Wednesday, August 23, 2006

Amnesty International Says The Obvious & Political Defeat.

Amnesty International released a report on the 34-day war between Hizballah and Israel. I know, I know... the web is going to be flooded with citations of this report, and used by thousands to argue for the decimation of Israel.

Nevertheless, I feel it important to quote some sections of Amnesty's summary; if for no other reason, than to point it out to some self-righteous Israeli commenters who visit this blog. The real victim of this war was and remains Lebanon.
Israel's destruction of thousands of homes, and strikes on numerous bridges and roads as well as water and fuel storage plants, was an integral part of Israel's military strategy in Lebanon, rather than “collateral damage” resulting from the lawful targeting of military objectives.
...
The Israeli government has argued that they were targeting Hizbullah positions and support facilities and that other damage done to civilian infrastructure was a result of Hizbullah using the civilian population as a "human shield".
...
"The pattern, scope and scale of the attacks makes Israel's claim that this was 'collateral damage', simply not credible..."
...
"Civilian victims on both sides of this conflict deserve justice. The serious nature of violations committed makes an investigation into the conduct of both parties urgent. There must be accountability for the perpetrators of war crimes and reparation for the victims.”
I have heard Israelis counter that if their Army faced a conventional adversary in an open battlefield similar to the wars fought in the Suez and Golan Heights, Lebanese would have been spared the civilian casualties and destruction of infrastructure. I have also heard arguments, which contend that Hizballah is inherently immoral because it is an organization that is intimately intertwined with the general (i.e. Shi'a) population. Therefore, placing its own constituents directly in harms way during times of war.

What? Am I supposed to take sides in this useless debate over the morality of the actions of either side of this conflict? No! To me, Both sides are equally immoral. Therefore, self righteousness from either is the worst kind of denial of reality that I can place a finger on.

Politically though, no such equivalence exists. Increasing numbers of articles published by writers much more credible and articulate than I am say so. The latest, published in the Washington Post was written by, Egyptian Democracy advocate, Saad Eddine Ibrahim, who was arrested by Mubarak for his activities. Ibrahim writes,
According to the preliminary results of a recent public opinion survey of 1,700 Egyptians by the Cairo-based Ibn Khaldun Center, Hezbollah's action garnered 75 percent approval, and Nasrallah led a list of 30 regional public figures ranked by perceived importance. He appears on 82 percent of responses, followed by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (73 percent), Khaled Meshal of Hamas (60 percent), Osama bin Laden (52 percent) and Mohammed Mahdi Akef of Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood (45 percent).

The pattern here is clear, and it is Islamic. And among the few secular public figures who made it into the top 10 are Palestinian Marwan Barghouti (31 percent) and Egypt's Ayman Nour (29 percent), both of whom are prisoners of conscience in Israeli and Egyptian jails, respectively.

None of the current heads of Arab states made the list of the 10 most popular public figures.
It is becoming increasingly clear that the legitimacy of not only the current Arab political elite, but also the very secular states that they lead are being strained to the limit. The Israeli war on Lebanon, and the pathetic reaction of the Lebanese state to the calamity (compared to Hizballah's response) only serve to increase that strain. Two weeks ago, I wrote the following in an e-mail, concerning Hizballah in the regional context,

I think Hizballah is an organization that is very conscious that it is being watched by the Arab world and the world in general. They seek to present themselves to that audience as an Islamic organization capable of standing up the "American-Zionist" behemoth. But, I also think, that they wish to present themselves simply as an "effective Islamic organization" - as a viable alternative to the status-quo (i.e. a counter-elite). They wish to show everyone that an Islamic political system is not only feasible, but more capable than the secular political elite in not only a military but also a political and social sense.

Unfortunately, I think that they have succeeded, and are winning over the Arab public. Countries like Malaysia, Turkey and Indonesia may have effective secular political elites and states, but the Arab world, has some of the most useless, limp, pathetic governments out there. Anything compared to the existing Arab political elite will shine in comparison. Hizballah knows that. Therefore, it presents itself as the alternative - and there is no better way to strut your stuff in the Middle East than to effectively challenge Israel (it's like proving your "manhood" when you enter a new school by challenging the bully - you do it to gain respect).

I am increasingly convinced that this trend towards legitimacy of Islamic movements at the expense of secular institutions is gradually turning into an unstopable current. Moreover, the only way to fix this problem, if at all, is through a final settlement of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, and a valiant effort on behalf of today's elite to salvage their political legitimacy through better governance and a healthier relationship between the state and society.

Something tells me I shouldn't hold my breath!


17 comments:

Lirun said...

hi raja

that is the exact story of the rise of hamas..

i am hoping for an effective secular reaction in the arab world..

but i am the first to admit that it is a long shot..

therefore we need peace..

whattroubles me just as much is a religious explosion in my country and in our countries as well..

many born agains of all sorts are appearing left right and centre..

i have NOTHING against religion.. but i dont like the recipe of politics and religion together..

while i dont think arab and israeli politics are to blame for this world trend.. the worsening situation certainly doesnt help.. stress tends to lead people to extreme solutions..

wishing us all peace withuot delay

lirun
telaviv
www.emspeace.blogspot.com
ziggi marley: love is my religion..

Laury Haytayan said...

I will comment on the last part of this report.
For 58 years all the Arab regimes were using The Palestinian cause to enforce their dictatorships...This helped in the creation of Islamic movements under the surveillance of the regimes...and now these regimes are unable to control their own creations, the new religious monsters...

Lirun said...

what happens when we all start behaving like cornered rats? do we then bask in this glorious excuse to bite?

or do we exercise our frequently nobel prize winning intellect and search for alternatives?

we are so smart.. everyday my colleagues amaze me with their intelligence and ingenuity.. why cant we solve this? what is really stopping us?

Ecumene said...

So ..Israeli generals are in big trouble..

Amnesty and Ultra-Jews are chasing them......

the first because of the Collateral damages...

the second because they failed
to destroy HEZ....

Ecumene said...

Good news for Lebanon...
:)

France disappointed Lebanese
by not sending many UN troops

so Lebanon basketball team
punished them

LIB vs FRA 74-73

Ecumene said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Ecumene said...

What about the israeli police...

Israeli activist heavily injured.

Mr. Smarterthanyou said...

I'm sure the gay peace activist was just holding hands with his arab boyfriend singing "Kumbaya" and the police started beating him.

What is it with leftists and their street theater? They act like a bunch of snotty children, demanding this and that, crying to the media about their causes, making the rest of us wish that they would just go awy if they hate where they live so bad.

Mr. Smarterthanyou said...

But what happened before the video rolled?

For the few (the cops) to control the many(the mob), they have to react strongly to provocation.

Mr. Smarterthanyou said...

"It's never religion that corrupts people"?

Religion is when some people organize to tell other people how to relate to God, and what God wants.

The Koran has many edicts to kill non muslims, to enslave non-muslims.

And as far as "a few fundimentalists" go, even over 10% of British muslims support the attacks of 7/7. In muslim countries, that number goes way higher, often over half. Islam seems to generate a huge number of psychotics, and that we can blame on the religion itself. Or what would YOU blame it on? You cannot say poverty, as many terrorists are not near poor. You cannot blame gov't corruption, as the British born muslims demonstrate.

Ecumene said...

This was written when the country was at war..provokating?...
maybe this text inspired the
protesters..
Peace Now published in Haaretz

Lirun said...

im a proud jew.. but aspects of my religion deem other people to be of lesser value/purity/worthiness etc.. those who speak against my religion from within are false prophets who should be stoned and there are various other stupid rules that have long become obsolete..

the main religions were formed centuries ago and it is easy to focus on some out of date edict and treat the whole religion as aggressive or otherwise unfavourably..

that is so retarded..

you may as well rant on about how oxydising kills you and one should therefore not exercise and how sleeping numbs the brain and kills brain cells.. it is so prejudicial and narrow minded.. and lacks any healthy perspective.. nevertheless is typical of ethnocentric people who have never opened their eyes to the world and see it purely as revolving around their superfueled behinds..

so then you say.. "but listen to what there wise people say" and i say.. take five and listen to the crap that some of our people say..

if you want to generalise and blind yourself from what people have to offer you.. than that is self inflicted damage.. if you want to hurt large groups of people because you think that the stereotypes you subscribe to are "well researched" then i would like to remind you that similar people have based their hatred of subordinated subcultures on science before.. in one case they even murdered over 6 million of the "deficient" race in the name of that science.. its been tried before.. its old and stupid.. and history judges..

you can label us greenies.. lefties.. whatever.. someone above seemed to think that peaceful people are necessarily gay.. or perhaps provocative in nature.. this is amazing.. i cant believe the extent of the ignorance.. not only about people on the "other" side but also about people on the purportedly "supported" side..

oh well..

these people will always exist.. they are identical to their own worst enemies except for the direction in which they direct their poison.. but that is mere technicality.. i think its a genetic flaw.. they hate the very people with which they ideologically agree the most..

wishing peace and sound genetic composition to us all..

lirun
telaviv
www.emspeace.blogspot.com
i remind you that peaceful societies have maniacs as well.. dont be discouraged.

root cause said...

I just read the following....Syrian President Bashar Assad was quoted as saying he would consider such a deployment along the Lebanon-Syria border a "hostile" move toward his country.

"First, this means creating a hostile condition between Syria and Lebanon," Assad told Dubai Television, according to excerpts released by the TV station ahead of the broadcast. "Second, it is a hostile move toward Syria and naturally it will create problems."

Assad did not elaborate on that point in the excerpts. But Finland's foreign minister, after meeting with his Syrian counterpart, said Damascus threatened to close the frontier with Lebanon if U.N. peacekeepers were deployed there.

"They will close their borders for all traffic in case U.N. troops will be deployed along the Lebanon-Syria border," Foreign Minister Erkki Tuomioja said after meeting Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Moallem in Helsinki. Finland holds the rotating presidency of the European Union.

"This closing of the border would certainly have negative consequences for the people living in the region," Tuomioja told reporters after his meeting with Moallem.

Is this not ridiculous?!?!? What a moron!! OK close the border down...that's what everyone wants anyway, to ensure HEZ is not re-armed. This guy's rants are beyond me!

still praying for peace, but the light continues to grow dim

Lirun said...

ron i think you are wrong..

nazi germany was a hell infested monster.. however.. rarely does the world focus on what the "winners" of world war two did to germany between world war one and world war two.. not that it is any excuse for the atrocities.. nevertheless.. i think there were some clear mistakes leading up to erruption of our (the jewish people's and other groups) near anihilation.. think about it next time you tow a wheel barrow of notes to the super market to buy a loaf of bread just because your father was involved in a war that was lost.. just to find out that when you arrived at the super market your money was even more worthless than when you left home..

you do not need to to compare adversaries to the worse of regimes immediately and draw conclusions based only the furthest extremes..

wishing peace to us all

lirun
telaviv
www.emspeace.blogspot.com
history does not contain every answer - but if we are to look back - lets do so with open eyes

Solomon2 said...

(Sigh.) AI is engaging in a bit deceit here. Extensive destruction of property not justified by military necessity is a war crime under the Geneva Conventions only when civilians are classified as "protected persons" under the Geneva Conventions. As Hezbollah is Lebanese, not an occupying power, Lebanese civilians don't fall under that classification: Article 4: "Persons protected by the Convention are those who, at a given moment and in any manner whatsoever, find themselves, in case of a conflict or occupation, in the hands of a Party to the conflict or Occupying Power of which they are not nationals...nationals of a co-belligerent State, shall not be regarded as protected persons..."

Another whopper: AI's claim that "while the use of civilians to shield a combatant from attack is a war crime, under international humanitarian law such use does not release the opposing party from its obligations towards the protection of the civilian population." That's precisely the reverse of the meaning of Article 4 in the Geneva Conventions.

A critical reading of the AI report thus reveals that Amnesty International has not uncovered ANY violations by Israel of international war crimes laws. AI is aware of this and acknowledges that Israel does investigate such allegations but Lebanon never does. Therefore, at the end of this report, AI calls for an international investigation to uncover violations by both sides in the conflict.

Solomon2 said...

Dershowitz: AI Redefines "War Crimes"

There are two problems with the Amnesty report and conclusion. First, Amnesty is wrong about the law. Israel committed no war crimes by attacking parts of the civilian infrastructure in Lebanon...

THE MORE troubling aspect of Amnesty's report is their inattention to Hizbullah. If Israel is guilty of war crimes for targeting civilian infrastructure, imagine how much greater is Hizbullah's moral responsibility for targeting civilians! But Amnesty shows little interest in condemning the terrorist organization that started the conflict...even al-Jazeera expressed surprise at the imbalance in the Amnesty report:

Solomon2 said...

Sorry to take so long to get back to you, Sherri.

The most serious allegations are that Israel intentionally targeted the civilian population, civilians and civilian objects, to turn the Lebanese people against Hezbullah.

Read the Dershowitz article: destroying civilian infrastructure (or "objects") is not a war crime.

If Israel had targeted the civilian population, Lebanese fatalities would be in the tens of thousands.

Or are you are saying that it is a "war crime" to use force "to turn the Lebanese people against Hezbollah"?

As far as I can tell, Lebanese civilian casualties were a result of Hezbollah locating its facilities or operating its weapons in or near civilian structures. That negates their "civilian" status.

Hezbollah, however, made it a practice to target the Israeli civilian population exclusively, ignoring military bases. If intentionally and deliberately targeting civilians is considered a war crime, then Hezbollah is the only party clearly guilty of this. It seems unnecessary to launch any kind of investigation on Hezbollah's guilt, considering the televised threats to Haifa and Tel Aviv and the devastation of Kiryat Shmona.

This isn't a case of two parties being equally bad. This isn't a case of Israel being mostly bad. This is a case of Hezbollah being bad and Israel waging a war to the good. That young children must see their parents dying after an Israeli attack is war: Israel wielded the deadly instrument, but by pushing or establishing civilians into its path as "shields" Hezbollah is responsible.

As for Hezbollah itself, the U.N. Security Council passed resolution 1559 in 2004 demanding its forcible disarmament, in line with the other Lebanese militias who willingly disarmed to resume normal political activities. Hezbollah's leaders have said Hezbollah exists to resist occupation in Lebanon and Palestine, which they define as all territory occupied by the State of Israel anywhere in the region. Thus they are not a "resistance" group at all, but are hell-bent on conquering a neighboring country as best as they may.