Sunday, March 08, 2009
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH
TO OUR BLUE DOG REPRESENTATIVE AND NEOLIBERAL PRESIDENT: ENOUGH
Yesh G’vul. Enough is enough. This is the language of Israeli war resisters. I honor their existence. My solidarity with them, I believe, allows me the opportunity to take sides in this conflict of siblings by not supporting Israel’s war.
The invasion of Gaza has shaken me to the core. The conduct of Israel has become my personal responsibility now. Not so for our politicians. Representative Thompson was one of the 390 who voted to support Israel’s aggression. Five reps voted No – Kucinich, Maxine Waters, another Progressive, Moore from Wisconsin, Ron Paul, and a rep named Rahall (must be a Muslim).
Of the 22 who voted a timid “Present,” 12 were Progressives including Lynn Woolsey, Barbara Lee, & Pete Stark, bringing the Prog “opposition” to a stunning 15, a tad over 20% of the Caucus. The Reagan Democrat Blue Dogs were notable by their absence. One voted “Present”, two skipped the vote. Thompson is rumored to have issued a “signing statement” defending his vote but I can’t locate it. Why should he bother? He has a Blue Dog for President now.
In the last few months I have intermittently expressed my distress by hoisting a “Solidarity with Gaza” sign during our weekly antiwar vigil. Most times I wear my Palestinian scarf. Now by making my opposition to Israel’s war and occupation central to my peace witness, I gain transparency. By saying Enough I am finally attacking the root instead of the branches of our midEast policy. The war in Iraq, the threat to Iran, these are not about oil only. They are equally about preventing any serious threat to Israel. Oilsreal! It’s all of a piece.
Now I am mulling over apartheid era strategies, like boycotting the corporations supporting Israel. The list is long. Take a look at just the obvious boycott of Caterpillar and its bulldozers. Open that can of pre-butterflies and you see millions of dollars in straight-on military contracts. Track Caterpillar’s chair, Owens, and you find him sitting cheek to jowl with such as Summers and Geithner, Obama’s financial teammates. Israel is an inseparable part of our Military-Industrial-Political Complex
Certainly an arms embargo is an obvious step. Ending all military aid to Israel is a moral imperative. Our US jets and choppers drop our US bombs, our white phosphorous, and our cluster bombs, on Gaza. But a lot more than Israel is involved here. Face it, in what war don’t our weapons do the killing? Israel is no more than the aggressive tail wagging our very vicious dog whose mouth is full of very sharp teeth. If we are looking to cut off military aid to someone, how about starting with the US government?
Israel may be a prime crime partner but we arm the world for fun and profit. Despite its special relationship, Israel is not in line to become our fifty first state (only 1000 miles further from a US coast than Hawaii). Israel may no longer inspire Western anti-Semitism (the Arabs fill that role now) but historically Western governments have instigated pograms against onetime Jewish “allies” whenever convenient. Israel could easily find itself as passé as the Kurds..
Israel may well serve a useful scapegoat role. The quagmire of Iraq - and more so Afghanistan – is not that different from Palestine. Occupation, puppet governments, war crimes galore. In a moment of absolution, the US could reject its own evil by rejecting Israel.
Israel does have a special problem. Saddam and his “vanguard” B’aathist party never stood for election. Hamas was however democratically elected (ask Jimmy
Carter). A majority of Palestinians had enough of Abbas and his corrupt and greedy American-style politics. Hamas was a Black Panther style Party, with schools and meals for the community, and the stiff arm of resistance for the occupier.
I understand the Israeli frustration. When I was six, I had a best friend – Eddie Casey. I remember him as hot-tempered and we fought too many dreary scuffles. I was stronger but that only made Eddie madder, and sometimes I had to “accidentally” signal to my mother to break it up.
One day, during one of our fights, I found myself sitting astride his back. Knowing that Eddie would never quit, I began slamming his forehead against the pavement. He wouldn’t stop, I thought dully, and I had no choice….
There is the Israeli government dilemma. The guru of war, von Clausewitz, eloquently stated “The object of war is not the numbers of enemy you kill, but that you break their will.” Eddie and I eventually were allowed to play together, but things had changed between us. We never fought again. Unfortunately for Israel, Hamas right now is recruiting freshly enraged Eddie Caseys to take the place of soldiers killed, forced into exile or underground, or who have lost the will to resist.
What we are witnessing is the weirdest form of “nonviolence” on record – what I call after Gandhi: “Polish nonviolence.” Gandhi had marveled at Polish resistance to the Germans – “Polish cavalry charging German tanks,” he enthused, “it was almost nonviolence.”
The Zapatistas used this desperate strategy. The Pine Ridge occupiers of Wounded Knee used it. When Hamas agents drop those homemade missiles that in some cases barely crack the pavements of an overwhelmingly superior enemy, it is sayings in effect: “Come and get us, but if you do it the blood and fire and noise will wake up world opinion and make your life very messy.”
The most important part of such an action of “Polish Nonviolence” is that it underscores and capitalizes and italicizes and emphatically emphasizes the fact that the resisters most definitely do not consent to the status quo.
Perhaps I was successful in my resumed relationship with Eddie because, I firmly believe (perhaps deludedly) that I was innocent of any aggression toward my friend and only fought in self-defense. Israel’s agenda, whatever the truth of mine, is certainly not so innocent.
Here is an except of an article written in the JTA (Jewish and Israeli News) summarizing the Israeli National Security Council’s assessments for 2009. “Whatever happens, the NSC says, Israel must continue to pressure and weaken Hamas. If the current Hamas-Israeli truce in Gaza bre4aks down, the NSC recommends that Israel launch a wide-ranging operation to topple Hamas in Gaza. Whether that would mean reoccupying Gaza, and if so, for how long, the NSC does not say….To keep Abbas in power and the two-state solution alive, the NSC recommends that Israel prevent Palestinian elections.”
The object of greatest concern here is losing the diversion of the “Two state solution” which has the advantage of sounding eminently reasonable but which Israel will assuredly never allow to be attained.
If the two state solution is a delusion not meant to bring peace, it is worth taking a look at a one state solution. A significant number of Palestinians already embrace the idea. A single state could accept in principle the right of return for Palestinians AND the recognition of the West Bank settlements, leaving the details to negotiations rather than violence. A one state solution would also be by its very nature a secular state founded on religious freedom for all, removing the otherwise irresolvable conflict between Zionists and Islamists. Here is nation-building that even a Blue Dog could sink its teeth in.
It appears that military power is inadequate in crushing Hamas. An imprisoned population being battered into submission a la von Clausewitz, doesn’t play. Given world opinion and a decentralized media , time may be running out on Israeli ambitions. In the narrow confines of the midEast, the security blanket of Israel’s nuclear arsenal could leave it only with the useless option of mutually assured destruction.
I have faith that the Israeli people will see the writing on the wall and abandon the religious fantasies of Supreme Power and initiate the process of reconciliation inherent in a one state solution. Until that time, we must keep making it clear that we’ve had enough.
Paul Encimer
Yesh G’vul. Enough is enough. This is the language of Israeli war resisters. I honor their existence. My solidarity with them, I believe, allows me the opportunity to take sides in this conflict of siblings by not supporting Israel’s war.
The invasion of Gaza has shaken me to the core. The conduct of Israel has become my personal responsibility now. Not so for our politicians. Representative Thompson was one of the 390 who voted to support Israel’s aggression. Five reps voted No – Kucinich, Maxine Waters, another Progressive, Moore from Wisconsin, Ron Paul, and a rep named Rahall (must be a Muslim).
Of the 22 who voted a timid “Present,” 12 were Progressives including Lynn Woolsey, Barbara Lee, & Pete Stark, bringing the Prog “opposition” to a stunning 15, a tad over 20% of the Caucus. The Reagan Democrat Blue Dogs were notable by their absence. One voted “Present”, two skipped the vote. Thompson is rumored to have issued a “signing statement” defending his vote but I can’t locate it. Why should he bother? He has a Blue Dog for President now.
In the last few months I have intermittently expressed my distress by hoisting a “Solidarity with Gaza” sign during our weekly antiwar vigil. Most times I wear my Palestinian scarf. Now by making my opposition to Israel’s war and occupation central to my peace witness, I gain transparency. By saying Enough I am finally attacking the root instead of the branches of our midEast policy. The war in Iraq, the threat to Iran, these are not about oil only. They are equally about preventing any serious threat to Israel. Oilsreal! It’s all of a piece.
Now I am mulling over apartheid era strategies, like boycotting the corporations supporting Israel. The list is long. Take a look at just the obvious boycott of Caterpillar and its bulldozers. Open that can of pre-butterflies and you see millions of dollars in straight-on military contracts. Track Caterpillar’s chair, Owens, and you find him sitting cheek to jowl with such as Summers and Geithner, Obama’s financial teammates. Israel is an inseparable part of our Military-Industrial-Political Complex
Certainly an arms embargo is an obvious step. Ending all military aid to Israel is a moral imperative. Our US jets and choppers drop our US bombs, our white phosphorous, and our cluster bombs, on Gaza. But a lot more than Israel is involved here. Face it, in what war don’t our weapons do the killing? Israel is no more than the aggressive tail wagging our very vicious dog whose mouth is full of very sharp teeth. If we are looking to cut off military aid to someone, how about starting with the US government?
Israel may be a prime crime partner but we arm the world for fun and profit. Despite its special relationship, Israel is not in line to become our fifty first state (only 1000 miles further from a US coast than Hawaii). Israel may no longer inspire Western anti-Semitism (the Arabs fill that role now) but historically Western governments have instigated pograms against onetime Jewish “allies” whenever convenient. Israel could easily find itself as passé as the Kurds..
Israel may well serve a useful scapegoat role. The quagmire of Iraq - and more so Afghanistan – is not that different from Palestine. Occupation, puppet governments, war crimes galore. In a moment of absolution, the US could reject its own evil by rejecting Israel.
Israel does have a special problem. Saddam and his “vanguard” B’aathist party never stood for election. Hamas was however democratically elected (ask Jimmy
Carter). A majority of Palestinians had enough of Abbas and his corrupt and greedy American-style politics. Hamas was a Black Panther style Party, with schools and meals for the community, and the stiff arm of resistance for the occupier.
I understand the Israeli frustration. When I was six, I had a best friend – Eddie Casey. I remember him as hot-tempered and we fought too many dreary scuffles. I was stronger but that only made Eddie madder, and sometimes I had to “accidentally” signal to my mother to break it up.
One day, during one of our fights, I found myself sitting astride his back. Knowing that Eddie would never quit, I began slamming his forehead against the pavement. He wouldn’t stop, I thought dully, and I had no choice….
There is the Israeli government dilemma. The guru of war, von Clausewitz, eloquently stated “The object of war is not the numbers of enemy you kill, but that you break their will.” Eddie and I eventually were allowed to play together, but things had changed between us. We never fought again. Unfortunately for Israel, Hamas right now is recruiting freshly enraged Eddie Caseys to take the place of soldiers killed, forced into exile or underground, or who have lost the will to resist.
What we are witnessing is the weirdest form of “nonviolence” on record – what I call after Gandhi: “Polish nonviolence.” Gandhi had marveled at Polish resistance to the Germans – “Polish cavalry charging German tanks,” he enthused, “it was almost nonviolence.”
The Zapatistas used this desperate strategy. The Pine Ridge occupiers of Wounded Knee used it. When Hamas agents drop those homemade missiles that in some cases barely crack the pavements of an overwhelmingly superior enemy, it is sayings in effect: “Come and get us, but if you do it the blood and fire and noise will wake up world opinion and make your life very messy.”
The most important part of such an action of “Polish Nonviolence” is that it underscores and capitalizes and italicizes and emphatically emphasizes the fact that the resisters most definitely do not consent to the status quo.
Perhaps I was successful in my resumed relationship with Eddie because, I firmly believe (perhaps deludedly) that I was innocent of any aggression toward my friend and only fought in self-defense. Israel’s agenda, whatever the truth of mine, is certainly not so innocent.
Here is an except of an article written in the JTA (Jewish and Israeli News) summarizing the Israeli National Security Council’s assessments for 2009. “Whatever happens, the NSC says, Israel must continue to pressure and weaken Hamas. If the current Hamas-Israeli truce in Gaza bre4aks down, the NSC recommends that Israel launch a wide-ranging operation to topple Hamas in Gaza. Whether that would mean reoccupying Gaza, and if so, for how long, the NSC does not say….To keep Abbas in power and the two-state solution alive, the NSC recommends that Israel prevent Palestinian elections.”
The object of greatest concern here is losing the diversion of the “Two state solution” which has the advantage of sounding eminently reasonable but which Israel will assuredly never allow to be attained.
If the two state solution is a delusion not meant to bring peace, it is worth taking a look at a one state solution. A significant number of Palestinians already embrace the idea. A single state could accept in principle the right of return for Palestinians AND the recognition of the West Bank settlements, leaving the details to negotiations rather than violence. A one state solution would also be by its very nature a secular state founded on religious freedom for all, removing the otherwise irresolvable conflict between Zionists and Islamists. Here is nation-building that even a Blue Dog could sink its teeth in.
It appears that military power is inadequate in crushing Hamas. An imprisoned population being battered into submission a la von Clausewitz, doesn’t play. Given world opinion and a decentralized media , time may be running out on Israeli ambitions. In the narrow confines of the midEast, the security blanket of Israel’s nuclear arsenal could leave it only with the useless option of mutually assured destruction.
I have faith that the Israeli people will see the writing on the wall and abandon the religious fantasies of Supreme Power and initiate the process of reconciliation inherent in a one state solution. Until that time, we must keep making it clear that we’ve had enough.
Paul Encimer
