Reply #24: Israel critique taken from a 2001 paper of mine: [View All]

But perhaps the most serious source of tension between the United States and the Arab population of the Middle East is the special relationship between the United States and Israel. Popular government propaganda has gone to great lengths to characterize the Arab-Islamic people of the region as relentless (and senseless) haters of Israel with no solid basis for any legitimate claims. And in addition to this, the Judeo-Christian community has also too often sought to characterize the Arab-Islamic people as the enemy of “God’s chosen people.” But if we are to justly call ourselves true Patriots, we must examine the situation more closely.

The United States has never questioned its tolerance of Israeli actions – actions that the U.S. would tolerate by no other government in the region. When Israel took and occupied territory by force in 1967, we did nothing other than continue to develop a standing policy of arming and supporting Israel with no conditions on that support. The justification given for the occupation was hardly different than Adolf Hitler’s explanation of the need for “breathing room” a few years earlier, though the world was much less outraged due to the limited scale and location of the occupation and the status of Israel as a “special” state, both from a religious and political perspective.

The United States has also showed itself to be drastically one-sided in its sponsorship of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. Rather than be committed to the Oslo peace accord and UN Resolution 242, which called for a “land for peace” doctrine through which certain land within the occupied territories would be exchanged for peaceful relations between Palestinians and Israelis, the United States acquiesced to Israel’s later rejection of the plan. Though initially agreeing to take steps to implement UN 242, Israel instead failed to take any steps towards those goals. Instead it has advocated a “peace for peace” process, in which no concessions are made of land forcibly occupied in 1967, but rather Israel agrees to “stop shooting if they (Palestinians) stop shooting.”

This position completely ignores the reasons for the shooting in the first place, takes no steps towards a policy of negotiation or “accommodation” and instead takes a strict “rejectionist” position consisting of an ongoing refusal to accept a Palestinian State of any kind. When the Netanyahu government took over in 1996, it refused to implement any of the agreements previously made by the former leadership. Instead, it embarked on a policy of further aggressive acts including expanding settlements, suspending Palestinian rights in East Jerusalem and closing territories. Current Israeli Prime Minster Ariel Sharon seems to be doing little to change those policies, and is himself the focus of calls from international human rights organizations for investigation into crimes against humanity while acting as Defense Minister (specifically, charges regarding the massacre of civilians in the Palestinian refugee camps of Sabra and Shatilla in 1982). All the while the United States has remained unflinchingly silent and demonstrated repeatedly to the regional Arab community its unwillingness to push its Israeli ally in to a position of dialogue and compromise with Palestinians. This is a further source of anger towards the United States in the Middle East region.

But far worse than the United States’ refusal to demand that Israel endorse the “land for peace” process outlined by the Oslo accords and UN 242 is the United States selective blindness towards countless cases of grievous Israeli human rights abuses, military crimes, and violations of International Law. While the years of conflict between displaced Palestinians and Israel have seen violence and atrocity on both sides, Israeli abuses and horrors barely get mention in official government statements and in the American press, while at the same time there is no end to reports and official reproach against the Palestinian aggression. In reality neither side has ever walked on moral high ground throughout the entire conflict, and if we were to be honest, we would question if there was any difference between Palestinian violence and Israeli violence apart from the fact that one is that one is labeled “terrorism” and the other is given official support under the name of (Israeli)government sponsored action. The United States strongly condemns one and remains silent toward the other. According to Bennis, “Washington’s willingness to ignore the Israeli threat in the Middle East strengthens the prevalent Arab view that the U.S. practices a dangerous double standard.”

In truth there is no difference between terrorism that sponsors suicide bombings in public restaurants and terrorism that sends military tanks and troops into Hebron with the mission of burning down homes and killing indiscriminately. Yet the United States’ support for Israeli violence has remained as unilateral as its condemnation for Palestinian violence. This glaring contradiction is difficult to characterize as anything but the most blatant hypocrisy, and as true Patriots we must critically examine the evidence of the situation.
In October of 2000, Human Rights Watch (HRW) prepared a report entitled, Israel, The Occupied West Bank And Gaza Strip, And The Palestinian Authority Territories: Investigation Into Unlawful Use Of Force In The West Bank, Gaza Strip, And Northern Israel. In the report, HRW described serious, sustained and numerous violations of human rights. The report is worth citing at length:

Human Rights Watch conducted a fact-finding investigation into the unlawful use of force against civilians by security and police forces in Israel, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip, from October 4 through October 11. The organization found a pattern of repeated Israeli use of excessive lethal force during clashes between its security forces and Palestinian demonstrators in situations where demonstrators were unarmed and posed no threat of death or serious injury to the security forces or to others. In cases that Human Rights Watch investigated where gunfire by Palestinian security forces or armed protesters was a factor, use of lethal force by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) was indiscriminate and not directed at the source of the threat, in violation of international law enforcement standards. In Israel, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip, the IDF regularly used rubber bullets and plastic-coated metal bullets as well as live ammunition in an excessive or indiscriminate manner. A particularly egregious example of such unlawful fire is the IDF's use of medium-caliber bullets against unarmed demonstrators in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and in some instances, such as the Netzarim Junction in the Gaza Strip, against medical personnel. These military weapons, which inflict massive trauma when striking flesh, are normally used to penetrate concrete and are not appropriate for crowd control.

Human Rights Watch also documented a pattern of IDF disregard for and targeting of Palestinian medical personnel and ambulances evacuating or treating injured civilians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, where the Palestinian Red Crescent Society (PRCS) provides medical services. To date, one PRCS emergency medical technician has been killed by IDF fire, and ten injured. The use of live fire against medical personnel interferes with the prompt treatment of wounded, and may in some instances have resulted in additional deaths.

Additionally on March 28, 2001, Hanny Megally of HRW addressed the 57th Session of the UN Commission on Human Rights and reported the following:

Human Rights Watch researchers in the West Bank and Gaza have documented dozens of serious human rights and international humanitarian law violations over the last six months.

Israeli security forces have committed by far the most serious and systematic violations. We documented excessive and indiscriminate use of lethal force, arbitrary killings, and collective punishment, including willful destruction of property and severe restrictions on movement that far exceed any possible military necessity.
The Israeli government refuses to investigate alleged violations committed during "war-like situations," in contravention of international human rights and humanitarian law.

Consider the killing of fourteen-year old `Ala Mahfouz. Last October, `Ala was watching clashes from the roof of his family home when he threw a stone that hit an Israeli soldier in the face. The soldier was evacuated, but a second soldier waited outside `Ala's home for more than an hour. When `Ala walked onto his balcony drinking a cup of tea, the soldier shot him in the forehead from a distance of fifteen meters. Soldiers then fired rubber bullets at `Ala's father and two neighbors as they tried to evacuate the boy, hitting all of them. `Ala died in a hospital. The soldier who shot him remained on duty, and witnesses told us that he openly boasted about the killing, and threatened to kill others in the household. (emphasis mine)

There can be no doubt that the United States’ silence towards Israeli abuses and its continuing unconditional monetary, military and political support for Israel fuels tension and hostility towards the United States among the Arab-Islamic population of the region. Our unconditional alliance with Israel is not fair, not just, and it is an additional cause for legitimate unrest in the region. As true Patriots we must call on our government to hold fast to a doctrine that makes military and political aid to Israel (and all other nations) conditional upon adherence to international law and basic human rights conditions. We must also recognize that the failure of our government to do this is a direct contributing factor to the anger and ongoing threat of violence against the United States. Moreover, though it may be uncomfortable to confront, we must accept the truth that our policies in the Middle East region, policies that exacerbate unrest, played a key contributing role to the terrorist attacks of September 11th.