topic by
Lynette
8/8/2002 (13:40) |
|
http://www.shalomctr.org/html/peace98.html
The Meaning of the Gaza Bombing
By Rabbi Arthur Waskow
In trying to understand the bombing of the Gaza apartment house on Monday night July 22-23 that killed not only a Hamas leader but also 13 other people, mostly children and noncombatant women, it is important to know about events at the end of November/ beginning of December 2001.
On Sunday, November 25, Yediot Achronot, Israel's largest mass-circulation newspaper, with right-of-center politics, carried a front-page article It appeared in a very conspicuous place, in a box on the paper's front page; and it was written by Yediot's veteran security commentator, Alex Fishman, who is known to have close contacts in the army and the security services.
The first four paragraphs of the article follow. (The entire text is posted on the Shalom Center Website in the 'Pursuing Peace' section, in a special subsection called 'The Meaning of Gaza.')
A dangerous liquidation
By Alex Fishman
Yediot Aharonot, Nov. 25, 2001
After raising our hats to the Shabak and the IDF for the liquidation of Mahmud Abu Hunud, the so-called 'No. 1 wanted Hamas terrorist' — ... — we again find ourselves preparing with dread for a new mass terrorist attack within the Green Line [Israel's pre-'67 border].
Whoever gave a green light to this act of liquidation knew full well that he is thereby shattering in one blow the gentleman's agreement between Hamas and the Palestinian Authority; under that agreement, Hamas was to avoid in the near future suicide bombings inside the Green Line, of the kind perpetrated at the Dolphinarium [discotheque in Tel-Aviv].
Such an agreement did exist, even if neither the PA nor Hamas would admit it in public. It is a fact that, while the security services did accumulate repeated warnings of planned Hamas terrorist attacks within the Green Line, these did not materialize. That cannot be attributed solely to the Shabak's impressive success in intercepting the suicide bombers and their controllers. Rather, the respective leaderships of the PA and Hamas came to the understanding that it would be better not to play into Israel's hands by mass attacks on its population centres.
This understanding was, however, shattered by the assassination the day before yesterday — and whoever decided upon the liquidation of Abu Hunud knew in advance that that would be the price. The subject was extensively discussed both by Israel's military echelon and its political one, before it was decided to carry out the liquidation.
On December 1 and 2, less than a week after this article appeared, came the mass-murder suicide bombing of Zion Square in Jerusalem and of a bus in Haifa, for which Hamas claimed responsibility.
Alex Fishman was reporting that (a) last October, Hamas had under pressure from the Palestinian Authority agreed to stop suicide bombings inside Israel proper; (b) the Israeli government knew this; (c) it discussed whether to kill a Hamas leader for his involvement in planning such terrorist bombings; (d) it knew if it did so the cease-fire agreement would lapse; (e) if so, there would be more suicide attacks against Israelis; and (f) the authorities probably could not prevent all such efforts, so at least one would succeed.
Fishman was right. Twenty-five Israelis died.
Why do I think it is important for us to know this history?
Because on MONDAY just this past week, according to a detailed report in the London Times of July 24 and a TWO-FULL-PAGE report by the same Alex Fishman in Yediot Achronot of July 24, the 'militant' factions besides Hamas that have joined in terror attacks during the last few months had agreed to issue a formal statement abandoning all attacks against Israeli civilians. And as those discussions went forward, on Monday, the chief of Hamas, Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, announced publicly that Hamas was considering entering into a cease-fire if Israeli troops left the Palestinian cities and villages they have recently reoccupied. (For both articles, see Shalom Center Website, in the 'Meaning of the Gaza Bombing' special subsection on the 'Seeking Peace' page.)
These discussions, and the public announcement by Hamas, were known to the Israeli authorities.
THE VERY NIGHT OF THE DAY on which Hamas made its public statement and the broader discussions achieved agreement on a cease-fire by other groups, came the midnight bombing of the Gaza apartment complex that killed Sheikh Salah Shehada and 14 others, mainly children and women.
Since the bombing, Hamas has — predictably — announced that it will make every effort to attack any Israeli target, including the families of government officials.
THIS RESPONSE BY HAMAS IS ITSELF A DISGUSTING ONE, MORALLY AND ETHICALLY VILE.
But what do these two sequences of events say about the policies of the Sharon government?
Why did the Sharon government not explore the possibility of a cease-fire? Why did it choose this very moment to kiill a Hamas leader, when the possibility existed of ending the terrorist bombings that have cost so many Israeli lives, so deeply damaged the Israeli economy, and been the target of so many Israeli demands that Palestinians abandon this disgusting, vile, and immoral practice?
Why is this sequence so similar to the one reported by Yediot Achronot last fall?
One possible answer is that the Israeli government thought it so important to kill these two leaders of Hamas that it did so DESPITE the consequences to be expected: that Palestinian civilians wouild die, that suicide bombings would continue, Israelis would die as a result of retaliataory attacks, negotiations would become impossible again, the Palestinian Authority's authority again be undermined and its painstaking efforts for a cease-fire go for nought.
There is another, even more dreadful possibility: That the Sharon government took these actions not despite but BECAUSE it expects these consequences.
That the Sharon government does not wish to achieve a peace settlement with a viable Palestinian state on the West Bank and Gaza, but intends to shatter every effort toward such a settlement, and wants to break every vestige of Palestinian nationhood and any kind of Palestinian national movement.
That the Sharon government is ready not only to kill Palestinians, whether terrorists or civilians or two-month-old babies, to make sure this terrible pot of blood keeps boiling, but to expect and accept the likely result that Israelis also will be killed.
Is there any evidence that the real intention of the Sharon government is to shatter all forms of Palestinian nationhood, not just the terrorist groups, and that it views a cease-fire as contradictory to that goal?
Two items:
1. Periodically in Israeli public life, the question is raised about bringing settlers safely home from the Gaza settlement of Netzarim, where fifty families of Israeli settlers have required the presence of thousands of Israeli troops and the deaths of more than a dozen in order to protect them. Asked in an interview with Ha'aretz in April 2001, only a few weeks after becoming Prime Minister, 'Would you be ready to evacuate settlements as part of a non-belligerency agreement?', Sharon answered bluntly: 'No. Absolutely not.' 'Not even isolated settlements like Netzarim in the Gaza Strip?', the interviewer followed up: 'No. Not at any price,' Sharon answered. 'Why do we have to evacuate Netzarim? For what?' Later Prime Minister Sharon said that to him, this settlement is as precious as Tel Aviv.
This may raise concern, but sometimes politicians use rhetoric beyond their real intentions. What follows, however, is not rhetoric.
2. After the Passover suicide bombing in Netanya, when Israeli troops reoccupied Ramallah and other towns, they destroyed educational, welfare, and similar civilian records of the Palestinian Authority — for example, the records of school grades, etc., of two million Palestinian children. These records were not part of a terrorist infrastructure; they were the normal part of any government's ability to carry on normal civilian life.
As you absorb these two items and reconsider the two killings of Hamas leaders — in November 2001 and July 2002 — what interpretation of the government's action strikes you as more likely?
Was the goal to kill these two Hamas leaders despite the price in blood and in the impossibility of making peace?
Or was the goal to kill these two Hamas leaders to PREVENT the emergence of a successful peace negotiation resulting in a viable Palestinian state alongside a secure Israel?
In either case, is the Sharon government a reliable trustee for hopes of peace?
And what should be the policy of the US government?
When you are ready to answer these questions out of your own knowledge and conscience, you might (a) call a rabbi and a synagogue or Jewish federation official to discuss this; (b) write a letter to the editor of your own Jewish and general newspaper; (c) write your member of Congress about US policy.
Shalom, Rabbi Arthur Waskow
SUCK EGGS YADAM THE 'YID' COZ DECENT PEOPLE IN THE WORLD SEE THIS OCCUPATION FOR WHAT IT STANDS FOR.........DEATH,MURDER AND BLOOD. JUST THE WAY ARI`HELL LIKES IT!!! IT SERVES HIS PLANS FOR EXPANDING HIS CREEPY GREATER ISRAEL IDEOLOGY MATE!
|
|