No 618 Posted by fw, November 20, 2012
“If there is not an end to the siege of Gaza, if the Gaza crossings are not opened, the Israeli controlled crossings… its control over the airspace, the waters, the borders, everything about Gaza is under Israeli control. Given that, if there is not an agreement to end that control, to open the border crossings, to let Gaza breathe, this [war] will continue. It will continue in a year, in two years, in four years.” —Phyllis Bennis
Phyllis Bennis, Middle East expert and fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies, gives her take on the Israeli bombardment of Gaza in an interview on Democracy Now. This post includes an embedded 16:30-minute video of the interview, an abridged transcript of selected highlights, added subheadings, hyperlinks and text highlighting. To go to the Democracy Now website to see the interview and have access to the full transcript, click on the linked titled below.
ABRIDGED TRANSCRIPT (Selected remarks by Phyllis Bennis)
Vicious Israeli bombardment of Gaza “very definitely a U.S. central institutionalized action”
We don’t know yet what the announcement from the Egyptian Prime Minister means. There was an announcement from the Israeli side they will delay — I think that was their word — the possibility of a ground invasion, but they are continuing, as we just heard, the air bombardment that has killed so many people in Gaza. This is, Amy, very definitely a U.S. central institutionalized action that’s going on. We heard, just in the last couple of days, from the Israeli Defense Minister who said directly, this effort could not have been concluded without the generous and consistent support of the American administration led by President Obama.
Obama gave Israel “carte blanche to use U.S.-made weapons” in violation of US law
I think that’s the most important thing for those of this in the U.S. to keep in mind. This is something where the United States has made clear that it is giving Israel carte blanche to use U.S.-made weapons — we’re talking about f-16’s, we’re talking about Apache helicopters, we’re talking about armored Caterpillar bulldozers, we’re talking about drones — most of which are produced in the U.S., purchased with our tax dollars, in violation, in this use, of U.S. laws, specifically the Arms Export Control act that makes it illegal to use U.S. arms in an illegal way, for example, in maintaining an illegal occupation, in violating the Geneva conventions, etc.
Dramatic changes in Middle East politics have reduced US influence and isolated Israel more than ever
What we’re looking at is a moment where for both the U.S. and Israel, as they take up this question of whether there could be an immediate cease-fire as the world is demanding, the question of the Middle East having changed so dramatically since four years ago during Operation Cast Lead, at that time, Israel could count on a U.S.-dependent dictator in Egypt, governments throughout the Arab world that had no accountability to their own population, that were only really accountable to the U.S., and were in that context prepare to play nicely with Israel. Do whatever the U.S. one of them to do, vis-a-vis Israel, whether it be peace treaties whether it be trade arrangements, etc. because the U.S. was calling all the shots.
Today, the situation is very different. The two countries the U.S. most needs to act as interlocutors in the region — Turkey and Egypt — are arguably right now the closest and most important allies of Hamas. Hamas is no longer an isolated outlier in the region. Hamas, now, is arguably less isolated than Israel is. Israel is more isolated than Hamas, has fewer friends. That changes the dynamics. It does not mean that any Arab countries are about to join the war against Israel. That would disastrous, that kind of escalation would not help anyone. But the that fact Israel cannot count on diplomatic support from Arab governments etc., changes the dynamics; it puts far greater pressure on Israel so that the possibility becomes much more realistic that there could be an immediate cease-fire, perhaps today, as the Egyptian Prime Minister said.
Without a permanent end to Israel’s iron-grip control over Gaza, expect to see future Israeli brutality
The question will be immediately with the cease-fire, is there going to be a change in the policy? If there is not an end to the siege of Gaza, if the Gaza crossings are not opened, the Israeli controlled crossings — because, we should remember, Gaza is still under occupation, despite the withdrawal of troops and soldiers in 2005, Israel continues its control over the airspace, the waters, the borders, everything about Gaza is under Israeli control. Given that, if there is not an agreement to end that control, to open the border crossings, to let Gaza breathe, this will continue. It will continue in a year, in two years, in four years. Maybe once again just after the next U.S. elections, that seems to be the favorite Israeli timeline. Maybe just before the next Israeli elections, which is what we’re looking at right now. Much of the timing of this has to do with the pressures on Netanyahu as he looks to his re-election in January. So all of those political factors are under way. But the possibility right now that there might be a desperately needed cease-fire is made more possible by these massive changes in the region where the U.S. is no longer able to count on compliant dictators willing to violate the wishes of their own populations to abide by Washington’s dictates.
Regarding responsibility for starting this latest war, that’s determined by when you start the clock
History can be determined by when you start the clock.
The deaths of 3 Israelis in the current conflict must be considered in the context of continuing Israeli brutality against Palestinians
If Israel was seriously trying to protect its population, that’s the period when no Israelis were killed. During this escalation, three Israelis were killed, tragically, civilians who should not have been killed. But, the reality is, that this goes back to the occupation. If we don’t acknowledge this in the context of occupation, the siege of Gaza, the traditional occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem, we will never be able to stop it. We can get a cease fire right now, stop it for the moment, but then it will continue because there is no option.
Western governments invoke the “moral responsibility to protect” mantra only when it suits their geopolitical interests
When the world abandons a people under occupation, as we have seen in the Palestinian Territories, there is reaction from those people. We hear a great deal from world leaders about the responsibility to protect the new mantra of the United Nations. We have a responsibility to protect the people of Libya. We have a responsibility to protect the people of Syria. There are serious reasons why the responsibility to protect should have been invoked, in my view, not the way it was, but the world did owe a level of protection to people living under repressive regimes around the world. That has also been true of U.S.-backed regimes that continues around the world. What we have seen in Bahrain and other places.
Under successive US administrations, “responsibility to protect” only applies to Israel
But, in the question of Palestine, that responsibility to protect for the Obama administration as was true of every administration before it, only applies to Israel. We heard it again and again from President Obama, from other officials of the administration, members of congress.
While Israel has the right to defend itself, Palestinians, it seems, only “have the right to die under Israeli rockets”
Israel has the right to defend itself. Israel has the right of self-defense. Asked whether Palestinians have the right of self-defense, the State Department’s spokesperson said, “Israel has the right of self-defense.” Implying Palestinians have no rights at all, they only apparently have the right to die under Israeli rockets.
Carte blanche support for Israel dropping among Democrats
President Obama and the Congress, which are so determined to keep this focus solely on Israel as a victim as if Israel was not the occupying force with a far greater military force, where almost all the casualties are on the Palestinian side only three on the Israeli side, 116, most of them civilians and including far too many children on the Palestinian side, what we’re looking at is a scenario where that reality is still seen as unacceptable to talk about in political circles here in Washington, but it’s no longer the popular view. If you look at the polls just two days ago, there was a new poll by CNN that indicated that when you divide it by parties, and this is becoming an increasingly partisan issue, Democrats dropped their support by 11% lower than it was four years ago when asked, do you think the Israeli move is legitimate? Only 41% of Democrats said, yes, we think this is legitimate. Four years ago 52% said that.
Absent an immediate end to the siege of Gaza, a cease fire by itself will not last
So, I think if we’re serious about this, two things need to happen. An immediate cease fire on all sides to stop the rockets in all directions, stop the bombings in all directions. But, immediate end to the siege of Gaza that has given rise to this kind of desperate resistance in the first place. If that does not happen, the immediate cease-fire that will happen, whether it’s today or tomorrow, that will happen, but it will not last unless the fundamental underlying root causes are addressed. The immediate root causes have to deal with the siege of Gaza, the closure, the turning of 1.6 million Gazan residents, half of them children under 16, into inmates in an open-air prison. That’s what has to stop.