume the firing so that he has an
excuse to wage a major invasion in the Gaza Strip."
Levy noted that the security establishment led by Barak was insulting
the authority of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, "as though there
were no negotiations or Israeli commitments... on peace".
In the Palestinian arena, the assassinations were embarrassing for the
leaders of Palestinian factions that had promised Egypt to halt
attacks on settlements in southern Israel so as to allow Cairo to
reach a comprehensive deal. Islamic Jihad, the most compromised before
their popular base, had little alternative but to respond by firing
tens of rockets on settlements near the Gaza Strip. Observers in the
Palestinian arena hold that Israel's violation of the truce is a slap
in the face for Egyptian efforts to reach a mutual truce. Nafidh
Azzam, a prominent leader in Islamic Jihad, considers the
assassinations in Bethlehem an Israeli response to Egyptian efforts.
"Until Israel is convinced about reaching a mutual, concurrent and
comprehensive peace, and lifts the siege on the Palestinian people, we
are free in responding to any aggressive act from Israel with all our
might," he told Al-Ahram Weekly.
Ayman Youssef, professor of international relations at the American
University in Jenin, says that decision- makers in Israel hold that it
is not in their interest to reach a truce at this time. "Israel is
distributing the cards of the game over a large area, and then will
collect them in a manner that serves its interests and benefits from
the internal struggle between Fatah and Hamas and the separation of
the West Bank from the Gaza Strip," he told the Weekly.
Youssef holds that Israel is worried about Egyptian efforts to secure
a comprehensive deal because such a deal would threaten Israel's most
important accomplishments -- internal Palestinian conflict and the
separation of the West Bank from the Gaza Strip. Youssef suggests that
the Israelis realise that any comprehensive agreement between Israel
and the Palestinian factions will not succeed unless a settlement is
reached on the conflict between Fatah and Hamas.
Reopening the Rafah Crossing, for example, will not be possible if
there is no domestic Palestinian accord that allows administration of
the crossing. Youssef also rejects the view that the United States has
changed its position on a truce between Israel and Hamas. He believes,
alternatively, that the position of the US on a truce between Hamas
and Israel is tied to Washington's intentions towards Iran. "If
expectations that President Bush will attack Iran during the final
three months of his term spell true, the American administration will
at that time be interested in a truce on all fronts in the region,
including Palestine; but it will be a temporary truce aiming only to
enhance Washington's ability to execute its plans," he said.
Tens of thousands of Palestinians participated in the funeral of
Mohamed Shehada and his companions, and called on Palestinian
President Mahmoud Abbas to halt negotiations with Israel and return to
dialogue with Hamas. Fatah's military wing, Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades,
also called on Abbas to dismiss his prime minister, Salam Fayyad. In a
statement passed to the Weekly, Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades stated that
continued Israeli aggression leaves one option open: "working
faithfully to regain the unity of the Palestinian people since that is
the most important source of strength it has."
Saeb Erekat, director of the Negotiations Department in the Palestine
Liberation Organisation, holds that Israel is persistently working to
weaken Abbas and shame him before the Palestinian people. "Through
escalating the aggression, Israel aims to extricate itself from its
commitments in the roadmap, make negotiations fail before they begin,
and cut off the path for Egyptian efforts to reach a comprehensive
truce," he told the Weekly.
Erekat does not hide his bitterness towards the American position, saying, "at the time when American security coordinator Keith Dayton announced that the Palestinian Authority (PA) was upholding its security commitments as best as possible, and frankly accused Israel of impeding the PA's security efforts, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice insisted on holding the PA and Israel equally responsible for the exploding security situation causing negotiations to stumble. This is injustice and bias."
(c) Copyright Al-Ahram Weekly. All rights reserved
Showing posts with label ehud barak. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ehud barak. Show all posts
Thursday, 20 March 2008
Saturday, 29 December 2007
Beware of Barak
Ran HaCohen - December 27, 2007
Israeli "Defense" Minister Ehud Barak is definitely the most dangerous politician in the Middle East. Ahmadinejad can only dream of having the powers – political and military, conventional and non-conventional – that Barak already possesses. Netanyahu and other far-right Israeli politicians say what they think and are earmarked as extremists, so they are under permanent scrutiny. Barak is more extreme than Netanyahu, but he's an extremist in disguise.
The person who destroyed the Oslo Process and initiated the second Intifada, the person who demolished the Israeli peace camp from within, by spreading legends about a "generous offer" rejected by the Palestinian, by persuading the Israelis that he "unmasked" Arafat and that there was no Palestinian partner – this person still calls himself "the leader of the Israeli peace camp." That's one of Barak's most dangerous traits: his inherent untruthfulness, his presenting himself as the very opposite of what he actually is.
Barak hasn't changed. As Yedioth Ahronoth announced just a few months ago ("Labor Leader More Right-Wing Than Netanyahu," Aug. 10, 2007), Barak described the renewal of the peace talks as "a fantasy," said "there is no difference between Hamas and Fatah"; promised "I will not remove roadblocks in the West Bank"; and repeated his old mantra, "there is no chance for a settlement with the Palestinians."
Indeed, Barak opposed the Annapolis Summit all along. His opposition turned into reserved support just a few weeks before, when it became clear the meeting would be nothing but a photo-op. On top of it, to make sure nothing comes out of the newly launched process, Barak repeatedly calls to resume peace negotiations with Syria, simultaneously with the Palestinian track. A characteristic Barakian trick: urging to resume peace talks with Syria enables Barak to boost his false reputation as a man of peace even as he knowingly works to sabotage any prospect of peace. In an official report written under then-Prime Minister Ehud Barak in 2000, recently obtained and published in Hebrew by Ha'aretz (Dec. 13, 2007), Barak's bureau chief wrote that resuming negotiations with Syria had led to extreme distrust and stiffening on the Palestinian side, and, on top of it, that the Israeli team had been unable to manage negotiations on both fronts simultaneously. In other words, resuming negotiations with Syria is a tested measure to make sure the Palestinian track doesn't work, and Barak is playing this dirty card for the second time.
Barak promised to quit the coalition with Olmert after the publication of the Winograd Commission final report, which is likely to blame Olmert for the failed war in Lebanon in summer 2006. He has now hinted, through his "aides," that he won't keep his promise (Barak never speaks to the media; he sends his "aides" to hint at his intentions, so that no one can hold him responsible for anything he actually says). It is quite likely that Barak's perverse logic leads him to plan his return to the prime minister's office by way of a "small" war. Once Olmert is officially discredited for the failed Lebanon war, Barak as defense minister can hope to take all the credit for a new, successful war – a big operation in Gaza ("drawing nearer all the time," as Barak tirelessly repeats), a war on Syria, a strike on Iran, or a combination of all these. Such a war would also be an excellent pretext to break his promise to exit the coalition: after all, it would be "irresponsible" to quit when a war is imminent.
Barak knows all too well how to get Israel into a war, even behind the government's back if needed: after all, it was young Maj. Gen. Barak who in the early 1980s recommended to his superiors in the army to use deception in order to allure the Israeli government and public into a war in Lebanon.
Rwanda Is Richer
Much of the foreign news in the popular media falls under "infotainment": "Man Bites Dog," "Host Eats Guest," "Woman Dry-Cleans Cat." Recently this kind of reporting – in both style and contents – is applied ever more often to the Gaza Strip, a region under effective Israeli control, just an hour's ride from Tel Aviv. We are informed about the price of a pack of cigarettes in besieged Gaza – more than $15 – while 63 percent of Gaza residents live on less than $2.50 a day, beating the poverty rate of Rwanda. We watch an amused television report about a soft-drink producer in the Strip, who, unable to get CO2-gas, found an original way to produce soda pop using some other, available gas. Or about a dramatic rise in the prices of donkeys, since there is no gasoline for cars, and how the transport of goods is done by animals. Great pictures: The soft-drink producer proudly showing his chemical invention, shaking off allegations it may cause cancer. A starving Gazan donkey auctioned for $60, $75, $100, the seller saying he cannot afford to feed it. Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh congratulating his people on the Muslim holiday of Eid ul-Adha, admitting there are no lambs to sacrifice in the starving Strip.
Hermetically under siege, after decades of occupation and years of Intifada in which Israel destroyed the little infrastructure that the Strip ever had, following many months of total embargo on everything except basic food products, which brought the economy to a halt, with daily invasions of Israeli tanks and extra-judicial killings by Israeli airplanes, and now with gasoline supplies cut and electricity supply to be reduced soon, the Gaza Strip (1.5 million people, 80 percent refugees) is no longer the world's biggest open-air prison. It's a huge laboratory for human experimentation, run by the Israeli army.
Some of these reports came together with the "good news" about the international community promising to give more than $7 billion to the Palestinian Authority over the next three years. Some Israeli commentators described the promised sum as the biggest amount ever given to any leader anywhere, though it is significantly smaller than the American military support given to the regional power, Israel, in any given three years. Others quickly calculated that every Palestinian family would "earn" about a $1,000 a month, if the sum were to be divided equally; but, they added triumphantly, we all know that most of it would get to the corrupt pockets of the Fatah leadership and not to the poor guy selling his donkey in Gaza. Dramatic sigh of despair and self-righteousness: once again, the Palestinians are to blame for their own plight. No one bothers to take the thought a step forward – for example, to wonder why Israel is so anxious to keep alive the corrupt Fatah leadership, even after it lost the support of its own people and was overthrown in Gaza, precisely because of its inherent corruption.
The public discourse in Israel does love questions – but only of the kind posed by President Shimon Peres last week: "There's not a single Israeli settler or soldier in Gaza now, so why do they shoot at us?" Yes, why do they?
Israeli "Defense" Minister Ehud Barak is definitely the most dangerous politician in the Middle East. Ahmadinejad can only dream of having the powers – political and military, conventional and non-conventional – that Barak already possesses. Netanyahu and other far-right Israeli politicians say what they think and are earmarked as extremists, so they are under permanent scrutiny. Barak is more extreme than Netanyahu, but he's an extremist in disguise.
The person who destroyed the Oslo Process and initiated the second Intifada, the person who demolished the Israeli peace camp from within, by spreading legends about a "generous offer" rejected by the Palestinian, by persuading the Israelis that he "unmasked" Arafat and that there was no Palestinian partner – this person still calls himself "the leader of the Israeli peace camp." That's one of Barak's most dangerous traits: his inherent untruthfulness, his presenting himself as the very opposite of what he actually is.
Barak hasn't changed. As Yedioth Ahronoth announced just a few months ago ("Labor Leader More Right-Wing Than Netanyahu," Aug. 10, 2007), Barak described the renewal of the peace talks as "a fantasy," said "there is no difference between Hamas and Fatah"; promised "I will not remove roadblocks in the West Bank"; and repeated his old mantra, "there is no chance for a settlement with the Palestinians."
Indeed, Barak opposed the Annapolis Summit all along. His opposition turned into reserved support just a few weeks before, when it became clear the meeting would be nothing but a photo-op. On top of it, to make sure nothing comes out of the newly launched process, Barak repeatedly calls to resume peace negotiations with Syria, simultaneously with the Palestinian track. A characteristic Barakian trick: urging to resume peace talks with Syria enables Barak to boost his false reputation as a man of peace even as he knowingly works to sabotage any prospect of peace. In an official report written under then-Prime Minister Ehud Barak in 2000, recently obtained and published in Hebrew by Ha'aretz (Dec. 13, 2007), Barak's bureau chief wrote that resuming negotiations with Syria had led to extreme distrust and stiffening on the Palestinian side, and, on top of it, that the Israeli team had been unable to manage negotiations on both fronts simultaneously. In other words, resuming negotiations with Syria is a tested measure to make sure the Palestinian track doesn't work, and Barak is playing this dirty card for the second time.
Barak promised to quit the coalition with Olmert after the publication of the Winograd Commission final report, which is likely to blame Olmert for the failed war in Lebanon in summer 2006. He has now hinted, through his "aides," that he won't keep his promise (Barak never speaks to the media; he sends his "aides" to hint at his intentions, so that no one can hold him responsible for anything he actually says). It is quite likely that Barak's perverse logic leads him to plan his return to the prime minister's office by way of a "small" war. Once Olmert is officially discredited for the failed Lebanon war, Barak as defense minister can hope to take all the credit for a new, successful war – a big operation in Gaza ("drawing nearer all the time," as Barak tirelessly repeats), a war on Syria, a strike on Iran, or a combination of all these. Such a war would also be an excellent pretext to break his promise to exit the coalition: after all, it would be "irresponsible" to quit when a war is imminent.
Barak knows all too well how to get Israel into a war, even behind the government's back if needed: after all, it was young Maj. Gen. Barak who in the early 1980s recommended to his superiors in the army to use deception in order to allure the Israeli government and public into a war in Lebanon.
Rwanda Is Richer
Much of the foreign news in the popular media falls under "infotainment": "Man Bites Dog," "Host Eats Guest," "Woman Dry-Cleans Cat." Recently this kind of reporting – in both style and contents – is applied ever more often to the Gaza Strip, a region under effective Israeli control, just an hour's ride from Tel Aviv. We are informed about the price of a pack of cigarettes in besieged Gaza – more than $15 – while 63 percent of Gaza residents live on less than $2.50 a day, beating the poverty rate of Rwanda. We watch an amused television report about a soft-drink producer in the Strip, who, unable to get CO2-gas, found an original way to produce soda pop using some other, available gas. Or about a dramatic rise in the prices of donkeys, since there is no gasoline for cars, and how the transport of goods is done by animals. Great pictures: The soft-drink producer proudly showing his chemical invention, shaking off allegations it may cause cancer. A starving Gazan donkey auctioned for $60, $75, $100, the seller saying he cannot afford to feed it. Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh congratulating his people on the Muslim holiday of Eid ul-Adha, admitting there are no lambs to sacrifice in the starving Strip.
Hermetically under siege, after decades of occupation and years of Intifada in which Israel destroyed the little infrastructure that the Strip ever had, following many months of total embargo on everything except basic food products, which brought the economy to a halt, with daily invasions of Israeli tanks and extra-judicial killings by Israeli airplanes, and now with gasoline supplies cut and electricity supply to be reduced soon, the Gaza Strip (1.5 million people, 80 percent refugees) is no longer the world's biggest open-air prison. It's a huge laboratory for human experimentation, run by the Israeli army.
Some of these reports came together with the "good news" about the international community promising to give more than $7 billion to the Palestinian Authority over the next three years. Some Israeli commentators described the promised sum as the biggest amount ever given to any leader anywhere, though it is significantly smaller than the American military support given to the regional power, Israel, in any given three years. Others quickly calculated that every Palestinian family would "earn" about a $1,000 a month, if the sum were to be divided equally; but, they added triumphantly, we all know that most of it would get to the corrupt pockets of the Fatah leadership and not to the poor guy selling his donkey in Gaza. Dramatic sigh of despair and self-righteousness: once again, the Palestinians are to blame for their own plight. No one bothers to take the thought a step forward – for example, to wonder why Israel is so anxious to keep alive the corrupt Fatah leadership, even after it lost the support of its own people and was overthrown in Gaza, precisely because of its inherent corruption.
The public discourse in Israel does love questions – but only of the kind posed by President Shimon Peres last week: "There's not a single Israeli settler or soldier in Gaza now, so why do they shoot at us?" Yes, why do they?
Tuesday, 30 October 2007
VIDEO: The US, Israel and missiles
October 17, 2007
Al Jazeera's blurb:
"As Condoleezza Rice tours the Middle East, Ehud Barak is making his first visit to the US as Israel's defence minister. Barak discussed missile defence with his US counterpart Robert Gates on Tuesday.
As preparations are being made for the latest peace conference, some wonder how effective the US can be in its role as peace-broker, given its close military ties to Israel.
Al Jazeera's Kimberly Halkett reports."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
