SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Israel to U.S. : Now Deal with Syria and Iran -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: sea_urchin who wrote (10962)5/20/2006 7:50:03 PM
From: sea_urchin  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 22250
 
The age of the neocons headed for the dustbin of history
By Linda S. Heard

onlinejournal.com

>>“The final hours of the North American empire have arrived . . . Now we have to say to the empire: ‘We are not afraid of you. You’re a paper tiger.’” These were the words of Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez during his recent visit to Vienna.

He may be right. The concept of a “New American Century,” conceptualized by neoconservatives who envisioned total US hegemony over land, seas, skies and even space, is fast fading. In the post-Sept. 11 climate of fear it seemed that all Washington had to do was wag its finger at errant nations for them to cave and do its bidding. Not so today.

The US chose Iraq as an example of what Washington’s military might could achieve under the banner of democracy. “Shock and Awe” was supposed to stand as a warning to neighboring countries. Watch out! Do as we say, or you’ll be next.

But the plan has gone badly wrong. Some might say it has had the opposite effect of what was intended.

By now, Iraq should have been effectively run by a puppet government answerable to the White House, rather than one that is fearful of leaving its Green Zone fortress. What is more, a government with ties to Iran. Its people should have been outwardly enjoying the outer trappings of “freedom” even as their natural resources were being stolen from under their noses.

Remember “The Matrix” where human minds were forced to dwell in an imaginary la-la land although in reality they were imprisoned and their energy used to feed predatory machines? In Iraq’s case, it is the American military-industrial complex that hoped to suck the land of its treasures.

The plan didn’t work simply because human beings aren’t that stupid, especially those who aren’t being indoctrinated on a daily basis by the skewed outpourings of Fox News and other US propaganda arms. Iraq today is an example all right. It stands as a stark salutary warning to the world: Uncle Sam has grown fangs and he must be kept at bay.

Iran has received the message loud and clear; hence, its defiant refusal to shut down its program of uranium enrichment.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who is actively seeking strong alliances with other countries such as India, China, Russia Venezuela and Indonesia, clarified his thoughts in a letter sent to President Bush via Tehran’s Swiss Embassy.

The letter has been dismissed by the US media as the ramblings of a distorted mind, whereas, in fact, Ahmadinejad merely echoes what many in this region are already thinking.

“Can one be a follower of Jesus Christ (peace be upon him) the great Messenger of God . . . and at the same time have countries attacked? The lives, reputations and possessions of people destroyed and on the slight chance of the presence of a few criminals in a village, city or convoy, for example, the entire village, city or convoy set ablaze?” he writes. Indeed, I’ve been wondering the same thing myself.

Iran’s new best friend Russia is aware of the message, too.

In his state of the nation address last week, President Vladimir Putin stressed that Russia needed a nuclear capability and a powerful military to deter potential enemies and also to enable it to resist political pressure from foreign countries.

It was evident which foreign country he had in mind when he said, “Comrade Wolf knows whom to eat, it eats without listening and it’s clearly not going to listen to anyone.

Where is all this pathos about protecting human rights and democracy when it comes to the need to pursue their own interests?”

Some are describing this as the start of a new Cold War. If this is the case, then neocon policies are responsible for destroying the warm détente between Russia and the West that was so carefully cultivated by Bush’s predecessors.

Putin won’t be pushed around and neither will an increasing number of nations on America’s doorstep. Washington is deeply disturbed over Latin America’s swing to the left, an anti-globalization movement led by Hugo Chavez together with Cuba’s Castro and Bolivia’s Evo Morales, who recently nationalized his country’s oil and gas fields.

During a recent press conference held in Rome, Chavez elucidated his support for Tehran and warned that if Iran were attacked no country would have access to crude oil.

Chavez is startlingly outspoken when it comes to his opinions of the US. “For all the horror it has created around the globe in the course of the past century, the United States’ war machine should be dismantled, since under the current conditions it is a threat against the entire mankind, particularly against our children.”

It’s worth remembering that while Iran, Russia and Venezuela are not big powers in themselves, together they are formidable and the coffers of all are currently overflowing with oil wealth, courtesy of US foreign policies. That’s irony for you.

The White House may soon be short of friends in Europe too. Italy’s Berlusconi has gone the way of Spain’s Aznar into political oblivion, while Tony Blair’s days in office are numbered.

With George Bush’s approval rating currently running at 29 percent and his British comrade-in-arms a mere 26 percent, the age of the neocons looks set to be stuffed into the dustbin of history as one of the world’s gigantic failures.

Whoever replaces them will have their work cut out when trying to convince the world that the last years represent an aberration never to be repeated.

Else, Washington’s would-be subjects will undoubtedly strike back.<<



To: sea_urchin who wrote (10962)5/21/2006 5:58:11 AM
From: Crimson Ghost  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 22250
 
Does Israel have the right to exist in its current form?
Remi Kanazi, Online Journal Contributing Writer

May 20, 2006

May 15 marked the 58th anniversary of Al Nakba (The Catastrophe). Every year, Palestinians recount the tragedy of 1948.

I recall my grandmother’s anguish: she was seven months pregnant with my mother when she was forced to flee to Lebanon by boat. She waited in Lebanon. The weeks turned into months. The months turned into years . . . Fifty-eight years later, my grandmother has yet to return to her house in Jaffa.

When the Zionists forces (the Haganagh, Irgun, and Stern Gang) tore Palestine limb from limb, depopulating villages, uprooting cemeteries, and pillaging arable fields, Israel had not even been created. Today we see a fight for Israel’s "right to exist." But what right does Israel have to exist in its current form?

United Nations (UN) Resolution 194 states,

"The refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbors should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return."

Israel’s admittance into the UN was conditional: it must recognize UN Resolution 194. Nevertheless, since the passing of UN Resolution 273 -- which admitted Israel into the UN on May 11, 1949 -- Israel has openly rejected this requirement. Commenting on Israel’s dismissal of the resolution, Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle wrote in his book Palestine, Palestinians and International Law, "Insofar as Israel has violated its conditions for admission to UN membership, it must accordingly be suspended on a de facto basis from any participation throughout the entire United Nations system."

Yet, the world hasn’t seen one UN resolution concerning Israel enforced by the UN or the international community. America specifically refers to "countless" UN resolutions Iraq refused to comply with as a major reason to invade in 2003. If America were to invade Iraq on this reasoning, one would think they would at least attempt to enforce the UN resolutions pertaining to Israel.

The implementing of UN Resolution 194 was the condition for Israel’s "right to exist." Today we see many more factors that should make one contemplate this right. Israel illegally occupies East Jerusalem, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. Post-disengagement, Israel continues to occupy Gaza through control of borders, air, water, and resources. According to the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, since March 31 of this year, Israel has fired more than 5,100 artillery shells at Gaza.

The occupation is illegal under international law and UN resolution 242 (reaffirmed by resolution 338). UN resolution 242 explicitly states that Israel must "withdraw from territories occupied." On this basis, before going into the brutality of the occupation, one cannot expect the Palestinian Authority to recognize Israel’s "right to exist."

Furthermore, Israel exists today as a Jewish state and not coincidentally a racist state. The Palestinians living inside Israel are second-class citizens. Discriminatory laws are in place regarding religion, marriage, and land ownership. Access to education, jobs and economic stability has been hindered due to successive Israeli administrations' prejudiced policies. One cannot expect those in the Occupied Territories to recognize Israel, if Israel as a Jewish state does not recognize the rights of one in five of its citizens.

Just this week the Israeli High Court voted down a law that would instate "family reunification," the unifying of Palestinians living outside of Israel with their spouse living inside Israel. This is one more policy that tries to force those living inside Israel to emigrate to the Occupied Territories or elsewhere. One father who has been trying to get Israeli citizenship since 2004 to reunite with his wife and two daughters, asked the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, "How do you explain to a five-year-old girl that daddy won't be home because of a law?"

The discriminatory policy of the government is emblematic of the feeling in Israeli society. A recent poll conducted by the Israel Democracy Institute found that 62 percent of Israelis prefer that their government promote the emigration of the Palestinian population living inside Israel. Electronic Intifada, a website that covers the Israeli/Palestinian conflict from the Palestinian perspective, published a piece by I’lam, "the only media centre for the Arab minority in Israel," which stated, "Recent polls have shown that, while on average 40 per cent of Israelis want Arab citizens forced to leave the country, that figure rises close to 60 percent when respondents are asked, more ambiguously, if they want the Arab population 'encouraged’ to emigrate." Israel’s systemic desire for the separation and future dispossession of its Palestinian citizens is yet another reason to question its "right to exist" in its current form.

It is particularly absurd for Israel and the West to call upon the Palestinian government to recognize Israel when Israel refuses to recognize the Palestinian people. Take for example the policy implemented during the Oslo years, a policy that continues today. During the Oslo years settlements expanded at an inordinate rate with a clear mission to expand the borders of Israel, jeopardizing the possibility of a future Palestinian state on 22 percent of historic Palestine -- the internationally recognized 1967 borders.

Today we see Kadima’s plan for the recognition of the Palestinian people: Judaize Jerusalem (while permanently dispossessing as many Palestinians as possible though extensions and encirclements of the Apartheid Wall), expand and connect desirable and densely populated settlements, and extend the policy of unilateralism, thereby hindering any opportunity for cohesion, reconciliation or negotiations. The border policy of Israel is compounded with a 38-year occupation, which includes land confiscation, home demolitions, permanent checkpoints, flying checkpoints, curfews, expropriation of vital resources such as water, strip searches and various acts of humiliation and collective punishment.

On the physical front, Israel has illegally detained thousands of Palestinians (in most cases torturing them), extrajudically assassinated hundreds of Palestinians, killed hundreds of women and children, and has fired thousands of artillery shells into the Occupied Territories. This course of action continues unabated, while the world sits idly by. Furthermore, the illegal settlers in the Occupied Territories abuse the Palestinian population with virtual impunity. Thousands of cases have surfaced where settlers have beaten Palestinians, thrown rocks at their children on their way to school, killed family livestock, and burnt down or uprooted their olive trees. The Israeli government has done nothing to stop these actions.

On the other hand, the Palestinian Authority has complied with the Sharm al-Sheikh cease-fire and has maintained the agreement well past its expiration only to be met with an economic and political boycott by Israel and the international community. Israel and the West’s policy of not recognizing the Palestinian people have driven up the figures of unemployment, poverty, and malnutrition.

The most significant point of hypocrisy is Israel and the West’s double standard regarding the governments in the conflict. If the world is to believe that Israel does not have to recognize Yasser Arafat or a Hamas-led PA because they are terrorist entities, would Israel not be held to the same standard? Their policies and tactics are in direct violation of international law and the Geneva Conventions, while their practices have been criticized by every major human rights organization in the world, not to mention the Hague’s critical ruling on the Apartheid Wall. Israel does not recognize the Palestinian Authority, not based on their refusal to recognize Israel, but on Israel’s summation of what the PA represents. Should the PA not be able to make the same assessment?

No people, surely no occupied people, should be expected to recognize Israel under these conditions. The international community should not demand the Palestinians recognize Israel, but ask themselves an important question: given the circumstances does Israel have a right to exist?

Remi Kanazi, a Palestinian-American, lives in New York City. He is a freelance writer, and the founder and primary writer for the political website, Poetic Injustice. He can be reached at remroum@gmail.com.