Israel:  The West stands idly by

 

On 30 June 2006, the Israeli Chargé d’Affaires to the UN, Daniel Carmon, told the Security Council about the capture of Gilad Shalit by Palestinians a few days earlier [1]:

 

“On Sunday, 25 June, at approximately 5.30 a.m., members of Hamas, along with its partner terror organizations, infiltrated Israel near the Kerem Shalom border crossing with the Gaza Strip, through a deep tunnel dug 300 metres into Israeli territory. During the ensuing attack, Palestinian terrorists killed two Israeli soldiers, First Lieutenant Hanan Barak, age 20, and Staff Sergeant Pavel Slutzker, also age 20. They kidnapped one soldier, Corporal Gilad Shalit, age 19, and wounded three others. … Gilad Shalit is currently being held hostage and his whereabouts are not known.”

 

Daniel Carmon did not tell the Security Council that in the 8 weeks prior to this incident his Government’s military machine had killed 73 Palestinians, according to statistics compiled by B’Tselem, the Israeli human rights group [2].  Nor did he tell the Council that, in this period, only one Israeli civilian (and no Israeli military personnel) died at Palestinian hands.  The civilian died as a result of injuries he received in the suicide bombing in Tel Aviv on 17 April 2006, the last Palestinian attack before 25 June 2006 that resulted in Israeli deaths, civilian or military.

 

(The B’Tselem figures for Palestinian deaths at the hands of the Israeli security forces do not include the 7 members of the Ghaliah family killed on a Gaza beach on 9 June 2006, of whom B'Tselem says it “cannot currently confirm with certainty who is responsible for their deaths” [3].)

 

This essential background has been almost entirely omitted from the British media coverage of the Palestinian attack at Kerem Shalom when Gilad Shalit was captured.  Since the Israeli election on 28 March 2006 and the subsequent installation of a new government, with Ehud Olmert as Prime Minister and Labour leader, Amir Peretz, as Defense Minister, the assault on Palestinians has been relentless, with well over a hundred killed up to 25 June 2006.

 

Few of these deaths have merited a mention in the British media, let alone a condemnation from the British government.  In total, they received fewer column inches in the British press than the holding of one Israeli soldier prisoner since 25 June.  Likewise, the over 9,000 Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli jails and detention centres, many for years and most without any kind of trial, have merited barely a mention in the British media, even after the Palestinians offered to exchange Gilad Shalit for women and young people held in Israeli jails.  Over 100 women and about 400 young people under 18 are currently held by Israel [4].

 

Hamas truce

In February 2005, Hamas announced a truce and ceased suicide bombings in Israel.  It maintained its truce for 16 months.  There have been 4 suicide bombings in Israel mounted by other groups (Islamic Jihad, for example) but none by Hamas.  From February 2005 up until June of this year, there was very little, if any, military activity by Hamas against Israel either in Israel itself or in the Occupied Territories.

 

The table below shows the number of Palestinians and Israelis killed by military action during the period of the Hamas truce.  The most significant feature of this is the relatively small number of Israelis, civilian or military, killed by Palestinians.  To the best of my knowledge, none was killed by Hamas.  In the four months after Hamas called the truce, for example, there were no Israelis killed within Israel.

 

 

                           Palestinians                                  Israelis

 

 

 

by Civ

by Mil

by Mil

 

Civs

Civs

Mil

Mil

 

 

in OT

in OT

in Is

 

in OT

in Is

in OT

in Is

 

 

(1)

(2)

(3)

 

(4)

(5)

(6)

(7)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2006

Jun

1

40

2

 

1

0

0

2

 

May

0

36

0

 

0

1

0

0

 

Apr

0

31

0

 

0

6

0

0

 

Mar

5

15

0

 

5

0

0

0

 

Feb

0

29

2

 

0

1

0

0

 

Jan

0

13

0

 

0

0

0

0

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total

6

164

4

 

6

8

0

2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2005

Dec

1

20

0

 

1

5

2

0

 

Nov

0

15

0

 

0

1

1

0

 

Oct

3

22

0

 

3

5

1

0

 

Sep

1

17

0

 

1

0

0

0

 

Aug

0

7

0

 

0

0

0

0

 

Jul

2

23

0

 

2

5

0

1

 

Jun

3

5

0

 

3

0

1

0

 

May

0

11

0

 

0

0

1

0

 

Apr

0

5

0

 

0

0

0

0

 

Mar

0

2

0

 

0

0

0

0

 

Feb

0

11

0

 

0

5

0

0

 

Jan

7

52

0

 

7

3

2

0

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total

17

190

0

 

17

24

8

1

 

Notes:

 

(1)   Palestinians killed by Israeli civilians in the Occupied Territories

(2)   Palestinians killed by Israeli military in the Occupied Territories

(3)   Palestinians killed by Israeli military in Israel

(4)   Israeli civilians killed by Palestinians in the Occupied Territories

(5)   Israeli civilians killed by Palestinians in Israel

(6)   Israeli military killed by Palestinians in the Occupied Territories

(7)   Israeli military killed by Palestinians in Israel

 

Source:  B’Tselem at www.btselem.org/english/Statistics/Casualties.asp

 

One might have thought that the Israeli response to this would be to reward Hamas for its truce by not engaging in military action against it and, by this and other means, seeking to get other Palestinian groups to follow the example of Hamas and call a truce – and thereby bring a halt to the killing of Israelis.  But Israel’s response has been the exact opposite: it has been to intensify its military action against Hamas, despite the fact that the Hamas’ ceasefire was holding.  This reached a crescendo after Hamas won the elections to the Palestinian legislature in January 2006 and the Olmert government took power after the Israeli elections in late March 2006.

 

Just look at the figures for April, May and June 2006.  There was one suicide bombing in Israel on 17 April 2006 (not by Hamas), as a result of which 7 Israeli civilians died (6 in April and one in May), but, up until Hamas abandoned its truce in June, no other Israelis, civilian or military, were killed.  But, 31 Palestinians were killed in April, 36 in May and 40 in June, as a result of the Israeli assault on Hamas.  Many of those killed were not members of Hamas but bystanders, including women and children.

 

The purpose of this Israeli assault was to destroy Hamas, as a military and a political force capable of resisting Israeli plans for Palestine.  This is to corral Palestinians into two ghettos, one in Gaza and the other in the West Bank, completely surrounded by Israel and under Israeli control.  To have any chance of achieving this successfully, Hamas has to be broken and made as subservient to Israel as Fatah is – Israel has been prepared to supply Fatah with arms recently, so little of an obstacle does Israel consider it.

 

Israel was given the green light for its assault on Hamas by the West’s refusal to accept the Hamas victory in the Palestinian elections and its continued characterisation of Hamas as a terrorist organisation, even though it had been on ceasefire for over a year.  How could the West object to Israel killing “terrorists”?  And, if bystanders got killed in the process, well, they had probably voted for “terrorists”.  In this context, Israel thought it could get away with a relentless assault on Hamas and it was quite right – the West didn’t object to the killing of over 100 Palestinians by the Olmert/Peretz government in less than 3 months.

 

Hamas stuck to its ceasefire, in the face of this fierce assault, until 25 June when with other groups it mounted an attack on Israeli troops at Kerem Shalom outside Gaza, as a result of which two Israeli soldiers were killed and Gilad Shalit was captured.  This was the excuse for Israel to further intensify its murderous Israeli assault on Gaza and collectively punish its inhabitants by bombing its only power station.  Again, the West supported or, at least, condoned Israel’s action and joined in the denunciation of taking Gilad Shalit “hostage”, an action that was obviously much more heinous than the killing of 73 Palestinians in the previous 8 weeks and the detention of thousands of Palestinians for years without trial.

 

The West has reacted in a similar manner to Israel’s extensive and ongoing collective punishment of Lebanon in response to Hizbullah’s taking two more Israeli soldiers “hostage”.  Hundreds, if not thousands, of Lebanese have been taken “hostage” by Israel over the years and held in Israeli jails, and some of them are still held, but the West has never felt the need to do anything about them.

 

On Security Council resolutions

In response to Hizbullah’s military action, Israel has been making great play of the fact that resolution 1559 on Lebanon has not been fully implemented.  This Chapter VI resolution was proposed jointly by the US and France and was passed on 2 September 2004.  It purports to be about the governance of Lebanon, but its real objective was to weaken Syria and Hizbullah.

 

It was opposed by the Government of Lebanon on the grounds that it was an unwarranted interference in Lebanon’s domestic affairs, contrary to Article 2.7 of the UN Charter [5], which it is.  Nevertheless, it was passed.  The two key paragraphs are:

 

[The Security Council]

2. Calls upon all remaining foreign forces to withdraw from Lebanon;

3. Calls for the disbanding and disarmament of all Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias;

 

Paragraph 2 was the stick used to beat Syria over the head and force it to withdraw its 15,000 troops last year, troops that were there under the Ta’if Accord.  The stick became effective only after the assassination on 14 February 2005 of the former Lebanese Prime Minister, Rafik Hariri, which the West blamed on Syria.

 

Paragraph 3 was aimed at Hizbullah, which had made Israel’s occupation of Lebanon so costly in casualties that Israel eventually withdrew in 2000 after 18 years of occupation.  In the aftermath of its recent attacks, Israel has been complaining bitterly that this paragraph has not been implemented and Hizbullah remains an independent military force.

 

Israel has some cheek in complaining about the failure to fully implement a Security Council resolution.  Israel itself is in breach of about 30 Chapter VI Security Council resolutions (see list compiled by Stephen Zunes here [6]).  Each of these is an explicit demand for action from Israel, and Israel alone, which it has refused to carry out.

 

Remember this one, asking Israel to rescind its annexation of the Golan Heights:

 

[The Security Council]

1. Decides that the Israeli decision to impose its laws, jurisdiction and administration in the occupied Syrian Golan Heights is null and void and without international legal effect;

2. Demands that Israel, the occupying Power, should rescind forthwith its decision;

 

This is resolution 497, passed on 17 December 1981 [7].  It deals with an issue of proper concern for the Security Council, that is, the aggressive behaviour of one UN member state towards another, and not the internal affairs of a member state like 1559.  For 25 years, it has been within Israel’s power to implement 497, but it continues to “impose its laws, jurisdiction and administration in the occupied Syrian Golan Heights”.

 

Israel is now complaining that its sovereign territory was violated by Hizbullah.   That’s rich coming from it, when it has continually violated the sovereign territory of its neighbours, up to and including the ultimate violation, that is, annexation.  Ironically, a few days before Israel began complaining about Hizbullah violating its sovereign territory, it had violated Syria’s air space with military aircraft, because of Syria’s alleged support for Hamas.

 

Israel has also annexed East Jerusalem and has maintained the annexation despite Security Council resolution 252, passed on 21 May 1968 [8], calling for the annexation to be rescinded.

 

And then there is resolution 446 passed on 22 March 1979 [9], which calls upon Israel to cease planting Jewish settlers in the Occupied Territories:

 

[The Security Council]

3.  Calls once more upon Israel, as the occupying Power, to abide scrupulously by the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention, to rescind its previous measures and to desist from taking any action which would result in changing the legal status and geographical nature and materially affecting the demographic composition of the Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, and, in particular, not to transfer parts of its own civilian population into the occupied Arab territories;

 

Israel has signally failed to implement 446, which has been outstanding for 27 years.  On the contrary, it has continued to plant more and more Jewish settlers on the West Bank.  There are now well over 400,000 Jewish settlers there, contrary to 446.  Their numbers have doubled since the “peace process” began in the early 90s.  Israel rewarded Fatah’s recognition of Israel and acceptance of a two-state solution by doubling the number of Jews planted on the territory of the putative Palestinian state, thereby making it impossible to establish such a state in the whole of the Occupied Territories.

 

For decades, Israel has been in breach of these three Security Council resolutions, which are concerned with very serious issues indeed – there could hardly be more serious issues in international affairs than annexation and colonisation of the territory of neighbouring states.  If any country in the world other than Israel behaved in this way, the media in the West would be full of demands that this rogue state must cease defying the will of “the international community” immediately or face serious consequences.  This is the language we hear continuously today about Iran, even though it hasn’t invaded any of its neighbours in living memory – let alone annexed or colonised their territory – hasn’t broken any of its international obligations on nuclear matters and hasn’t even had a Security Council resolution passed demanding action from it.

 

But, the West’s reaction to Israel’s defiance of “the international community” has been to do nothing.  All of these resolutions were under Chapter VI of the UN Charter, in other words, they amounted to polite requests, since they were not accompanied by the threat of economic or military sanctions, as a Chapter VII resolution could be.   There is no doubt that the annexation or colonisation of the territory of another state merits Security Council action under Chapter VII, which may be applied if “any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression” has taken place (to quote from Article 39, the first Article in Chapter VII of the Charter [5]).  But, Israel has never been subject to a Chapter VII resolution.  The West’s reaction to Israel’s failure to comply with numerous Chapter VI resolutions has been to sit on its hands.

 

Today, it is difficult to imagine any action by Israel against its neighbours that would provoke the West into supporting a Chapter VII resolution with sanctions.  Even the use of nuclear weapons might be accepted as legitimate if Israel asserted that it had used them for its own security.

 

Qatar resolution

Nowadays, with the US acting as Israel’s protector at the Security Council, it is almost impossible to have a Chapter VI resolution passed, if it is the least bit critical of Israel.  The Security Council met on 13 July 2006 to consider on the collective punishment and ongoing slaughter of civilians in Gaza.

 

On its agenda was a Chapter VI resolution, proposed by Qatar, a non-permanent member of the Council.  The proposed resolution was mild – it didn’t even dare to use the phrase “collective punishment”.  The operative parts of it were [10]:

 

[The Security Council]

1.   Calls for the immediate and unconditional release of the abducted Israeli soldier;

 

2.   Calls upon Israel, the occupying Power, for the immediate and unconditional release of all detained Palestinian ministers, members of the Palestinian Legislative Council and other officials, as well as other illegally detained Palestinian civilians;

 

3.   Calls upon Israel, the occupying Power, to halt its military operations and its disproportionate use of force that endanger the Palestinian civilian population and to withdraw its forces to their original positions outside the Gaza Strip;

 

4.   Emphasizes the need to preserve the institutions of the Palestinian National Authority and Palestinian infrastructure and properties;

 

5.   Calls upon the Palestinian Authority to take immediate and sustained action to bring an end to violence, including the firing of rockets on Israeli territory;

 

6.   Urges all concerned parties to abide by their obligations and respect in all circumstances the rules of international humanitarian law, including the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War of 12 August 1949 and refrain from violence against civilian population;

 

7.   Calls on the international community to provide emergency assistance to the Palestinian people to meet the dire humanitarian situation; and also calls on the Government of Israel to restore and maintain the continuous and uninterrupted supply of fuel to Gaza, and to act expeditiously to replace the destroyed equipment at the Gaza power plant;

 

10 out of 15 members of the Security Council voted for the resolution, 4 abstained, but the US vetoed it.  Of the other 4 permanent members, the UK abstained (on the grounds that the resolution wasn’t “balanced”) but France, Russia and China voted for.

 

At the time of writing, the Security Council hasn’t even met to consider the unprecedented collective punishment that Israel continues to mete out to the Lebanese people.

 

 

 

David Morrison

17 July 2006

Labour & Trade Union Review

www.david-morrison.org.uk

 

References:

 

[1]  daccessdds.un.org/doc/UNDOC/PRO/N06/413/66/PDF/N0641366.pdf

[2]  www.btselem.org/english/Statistics/Casualties.asp

[3]  www.btselem.org/english/Press_Releases/20060622.asp

[4]  electronicintifada.net/v2/article4986.shtml

[5]  www.un.org/aboutun/charter/

[6]  www.fpif.org/commentary/2002/0210unres.html

[7]  www.david-morrison.org.uk/scrs/1981-0497.htm

[8]  www.david-morrison.org.uk/scrs/1968-0252.htm

[9]  www.david-morrison.org.uk/scrs/1979-0446.htm

[10]  daccessdds.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N06/429/31/PDF/N0642931.pdf