💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › noam-chomsky-guillotining-gaza.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 12:57:19. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Title: Guillotining Gaza
Author: Noam Chomsky
Date: July 30, 2007
Language: en
Topics: Palestine
Source: Retrieved on 14th October 2021 from https://chomsky.info/20070730/
Notes: Published in the Information Clearing House.

Noam Chomsky

Guillotining Gaza

The death of a nation is a rare and somber 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.