As occupier, Israel must face up to Goldstone report
Operation Cast Lead is not an 'incident,' but rather a link in a chain as old as the occupation itself.
By Zvi Bar'el Tags: Goldstone report Israel news PalestiniansGoldstone was born in June 1967. I am not referring to the judge from South Africa, but to his report, or more precisely, the notion that Israel needs a synonym for the soul-searching it must carry out after 42 years of occupation. In the 575 pages of the report that is loaded with details, names, numbers, a list of weapons, interrogation methods and articles of international law, three paragraphs hide among the conclusions on pages 521 and 522, numbered 1674 to 1676. Here lies the explanation for the tragic results of Operation Cast Lead.
In those paragraphs Goldstone uses the term "continuum" to establish that the operation cannot be understood on its own without assessing it as part of a chain of events, which also includes the complete closure of the Gaza Strip for three years, the policy of razing homes, the arrests, the interrogations and torture, not only in the Gaza Strip but also in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. In short, Operation Cast Lead is not an "incident." It is a link in a chain as old as the occupation itself.
The equation Israel is demanding - between those wounded in the Gaza operation and those wounded in Sderot, between the Qassams and the F-16s, between the mortars and the tank that killed three of Dr. Ezzeldeen Abu al-Aish's daughters, between Hamas and Israel - betrays a poor understanding of the report's essence. Goldstone puts the symptom under the microscope and derives the illness. The result is a textbook whose title should have been "A manual for the occupier in the fifth decade."
Unfortunately for us, the publication of this tome, not its content, has given rise to competition between Israel and other countries: The issue that concerns Israel is no longer the shocking description of the events, but if and where the report will be deliberated, and who will vote for or against. Israel has a score to settle with everyone except itself. Israel is fighting against the microscope.
And the medicine? That, too, is typical. After blaming the messenger, there is a need to look for a real culprit, who has already been found. The occupied and their violent messengers are to blame. They are the ones who attack from schools and mosques, who carry bombs in ambulances and who dare to oppose the occupation using unacceptable means, leaving no option but to kill them without discrimination. If this is so, then it is not the nature of warfare that needs to be changed but the laws that limit it. To legalize the illegitimate war. And a strategy to this end is taking shape called "asymmetric warfare" - an army against groups, an army against civilians; all that is left is for an army of legal experts to develop new legislation and provide new legitimacy to kill indiscriminately, sending Goldstone to the trash bin.
It is interesting that only after the Goldstone report has the question of the laws of warfare been raised. Why was there no initiative after tragic strikes like the one in the southern Lebanese village of Qana? Why not after the Israeli bombing that produced the story about the "slight shudder on the wing" that brought down an apartment building housing civilians in the Gaza Strip? Why not after the no-limits bombing of Lebanon? In part because at that time there was still a sense of clarity that there must be an uncompromising standard to establish what is and is not allowed, and that this distinction cannot be blurred. But this distinction is increasingly becoming blurred. Were it not, a commission of inquiry would have already been set up in Israel, not to impress the world's nations after the publishing of a condemning report, but to bolster the standards of humanity.
One more matter is puzzling. Why has the issue been directed against Israel and not, for example, the United States or Britain? Many Iraqi, Afghani and Pakistani civilians - their numbers are uncertain - have been killed in indiscriminate bombings by foreign armies. No official international investigation committee has been set up to examine the conduct of the U.S. or British armies. The reason is that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan enjoy international legitimacy, to some extent in the eyes of the local people. More importantly, the occupation in Iraq has a defined termination date. The Israeli occupation, on the other hand, gives off signs of being eternal. Disgust at this is powerful enough to affect even our friends.
Why Facebook Connect?
Comment on Haaretz.com articles with your Facebook login, and share your thoughts on your own wall.
- Latest
- Most Viewed
- Most Rated
- Open all
Good point!
PSM: "BBS EGYPT controlls its Sinai side of Gaza&Hamas is govt in Gaza" Egypt does not recognize Hamas as the legitimate govt in Gaza. Neither does Israel. Neither does the USA. Neither does the PA. Indeed, nobody does. Except you. As far as Egypt is concerned Gaza is occupied territory, and the IDF is the occupying power. That means that as far as Egypt is concerned the IDF has full authority over the Gaza Strip, and so if Israel says "keep Rafah closed" then Egypt is, indeed, obliged to keep Rafah closed. The USA was the occupying power in Iraq in 2003, PETER, yet it did not have enough troops to seal the Syria/Iraq border. Nowhere near enough troops... Did that mean that Assad was ENTITLED to send whatever men and equipment he wanted across that border? Was he, PETER?
Sto: "No need to split hairs." How odd that it was ISRAEL that felt the need to split those hairs when the Disengagement Plan was presented to the Knesset.... Go read it, because it carefully distinguished between the settlers ("withdrawn") and the IDF ("redeployed"). That you think those two words are the same indicates only that you do not understand what they signify. Q: Why were the settlers "withdrawn"? A: Because Sharon wanted them to know they can't - ever - go back. Q: Why was the IDF "redeployed"? A: Because Sharon wanted to be able to send the IDF back in whenever he wanted. Which meant that Israel was ensuring that the IDF would maintain an "effective control" over the Gaza Strip even AFTER disengagement, because a "redeployed" IDF was entitled to "re-redeploy" back in whenever the Israeli PM wanted, and for whatever reason he choses. Look up that phrase: "effective control". It is the litmus test for "an occupation".
I have to agree with you, Israel does not occupy Gaza, yet the truth is even worse: Israel has created and maintains a colonial rule not only in Gaza but in all of the Palestinian territories. Land is being abused in the construction of settlements and roads, Israel is in control of the resources and she denies the Palestinian people the right to self-determination. All that is an incidence of colonialism, which is illegal under international law. http://www.alhaq.org/pdfs/IainScobbie.pdf
...and withdraw or lose support for its palce in the Middle East as a member state. People will not accept its assault on the Palestinian people and their land anymore. It's attacks on Gaza was the kiss of death. Dutch
... works? The mind boggles.
GosDep signed up guarantees of Israel safety when signing tri - patrial agreement ethnically cleansing Gaza from Jewish people. And now GosDep hired Goldstone to stonewall Swiss bank account liable for insurance. Own them up to their word, Israel.
acceptable for criminal prosecution. Open hearings with Hamas running Gaza are about as open as a Stalinist public trial. If Hamas do not like something they just shoot the object of their dissatisfaction out of hand. .
Obama first then Goldstone are sending the message that peace is need and very soon. When Israel moved settlers out of Gaza it and PA both made mistakes. One question is why did IDF destroy all the factories and food infrastructure then ban imports on most food types. Bombing Gaza "back to the stone age" then trying to keep them there is a war crime and Israel for the most part admits it. The laws were changed after WWII to stop this.
No matter what Goldstone says. Egypt not Israel.Hamas not Israel
You state Israel "redeployed to the borders". I'm glad to see that you agree that it withdrew fully from Gaza. No need to split hairs. Secondly, as for Egypt closing the border because of Israel: it might interest you to know that the border *was* open for years past the Israeli withdrawal. Egypt decided to close it immediately after Hamas staged a violent coup d'etat and slaughtered hundreds of Fatah members. Egypt is aligned with Fatah, not Hamas. Gazans only have Hamas to blame for any of their suffering.
#42 We did not all see the 12,000 rockets sent from Gaza in to Israel over the course of 8 years. Why not? Does a democratic state have the right to defend itself against an army dressed in civilian clothes, fighting amongst civilians? Didn't Israel telephone (thousands of times), send leaflets (millions of times to the population), to warn about upcoming attacks? Has Britain done that, has the US? Pakistan? What's the focus on Israel? Israel enforces a blockage at Gaza but so does Egypt. Why no complaints against Egypt?
happened because the arabs did not want to accept Israel.The land is disputed not occupied.If you look at the history and the realization that the arab regimes that constantly attack Israel treat the "Palestinians" worse than anyone else.Arabs abuse pals more than anyone other than Iran which has caused a great deal of arab deaths. Israel doesn't have to face up to goldstone which hardly held Hamas, the true monster in this accountable. Iran and its proxy Hamas are responsible and should be held up for war crimes not Israel.
We all saw the white Phospherous clouds dropping on innocent men women and children. Do you require that we ignore it because it was Jews who did it????. Now what would that be called???. We all saw the parasitical onlookers watching the "display" from the TA hilltops in typical ghoulish fasion. Despicable behaviour and you think we should pretend it did not happen. Those people disgust me as do those who support such crimes.
705. The Mission investigated 11 incidents in which serious allegations of direct attacks with lethal outcome were made against civilians. There appears to have been no justifiable military objective pursued in any of them. The first two incidents concern alleged attacks by Israeli armed forces against houses in the al-Samouni neighbourhood of Gaza during the initial phase of the ground invasion. The following group of seven incidents concern the alleged shooting of civilians who were trying to leave their homes to walk to a safer place, waving white flags and, in some of the cases, following an injunction from the Israeli armed forces to do so. In the last of these seven cases, a house was allegedly shelled with white phosphorous, killing five and injuring others. Two further members of the family were allegedly shot by Israeli troops as they tried to evacuate the wounded to a hospital. In the following incident, a mosque was targeted during the early evening prayer, resulting in the death of 15. In many of the incidents, the Israeli armed forces allegedly obstructed emergency medical help to the wounded. A further incident concerns the bombing of a family house, killing 22 family members. In the last of the incidents described, a crowd of family and neighbours at a condolence tent was attacked with flechettes.
"There are also many Articles that describe what A WARRING ARMY can (and can not) do" That's charming. And the rules of war don't apply when one of the opposing parties breaches them.
TONIGHT AT 7PM INNYC ON CHANNEL 13, PBS, BILL MOYERS INTENSLEY INTERVIEWS FOR 1 HOUR,GOLDSTONE do you have pbs?
Should we term the American blockade of Cuba in 1961 ...occupation? I do not remebered hearing that term. It seems to me that it was a blockade. Is Guantanamo occupation? IN any case Israel does not occupy Gaza. Kouchner could have entered into Gaza through the Egyptian frontier.
mandate !! the san remo convention 1920 and its all israel jb stop posting garbage !! its all israel !!!
...must be changed in view of tactics adopted by terrorists like Hamas (e.g., firing from populated areas, failure to wear uniforms, etc.) . Israel should undertake a thorough investigation (although many people will never believe anything Israel does or says), and if there was wrong doing, it should be dealt with. But, Bar'el, if you care about Israel and its survival at all, then you need to more carefully analyze Israel's position. To put this all at Israel's feet is irresponsible (providing aid to Israel's enemies) or clear evidence of an anti-Israel bias.
R: "One of the most pathetic things about the Goldstone Report`s authors is that they decided to use the opportunity to issue a political rant against the Occupation " !!!!! Read the Geneva Conventions, Robert. Read the Hague Regulations, Robert. There are many Articles in both that apply to an OCCUPYING POWER, but which do not apply to A WARRING ARMY. There are also many Articles that describe what A WARRING ARMY can (and can not) do, but which do *not* grant equivalent latitude to an OCCUPYING POWER. It was therefore extremely important for that commission to determine if the IDF was an "invading army" or an "occupying power", precisely because the latter operates under much more restrictive rules than does the former.
An investigation behind closed doors is actually no good: "Justices should be seen to be done" Moreover soldiers are trained to form a team and protect each other. This works great in battle but not so great during investigations. In the case of Israel during and after the war almost the whole nation forms a team. If you read the IDF report of operation Cast Lead you see a great willingness to accept favourable explanations. The same incidents in the Goldstone report contain extra detail and poses questions that let you wonder whether the IDF report contains the whole story. Look for instance at the IDF explanation of the "Fahoura School incident", and compare it with the Glodstone report.
Goldstone himself said that his report provided no evidence of war crimes. It was only meant to be a basis for further investigation. So why are some of you presuming Israeli guilt? And why do you fail to note Hamas' role in all of this? It couldn't be that you are biased against Israel, could it?
Goldstone himself said that his report provided no evidence of war crimes. It was only meant to be a basis for further investigation. So why are some of you presuming Israeli guilt? And why do you fail to note Hamas' role in all of this? It couldn't be that you are biased against Israel, could it?
Yes, Israel needs to take some risks for peace, it needs to end the settlement enterprise, and it needs to recognize Palestinian suffering (which is not all Israel's fault, by the way). However, we also need to understand why there is an occupation. Among other things, it is due to: 1) Palestinian intransigence (e.g., they won't recognize Israel as a Jewish state), 2) failure of Arabs to come to grips with Israel and to provide genuine support for Palestinian and Israeli moderates, 3) failure of the world to hold Iran, Hezbollah, Hamas, and others accountable, and 4) If Israel just leaves the West Bank, then Hamas and other radical will take over. We all want out of the West Bank. We all want Palestinians to have their own state. But to say that it's all Israel's fault is a cop out, evidence of an inability for deeper analysis, and/or evidence of an anti-Israel bias.
And their "struggle" will continue so long as Israel exists!
Those who responded to you forgot to mention that Israel controls the water and electricity in Gaza. They can, and occasional have, simply turned off the lights and have the power to turn off the water supply as well. That is called occupation.
Goldtsone & everybody knows it and the last thing Israel needs to do is start treating it as a respectable document. Internal investigations are fine as long as they are done behind closed doors & for the eyes of the government & IDF top brass only. If its done in private then IF there were faults they can be corrected Anything else is a witch hunt to find IDF scapegoats to try boost Israels image. A public investigation would also be seen as an admission of guilt so even if the investigation decides nothing was done wrong the very fact it was investigated the world will say Israel was guilty thats why it felt the need to hold an investigation If Goldstone goes to the General Assembly who cares one of their resolutions can't be enforced. If it goes to the Security Council the US, Russia & China have all said they are against further action so they will veto sanctions & Goldstone will die hold a public investigation & it will live on & continue to haunt Israel and damage its image.
because, as bad as it is, and as criminal as the planning may have been, what happens in Iraq and Afghanistan can still be described as collateral damage, and of course, though Britain and the US still work with colonial perceptions, the divide and rule is invisible from the public eye and the colonial age has passed. but Jews and Palestinians share the same country and the Israeli army has been starving, separating and killing people, destroyed their homes and workplaces just because they live across the line. which would be called racist and a crime by most peoples book.
STO: "Israel pulled out completely in 2005." No, it did not. It redeployed to the borders, and that is a very different thing. STO: "Israel does not control anything that happens in Gaza." Consider this: A prison warden pulls the guards out of the barracks and puts them all into the watch towers. Result: Those guards can "no longer control" what goes on inside those prison barracks. That does *not* mean 1) it ceases to be "a prison" 2) they cease to be "prison guards". STO: "Nothing prevents Gazans from sending people and goods through Egypt, except for Egypt itself." Egypt recognizes that Israel is the occupying power, and so *if* it tells Egypt to close Rafah *then* Egypt must close Rafah. To do otherwise is to challenge the IDF's "authority" over Gaza, and that would mean that Egpyt is as good as going to war with Israel over Gaza.
In that case why did the Israeli Government prevent the French Foreign Minister from visiting Gaza? If Israel is not occupying Gaza ewhy then does Israel control what goes in and what comes out of Gaza? Why am I prevented by Israel from flying to or sailing to Gaza? Where is the United Nations resolution that Israel is abiding to which allows Israel to enforce the borders of Gaza?
It''s strange and sad that it's taken 42 years for something like this to be produced and Israel has had 42 years to prepare a case for it. The sad thing is that Israel doesn't even want to fight it! Is this because they can't or won't? (regardless of whether they're ight or wrong) The key question is why has it taken 42 years for the judges of the world to act now? Why not do it before? The other key question is whether the US will veto it?
... the report was seeking a way to 'soften' the blow for the IDF, by describing how such wanton cruelty can evolve from a lengthy ongoing controversy... not from the hearts of the perpitrators...
...for the entire Israeli establishment, the total 'annointed' coalition... ...Zvi Bar'el, very grateful to you... ...so far nobody has put it as succintly as you have...
Imagine if the Nuremberg trials had focused on the general European conflict starting in 1900. Ridiculous, of course. One of the most pathetic things about the Goldstone Report's authors is that they decided to use the opportunity to issue a political rant against the Occupation - something which was completely irrelevant to the assigned mission, which was supposedly to assess whether war crimes had been committed in Gaza, and in the period immediately before and after the attack, i.e. were the Kassams a type of war crime, the use of civilian shields, etc. The fact that the Report went off for 10-20 pages with a super-selective history of the Occupation speaks volumes about the politicization of the United Nations, and the utter lack of professionalism by the Report's authors.
Israel does not 'occupy' Gaza but it imposes a state of siege which is in itself an act of war. In 1967 Israel used Egypt's blockade of the Straits of Tiran as casus belli. Again the pro Israel lobby demands standards they are not prepared to accept for themselves
... calling her husband, 70's and driving in the highway, to tell him that a crazy driver is against the flow, and he tells her " not one, ... 100's are!" any analogy between Israel- the Goldstone advice and the world?
...The Gaza Strip has been occupied by Israel continuously for decades. The legal basis for this fact is found in the Goldstone Report, hence the sheer terror on the part of Israeli officials.
the birth of goldstone occurred in june 1967...
"I put a wall around your house and will not let you out that I am not occupying your house, and that you have no right to resist?" Kill my family, and I will put a wall around your house. If I USED to be in your house, and I'm not any longer, I'm not occupying it.
Perhaps the problem is that all this attention is pointing up the questionable nature of the zionist credo that Israel is specially entitled and the rules that apply to everyone else don't apply to it..
PF:"This is BS. You mean to tell me that if I put a wall around your house and will not let you out that I am not occupying your house, and that you have no right to resist?" That's exactly right Neutered, you do not OCCUPY my house. WHY? Because you are not IN my house. I can still do whatever I like IN my house. You have BLOCKADED my house. Similarly Gaza is NOT occupied, it is blockaded to control weapons. Those who define it as occupied are only doing so for political reasons.
Israel is the gatekeeper of an open air prison - Gaza. Israel is stifling, starving, and stealing from the inmates (Palestinians) in that prison called Gaza. Stealing what from Palestinians in Gaza, you may ask. The answer dear Paul, is life.
Israel is not an occupier in the traditional sense. It did not seek to own gaza or the west bank, but was presented with them by default as the arabs started wars, lost, and dumped the unwanted Palestinians on Israel as a spoil of war. While Israel developed into a modern thriving democratic state, the palestinians have wallowed in hatred and internicine warfare. Gimme a break. Israel doesn't want to control Palestinians, but they cannot rule themselves. That is the Palestinian tragedy.
Guess what paul, a blockade is occupation under international law. When you block their seaport, airport, and land port you are still considered Ocuppying a country. Don't believe me believe international law.
Israel pulled out completely in 2005. Israel does not control anything that happens in Gaza. Nothing prevents Gazans from sending people and goods through Egypt, except for Egypt itself. There is no occupation, just whining. Get over yourselves!
PF: "It should be obvious that Israel does not occupy Gaza " Just last week the French Foreign Minister wanted to visit Gaza. He had to ask permission from the Israeli Prime Minister in order to do so, and when that Israeli PM said "No, I refuse" then that French FM had no option but to cancel his plans. What further evidence do you need, Paul Freedman, that the person with "authority" over the Gaza Strip is the gentleman who goes by the name of "Netantahu". And "authority" over territory is the very definition of "occupation".
...The Gaza Strip is still and has been for decades occupied by Israel. And currently Israel is holding the 'Strip under continued collective punishment. Mentioned no less than eighteen times in the report. It's a crime against humanity. Hence Israel's serious aversion to the report being taken seriously.
I put a wall around your house and will not let you out that I am not occupying your house, and that you have no right to resist?
Saying Gaza is not occupied is factually and legally wrong. Israel controls the borders, the sea and air above Gaza. This makes it directly responsible for the welfare and well being of its inhabitants under international law. In any case, Gaza is inseparable from the West Bank - its as if the British in the Revolution withdrew from New York but remained in New England - the country is still under occupation. Gazans are resisting the occupation of their land all over Palestine.
...finally, somebody who has read the entire report and digested its import.
I think the so-called continuum needs to be examined fairly. It was surely broken in Gaza by Sharon's unilateral withdrawal. What really continued after that was thousands of qassams. The continuum was also broken by Hamas taking power (violently suprise surprise) which everyone seems to be forgetting does not abide by previous committments by the Palestinians or recognise Israel or even want democratic elections in Gaza.
Israel is certainly free to continue to believe that controlling a population nearly as large as its own, from a very different culture, and in violation of international law is a good idea. But the West, and the US in particular, should withdraw its financial and diplomatic support.
It should be obvious that Israel does not occupy Gaza--it is not in control of the ground there notwithstanding elements of blockade--it if were an occupying force then the invasion would not have been necessary as Israel would be on the ground and the rocket fire could not continue unabated. There is a rhetorical reason to call Israel's control of the periphery of Gaza occupation--it is a disingenuous rhetorical strategy to justify rocket fire from Gaza in the first instance as resistance. The wars of warfare apply to all and cannot be made more stringent for Israel because of an imaginary occupation that were it only to exist would have obviated the very need for Operation Cast Lead.