MIM Notes # 222       Nov 15, 2000

Israeli war mocks Palestinian "sovereignty"

By MC12

In the first month of what has been called the Al-Aqsa 
Intifada, 139 people were killed, 131 of them Palestinian -- 
that's a 16-to-1 ratio -- and one quarter under age 18.(1) 
While many bemoan the "collapse of the peace process," MIM 
takes a moment to learn some lessons from the current 
situation. 

In mid-October the group Human Rights Watch counted up the 
bodies, and released a report on Israeli atrocities in 
response to the uprising. Their report showed: "repeated use 
by Israeli security forces of lethal force in situations where 
demonstrators posed no threat of death or serious injury to 
security forces or others. In situations where Israeli war 
mocks Palestinian "sovereignty" Palestinians did fire upon 
Israeli security forces, the IDF [Israeli Defense Forces] 
showed a troubling proclivity to resort to indiscriminate 
lethal force in response. At least 100 Palestinians have been 
killed and 3,500 injured in clashes with Israeli security 
forces [as of October 17]. Human Rights Watch also expressed 
concern at the IDF's use of medium caliber munitions, which 
are meant for penetrating concrete and other hard surface 
barriers, against unarmed demonstrators in the West Bank and 
Gaza Strip. The military munitions were particularly 
devastating when they hit civilians."(2)

National self-determination is never given as a gift. It is 
not given at all, but must be won. Many colonies have gained 
"independence" without achieving national self-determination. 
The distinction is important, and the current Israeli war 
against Palestine is a case in point.

In late November 1998, the Palestinian Authority finally 
opened an airport in Gaza -- after more than a year of trying 
to get permission from the Israeli government. The opening was 
trumpeted by both friends and foes of a Palestinian state who 
don't understand what national self-determination is.

For Many Palestinians, Joel Greenberg wrote in the New York 
Times, the airport "enhanced their sense that, while there was 
no Palestinian state yet, something like one is emerging from 
negotiations with Israel."(3) The Seattle Times reported, "The 
Palestinians consider the airport as their first gateway to 
the world, a strong symbol of fledgling independence."(4) 
Palestinian Authority leader Yassir Arafat said, "This is a 
preparation for the declaration of the Palestinian state."(5) 
And, most farcically, Ahmad Abdel Rachman, the general 
secretary of the Palestinian Cabinet, said: "I am standing on 
Palestinian soil, and I have an airport, I have a flag, I have 
an airplane. This is our path to the independent Palestinian 
state."(6)

As the violence spread in the beginning of October this year, 
the Israeli military unilaterally shut down the Gaza airport, 
blocking even medical relief flights from Arab states.(7)

The rage of the Palestinian people in the current uprising has 
surprised some people, who believe that Palestinians should be 
getting more and more happy as the "peace process" moves 
along. They do not see, or pretend not to see, that 
"independence" -- which the Palestinians remain very far from 
achieving -- itself is a far cry from self-determination. So 
things can get worse, much worse, even as the people win the 
right to raise their own flag. The disconnect between the 
promises and the reality is a recipe for uprising, and MIM is 
glad to see it come.

Noam Chomsky, with whom MIM has fundamental disagreements, is 
nevertheless a good observer of the process. He wrote recently 
that the "peace process," before it was derailed, was in the 
process of implementing "mechanisms to ensure that usable land 
and resources (primarily water) remain largely in Israeli 
hands while the population is administered by a corrupt and 
brutal Palestinian authority (PA), playing the role 
traditionally assigned to indigenous collaborators under the 
several varieties of imperial rule: the Black leadership of 
South Africa's Bantustans, to mention only the most obvious 
analogue. In the West Bank, a northern canton is to include 
Nablus and other Palestinian cities, a central canton is based 
in Ramallah, and a southern canton in Bethlehem; Jericho is to 
remain isolated. Palestinians would be effectively cut off 
from Jerusalem, the center of Palestinian life. Similar 
arrangements are likely in Gaza, with Israel keeping the 
southern coastal region and a small settlement at Netzarim 
(the site of many of the recent atrocities), which is hardly 
more than an excuse for a large military presence and roads 
splitting the Strip below Gaza City. These proposals formalize 
the vast settlement and construction programs that Israel has 
been conducting, thanks to munificent US aid, with increasing 
energy since the US was able to implement its version of the 
'peace process' after the Gulf war."(8)

Journalist Amira Hass reported in Ha'aretz that Israel has 
been able "to double the number of settlers [in Palestinian 
areas] in 10 years, to enlarge the settlements, to continue 
its discriminatory policy of cutting back water quotas for 
three million Palestinians, to prevent Palestinian development 
in most of the area of the West Bank, and to seal an entire 
nation into restricted areas, imprisoned in a network of 
bypass roads meant for Jews only."(9)

National liberation from imperialism has never been won at the 
barrel of a pen or even through military means under non-
communist leadership, but only through people's war under the 
leadership of a communist vanguard party. The neocolonial 
world is littered with the wreckage of countries that followed 
different paths. The rivers of Palestinian blood flowing down 
the streets of "Palestinian Authority" areas should be a 
pointed reminder of this historical principle.

Notes: 

1. Reuters, 28 Oct 2000. 

2. "Research Shows Israeli Pattern of Excessive Force," Human 
Rights Watch report, available at: 
http://www.hrw.org/press/2000/10/isr-pa1017.htm. MIM has 
fundamental disagreements with the conception of human rights 
put forward by Human Rights Watch, and by their alleged 
political neutrality. But their fact gathering in this case is 
fairly reliable, as it reflects mostly press reports.

3. New York Times, 7 Dec 1998, p. A1.

4. Seattle Times, 6 Dec 1998, p. 19. 

5. Baltimore Sun, 25 Nov 1998, p. A13. 

6. New York Times, 25 Nov 1998, p. A1. 

7. New York Times, 9 Oct 2000, p. A8. 

8. Noam Chomsky, "Al-Aqsa Intifada," from Z Magazine's web 
site at: http://www.zmag.org/meastwatch/alaqsa.htm. 

9. Ha'aretz 18 Oct 2000, quoted in Chomsky, op cit.