http://www.counterpunch.org/prashad07292006.html
Vijay Prashad: Cry Havoc
Weekend Edition
July 29/30 2006

Anyone Who Opposes Israel is Labeled a Terrorist

Cry Havoc

By VIJAY PRASHAD

The G-8 statement on Israel's war on Lebanon puts the onus on 
Hezbollah. The Europeans are wringing their hands. Mr. Blair begs Mr. 
Bush to give him leave to mollify public opinion in Britain. 
Meanwhile, the Syrian ambassador to the US, Imad Mustafa, the 
Lebanese Cardinal Nasrallah P. Sfeir, and the Saudi Foreign Minister 
Prince Saud al-Faysal plead with the U. S. government to "restrain 
Israel." The mad dog has been let loose, but no-one can seem to get 
the owner to apologize for it or to bring it back home. Among the 
emissaries of the Arab ruling class, the plea to the U. S. is made to 
indicate that they don't want to beg Tel Aviv, to whom they cannot be 
seen to be subservient. Their cringing in Washington D. C. is 
acceptable, and it is understood by the eminences that this is a 
message to Israel.

But among U. S. liberals there seems to be no such subtlety. The 
illusion is well-fed, that the U. S. government is outside this 
current conflict and that pressure from Washington, D. C. could force 
the Israeli army to the barracks. The plea that we should put 
pressure on the White House to act is misguided. The White House is 
deaf to these calls; it already has a dog in this fight. The call for 
the U. S. government to restrain Israel relies upon at least two 
premises:

(1) That the U. S. government and ruling class do not share a foreign 
policy with the Israeli ruling establishment.

(2) That the U. S. government is capable of telling the Israelis to back off.

The second point is mooted by the first. The U. S. government is not 
prepared to tell Israel to back off. Indeed Bush's enthusiastic 
statements and the fresh shipments of U. S. armaments to Tel Aviv egg 
on the Israelis to prosecute this assault. Even if the U. S. 
government did ask Israel to slow down or shutdown the assault, 
history shows us that Israel will not listen. One might recall the 
visit by the "man of peace," Ehud Barak, to Washington, D. C. shortly 
after his election victory (enabled by Clinton pal James Carville). 
After he signed a $2.5 billion deal to get fifty F-16E bombers, Barak 
hit Clinton hard for being "patronizing" and reminded the U. S. never 
to become the "policeman, judge and arbitrator" of Israeli relations 
with the Arab world. It is with some irony that I recall reading 
Clinton's carp over the July 2000 Camp David fiasco, when he told 
Barak that he could no longer countenance being treated "like a 
wooden Indian doing your bidding."

Bush in Moscow carped with his wingman, Mr. Blair, about the United 
Nations' role in the current fracas. "What about Kofi," he asked, 
"That seems odd." Before Israel ruthlessly killed four U. N. unarmed 
observers, Mr. Annan had made noises about a ceasefire (now his tone 
is more militant, angered by the cold-blooded killing not of the 
Lebanese, but of the four U. N. employees). "I don't like the 
sequence of it," Bush told Blair, "[Annan's] attitude is basically, 
cease-fire and everything else happens." Bush does not want the fires 
to cease. He wants Israel to continue. This comes from the old theory 
of how to deal with the mosquitoes.

Major-General Yehoshafat Harkabi had been Israeli's chief of military 
intelligence from 1955 to 1959, and a major proponent of the armed 
road against the Palestinians. Over time, Harkabi came to realize the 
futility of Israeli intransigence, and he began to call himself a 
"Machiavellian dove." In 1984, Harkabi noted that the solution to 
terrorism was not an escalation of Israeli military response, but the 
completion of a political settlement between the Israelis and the 
Palestinians. "To offer an honorable solution to the Palestinians, 
respecting their right to self-determination: that is the solution to 
the problem of terrorism. When the swamp disappears, so will the 
mosquitoes." Harkabi's point is simple, that a political solution 
would remove the grievances (the swamp) and peace would drive out the 
militants (the mosquitoes).

On September 18, 2001, during a press conference at the Pentagon, 
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld borrowed and twisted Harkabi's 
metaphor. "Terrorists do not function in a vacuum," he noted. "They 
don't live in Antarctica. They work, they train, and they plan in 
countries." The only way to undermine terrorist networks, said the 
Pentagon's leader a week after 911, is to "drain the swamp they live 
in." Unlike Harkabi, Rumsfeld did not mean that the U. S. should 
create a political settlement with those who bear grievances against 
it. Rather, he argued, they and their neighborhoods must be 
obliterated. "This adversary is different. It does not have any of 
those things [armies, navies, air forces] or any high-value targets 
we can go after. But those countries that support them and give them 
sanctuary do have such targets."

Hezbollah, formed in 1982 in reaction to the Israeli invasion of 
Lebanon, was placed on the U. S. State Department terrorist list in 
1997. The U. S. like Israel, therefore, sees Hezbollah as a terrorist 
organization. In 1992, Hezbollah began to play an active role in 
Lebenese electoral politics, and seemed, if the conditions were ripe 
(i. e. if Israel conducted a political settlement with the 
Palestinians and truly withdrew from all of Southern Lebanon, 
including the Shams Farms), to move in the direction of the IRA-Sinn 
Fein. This was not to be. The provocations continued, and were 
intensified recently. Since the U. S. sees Hezbollah as a terrorist 
organization, it gives Israel the widest latitude to do to Lebanon 
what it did to Afghanistan and what it is doing in Iraq. The civilian 
population is the oxygen of groups like Hezbollah and they must 
therefore be "drained" if the mosquitoes are to be destroyed. Israel 
has been catholic in its choice of who to name a terrorist. Shimon 
Peres once noted, "If there were an Israeli in Central America, the 
Americans would not have the problems they do there." In other words, 
the IDF would be so much more reliable than the Contras. The PLO, the 
African National Congress, the Algerian FLN anyone who crossed 
Israel's path was tarred with the label "terrorist." How must these 
groups be dealt with: as Chief of Staff General Rafael Eitan said, 
"The PLO must be fucked" (Ma'ariv, January 3, 1986). The IDF's 
pacification campaign against the Palestinians and the Lebanese is a 
reflection of this, a policy that is being followed with American 
accents in Iraq.

Harkabi must feel shifty in the afterlife. This invasion and the 
"peace process" are designed to do one thing: not to create stability 
in the Middle East, but to pacify those who neighbor Israel. A 
condition of being human is to demand freedom. Pacification is a 
myopic solution to Israel's long-term problem. Hezbollah and the 
people of southern Lebanon might be destroyed, but from that earth 
and from the blood around it, other forces will arise. The swamp is 
never drained. It finds its water, and breeds its own mosquitoes.

Vijay Prashad teaches at Trinity College, Hartford, CT. His latest 
book is Keeping Up with the Dow Joneses: Debt, Prison, Workfare 
(Boston: South End Press). His essay, "Capitalism's Warehouses", 
appears in CounterPunch's new book, Dime's Worth of Difference. His 
forthcoming book is The Darker Nations: A People's History of the 
Third World (The New Press, November 2006). He can be reached at: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

_______________________________________________
Biofuel mailing list
Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages):
http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/

Reply via email to