Politics.be Registreren kan je hier.
Problemen met registreren of reageren op de berichten?
Een verloren wachtwoord?
Gelieve een mail te zenden naar [email protected] met vermelding van je gebruikersnaam.

Ga terug   Politics.be > Diverse > Archief > Brandend Actueel: Gaza offensief
Registreer FAQForumreglement Ledenlijst

Brandend Actueel: Gaza offensief Tijdelijk forum

 
 
Discussietools
Oud 14 januari 2009, 08:29   #1
E. Gidius
Secretaris-Generaal VN
 
E. Gidius's schermafbeelding
 
Geregistreerd: 14 november 2008
Locatie: Belgisch-Congo, oeps -Vlaanderen
Berichten: 22.112
Standaard Prof. Mark LeVine: "Wie zal Israël redden van zichzelf?"

Vele voorstanders van de Gaza-oorlog lezen al lang geen analyses meer. Beelden van de verwoestingen willen ze niet zien of ridiculiseren ze. Het is allemaal een beetje te confronterend.

Er zijn er - hier op het forum, in Israël en in de wereldwijde Joodse gemeenschap - die niet verblind zijn door haat en bloeddorst, en desondanks alle feiten onder ogen blijven nemen. Voor hen deze analyse van Mark LeVine, professor geschiedenis van het Midden-Oosten aan de Universiteit van Californië.

LeVine stelt bezorgd vast dat het discours van de Israëlische regering aan alle kanten rammelt, en vooral dat dat overal in de wereld begint door te dringen. Israël is, met andere woorden, de oorlog om de publieke opinie aan het verliezen is. Hij toont aan dat alle argumenten die Israël opdelft om oorlog te kunnen voeren (schending bestand, wil om Israël te vernietigen etc.), één voor één door de mand vallen.

Israël kan Hamas niet vernietigen, aldus LeVine. Net zoals Hesbollah in 2006 zal Hamas overleven en alleen daardoor al gewonnen hebben. Dat is dodelijk voor de veiligheid van Israël.

Citaat:
http://english.aljazeera.net/focus/w...723260741.html

WHO WILL SAVE ISRAEL FROM ITSELF?

By Mark LeVine

One by one the justifications given by Israel for its latest war in Gaza are unravelling.

The argument that this is a purely defensive war, launched only after Hamas broke a six-month ceasefire has been challenged, not just by observers in the know such as Jimmy Carter, the former US president who helped facilitate the truce, but by centre-right Israeli intelligence think tanks.

The Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center, whose December 31 report titled "Six Months of the Lull Arrangement Intelligence Report," confirmed that the June 19 truce was only "sporadically violated, and then not by Hamas but instead by ... "rogue terrorist organisations".

Instead, "the escalation and erosion of the lull arrangement" occurred after Israel killed six Hamas members on November 4 without provocation and then placed the entire Strip under an even more intensive siege the next day.

According to a joint Tel Aviv University-European University study, this fits a larger pattern in which Israeli violence has been responsible for ending 79 per cent of all lulls in violence since the outbreak of the second intifada, compared with only 8 per cent for Hamas and other Palestinian factions.

Indeed, the Israeli foreign ministry seems to realise that this argument is losing credibility.

During a conference call with half a dozen pro-Israel professors on Thursday, Asaf Shariv, the Consul General of Israel in New York, focused more on the importance of destroying the intricate tunnel system connecting Gaza to the Sinai.

He claimed that such tunnels were "as big as the Holland and Lincoln tunnels," and offered as proof the "fact" that lions and monkeys had been smuggled through them to a zoo in Gaza. In reality, the lions were two small cubs that were drugged, thrown in sacks, and dragged through a tunnel on their way to a private zoo.

Israel's self-image

The claim that Hamas will never accept the existence of Israel has proved equally misinformed, as Hamas leaders explicitly announce their intention to do just that in the pages of the Los Angeles Times or to any international leader or journalist who will meet with them.

With each new family, 10, 20 and 30 strong, buried under the rubble of a building in Gaza, the claim that the Israeli forces have gone out of their way to diminish civilian casualties - long a centre-piece of Israel's image as an enlightened and moral democracy - is falling apart.

Anyone with an internet connection can Google "Gaza humanitarian catastrophe" and find the UN's Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs in the Occupied Territories and read the thousands of pages of evidence documenting the reality of the current fighting, and the long term siege on Gaza that preceded it.

The Red Cross, normally scrupulous in its unwillingness to single out parties to a conflict for criticism, sharply criticised Israel for preventing medical personnel from reaching wounded Palestinians, some of whom remained trapped for days, slowly starving and dying in the Gazan rubble amidst their dead relatives.

Meanwhile, the United Nations has flatly denied Israeli claims that Palestinian fighters were using the UNRWA school compound bombed on January 6, in which 40 civilians were killed, to launch attacks, and has challenged Israel to prove otherwise.

War crimes admission

Additionally, numerous flippant remarks by senior Israeli politicians and generals, including Tzipi Livni, the foreign minister, refusing to make a distinction between civilian people and institutions and fighters - "Hamas doesn't ... and neither should we" is how Livni puts it - are rightly being seen as admissions of war crimes.

Indeed, in reviewing statements by Israeli military planners leading up to the invasion, it is clear that there was a well thought out decision to go after Gaza's civilian infrastructure - and with it, civilians.

The following quote from an interview with Major-General Gadi Eisenkot that appeared in the Israeli daily Yedioth Ahronoth in October, is telling:

"We will wield disproportionate power against every village from which shots are fired on Israel, and cause immense damage and destruction. From our perspective these [the villages] are military bases," he said.

"This isn't a suggestion. This is a plan that has already been authorised."

Causing "immense damage and destruction" and considering entire villages "military bases" is absolutely prohibited under international law.

Eisenkot's description of this planning in light of what is now unfolding in Gaza is a clear admission of conspiracy and intent to commit war crimes, and when taken with the comments above, and numerous others, renders any argument by Israel that it has tried to protect civilians and is not engaging in disproportionate force unbelievable.

International laws violated

On the ground, the evidence mounts ever higher that Israel is systematically violating a host of international laws, including but not limited to Article 56 of the IV Hague Convention of 1907, the First Additional Protocol of the Geneva Convention, the Fourth Geneva Convention (more specifically known as the "Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War of 12 August 1949", the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and the principles of Customary International Humanitarian Law.

None of this excuses or legitimises the firing of rockets or mortars by any Palestinian group at Israeli civilians and non-military targets.

As Richard Falk, the UN special rapporteur, declared in his most recent statement on Gaza: "It should be pointed out unambiguously that there is no legal (or moral) justification for firing rockets at civilian targets, and that such behavior is a violation of IHR, associated with the right to life, as well as constitutes a war crime."

By the same logic, however, Israel does not have the right to use such attacks as an excuse to launch an all-out assault on the entire population of Gaza.

In this context, even Israel's suffering from the constant barrage of rockets is hard to pay due attention to when the numbers of dead and wounded on each side are counted. Any sense of proportion is impossible to sustain with such a calculus.

'Rogue' state

Israeli commentators and scholars, self-described "loyal" Zionists who served proudly in the army in wars past, are now publicly describing their country, in the words of Oxford University professor Avi Shlaim, as a "rogue" and gangster" state led by "completely unscrupulous leaders".

Neve Gordon, a politics professor at Ben Gurion University, has declared that Israel's actions in Gaza are like "raising animals for slaughter on a farm" and represent a "bizarre new moral element" in warfare.

"The moral voice of restraint has been left behind ... Everything is permitted" against Palestinians, writes a disgusted Haaretz columnist, Gideon Levy.

Fellow Haaretz columnist and daughter of Holocaust survivors, Amira Haas writes of her late parents disgust at how Israeli leaders justified Israel's wars with a "language laundromat" aimed at redefining reality and Israel's moral compass. "Lucky my parents aren't alive to see this," she exclaimed.

Around the world people are beginning to compare Israel's attack on Gaza, which after the 2005 withdrawal of Israeli forces and settlers was turned literally into the world's largest prison, to the Jewish uprising in the Warsaw Ghetto.

Extremist Muslims are using internet forums to collect names and addresses of prominent European Jews with the goal, it seems clear, of assassinating them in retaliation for Israel's actions in Gaza.

Al-Qaeda is attempting to exploit this crisis to gain a foothold in Gaza and Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon and Syria, as well as through attacking Jewish communities globally.

Iran's defiance of both Israel and its main sponsor, the US, is winning it increasing sympathy with each passing day.

Democratic values eroded

Inside Israel, the violence will continue to erode both democratic values in the Jewish community, and any acceptance of the Jewish state's legitimacy in the eyes of its Palestinian citizens.

And yet in the US - at least in Washington and in the offices of the mainstream Jewish organisations - the chorus of support for Israel's war on Gaza continues to sing in tight harmony with official Israeli policy, seemingly deaf to the fact that they have become so out of tune with the reality exploding around them.

At my university, UCI, where last summer Jewish and Muslim students organised a trip together through the occupied territories and Israel so they could see with their own eyes the realities there, old battle lines are being redrawn.

The Anteaters for Israel, the college pro-Israel group at the University of California, Irvine, sent out an urgent email to the community explaining that, "Over the past week, increasing amounts of evidence lead us to believe that Hamas is largely responsible for any alleged humanitarian crisis in Gaza".

I have no idea who the "us" is that is referred to in the appeal, although I am sure that the membership of that group is shrinking.

Indeed, one of the sad facts of this latest tragedy is that with each claim publicly refuted by facts on the ground, more and more Americans, including Jews, are refusing to trust the assertions of Israeli and American Jewish leaders.

Trap

Even worse, in the Arab/Muslim world, the horrific images pouring out of Gaza daily are allowing preachers and politicians to deploy well-worn yet still dangerous and inciteful stereotypes against Jews as they rally the masses against Israel - and through it - their own governments.

What is most frightening is that the most important of Israel's so-called friends, the US political establishment and the mainstream Jewish leadership, seem clueless to the devastating trap that Israel has led itself into - in good measure with their indulgence and even help.

It is one that threatens the country's existence far more than any Qassam rockets, with their 0.4 per cent kill rate; even more than the disastrous 2006 invasion of southern Lebanon, which by weakening Israel's deterrence capability in some measure made this war inevitable.

First, it is clear that Israel cannot destroy Hamas, it cannot stop the rockets unless it agrees to a truce that will go far to meeting the primary demand of Hamas - an end to the siege.

Merely by surviving (and it surely will survive) Hamas, like Hezbollah in 2006, will have won.

Israel is succeeding in doing little more than creating another generation of Palestinians with hearts filled with rage and a need for revenge.

Second, Israel's main patron, the US, along with the conservative Arab autocracies and monarchies that are its only allies left in the Muslim world, are losing whatever crumbs of legitimacy they still had with their young and angry populations.

The weaker the US and its axis becomes in the Middle East, the more precarious becomes Israel's long-term security. Indeed, any chance that the US could convince the Muslim world to pressure Iran to give up its quest for nuclear weapons has been buried in Gaza.

Third, as Israel brutalises Palestinians, it brutalises its own people. You cannot occupy another people and engage in violence against them at this scale without doing even greater damage to your soul.

The high incidence of violent crimes committed by veterans returning from combat duty in Iraq is but one example of how the violence of occupation and war eat away at people's moral centre.

While in the US only a small fraction of the population participates in war; in Israel, most able-bodied men end up participating.

The effects of the latest violence perpetrated against Palestinians upon the collective Israeli soul is incalculable; the notion that it can survive as an "ethnocracy" - favouring one ethnic group, Jews, yet by and large democratic - is becoming a fiction.

Violence-as-power

Who will save Israel from herself?

Israelis are clearly incapable. Their addiction as a society to the illusion of violence-as-power has reached the level of collective mental illness.

As Haaretz reporter Yossi Melman described it on January 10, "Israel has created an image of itself of a madman that has lost it".

Not Palestinians, too many of whom have fallen prey to the same condition.

Not the Middle East Quartet, the European Union, the United Nations, or the Arab League, all of whom are utterly powerless to influence Israeli policy.

Not the organised Jewish leadership in the US and Europe, who are even more blind to what is happening than most Israelis, who at least allow internal debate about the wisdom of their government's policies.

Not the growing progressive Jewish community, which will need years to achieve enough social and political power to challenge the status quo.

And not senior American politicians and policy-makers who are either unwilling to risk alienating American Jewish voters, or have been so brainwashed by the constant barrage of propaganda put out by the "Israel Lobby" that they are incapable of reaching an independent judgment about the conflict.

During the US presidential race, Barack Obama was ridiculed for being a messiah-like figure. The idea does not sound so funny now. It is hard to imagine anyone less saving Israel, the Palestinians, and the world from another four years of mindless violence.

Update: In a further challenge to the democratic process in Israel, on January 12, the Israeli newspaper Haaretz reported that the Central Elections Committee had voted overwhelmingly to bar Arab-led parties from participating in the upcoming parliamentary elections.

Also, there are reports that the claim that extremist Muslims are using the internet to collect names and addresses of prominent British Jews in order to attack them, might in fact have been a hoax.

Mark LeVine is a professor of Middle East history at the University of California, Irvine, and is the author of "Heavy Metal Islam: Rock, Resistance, and the Struggle for the Soul of Islam" and the soon to be published "An Impossible Peace: Israel/Palestine Since 1989".

The views expressed by the author are not necessarily those of Al Jazeera.
__________________
E. Gidius is offline  
Oud 14 januari 2009, 08:38   #2
ministe van agitatie
Eur. Commissievoorzitter
 
ministe van agitatie's schermafbeelding
 
Geregistreerd: 9 november 2006
Berichten: 8.593
Standaard

Bijzonder heldere tekst ... De man verwijst naar http://www.ochaopt.org/
__________________
• نريد ثورة- • we want revolution •


Laatst gewijzigd door ministe van agitatie : 14 januari 2009 om 08:45.
ministe van agitatie is offline  
Oud 14 januari 2009, 08:55   #3
Red_Dog
Schepen
 
Red_Dog's schermafbeelding
 
Geregistreerd: 30 juli 2004
Locatie: Antwerpen, Dublin
Berichten: 416
Stuur een bericht via MSN naar Red_Dog
Standaard

Het is uiteraard makkelijk om een opinie-stuk te schrijven als je je eigen leugens gaat geloven.

Citaat:
Israel's self-image

The claim that Hamas will never accept the existence of Israel has proved equally misinformed, as Hamas leaders explicitly announce their intention to do just that in the pages of the Los Angeles Times or to any international leader or journalist who will meet with them.
Dit, bijvoorbeeld, is pertinent onwaar.
Nergens heeft Hamas toegegeven aan een erkenning van Israël, en al zeker niet in de LA Times.

En E. Gidius: De pro-Israël mensen lezen die opinies niet meer om net die redenen: Iedereen die zo'n stuk schrijft denkt dat hij/zij de wijsheid in pacht heeft en het conflict eens snel zal oplossen. Opinie-stukken zijn net dat: opinies.
__________________
Quis Separabit ?

Laatst gewijzigd door Red_Dog : 14 januari 2009 om 09:02.
Red_Dog is offline  
Oud 14 januari 2009, 09:16   #4
ministe van agitatie
Eur. Commissievoorzitter
 
ministe van agitatie's schermafbeelding
 
Geregistreerd: 9 november 2006
Berichten: 8.593
Standaard

Citaat:
Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Red_Dog Bekijk bericht
Het is uiteraard makkelijk om een opinie-stuk te schrijven als je je eigen leugens gaat geloven.

Nerge,s heeft Hamas toegegeven aan een erkenning van Israël, en al zeker niet in de LA Times.
En gij hebt de LA Times uitgepluisd om dat te weten? Hamas heeft met zoveel woorden gezegd dat Israel bestaat en zal blijven bestaan. Ik hoop dat je kan lezen:

Citaat:
Hamas' political leader Khaled Meshal on Monday said Hamas would accept a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip along Israel's pre-1967 borders, and would grant Israel a 10-year hudna, or truce, as an implicit proof of recognition if Israel withdraws from those areas.

Meshal's comments were one of the clearest outlines Hamas has given for what it would do if Israel withdrew from the territories it captured in the 1967 Six Day War. He suggested Hamas would accept Israel's existence alongside a Palestinian state on the rest of the lands Israel has held since 1948.
bron


Citaat:
The statement by Khaled Mashaal in Damascus amounted to a tacit acceptance of Israel’s right to exist alongside a Palestinian state, but without explicit recognition. Hamas has previously called for the destruction of Israel, which occupied the West Bank, the Gaza Strip and east Jerusalem in the 1967 war. Israel later declared the entire city of Jerusalem as its capital.

Mashaal, who spoke at a news conference, said that the future Palestinian state must have Jerusalem as its “genuine, sovereign capital. He did not say whether he meant the eastern, Arab, section or the entire city.

“We agree to a (Palestinian) state on pre-67 borders, with Jerusalem as its capital with genuine sovereignty without settlements but without recognising Israel,” Mashaal said.

Earlier, Jimmy Carter, the former US president, said that Hamas was prepared to accept Israel's right to “live as a neighbour next door in peace.” Carter met twice with Mashaal over the weekend.

"They said they would accept a Palestinian state on the 1967 borders if approved by Palestinians ... even though Hamas might disagree with some terms of the agreement," Mr Carter said during a speech in Jerusalem.

bron


Citaat:

DAMASCUS (Reuters) - Hamas acknowledges the existence of Israel as a reality but formal recognition will only be considered when a Palestinian state has been created, the movement's exiled leader Khaled Meshaal said on Wednesday.

Softening a previous refusal to accept the Jewish state's existence, Meshaal said Israel was a "matter of fact" and a reality that will persist.

"There will remain a state called Israel," Meshaal said in an interview in the Syrian capital, in what appeared to be clearest statement yet by the Islamist group on its attitude toward the state it previously said had no right to exist.

"The problem is not that there is an entity called Israel," said Meshaal, who survived an Israeli assassination attempt in 1997. "The problem is that the Palestinian state is non-existent."
bron

Citaat:
Aboul Geit, interviewed in the London-based newspaper Al Sharq Al Awsat, said: "I am confident that Hamas recognises the existence of Israel and I am confident that it is able to coexist with the idea of negotiations with Israel."

"There's no need to keep equivocating on this matter, especially since Hamas has already accepted a truce with Israel for the sake of negotiations. I wonder whether this truce was with a ghost," he added.

bron
__________________
• نريد ثورة- • we want revolution •

ministe van agitatie is offline  
Oud 14 januari 2009, 09:23   #5
Red_Dog
Schepen
 
Red_Dog's schermafbeelding
 
Geregistreerd: 30 juli 2004
Locatie: Antwerpen, Dublin
Berichten: 416
Stuur een bericht via MSN naar Red_Dog
Standaard

Nergens wordt daar het bestaansrecht van de staat Israël erkend.
En dan zeg je tegen mij dat je hoopt dat ik kan lezen ?

Raar dat je enkel de stukken in het vet gedrukt zegt die je uitkomen, de zinnen die erop volgen echter niet.
Meshaal heeft ook het volgende gezegd:

Citaat:
In a Reuters interview in January 2007, Mashal said: "As a Palestinian today I speak of a Palestinian and Arab demand for a state on 1967 borders. It is true that in reality there will be an entity or state called Israel on the rest of Palestinian land. This is a reality, but I won't deal with it in terms of recognising or admitting it." In the same interview, he declined to accept the Western demand for Hamas to recognise Israel, renounce violence against it and honour previous peace agreements.
Wat hij dus zegt is: Er bestaat inderdaad een staat Israël, maar ik en Hamas erkennen ze niet.
__________________
Quis Separabit ?
Red_Dog is offline  
Oud 14 januari 2009, 09:34   #6
E. Gidius
Secretaris-Generaal VN
 
E. Gidius's schermafbeelding
 
Geregistreerd: 14 november 2008
Locatie: Belgisch-Congo, oeps -Vlaanderen
Berichten: 22.112
Standaard

Citaat:
Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Red_Dog Bekijk bericht
Nergens wordt daar het bestaansrecht van de staat Israël erkend.
Wat voor een onzin is dit alweer? Het bestaansrecht van een volwaardige Palestijnse staat hangt niet af van of die al dan niet Israël wil erkennen. Erkenning van andere staten is trouwens voor geen enkele staat ter wereld een voorwaarde.

Wat een ongelooflijke pretentie.
__________________
E. Gidius is offline  
Oud 14 januari 2009, 09:39   #7
ministe van agitatie
Eur. Commissievoorzitter
 
ministe van agitatie's schermafbeelding
 
Geregistreerd: 9 november 2006
Berichten: 8.593
Standaard

Citaat:
Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Red_Dog Bekijk bericht
Nergens wordt daar het bestaansrecht van de staat Israël erkend.
Ik heb geen zin in semantische spelletjes. Ik sluit af met:

Het bestaan van Israël wordt erkend. En het feit dat die staat zal blijven bestaan ook.
__________________
• نريد ثورة- • we want revolution •

ministe van agitatie is offline  
Oud 14 januari 2009, 09:43   #8
Red_Dog
Schepen
 
Red_Dog's schermafbeelding
 
Geregistreerd: 30 juli 2004
Locatie: Antwerpen, Dublin
Berichten: 416
Stuur een bericht via MSN naar Red_Dog
Standaard

Citaat:
Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door E. Gidius Bekijk bericht
Wat voor een onzin is dit alweer? Het bestaansrecht van een volwaardige Palestijnse staat hangt niet af van of die al dan niet Israël wil erkennen. Erkenning van andere staten is trouwens voor geen enkele staat ter wereld een voorwaarde.

Wat een ongelooflijke pretentie.
Excuseer ?
In de hier zo populaire VN-resoluties wordt gezegd dat de toekomstige Palestijnse staat het bestaansrecht van Israël moet erkennen.

Of gelden die resoluties enkel als ze moeten uitgevoerd worden door Israël ?

Citaat:
Resolution 242 - This Security Council resolution (a binding resolution) has two main components:

1. Affirms that the fulfillment of Charter principles requires the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which should include the application of both the following principles:

a. Withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;

b. Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force;

2. Affirms further the necessity:

a. For guaranteeing freedom of navigation through international waterways in the area;
b. For achieving a just settlement of the refugee problem;
c. For guaranteeing the territorial inviolability and political independence of every State in the area, through measures including the establishment of demilitarized zones.
En net DAT is het probleem met Hamas.
Zij weigeren namelijk dat te doen.
1b en 2c van Resolutie 242 zijn de verantwoordelijkheid van de Arabische landen rondom Israël samen met de Palestijnse Authoriteit.
Israël moet zich zelfs niet terug trekken zolang die voorwaarden niet vervuld zijn, dat deden ze toch in 2005.

En nee, het feit dat Israël zal blijven bestaan wordt niet beweerd, enkel dat ze er voorlopig is. Maar ja, als dat semantische spelletjes zijn voor jou is de discussie afgelopen zeker ?
__________________
Quis Separabit ?

Laatst gewijzigd door Red_Dog : 14 januari 2009 om 09:45.
Red_Dog is offline  
 



Regels voor berichten
Je mag niet nieuwe discussies starten
Je mag niet reageren op berichten
Je mag niet bijlagen versturen
Je mag niet jouw berichten bewerken

vB-code is Aan
Smileys zijn Aan
[IMG]-code is Aan
HTML-code is Uit
Forumnavigatie


Alle tijden zijn GMT +1. Het is nu 11:26.


Forumsoftware: vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content copyright ©2002 - 2020, Politics.be