Four Palestinian civilians have been killed in an Israeli raid on the West Bank city of Ramallah. The IDF entered Ramallah with the objective of locating and detaining Rabiah Hamad, a senior militant with the al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades. Israeli soldiers exchanged fire with the armed Hamad and injured him, but he was able to escape. Four other Palestinians were detained – Israel claims they are militants, Palestinian sources say none of them are operatives of the organisation.
In the course of the “routine” incursion (and it is indeed routine: between 21-27 December, for example, Israeli forces carried out no less than 22 incursions into the West Bank, arresting 37 Palestinians in the process, including six children), Israeli bulldozers and armoured cars swept through the city, ‘clearing cars out of the way and turning some over on the pavement,’ and blocked off streets close to the central square.
A helicopter is reported to have opened fire, while gunfire and explosions could be heard in the area. Understandably angry Palestinians started throwing stones and Molotov cocktails at the Israelis, who responded with gunfire. The confrontation lasted almost an hour, during which the four civilians were killed. No Israeli soldier was wounded.
Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, who is currently hosting Olmert in Sharm el-Shiekh, condemned the Ramallah raid, stating, “Israel’s security cannot be achieved through military force but by serious endeavors toward peace”. President Abbas declared that it, “proved that the Israeli calls for peace and security are fake.” The continued aggression will only lead to the destruction of all efforts aimed at realizing peace”, he went on to say.
He is, of course correct. As I wrote at the time, the ceasefire between Israel and the various militant factions in Gaza was doomed from the minute Israel refused to extend it to the West Bank. It is completely unreasonable to expect that members of the al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades or the Popular Resistance Committees (PRC) in Gaza would sit back and do nothing whilst Israeli forces continued to ‘arrest’ and kill militants and civilians in the West Bank. It’s as if Hamas made a truce with the residents of Haifa whilst continuing to fire on Tel Aviv. Indeed, the al-Aqsa Brigades said as much from the start, declaring,
“The Israeli aggression must stop in both the West Bank and Gaza Strip…This is a temporary cease-fire and any Israeli assault on our people in the West Bank will be viewed as a violation of the agreement.”
Olmert refused, inexplicably, to extend the ceasefire to the West Bank, and Israeli Occupation Forces (IOF) have continued to ‘arrest’ and kill Palestinians in the West Bank. As a result, the Qassams have continued to fall on southern Israel. For example, on November 27, the IOF shot dead a PRC militant in the West Bank. In retaliation, the PRC in Gaza launched two Qassams into Israel.
I say ‘inexplicably’, but that is only the case if one accepts that Israel truly wanted the ceasefire to last. Considering the evidence, this is can only be described as a faith position. Olmert’s government initially rejected a ceasefire in favour of expanding military operations, describing the Palestinian offer “a media stunt”. When force failed to stop the Qassams, however, he performed an about-face. Even then, he refused to agree to the one condition that might have made the ceasefire work, neglecting to provide even a remotely reasonable justification for doing so. The best he has come up with is that Israel would like to extend the truce to the West Bank, but will only do so after Gaza militants stop firing Qassams. This barely merits a response – the point, obviously, is that the militants won’t stop firing Qassams unless Israel stops killing Palestinians in the West Bank.
In any event, when one considers the horrendous violence, criminality and suffering Israel has inflicted on the Palestinian people this year, the idea that Olmert simply woke up one morning wanting peace is not credible. Events since the ceasefire have merely confirmed that Israel is not looking to sustain the ceasefire or use it as the basis for a lasting peace. When Olmert met with President Abbas, he promised to release $100 million of the $600 million in tax revenues Israel is withholding from the Palestinians, to dismantle 59 roadblocks in the West Bank and to release a small number of Palestinian prisoners as a gesture of goodwill. Said Defence Minister Peretz (whose days may well be numbered) of the roadblocks,
“We must consider easing roadblocks in places where this does not pose a danger,”
thereby admitting what everyone already knew: that Israel constructs roadblocks in the West Bank for reasons other than security. Despite the promising talk, the roadblocks have not been dismantled, the money has not been released and neither have the prisoners.
The irony of the Ramallah raid is that it was supposedly aimed at detaining a senior al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades militant, even as Israel and its allies are funding, arming and training the private army of President Abbas, whose Fatah party is the political wing of – who else? – the al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades!
Israel and its international allies’ strategy is clear: they have, through sustained economic sanctions and brutal military aggression (termed ‘Operation Summer Rains’ by Israel), brought Palestinians to the point where internal factions are fighting each other and Palestinian society is slowly but surely descending into civil war. That strategy has worked – only today, three Palestinians were killed and 18 wounded when fighting broke out between Fatah and Hamas forces in northern Gaza, whilst earlier this evening three Hamas members were kidnapped by Fatah. In total, eight Palestinians have been killed today due to factional violence. Now that civil war looks likely, Israel, the U.S. and Britain are busy arming and training the side they want to win (Abbas, incidentally, should be ashamed at his flagrant collaboration with the aggressors and the occupier). It’s textbook: despite Haniyeh’s pleas, the Palestinians are killing each other, Hamas’ days in government look numbered and there is no longer a unified Palestinian front against Israel.
The ceasefire is unlikely to hold out much longer, and civil war in Gaza looks increasingly probable. This is obviously disastrous for the Palestinians, but in the long term, it is also harmful to Israel’s security interests. As history demonstrates, the toppling of Hamas will serve only to further radicalise both the organisation itself and the Palestinian population as a whole. A just peace truly is the only alternative to war – unfortunately; we cannot help but conclude that Olmert simply isn’t interested in it.
Filed under: Israeli / Palestinian, News and politics, US | 13 Comments
-
Subscribe to The Heathlander feed
-
Site Meter
This link explains much.
That was horrible to watch, and I know what you’re getting at. Every civilian casualty is an awful thing, whether Israeli or Palestinian.
Of course, it is completely wrong for a Palestinian (or anyone) to lob a Molotov cocktail at a civilian. I don’t think anyone could describe such an act as anything but despicable.
But that’s not the situation here. Firstly, Israeli soldiers were on Palestinian territory in the process of carrying out another illegal act of aggression. Palestinians have a right to resist using force if necessary, and soldiers (as opposed to civilians) are legitimate targets.
Secondly, the four Palestinians who were killed were civilians. As I say, killing civilians is wrong, particularly in the context of an act of aggression.
How about a few clips of the hundreds of Palestinian children bombed by the zionist enterprise? How about a few clips of Palestinian children being blown to bits by the zionist enterprises gunboats? How about a few clips of Palestinian children being shot by jewish snipers? Why is it all right to murder civilians from a height of 30 000 feet but it is disgraceful to throw a molotov coctail at one?
It is the jewish state that refuses to abide by international law. It is the jewish state that ignores UN resolutions. It is the jews that have created an entity that is based on colonial settlements, ethnic cleansing and racial laws. Israel claims to be a “western” state, yet it has no defined borders (the better to steal more land) and it is set up by and exclusively for the benefit of jews.
kassandra: you are right to point out the hypocrisy in showing a video of an Israeli child getting attacked in a reply to a post about Palestinian civilians being attacked, as if one justified the other (although I don’t think ozymandias meant it that way). The point is that both are wrong.
I would, however, talk about Israel and Israelis rather than Jews. It cannot be denied that Israel consists of more than Jewish people, and I don’t see how one can put all the blame on one ethnic group (even if they are a majority).
Now just who flies those airplanes that bomb the Palestinians, the Lutherans? . If it makes you feel better, I’ll say israeli jews. According to some latest polls, almost 70% of israeli jews believe that torture is justified, the highest percentage in any country. For comparison, Italians came in at around 13%. About the same number would refuse to live in the same building with Palestinians, although stolen Palestinian homes are considered prime real estate in the jewish state. And considering a majority of jews worldwide support the racist, exclusivist jewish state unconditionally, the only conclusion that can be drawn is that it is the jews. When you find a Methodist sniper, let me know.
Firstly, about the torture and racism – fear can make people do and think all sorts of things. It was fear that convinced the British and American publics to allow Bush and Blair to invade Iraq. Now, of course from the outside we know that Israelis have no right to be as afraid as they are, but that doesn’t change the fact that they are.
Secondly, it’s not about what i ‘prefer’, it is about what is accurate. If you’re going to generalise, then do it accurately. It is innaccurate to say that ‘the Jews are occupying Palestine’ or ‘the Jews are doing this’ unless, in reality, all Jewish people were. In reality, that’s not even close to being the case. Israel is occupying the Palestinian, not the Jews. That’s just a fact.
You are right about fear leading people to carry out or accept certain crimes or acts. I disagree when you say that the Israelis seemingly have no right to be as afraid as they are. I’m not surprised they are as fearful as they are, I would be too in Israel at this point in time. Rockets being fired over the border, suicide bombers being caught each week before they inflict damage and death, threats of invasion, threats from Iran and the continuous looking-the-other-way of Europe and much of the world.
The disputed territories where the former Jordanians now reside (now known as Palestinians) is not a nation, yet. If the Arabs in this area don’t put down their weapons, renounce hatred and violence and come to the peace table, then maybe they will never get their desired state.
Israel has given all to bring peace to their region. They withdrew from the Gaza Strip, offered around 95% of the West Bank but no, the ‘Palestinians’ refuse and continue their barbaric attacks and radicalism.
All in all, I don’t blame Israelis for being scared. They have every excuse and right to be scared. I believe the West should aid Israel in every way to safe guard their democratic nation against radical Islamists/Nationalists.
“I disagree when you say that the Israelis seemingly have no right to be as afraid as they are. I’m not surprised they are as fearful as they are, I would be too in Israel at this point in time. Rockets being fired over the border, suicide bombers being caught each week before they inflict damage and death, threats of invasion, threats from Iran and the continuous looking-the-other-way of Europe and much of the world.”
Israelis face more of a threat than we do, certainly, but this constant fear of an existential threat that many seem to have is not grounded in reality. During the Lebanon war in the summer there were a couple of interesting pieces in Ha’aretz that discussed Israel’s tendency to view every battle as one for survival, probably left over from the days when Israel (and, before that, Jews) really did face exitential threats. But they really don’t any more – it is Israel that is the regional military superpower, not Lebanon, not Syria, not Iran and certainly not Hizbullah or Hamas.
Qassams have killed something like a dozen or so people in over a year. Now, that is not to be sniffed at and that’s not to trivialise Israeli suffering. But it’s important to get a bit of perspective; something like 683 Palestinians have been killed this year by Israel. And there is no threat of invasion, and the world is most definitely not looking away (I almost wish that it would).
“The disputed territories where the former Jordanians now reside (now known as Palestinians) is not a nation, yet. If the Arabs in this area don’t put down their weapons, renounce hatred and violence and come to the peace table, then maybe they will never get their desired state.’”
The territories are not “disputed”. They are “occupied”. Yes, it is true that Jordan once occupied the West Bank – that doesn’t make the Palestinians Jordanians, any more than they are now Israelis because Israel is occupying the West Bank. The tactic of casting doubt upon the existence of the Palestinian is an old one (employed infamously by Golda Meir), but it is simply bullshit (to put it bluntly).
It is interesting that you insist that the ‘Arabs’ put down their weapons, renounce ‘hatred’ (whatever that means) and violence and come to the ‘peace table’. Has Israel ever put down its weapons or renounced violence? Or has Israel developed into the third ranking military power on the planet, and regularly used that power illegally against the Palestinians and the Lebanese (and that’s just this year)? Is it the ‘Arabs’ or Israel that is currently perpetuating the longest illegal occupation in the world? Is it the ‘Arabs’ who refused to make a single compromise at Oslo and Camp David, or was that the Israelis?
It’s really quite simple: Israel is not only occupying the Palestinians; it is continuing to expand the settlements, annex more land (including the intended future capital of the Palestinian state) and implement policies that drive more and more Palestinians away from their homes. It also continues to use military force to oppress the Palestinians and topple their elected government.
Then, we’ve got the Palestinian resistance. Like all occupied people, the Palestinians are allowed to resist, using force if necessary.
For some reason, you are following the absurd line of demanding that the resistance give up all their weapons and renounce violence whilst the occupier does neither, and in fact continues to oppress and to annex land. Would you, if you were around during WWII, demand that the French resistance movements renounce violence and ‘hatred’ and disarm? Or would you instead support their right to resist against the foreign military occupation?
“Israel has given all to bring peace to their region. They withdrew from the Gaza Strip, offered around 95% of the West Bank but no, the ‘Palestinians’ refuse and continue their barbaric attacks and radicalism.”
I’m afraid that’s just nonsense. Read what Israel offered at Camp David. Look at the maps. Read the Oslo Accord. Israel never offered the Palestinians anything even close to what they are legally entitled to. I think Norman Finkelstein can sum it up better than me:
EDIT: The one exception was at Taba, which was ended before reaching a formal proposal when Barak left to fight an election campaign. Talks continued, however, and eventually produced the 2002 Geneva Accords. These Accords are, I think, a good basis for a future peace.
You zio-jews are defending an enterprise based on colonial settlements, ethnic cleansing and racial laws. The only vaguely similar state that comes to mind is apartheid-era South Africa, and even that country did not systematically bomb its black population, although it is true that some of the most stalwart defenders of the South African apartheid system were local jews. The list of your jews inhumanity towards the Palestinians has no end. Can you think of another entity that has roads that only one group is allowed to travel on? Yet, the zio-jewish enterprise has JEWS ONLY roads. Not even the nazis did that. You jews have outnazied the nazis. This is how the world has come to view you. Jamiekins, you live in la-la land, don’t peddle your Goebbels-like propagada concoctions to people who DO know history.
My comments were addressed to Beaman, not you Jamie. I just see red when I read the same old claptrap propaganda.
That’s fine kassandra, but again I’m afraid your argument loses its legitimacy because of basic errors, all to do with conflating ‘Israel’ and ‘Israelis’ with ‘Jews’. To do so is wrong and, frankly, racist. For example, Israel has not built any ‘Jewish only’ roads. It has constructed ‘Israeli only’ roads. As I’m sure you know, roughly a fifth of Israel’s population is Arabic. Second, whilst the comparison with apartheid South Africa is apt, the comparison with Nazism is not (at least, not without further qualification). Perhaps the Nazis did not have ‘German-only roads’ (although they certainlyexcluded Jews from schools and busses and citizenship and political office, for example). But the crimes of the Nazis, both in qualitative terms and in scale, are simply not in the same league as the crimes Israel has committed against the Palestinians.
That you ’see red’ when you read mistaken views on the Israel/Palestine conflict is understandable. But when you write in anger, as you obviously have done, your arguments are adversely affected, to put it mildly.
I appreciate your detailed response to my last comment Jamie.
Firstly, Kassandra, I am not actually Jewish, nor Evangelical Christian (of which you might have thought next). I have little to no interest in the religious side of the Israel/Palestinian debate. I see it politically. I am non-religious myself.
Secondly, you were half right in referring to me as a ‘zio-jew’. I am sympathetic to Zionism indeed.
Jamie, your arguments interest me very much and the Israel debate is one I’m fascinated by. I’m afraid I can’t agree with a lot of what you have stated. Suffice to say, in the very near future I will write my views about the Israel/Palestinian issues on my blog ‘Beaman’s World’, if you like I can let you know when.
Thanks Beaman – yes, tell me and I’ll have a read.