We westerners set the precedent when it comes
to "collateral damage", now the Israelis are reeling out the same
tired excuses
By Robert Fisk Independent/UK 20
November 2012
Enough
is enough. Now we have even “National Infrastructure” Minister Uzi Landau – one
of my favourite dogsbodies in the Israeli government – talking about
“collateral damage” and the justification for bombing Hamas’s broadcasting
station. It could be used for transmitting military instructions, he said. But
wasn’t that exactly what our own beloved Lord Blair of Kut al-Amara – now, I
suppose, Lord Blair of the Holy Land – said after Nato bombed the Serb
television station in Belgrade, when Nato, too, was blathering on about
“collateral damage”?
We
Westerners set the precedents in the former Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq –
trains, bridges, TV stations, wedding parties, blocks of civilian apartments,
you name it – and now the Israelis can trot along behind and produce, whenever
necessary, the same tired list of excuses we invented for Nato.
It’s odd, the way they all get away with it. Lord Blair, whose 92 Business Class trips to the Holy Land have
produced a peace beyond all peace, is now talking about how it’s in
everybody’s interest to have a truce – is his face getting a bit skeletal, or
is that my imagination? – and a truce, I suppose, we shall have, well over 100
Palestinian and three Israeli dead too late. But is it all worth it? Was the
murder by Israel of Hamas’s military leader Ahmed al-Jabari in fact not staged
to provide an excuse to bomb all those new missiles that Hamas has acquired?
That
wise old Israeli owl Uri Avneri – he is 89 years old – thinks this is just the
trap that Hamas fell into by launching its preposterous “Gates of Hell” rocket
attacks in revenge for Jabari’s death. The whole Operation “Pillar of Defence”
was about destroying Hamas’s weapons – not about the largely ineffective
missiles themselves.
Isn’t
this why Israel gave its operation the name it did? For, despite our constant
repetition of “Operation Pillar of Defence”, Israeli friends tell me that the
correct Hebrew translation of this sick war is Operation Pillar of Cloud. Which
makes a lot more sense. For this comes from the Book of Exodus (13:21) – “And
the Lord went before them by day in a pillar of cloud, to lead them the way.” I
wonder, indeed, if the ridiculous William Hague realised he was doing God’s work when he
gave his support to this bloodletting?
But
this leads me to another little matter. One of the new Israeli lines on the war
runs like this. Israel kills “terrorists” by the score along with a handful of
“collateral damage” innocents – and the world rages against Israel. Yet isn’t
the Syrian regime killing Syrian innocents by the thousand every month? Where
are the mass protests, the venting of wrath at Bashar al-Assad? What hypocrisy!
But of course, this is in itself a hypocrisy. We know the old “Hama rules” of
Syria; no one asks us to support them. And comparing Israel’s brutality to that
of the Assad regime is playing the old Lord Blair game: we weren’t perfect in
Iraq – but we weren’t as bad as Saddam.
No.
Israel claims to hold the same values as the supposedly moral West. It says
that it is fighting “terrorism” in our name as well as its own. It says it is
fighting like us. It is playing by our Western rules. We are all Israelis now;
that is what we are meant to say. Hamas is our enemy, as well as Israel’s. And
so – for this is the effect – we too must be contaminated by the war crimes of
Israel’s pilots. That, I believe, is why we protest against Israel. Operation
Pillar of Cloud must not be committed in our name.
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/we-are-all-israelis-now-its-brutality-unlike-syrias-is-fought-in-the-name-of-the-wests-war-on-terror-8335857.html
No comments:
Post a Comment