[NYTr] Chomsky: Guillotining Gaza

[All the News That Doesn't Fit]

Khaleej Times - Jul 18, 2007
http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticleNew.asp?xfile=data/opinion/2007/July/opinion_July63.xml

Guillotining Gaza

By NOAM CHOMSKY 

THE death of a nation is a rare and sombre event. But the vision of a
unified, independent Palestine threatens to be another casualty of a
Hamas-Fatah civil war, stoked by Israel and its enabling ally the United
States.

Last month's chaos may mark the beginning of the end of the Palestinian
Authority. That might not be an altogether unfortunate development for
Palestinians, given US-Israeli programmes of rendering it nothing more
than a quisling regime to oversee these allies' utter rejection of an
independent state.

The events in Gaza took place in a developing context. In January 2006,
Palestinians voted in a carefully monitored election, pronounced to be
free and fair by international observers, despite US-Israeli efforts to
swing the election towards their favourite, Palestinian Authority
President Mahmoud Abbas and his Fatah party. But Hamas won a surprising
victory.

The punishment of Palestinians for the crime of voting the wrong way was
severe. With US backing, Israel stepped up its violence in Gaza,
withheld funds it was legally obligated to transmit to the Palestinian
Authority, tightened its siege and even cut off the flow of water to
the arid Gaza Strip.

The United States and Israel made sure that Hamas would not have a
chance to govern. They rejected Hamas's call for a long-term cease-fire
to allow for negotiations on a two-state settlement, along the lines of
an international consensus that Israel and United States have opposed,
in virtual isolation, for more than 30 years, with rare and temporary
departures.

Meanwhile, Israel stepped up its programmes of annexation,
dismemberment and imprisonment of the shrinking Palestinian cantons in
the West Bank, always with US backing despite occasional minor
complaints, accompanied by the wink of an eye and munificent funding.

Powers-that-be have a standard operating procedure for overthrowing an
unwanted government: Arm the military to prepare for a coup. Israel and
its US ally helped arm and train Fatah to win by force what it lost at
the ballot box. The United States also encouraged Abbas to amass power
in his own hands, appropriate behaviour in the eyes of Bush
administration advocates of presidential dictatorship.

The strategy backfired. Despite the military aid, Fatah forces in Gaza
were defeated last month in a vicious conflict, which many close
observers describe as a pre-emptive strike targeting primarily the
security forces of the brutal Fatah strongman Mohammed Dahlan. Israel
and the United States quickly moved to turn the outcome to their
benefit. They now have a pretext for tightening the stranglehold on the
people of Gaza.

'To persist with such an approach under present circumstances is indeed
genocidal, and risks destroying an entire Palestinian community that is
an integral part of an ethnic whole,' writes international law scholar
Richard Falk.

This worst-case scenario may unfold unless Hamas meets the three
conditions imposed by the 'international community' - a technical term
referring to the US government and whoever goes along with it. For
Palestinians to be permitted to peek out of the walls of their Gaza
dungeon, Hamas must recognise Israel, renounce violence and accept past
agreements, in particular, the Road Map of the Quartet (the United
States, Russia, the European Union and the United Nations).

The hypocrisy is stunning. Obviously, the United States and Israel do
not recognise Palestine or renounce violence. Nor do they accept past
agreements. While Israel formally accepted the Road Map, it attached 14
reservations that eviscerate it. To take just the first, Israel demanded
that for the process to commence and continue, the Palestinians must
ensure full quiet, education for peace, cessation of incitement,
dismantling of Hamas and other organisations, and other conditions; and
even if they were to satisfy this virtually impossible demand, the
Israeli cabinet proclaimed that 'the Roadmap will not state that Israel
must cease violence and incitement against the Palestinians.'

Israel's rejection of the Road Map, with US support, is unacceptable to
the Western self-image, so it has been suppressed. The facts finally
broke into the mainstream with Jimmy Carter's book, 'Palestine: Peace
not Apartheid,' which elicited a torrent of abuse and desperate efforts
to discredit it.

While now in a position to crush Gaza, Israel can also proceed, with US
backing, to implement its plans in the West Bank, expecting to have the
tacit cooperation of Fatah leaders who will be rewarded for their
capitulation. Among other steps, Israel began to release the funds -
estimated at $600 million - that it had illegally frozen in reaction to
the January 2006 election.

Ex-prime minister Tony Blair is now to ride to the rescue. To Lebanese
political analyst Rami Khouri, 'appointing Tony Blair as special envoy
for Arab-Israeli peace is something like appointing the Emperor Nero to
be the chief fireman of Rome.' Blair is the Quartet's envoy only in
name. The Bush administration made it clear at once that he is
Washington's envoy, with a very limited mandate. Secretary of State
Rice (and President Bush) retain unilateral control over the important
issues, while Blair would be permitted to deal only with problems of
institution-building.

As for the short-term future, the best case would be a two-state
settlement, per the international consensus. That is still by no means
impossible. It is supported by virtually the entire world, including
the majority of the US population. It has come rather close, once,
during the last month of Bill Clinton's presidency - the sole
meaningful US departure from extreme rejectionism during the past 30
years. In January 2001, the United States lent its support to the
negotiations in Taba, Egypt, that nearly achieved such a settlement
before they were called off by Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak.

In their final Press conference, the Taba negotiators expressed hope
that if they had been permitted to continue their joint work, a
settlement could have been reached. The years since have seen many
horrors, but the possibility remains. As for the likeliest scenario, it
looks unpleasantly close to the worst case, but human affairs are not
predictable: Too much depends on will and choice.


[Noam Chomsky's most recent book is 'Interventions,' a collection of his
commentary pieces distributed by The New York Times Syndicate. Chomsky
is emeritus professor of linguistics and philosophy at the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology in Cambridge, Mass.]