Tuesday, December 17, 2024

 

Mahmoud Abbas is in his final act as betrayer of the Palestinian cause

Sami Al-Arian, MEE, 17 December 2024

Desperate to stay relevant, the faithful US-Israeli ‘handpicked leader’ has intensified his crackdown on Palestinians in the West Bank and pledged to work with Trump

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas speaks during the United Nations General Assembly at the UN headquarters in New York City on 26 September 2024 (Stephanie Keith/Getty Images/AFP)

Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas has been trying to stay relevant as events in Gaza, the West Bank and across the region have been moving at a much faster pace than the octogenarian politician is able to cope with.

This week, amid an Israeli genocide that has been unceasingly raging in Gaza for 14 months, Abbas’s security forces brazenly killed several prominent resistance fighters in Jenin in an attempt to appease the Israelis and their American benefactors.

When then-US President Donald Trump announced in January 2020 the so-called “deal of the century“, a proposal that was wholly aligned with Israel on all issues of contention, Abbas said: “I want to say to the duo – Trump and [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu – that Jerusalem is not for sale, and all of our rights are not for sale or bargaining. Your deal, the conspiracy, will not happen…we say a thousand times no, no, no to the deal of the century.”

Yet, when Trump was re-elected on 5 November, Abbas called to congratulate him and vowed to work with him on a political settlement that he himself rejected out of hand five years earlier.

This was followed by a deal the Egyptians struck two weeks ago between Hamas and Fatah, the Palestinian faction headed by Abbas. The agreement was to appoint an independent committee of prominent and professional Palestinians in Gaza to run its affairs and reconstruction after the war.

New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch

Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters

It was a demand by the Zionist regime and the Biden administration in order to dislodge Hamas from any future role in ruling Gaza.

However, Abbas’s Fatah quickly retracted its approval as the Israelis rejected any role for or input from Hamas in the future of Gaza. It seems that such a deal would not play well in Netanyahu’s vow for a “total victory” over Hamas and the resistance.

So what’s Abbas’s end game, and where is he headed in his twilight years?

Hand-picked ‘leader’

In his 20th year of a four-year term, Abbas announced in late November, a few days after he turned 89, his succession plan.

He issued a decree that called for the appointment of the unambitious, uncharismatic and feeble Fatah leader, Rawhi Fattouh, as an interim president after Abbas.

Condoleezza Rice recounted how a handful of people in 2003 hand-picked Abbas to become the leader of the Palestinian people

The 75-year-old Fattouh is currently serving as the chairman of the Palestine National Council, the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) parliament in exile.

In 28 years, the PNC met only once in 2018.

Interestingly enough, Fattouh is also the same person who served as an interim president after the death of former PA President Yasser Arafat in November 2004 until Abbas was elected to replace him in January 2005.

For over a year, Abbas has been under American pressure to appoint a successor who will be as compliant and amenable to Israel and the US as he has been during his long tenure.

As recalled in her 2011 memoir, No Higher Honor, Condoleezza Rice, who served as US President George W Bush’s national security advisor, recounted how a handful of people in 2003, including her, Bush, CIA Director George Tenet, and Ariel Sharon, the Israeli prime minister at the time, hand-picked Abbas to become the leader of the Palestinian people.

For much of 2002, Sharon refused to deal with Arafat but was eventually able to convince Bush to sideline the PLO leader in favour of Abbas as the more submissive and yielding Fatah leader.


Follow Middle East Eye’s live coverage of the Israel-Palestine war


Before he was appointed as a prime minister in 2003 as a result of American and European pressures, Abbas was publicly ridiculed by Arafat, who called him the “Karzai of Palestine”, a reference to Hamid Karzai, the former Afghan president, who was widely considered in the Arab world as a US puppet.

Abbas, aka Abu Mazen, had risen to the leadership of Fatah and the PLO almost by default.

Even though he was considered among the first generation of Fatah founders as he joined the movement in the early 1960s, he was not distinguished or appointed to senior positions until decades later.

‘Strategic asset’

It was not until most of the early founders and senior leaders of Fatah and the PLO, such as Khalil al-Wazir (Abu Jihad), Salah Khalaf (Abu Iyad), Sa’ad Sayel, Abu Yusuf al-Najjar, and many others, had been assassinated by Israel between the 1970s and early 1990s that Abu Mazen started to hold more significant positions within Fatah and the PLO.

When the PLO adopted its 10-point plan in 1974, paving the way towards a political settlement based on recognising Israel in exchange for a truncated Palestinian state, Abbas was known to favour abandoning any form of armed resistance to the Israeli occupation.

Why the Palestinian Authority’s biggest claim is a lie

Read More »

Regarding this political ideology, Abu Iyad, who was considered to be next in line in the Palestinian movement after Arafat before his assassination in 1991 by the Zionist regime, quipped: “The thing that I fear the most is that treason would one day just become (normalised as) an opinion.”

When Israel failed to crush the First Intifada (1987-1991), it adopted a political track that would preserve its expansionist and settlement policies. This path culminated in the 1993 Oslo Accords.

Abbas was not only one of the few Palestinian interlocutors in this process but also the person who actually signed the accords on the White House lawn on behalf of the Palestinians.

Needless to say, the Oslo process was nothing short of a disaster that was doomed to fail from the start.

The Palestinian negotiators led by Arafat and Abbas surrendered their main card and strongest leverage at the outset, which was the recognition of the Zionist regime on 78 percent of the historical land of Palestine.

In exchange, Israel only pledged to engage in a vain political process that should have ended with an independent Palestinian state by 1999, or so thought the PLO leaders.

Yet, more than three decades after Oslo, the Zionist regime has not only killed the so-called two-state solution but consolidated its plans for a “Greater Israel”, including a more than six-fold increase of illegal settlers in the West Bank from about 115,000 in 1993 to over 750,000 today.

According to a 2015 International Crisis Group report, most Israeli officials consider Abbas their most important “strategic asset”.

The reason is quite clear.

It has been mainly through a political philosophy championed by Abbas that rejected decades of Palestinian resistance, prompting one expert to remark: “Abbas not once in his life did he adopt armed resistance, nor did he support it.”

He often mocked any notion of armed resistance by any group, including his own, even when Israel had killed scores of Palestinians unprovoked.

Brutal security force

His leadership style turned a relatively vibrant Palestinian national movement into a subsidiary of the Israeli occupation, often referred to as a “five-star occupation” since it had relieved the Zionist regime from appearing as the occupying power, while carrying out aggressive and domineering settler-colonial policies worse than South Africa’s apartheid regime.  

During his tenure, he embraced the American dictate to change the security doctrine of the Palestinian security forces from policing and protecting Palestinian population centres into a brutal security force acting as the first line of defence of Israeli settlements and the occupation army against any form of resistance, including passive popular forms.

Why western plans for another Palestinian client regime will fail

Read More »

Since his rise to lead the Palestinian Authority in 2005, he adopted the American plan under Lieutenant General Keith Dayton to train PA security forces, which engaged in suppression and silencing of dissent, as well as illegal arrests and torture, many times leading to death as in the case of Nizar Banat in 2021.

In coordination with the US and the Zionist regime, Abbas created a bloated security force whose primary mission was security coordination with the Israeli army to thwart any resistance or operations against the occupation.

He called this mission sacred and for decades refused to stop it even though Palestinian public opinion overwhelmingly condemns it.

Scores of Palestinian political bodies and factions have called on him to halt such disgraceful practices.

A detailed 2017 report found that the Palestinian security sector employed around half of all civil servants, accounting for nearly $1bn of the PA budget, and receives around 30 percent of total international aid given to the Palestinians, including most of the funds coming from the US.

The study further found that the Palestinian security sector spent more of the PA’s budget than the education, health, and agriculture sectors combined. It included more than 80,000 individuals, where the ratio of security personnel to the population is as high as 1 to 48 – one of the highest in the world.

In Abbas’s first encounter with Donald Trump in 2017, the US president bragged about the PA’s continued security coordination with Israel, as he praised its effectiveness in protecting the Israeli occupation, in which he said: “They get along unbelievably well. I was actually very impressed and somewhat surprised at how well they got along. They work together beautifully.”

‘Small-time dictator’

When Hamas won the 2006 legislative elections, Abbas coordinated with the Americans and Israelis, as laid out in detail in Rice’s account in her book, to obstruct the Hamas-led government from being able to serve as the democratically elected party.

In fact, it was Abbas’s security forces, again in coordination with the Americans, that tried in 2007 to topple Hamas’s government in Gaza, only to be outmanoeuvred by Hamas, which took over Gaza, effectively resulting in two separate Palestinian governments.

Palestinian resistance can always survive without outside support. Can Israel?

Read More »

David Wurmser, a Bush administration official at the time, commented in a Vanity Fair article in 2008 that the Bush administration was engaged “in a dirty war in an effort to provide a corrupt dictatorship [led by Abbas] with victory”.

He added that Hamas had no intention of taking Gaza until Fatah forced its hand.

Wurmser further observed: “It looks to me that what happened wasn’t so much a coup by Hamas but an attempted coup by Fatah that was pre-empted before it could happen.”

Ever since this internal strife, Gaza has been living under a crippling Israeli siege with little interference from Abbas.

With the support of the Americans, Israelis and regional actors, Abbas took total control of the Palestinian political life. He started to unilaterally issue decrees like any small-time dictator of a banana republic.

His unconstitutional and unlawful decrees would dismiss governments, install prime ministers, cancel elections, spend billions, cover corruption by his cronies, family members and sons, and appoint a constitutional court in order to dismiss the Hamas-led legislative council.

But perhaps the behaviour that shocked most Palestinians was Abbas’s deafening silence during the early days of Israel’s genocidal war.

As the Israeli war of extermination and ethnic cleansing campaign intensified, Abbas would voice his strong but empty opposition to the Israeli brutality on the one hand, while continuing to have security coordination with the same vigour as if no genocide in Gaza, daily settler attacks across the West Bank, or routine Al-Aqsa compound incursions had been taking place for over a year.

With the Israeli genocidal war in Gaza entering its 15th month with no end in sight, and while Israel prepares its long-term occupation of Gaza, as well as aggressively pushing its policy of effective annexation of Area C in the West Bank, it appears that the current fascist Israeli government is on the verge of dumping Abbas in favour of a new security arrangement that would favour local Palestinian collaborators to govern the Palestinian populations.

A 2017 study found that the Palestinian security sector employed around half of all civil servants, accounting for nearly $1bn of the PA budget

It’s clear that the current Zionist regime, with its grand design to impose the Greater Israel project, wants to resolve its demographic Palestinian problem and decisively end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in its favour once and for all.

Hence, part of Israel’s grand strategy to realise this objective is not merely to be content with banning Unrwa, killing the two-state solution, or establishing Israeli hegemony in the region.

But in essence, it’s moving aggressively to redesign all the Palestinian institutions and sources of power that have defined the Palestinian struggle over decades.

Regardless of Abbas’s decree or what happens to him in the near term as he enters the twilight of his life, Israel will make sure that he is the last Palestinian leader who combines all the titles that define the Palestinian institutions – the PA president, the PLO chairman, the Fatah leader, and the president of the “State of Palestine”.

From an Israeli perspective, he has served his purpose, and it is now time for the final solution.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.

Sami Al-Arian is the Director of the Center for Islam and Global Affairs (CIGA) at Istanbul Zaim University. Originally from Palestine, he lived in the US for four decades (1975-2015) where he was a tenured academic, prominent speaker and human rights activist before relocating to Turkey. He is the author of several studies and books. He can be contacted at: nolandsman1948@gmail.com.

Middle East Eye delivers independent and unrivalled coverage and analysis of the Middle East, North Africa and beyond. To learn more about republishing this content and the associated fees, please fill out this form. More about MEE can be found her.

Share this:

Monday, December 16, 2024

๐๐ž๐ญ๐š๐ง๐ฒ๐š๐ก๐ฎ ๐’๐š๐ฒ๐ฌ ๐‡๐š๐ ‘๐…๐ซ๐ข๐ž๐ง๐๐ฅ๐ฒ’ ๐‚๐จ๐ง๐ฏ๐ž๐ซ๐ฌ๐š๐ญ๐ข๐จ๐ง ๐–๐ข๐ญ๐ก ๐“๐ซ๐ฎ๐ฆ๐ฉ ๐€๐›๐จ๐ฎ๐ญ ๐€๐œ๐ก๐ข๐ž๐ฏ๐ข๐ง๐  ‘๐•๐ข๐œ๐ญ๐จ๐ซ๐ฒ’ ๐€๐ ๐š๐ข๐ง๐ฌ๐ญ ๐ˆ๐ซ๐š๐ง

 ๐‘‡โ„Ž๐‘’ ๐‘๐‘œ๐‘›๐‘ฃ๐‘’๐‘Ÿ๐‘ ๐‘Ž๐‘ก๐‘–๐‘œ๐‘› ๐‘๐‘Ž๐‘š๐‘’ ๐‘Ž๐‘“๐‘ก๐‘’๐‘Ÿ ๐‘Ÿ๐‘’๐‘๐‘œ๐‘Ÿ๐‘ก๐‘  ๐‘ ๐‘Ž๐‘–๐‘‘ ๐‘กโ„Ž๐‘’ ๐‘‡๐‘Ÿ๐‘ข๐‘š๐‘ ๐‘ก๐‘Ÿ๐‘Ž๐‘›๐‘ ๐‘–๐‘ก๐‘–๐‘œ๐‘› ๐‘ก๐‘’๐‘Ž๐‘š ๐‘–๐‘  ๐‘๐‘œ๐‘›๐‘ ๐‘–๐‘‘๐‘’๐‘Ÿ๐‘–๐‘›๐‘” ๐‘ ๐‘ก๐‘Ÿ๐‘–๐‘˜๐‘’๐‘  ๐‘œ๐‘› ๐ผ๐‘Ÿ๐‘Ž๐‘›'๐‘  ๐‘›๐‘ข๐‘๐‘™๐‘’๐‘Ž๐‘Ÿ ๐‘“๐‘Ž๐‘๐‘–๐‘™๐‘–๐‘ก๐‘–๐‘’๐‘ 


by Dave DeCamp, Antiwar. com, December 15, 2024

On Sunday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that he spoke with President-elect Donald Trump about Israel’s need to achieve “victory” against Iran and its allies in the region.

“I unequivocally declare to Hezbollah and to Iran: In order to prevent you from attacking us, we will continue to take action against you as necessary, in every arena and at all times,” Netanyahu said.

“I discussed all of this last night with my friend, US President-elect Donald Trump. We had a very friendly, warm and important discussion. We discussed the need to complete Israel’s victory and we spoke at length about the efforts we are making to free our hostages,” the prime minister added.

The conversation between Netanyahu and Trump came after reports said Israel sees an opportunity to bomb Iran following the regime change in Syria that ousted former President Bashar al-Assad. The Wall Street Journal also reported that the Trump transition team is discussing the idea of strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities.

The pretext for any Israeli or US action against Iranian nuclear facilities would be to stop Iran from building a bomb, but there’s no evidence that Tehran has decided to pursue nuclear weapons, something recently acknowledged by the CIA.

In his remarks on Sunday, Netanyahu also said Israel was changing the “face” of the Middle East. “Syria is not the same Syria. Lebanon is not the same Lebanon. Gaza is not the same Gaza. And the head of the axis, Iran, is not the same Iran; it has also felt the might of our arm.

The Israeli leader claimed Israel has “no interest in a conflict with Syria,” but Israel has unleashed a heavy air campaign against the country since the downfall of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, launching over 800 strikes.

Thursday, December 12, 2024

Washington Post: How Ukraine contributed to the fall of Assad’s rule

 11 December 2024

The recent fall of President Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Damascus marked a turning point in Syria’s ongoing conflict, with new reports revealing a covert Ukrainian role in aiding Syrian rebels.

Ukrainian intelligence provided strategic support, including drone technology and experienced operators, to Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), the dominant rebel faction in Idlib, Caliber.Az reports via The Washington Post.

This effort underscores Ukraine’s broader strategy to undermine Russian influence on multiple fronts amid its ongoing war with Moscow.

Approximately four to five weeks prior to the HTS-led offensive, Ukrainian operatives delivered 150 first-person-view drones and deployed 20 experienced operators to assist the rebels. Although Western intelligence sources suggest this aid played a modest role in the regime’s downfall, it was a significant demonstration of Kyiv’s intent to counter Russia in unconventional theatres such as the Middle East, Africa, and even within Russia itself.

Ukraine’s intelligence agency, the GUR, has reportedly collaborated with opposition groups in Syria under a special unit known as “Khimik,” bolstering rebel capabilities against Russian-backed Syrian forces.

Ukraine’s motivations for such actions are clear. With its homeland under siege, Kyiv is actively opening secondary fronts to stretch Russian resources and influence. A June report in the Kyiv Post detailed strikes by Ukrainian-backed Syrian rebels on Russian military installations, accompanied by video evidence of these operations.

Russian officials have expressed growing concern, with statements from representatives such as Alexander Lavrentyev and Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov accusing Ukrainian intelligence of conducting “dirty operations” in Idlib. Despite these claims, independent verification remains scarce.

While Russia has downplayed Ukraine’s involvement, pointing to HTS’s independent drone program and prior expertise, the rapid collapse of Assad’s regime caught Moscow off guard. Russian Telegram channels have sought to minimize Kyiv’s role, suggesting Ukrainian personnel were in Syria for too short a time to significantly influence operations. However, this narrative contrasts with Ukraine’s broader pattern of covert actions against Russian forces worldwide.

Beyond Syria, Ukraine has demonstrated its capability for overseas operations in other regions. In July 2023, Ukrainian intelligence reportedly supported Malian rebels in an ambush against Wagner Group mercenaries, resulting in significant losses for the Russian paramilitary group.

Such actions highlight the GUR’s aggressive strategy, with its head, Lt. Gen. Kyrylo Budanov, affirming Ukraine’s commitment to targeting Russian military assets globally. This approach has drawn concerns from Western allies, including the Biden administration, over potential escalations.

Ukraine’s actions in Syria align with its broader strategy to disrupt Russia’s influence and partnerships. By aiding HTS, Kyiv weakened a critical Russian ally in the Middle East, further isolating Moscow. Although the Ukrainian assistance may not have been decisive, it contributed to an environment where the Assad regime’s fall became inevitable.

The parallels to other intelligence failures, such as Russia’s inability to anticipate HTS’s offensive or Israel’s surprise during Hamas’s October 2023 attack, are striking. Both underscore the challenges nations face in responding to unconventional threats.

For Ukraine, these operations serve as a testament to its resilience and resourcefulness in a protracted struggle against a powerful adversary. While not the decisive factor in Damascus, Ukraine’s covert actions signal its intent to shape the global battlefield to its advantage.

By Aghakazim Guliyev 

Share this:

Monday, December 09, 2024

Washington Celebrates Al-Qaeda’s Victory in Syria

 Editor's remarks: There are great jubilations in Syria and the Syrian diaspora in the world on the fall of Bashar al-Assad and his oppressive regime. However, many people are not aware of the implications of the new ‘Mujahideen’ regime in Damascus and its unknown course in the time to come. What role did the United States and Israel play in bringing down the al-Assad regime and its long-term implications for Syria and the Middle East? There are many questions that need clarifications and answers. In this article, Kyle Anzalone, a political analyst, discusses the imperial role of the United States in Syria, a role about which many ordinary readers don’t hear much in the mainstream media.

–๐–๐š๐ฌ๐ก๐ข๐ง๐ ๐ญ๐จ๐ง ๐‚๐ž๐ฅ๐ž๐›๐ซ๐š๐ญ๐ž๐ฌ ๐€๐ฅ-๐๐š๐ž๐๐š’๐ฌ ๐•๐ข๐œ๐ญ๐จ๐ซ๐ฒ ๐ข๐ง ๐’๐ฒ๐ซ๐ข๐š

https://original.antiwar.com/kyle_anzalone/2024/12/08/washington-celebrates-al-qaedas-victory-in-syria/?fbclid=IwY2xjawHECAlleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHVdx9wWd7dM-YtSnbf0pmshMoAH9XYF_nRi2MZyHpY5rp5vN3FDQ5woKug_aem_4Zm32JuEqEKBPvRNewf_kg

Share this:

Thursday, December 05, 2024

Western Racism and Palestine

 by Michael Brenner, Dissident Voice, December 2nd, 2024

Racism is at the core of Western societies complicity in Israeli’s genocide against the Arab Palestinians. That is self-evident. The United States and Britain are more than accomplices; they are co-belligerents. The behavior of all has been constant over 14 months of graphic depiction day-by-day of atrocities of the most heinous kinds.

Racism, though, is a multifaceted phenomenon. It encompasses a wide range of attitudes and actions. They should be parsed as a precondition for analyzing which have been operative in this case, how they shaped policies and interventions, how reconciled with the values of liberal democracies, and how sustained in the face of such glaring criminal abuses of humanity.

Nazi extermination of Jews is at one extreme of racism. The negative weighing of ethnic identity in vetting candidates for a position of town supervisor also is racism. Using disparaging terms about a particular ascriptive group in casual conversation is racism. Apartheid is racism – whether in the form of ghettoes, Bantustans, or the Gaza concentration camps. Thoughts can be racist, words can be racist, actions can be racist. There are connections among these three expressions of racism – but to varying degrees and not always.

Let us take a look at these ambiguities and discontinuities with a view to getting a better fix on the ways that racism has driven Western countries’ involvement in the Palestine genocide.

  1. It is normal for social groupings to differentiate themselves. This is an affirmation of solidarity. It need not be accompanied by an ascription of the other’s intrinsic inferiority. Nor be hostile and aggressive.)
  2. The diversity among larger, more organized societies changes things in two respects: variations in race, color, language, ethnicity are frequently encountered; the capacity for stereotyping grows along with interactions that can lead to contention and rivalry.
  3. Competition and conflict generate a need for justification of ‘winners’ exploiting/subordinating/abusing losers. Prejudice serves this person.
  4. That experience once institutionalized, as it was historically in Western societies’ domination of non-Western peoples, leaves an enduring residue of prejudicial feelings among both parties in the relationship.
  5. Those feelings can fade over time while remaining dormant with the latent potential to resurface.
  6. A dramatic event instigated by a formerly subordinate/inferior that inflicts pain is the surest catalyst for that recrudescence – for it is acutely humiliating as well as painful. The intensity of the reaction (emotional, physical) to such an offense can be commensurate with the sublimated guilt one feels about past abuse of the perpetrator.

Back to the contemporary situation. The facilitating, background factors that help explain Western elites’ willing embrace of the Palestinian genocide are easy to identify. The long history of colonial domination of ‘inferior’ peoples; their systematic exploitation; a widespread sense of diminishing status relative to emerging new centers of strength and influence – as punctuated by the 1973 oil crisis and ensuing dependency on the ‘hajjis’; a reflexive disposition to perform penance for historical sins committed against Jews in Europe by turning a blind eye to the sins of the previously sinned against; 75 years of painting the Arabs as the ‘black hats’ in their struggle against the Israeli settler state; revulsion at earlier acts of terror abroad by PLO and PFLP.

Stunning events over the past two decades have stirred a potent mix of negative emotions about Arabs. 9/11 punctuated the opening of the Terrorism Era. Reciprocation of violent acts on Western soil and the brutal, indiscriminate retaliation of the so-called War on Terror drew a line of blood not only between the Westerners on the one side, and terrorist groups along with their perceived state ‘sponsors’, on the other. It also imprinted powerful images of Arabs/Muslims as fanatics, as a menace to their comfortable social order, as people ‘beyond the pale’ – to coin a phrase – who can be dealt with only through strength and a readiness to follow the admonition of “an eye for an eye.”

This depiction of the ingredients that have formed the psyche of our political class in regard to Arabs, and the Palestinians in particular, goes aways toward explaining the West’s current abhorrent behavior. The extremity of their actions and inactions could be seen as the outcome of a dynamic wherein enmity turns into hatred (albeit expressed in the quiet tones of normality) and dehumanization of the ‘other.’ A paradoxical feature of this dynamic is that as past shameful abuses of the ‘other’ are aggravated by new ones, there is a compulsion to continue farther down that path. For doing provides a perverse form of reassurance that somehow they must have deserved such extreme ill treatment. This relentless punishment of our victims becomes a displacement of suppressed self-hatred – among a few.

Suppose that the analysis offered above makes sense. That still leaves us with an inadequate understanding of what is happening. We should bear in mind the unprecedented features of the present situation. One, Western governments have no strategic interest in supporting Jerusalem’s project of creating a Greater Israel by eliminating the Palestinians. No security or economic stakes encourage that. On the contrary, Western interests in the region, and in the wider world, manifestly have been seriously damaged by their close association with all parts of the Israeli campaign. Two, there is no uncertainly about the gross crimes against humanity being committed before our eyes daily or the genocidal intent of the Israeli government. Indeed, cabinet ministers advertise what their plans are. Three, the means to prevent the bloody onslaught existed at the outset, and have been available throughout. Without abundant provision of arms and money from the United States and allies, Israel could not have prosecuted its diabolical strategy. Sanctions are also an available option, although unnecessary. Four, Western societies – particularly the European – are timorous, complacent and risk averse; therefore, to act in a manner that erodes their legitimizing foundations is incongruous, and needs explanation.

Conclusion: the behavior of Western societies is pathological – that is to say, abnormal. It is perverse. We all share the natural instinct to protect the young of the species, and – to a somewhat lesser extent – the vulnerable aged and infirmed. This instinct, in fact, can be observed in the behavior of all mammals. Our supposedly enlightened societies go well beyond instinct to proclaim our dedication to those humane values, and to stipulate them in laws and conventions. This instinct/principle normally overrides prejudice when confronted, in the mortified flesh, with the realities of atrocity. Yet, we are acting in the diametrically opposite manner. And we ruthlessly repress those among us who point out that contradiction because their witness to our perfidy is intolerable.

Therein lies a great puzzle. No conventional political or sociological analysis can solve it. Filling that void is the compelling challenge – and precondition for restoring a collective ethical sense that abhors rather than embraces evil. There is no scarcity of anthropologists, psychiatrists and psychologists. With luck, a few talented and motivated persons among them might step forward.

FacebookTwitterReddit

Email

Michael Brenner is Professor Emeritus of International Affairs at the University of Pittsburgh and a Fellow of the Center for Transatlantic Relations at SAIS/Johns Hopkins. He was the Director of the International Relations & Global Studies Program at the University of Texas. Brenner is the author of numerous books, and over 80 articles and published papers. His most recent works are: Democracy Promotion and IslamFear and Dread In The Middle EastToward A More Independent Europe Narcissistic Public Personalities & Our Times. Read other articles by Michael.

This article was posted on Monday, December 2nd, 2024 at 8:50am and is filed under Genocide, Palestine, Racism.


Share this:

Wednesday, December 04, 2024

๐‡๐š๐ฆ๐š๐ฌ ๐‘๐ž๐ฌ๐ฉ๐จ๐ง๐๐ฌ ๐ญ๐จ ๐“๐ซ๐ฎ๐ฆ๐ฉ’๐ฌ ๐“๐ก๐ซ๐ž๐š๐ญ, ๐’๐š๐ฒ๐ฌ ๐ˆ๐ญ ๐’๐ก๐จ๐ฎ๐ฅ๐ ๐๐ž ๐ƒ๐ข๐ซ๐ž๐œ๐ญ๐ž๐ ๐š๐ญ ๐๐ž๐ญ๐š๐ง๐ฒ๐š๐ก๐ฎ

๐‘‡โ„Ž๐‘’ ๐‘๐‘Ÿ๐‘’๐‘ ๐‘–๐‘‘๐‘’๐‘›๐‘ก-๐‘’๐‘™๐‘’๐‘๐‘ก ๐‘ ๐‘Ž๐‘–๐‘‘ ๐‘กโ„Ž๐‘’๐‘Ÿ๐‘’ ๐‘ค๐‘œ๐‘ข๐‘™๐‘‘ ๐‘๐‘’ ‘๐‘Ž๐‘™๐‘™ โ„Ž๐‘’๐‘™๐‘™ ๐‘ก๐‘œ ๐‘๐‘Ž๐‘ฆ’ ๐‘–๐‘“ ๐‘กโ„Ž๐‘’ โ„Ž๐‘œ๐‘ ๐‘ก๐‘Ž๐‘”๐‘’๐‘  ๐‘ค๐‘’๐‘Ÿ๐‘’๐‘›’๐‘ก ๐‘Ÿ๐‘’๐‘™๐‘’๐‘Ž๐‘ ๐‘’๐‘‘ ๐‘๐‘ฆ โ„Ž๐‘–๐‘  ๐‘–๐‘›๐‘Ž๐‘ข๐‘”๐‘ข๐‘Ÿ๐‘Ž๐‘ก๐‘–๐‘œ๐‘›

by Dave DeCamp, Antoiwar. com, December 3, 2024

On Tuesday, a Hamas official responded to President-elect Donald Trump’s warning that there would be “all hell to pay” if Israeli hostages in Gaza weren’t released by his inauguration on January 20, 2025.

Trump didn’t mention Hamas by name in his warning but appeared to threaten US strikes on the Palestinian group, saying, “Those responsible will be hit harder than anybody has been hit in the long and storied History of the United States of America.”

Basem Naim, a senior member of Hamas’s political bureau, said Trump’s threat should be directed at Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, citing his efforts to sabotage a hostage and ceasefire deal. Israeli officials and media reports have also blamed Netanyahu for the lack of a deal.

“Hamas understands that Trump’s message is, in fact, directed primarily at Netanyahu and his government,” Naim said, according to The Palestine Chronicle.

Naim said the Netanyahu government had been using negotiations as a cover to advance its own agenda. “Netanyahu’s government must put an end to this deceptive charade,” he said.

Former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, who was recently fired by Netanyahu, said that the prime minister sabotaged the chances of a hostage deal by demanding Israel maintain control of the Philadelphi Corridor on the Gaza-Egypt border.

“I can tell you what there was not, security considerations. The IDF chief and I said there was no security reason for remaining in the Philadelphi Corridor,” Gallant told hostage families on November 7. “Netanyahu said that it was a diplomatic consideration, I’m telling you there was no diplomatic consideration.”

There are believed to be 97 Israeli hostages remaining in Gaza, and Israeli media reported back in September that Netanyahu told a Knesset committee that only half of the hostages were believed to be alive.

The Israeli newspaper Haaretz reported in October that the Israeli government was done with ceasefire talks and was instead focused on annexing portions of the Gaza Strip. There’s been some recent efforts by mediators to restart talks, but there’s no sign the effort is going anywhere, and there’s no end in sight to the daily slaughter in Gaza.

Share this:

Monday, December 02, 2024

Former Israeli Defense Minister Says Israel Is Carrying Out Ethnic Cleansing in Northern Gaza

Moshe Yaalon, Israel’s defense minister during the 2014 Gaza War, said there’s ‘no other word’ to describe what Israel is doing

by Dave DeCamp, Antiwar. com, December 1, 2024 at 4:51 pm ET Categories NewsTags Gaza, Israel, Palestine

A former Israeli defense minister has said Israel is conducting an ethnic cleansing campaign in northern Gaza, where Israeli troops are forcibly expelling civilians under the threat of death.

Moshe Yaalon, a former member of the ruling Likud party, was defense minister under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu from 2013 to 2016 during the 2014 Gaza War. In comments on Saturday, Yaalon criticized the current Netanyahu government.

“The path they’re dragging us down is to occupy, annex, and ethnically cleanse — look at the northern strip,” Yaalon said.

When asked to clarify if he meant Israel is currently conducting ethnic cleansing or is headed in that direction, Yaalon pointed to what is happening on the ground in northern Gaza today.

“There’s no Beit Lahia. There’s no Beit Hanoun. They’re now operating in Jabalia. They’re basically cleaning the territory of Arabs,” he said.

The northern cities of Beit Lahia, Beit Hanoun, and Jabalia have been under a total siege since early October as part of an ethnic cleansing campaign that’s following an outline known as the “general’s plan.” In those areas, Israeli troops are demolishing homes, so Palestinian civilians have nowhere to return.

Yaalon’s comments sparked a strong backlash in Israel, but he doubled down on Sunday. In another interview, the former defense minister said the term ethnic cleansing was “accurate” and asked “no other word for it.”

He pointed to Israeli ministers who openly call for the expulsion of Palestinians from Gaza and the establishment of Jewish settlements. Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich recently said that it may be possible to cut the population of Gaza in half within two years through “voluntary emigration,” though there is nothing voluntary about the displacement in Gaza that’s happening today.

Share this: