I’ve had a few very interesting responses to my previous ‘Why I’m so angry’ post, in which I set out to explain (as the title suggests) why I was angry about I/P, and why I thought it was an extremely important topic. Douglas Clark’s response was to question whether I was not “in danger of becoming a one trick pony” by concentrating so heavily on I/P (and knowing so much about it — though I really don’t), when there are a huge number of other attrocities occuring across the world; he was also concerned that I was at risk of being swallowed up by my own bitterness at the injustices that I perceived. I responded in a brief message, but yesterday, Pickled Politics regular and Pass the roti contributor Desi Italiana gave a far more eloquent and thoughtful response to Douglas Clark as well as to Chairwoman’s comments about the nature of the US funding to Israel. So, I thought (with Desi’s permission) I’d repost them on the front page. So here they are (in red):
“But Darfur isn’ sexy enough. Congo isn’t sexy enough. No western country can be blamed so it doesn’t become the object of worldwide ire. I see that as fundamentally hypocritical.”
I totally disagree.It’s not that Darfur and other conflicts aren’t “sexy” enough and I/P is. What’s infuriating are a couple of things.First, I/P is the most publicized conflict in the world. I think a lot of this has to do with the fact that the Holocaust happened in Europe, to a group that was European (even when speaking about the Holocaust, people focus on European Jews, even those Gypsies had been slaughtered as well). That a European event is THE event, and the Holocaust is THE holocaust/genocide is one characteristic.Second, it is mindblowing that given the fact that it’s the most publicized conflict, excuses, double standards, and exceptions are made for Israel. No one in their right mind can come up with a plausible justification for the atrocities in Darfur, or say, apartheid in South Africa, but in Israel’s case, justifications abound.
Thirdly, the misinformation and ommission is astounding. The conflict is so mentioned and covered, YET IT IS COMPLETELY SKEWED.There are way too many instances of this in the media. But a couple stand out. I remember in Italy, I was watching a popular evening political talk show. The whole show was on I/P (as were most political shows in Italy), and one journalist pointed out that Israel had bombed a hospital in Lebanon during the 1982 invasion. The host- a noted journalist himself- completely cut off the journalist and actually said, “Come on, let’s not say that Israel would do this. Israel’s not like that.” The other journalist looked at him dumbfounded and said that it’s written all over the place, and well documented by Western sources and even Israeli sources- humanitarian agencies, the Red Cross, and what not. The host said, “It’s not true” and moved on. Here is a show that is one of the most widely watched prime time show, run by a journalist. What kind of journalist are you if you don’t even know the facts, or care to? Another telling situation is a poll conducted by an American group “If only Americans knew.” Americans were asked who they thought killed Palestinian children. An overwhelming majority said “Palestinians” even though the truth is that the majority of the Palestinian children are killed by the IDF (and some even thought that Palestinian children don’t even get killed, most thought it was Israelis even though the ratio of Israelis to Palestinians killed is so unbelievably lopsided). Again, in the US the conflict is always referenced to in the media; yet the framing of the media gives the impression that Palestinians are killing their own children.
The third reason is related to the above. Time and time again, I’m astonished at how inconsistent people can get. This happens especially in leftist and “progressive” circles: they will eloquently denounce colonalism, imperialism, military occupation, ethnic cleansing, genocide and so on when it happens in other countries/nations, but when it comes to Israel, the same criteria doesn’t apply. In fact, defending Israel has become a “leftist” cause.
When Palestinians are actually taken into consideration, it’s only partial: they have “legitimate grievances”: “grievances” of course always being vaguely referred to (also, note the word choice of “grievance”: as if they are complaints or whining). A friend of mine who is totally off the political spectrum and is a staunch leftist even once said to me when I sent him an article on Palestinians, “That’s a well compiled list of grievances”. I told him that it’s not a list of grievances, but that the list should grieve US. With all the coverage surrounding I/P, what is so blatant and in your face is somehow not.
Lastly, Israel’s occupation is the longest military occupation of the 20th century, carried on into the 21st. I also think that the question of Israel is going to pave the way for a lot of how governments and nations can be let off the hook. It’s no suprise that the right wing fascist Hindutva movement in India has consistently and constantly spoken of Israel as a “model” and vociferously assert that Israeli Jews and Indian Hindus share a natural affinity.
“I am fed up hearing that America pays for all this. The American aid package is extremely crafty. The deal baiscally is that the US gives $X to Israel each year, but the majority of it has to be spent on arms purchased from American companies. Pay for Israel’s atrocities?”
This is wrong. You’re referring to the arms part of the package, not the aid in its entirety. It is true that military aid is the way you say it is, but there is the “economic” aid, which is what people refer to when they talk about taxpayer monies. There are a couple of things: Israel is the largest recipient of US foreign aid, and it is also apparently the most special: unlike other recipients, Israel doesn’t not have to offer an accountability for how it has spent the money. Many of the “settlements” have been constructed with US taxpayer money. Another thing is that there is over a billion in private US funds, which are tax deductible. There are also agencies that make up a part of the aid: the Pentagon, Department of Commerce, and so on. These are all taxpayer monies.(Also, even with the military aid, the defense industries that profit the most– who do you think pays for that? The US government for years has been using public monies to finance private industries, and the defense industry is one of the largest beneficiaries, since it is contracted out by the government. This information is nothing new).There are infinite sources on how much taxpayer money is used to fund Israeli activities, including government documents such as the Congressional hearings.To expand on my comment “I also think that the question of Israel is going to pave the way for a lot of how governments and nations can be let off the hook.”–
Also, the issue of religion, the state, politics and nationalism all being intertwined as it is in the case of Israel (more so and more explicitly than in other countries, besides Pakistan). In addition, Israel and Pakistan are the only two countries to have been founded on religion, and the implications of that are far reaching. Furthermore, the meaning of “democracy”– if countries like Israel and the US are lauded as “democracies” when many of their actions, policies and so on are not so democratic in practice, what does this mean? That as long as you have the label “democracy,” there is no way in hell that they could be anything but, and that they could get away with a lot of things (ie flouting international law, flagrant violations of human rights, military complex and military state, racism, etc…)
