As per usual, unequivocally the full weight of accepted international moral opinion and consensus comes down upon and falls heavily against the Israelis - as represented by their Government's actions of late.
But who's at real or at least most fault here? Arguably not the Israelis, merely exercising the long-established and universally all too well-understood right - of sovereign nations and/or peoples - to self-defence; by whatever means are at their disposal. Suffering daily, continual and intense bombardment from an enemy, apparently bent upon their - utter - destruction, or at the very least their abject terrorizing, they simply respond with surgically precise air strikes - sadly, and yes all too predictably, killing many innocent civilians including small kids in the process; (among families, according to Israel's Government, however, deliberately 'planted' next to missile silos and the like, to subsequently elicit popular sympathy for the Gazans' side of the conflict.) Whereas since the Israelis manage, through clever(er) technology and/or simply better preparedness, to evade such civilian death - losing very few citizens to Hamas rocket fire - they are automatically deemed the moral transgressor in the conflict. Since the Gazan Palestinians are thus clearly understood to be the natural underdog, 'we' instantly come to their defence and support, much as few people would tend to rally in support of Goliath when David is being overshadowed and threatened darkly with death. That's human nature, clearly understood and very understandable.
Granted - and it's a big concession - Israel certainly did kick-start this conflict anew, in one major, important sense, by choosing to - at this time - 'take out' in exactly such a clinically well-planned, organized and executed assassination, a leading member of Hamas. For who knows what underlying reason? Perhaps as a major distraction, with knowledge of attention all too undesired to soon come upon them again - whether well-deserved or otherwise - for the death in 2004 of Yasser Arafat, a beloved leader of the Palestinians. Someone who, love him or hate him, exuded a natural charisma and leadership on the world stage unequalled by any other popular Middle East leader since Abdul Nasser; excepting Ayatollah Khomeini and Saddam Hussein, though these two were hated, loathed and detested in significantly greater proportion. Or maybe, as has been said, simply as an age-old device in drumming up support ahead of a rapidly approaching election.
So here we have it: the widely acknowledged militarily stronger nation in the conflict, Israel, supposedly - admittedly its vehement critics would argue only ostensibly - goes out of its way to avoid causing civilian casualties, yet actually 'achieves' exactly the opposite outcome among Gazan civilians (through arguably no fault of its own). Whereas that selfsame country, Israel, daily and hourly suffering intense aerial bombardment throughout its territory, perpetrated by a party, yes arguably the guilty aggressor in the conflict, determined thus to 'take out' as many innocents as possible, fails miserably in its aim but certainly not for want of trying or intention. And so we come to judge one party - i.e. the Israelites - as ipso facto the aggressor in the conflict, due to the evident results of its actions.Whereas the other party in the conflict, the Hamas militants in Gaza, despite motive-wise, apparently having no greater desire than to kill as many innocent Israelis as possible -none of their missiles evidently being aimed at obvious military targets - are rather impotent as it turns out, and so are to be automatically adjudged the innocent party. I'm sorry, something's not quite right here. If I indeed am wrong, then pray tell me in what appreciable way?
Indeed, Israel's Government amazingly made no upping of its long-threatened escalation of said conflict (by sending ground troops into Gaza) even while yet another bus full of completely innocent and totally defenceless Israeli civilians were bombed to smithereens - without either a murmur or a whisper from the international community, much less its supposed 'guardians' the United Nations. Which reminds me of a number of old newspaper clippings I've been stumbling upon recently, which alarmed and concerned me at the time in view of the international media approach to Israel. What were these? Simply two occasions over the past decade-and-a-couple years when Israel, in order to secure the release from captivity of one (or at most a few) of its soldiers in Palestinian (I believe Gazan) captivity, willingly and rather controversially - among its citizenry - to put it mildly, agreed to simultaneously release around 500 Palestinians prisoners. So who - really - cares more about its own civilian (or for that matter military) population?
No comments:
Post a Comment