By Oussama El-Mohtar

March 23, 2004

By murdering Sheikh Yassin, Ariel Sharon has signed the death order of a number of innocent people in Israel and worldwide. The Israelis know this better than anyone, and they chose to stay home in the aftermath of Yassin’s assassination. 

Sharon has been striving to cross, with political impunity, three red lines: either killing or marginalizing Yasser Arafat as the political leader and national symbol of the Palestinians; silencing Sheikh Ahmad Yassin, as their spiritual leader and moral counterweight to the corrupt Palestinian Authority; and “transferring” the Palestinians beyond the borders of historical Palestine, the most dangerous of Sharon’s policies.

The impunity we refer to is from American sanction. Nothing else matters right now to Ariel Sharon. He can take criticism from the whole world, but will not risk American wrath. Sharon has no cause for worrying. It seems that the American administration is just as eager for him to carry on with his policies.

Sharon has been successful in the first task, that of marginalizing Arafat. He has just killed Yassin, but it is too early to determine if this will silence his voice or amplify it many times over. The third line, transferring the Palestinians is happening, slowly, under the unseeing eye of the whole world. The separation Wall is another step in that direction.

Here in Canada, there seems to be a great deal of confusion regarding cause and effect when it comes to the Middle East. For example, Foreign Affairs Minister Bill Graham’s condemnation yesterday of Sheikh Yassin’s assassination could have passed as a silly joke, were it not for the seriousness of the matter, and the grave spot in which it puts Canada. Before condemning the assassination, the Minister assured us of Israel’s “Right for Self Defense”; of the fact that Canada considers Hamas a “Terrorist Organization”, and that Sheikh Yassin was the leader. The rest is left for us to conclude, beyond the “official” condemnation. 

Mr. Graham has been very deliberate in appeasing pro Israeli interests. In most of his press releases that condemn Israel, he makes a point of condemning the Palestinians or finding an excuse for Israel first. Condemning Israel seems to come as an afterthought. This policy of appeasing Sharon has to stop. If it doesn't, it will only help him in completing his “Transfer”, referred to as genocide by some Israeli journalists, and as “Politicide” by Baruck Kimmerling, a noted Jewish intellectual who wrote a book on this topic.

Minister Graham and the Prime Minster, and all political leaders for that matter have to ask themselves a very serious question: What is the root cause of the conflict in the Middle East? Is it, as Israeli apologists would like us to believe, “Blind Terrorism” which should be dealt with militarily, or is it “Occupation” as the Palestinians contend, and therefore deal with it by forcing an end to the occupation through sanctions. Canada cannot continue its policy of befuddlement on this issue. There is a cause and an effect and we have to get their order straight and deal with them accordingly and now. Why the urgency? Because there is a major war out there, world wide, and Canada cannot escape it for long.

The second question related to cause and effect was posed in the Toronto Star when Manuel Prutschi, interim national executive director of the Canadian Jewish Congress stated: “Criticism of Israel is not only against its policies. There's an existential question, an assault on the very notion of a Jewish state in the region and the right of Jews to have a homeland." 

Is that so? Is it really an existential question or is it a causal one? The United Nations created Israel by dividing Palestine. It has recognised it, and the US has made sure that it is the most significant military power not only in the Arab World, but in the expanded Middle East as well. The world has rejected anti-Semitism. It has rejected the racist ideologies of the Nazis, and the Fascists. It has pushed the countries and institutions responsible for mass murder, enslavement of Jewish labourers, and theft of Jewish bank accounts and art to pay restitution. This has been successful although not universally applied to other victims of WWII. So is it true that there is a world wide anti-Semitic conspiracy against “a Jewish state in the region”, or could it be that what the world had in mind when it gave the Zionist movement a Jewish State in Palestine, is different than what the Jewish State had in mind.

From the Balfour declaration to the League of Nations Mandate over Palestine, to the Partition plan, to every UN resolution, Israel was expected not to harm or negatively impact the indigenous population of Palestine, the Palestinians. The stack of ignored UN resolutions condemning Israel for not living up to its commitment is too high.

Could it be that the world that grew sick of what happened in WWII, of concentration camps, of barbed wires, of machine gun toting soldiers breaking down doors and dragging people to jail, of walls separating East from West, of refugees living in tents, of inhumane check points, sees all this in Gaza and the West Bank and can't help but make the comparison? Could it be that the world that expected Israel to live up to its own motto of being a “Light unto the nations” is now seeing some ugly dark shades as well?

These are questions that we all have to face because if we don't they are going to hit us between the eyes when we least expect it. The world is moving to an unprecedented level of violence and terrorism. With all due respect to those advocating a “Security” solution based on “eradicating the terrorists”, we beg to differ. Fighting terrorism, the way Israel and the USA are proposing, is not only a losing battle, it is increasing terrorism to an unprecedented level. This is a political and asymmetrical war between disproportionate powers. In such a war, the greater power needs a major force to eliminate or destabilize one individual terrorist, a terrorist cell or a network. But those cells can regenerate and regroup endlessly. Conversely, one terrorist act carried out by one cell could destabilize a super power, and it will take a long time for the super power to shed the results of such an attack. September 11 is a perfect example. Terrorism has become the weapon of choice of the weak facing the strong. We have to get out of the “Security” box and think of new and genuine alternatives based on Justice first and on righting the wrongs instead of pushing the weak to accept the wrongs of the strong.

For the longest time, many have been viewing the Palestinians not as human beings with dignity and aspirations, but as refugees worthy of pity, or terrorists worthy of destruction. Those, and among them we name Minister Graham, seem to satisfy their conscience when they throw alms at the Palestinian refugees, and satisfy their ego when they appear to be destroying the Palestinian “Terrorist”.

This has to stop; because the refugee is going to turn into a terrorist who, if we keep denying him justice, will come knocking at our door seeking revenge. 

Oussama El-Mohtar is a Gatineau, Quebec consultant who has been writing mostly in Arabic, but plans to do more in English. Cpn-O looks forward to future articles from this author.

Your Comments