Saturday, August 12, 2006

A ceasefire with bombs and bullets

The UN has resolved there is to be a "full cessation of hostilities" in the Lebanon. Although someone needs to tell Israel that as they have intensified their military operations, despite the fact that Hezbollah have vastly reduced the number of rockets they are firing into Israel (Fresh Israel raids after UN vote BBC).

Resolution 1701 (Text here) includes 15,000 UN peace keepers to occupy southern Lebanon for Israel, but Israel does not need to withdraw or stop the killing until their deployment (which is estimated to be in about ten days time).

It's completely unacceptable that Israel get everything they want through the use of bloody and indiscriminate murder and Lebanon gets occupied, vilified and laid waste. What makes the whole thing more sickening is the way that some on the left have chosen to respond to the crisis.

If I hear one more pointless fucking criticism of Hezbollah I'm going to scream. They're not socialists, they're no good on women's rights, they Muslims. Fuck off - who made these people the gate keepers of who is and is not allowed to fight against imperialism?

If you support the right of people to resist being murdered by an invading army then you don't get to choose who is allowed to take part in that resistance, and if you don't support that then stop pretending to be on the left.

Just as when recruiting to the union you don't first ask "what do think of gay people" or when building a demonstration you don't stick on the leaflet "don't turn up unless you sign our twenty point programme" you have these arguments inside the movement rather than use disagreements as an excuse to become offish to those who are putting their life on the line to prevent the wholesale destruction of their country.

In Cambridge the only people to treat the current crisis with the seriousness that it deserves is Respect. They've been organising protests, doing stalls everyday, and essentially throwing themselves into turning people's horror into a movement. In contrast whilst others have done little bits here and there it's been tokenistic, without any sense of being part of a real struggle, and unfortunately that is unlikely to change in the near future.

Whilst there are so many things about Respect that I simply can't stomach I'm being put in a position where I either support their initiatives with enthusiasm or absent myself from the most important political issue of the day. Can't say I'm particularly happy about the choice I'm being given.


Anonymous said...

If UN Resolution 1559 had been enforced, Israel would not have invaded. It's that simple. What would you do if someone fired rockets at your home and the police never came?

Jim Jay said...

Well, if Israel had taken any notrice of the numerous UN resolutions aimed at curbing its behaviour it would have happened.

I don't think it's correct to say that Israel is simply defending itself because that requires us to forget decades of murder.

After all this current crisis began months into an Israeli policy of bombing open areas in Palestine, killing many innocents. If Israelis are allowed to defend themselves why aren't arabs?

Anonymous said...

Oh, that's right. It's all Israel's fault.

Wherever Israel has withdrawn from, new attacks have come from those places. Southern Lebanon. The Gaza Strip. Israel can't defend its people and its territory?

You talk about murder and make it one-sided, even though countries like Iran and Syria have financed and trained organizations like Hezbollah and the PLO to kill Israeli civillians by blowing them up in homicide bombings. *I dare to you not call that murder.* You do Neville Chamberlain proud.

When has Israel attacked Iran or financed bombings against its civillians? C'mon, tell us. If France financed bombings in the UK, you think the British government would take it?

Why don't you apply your same judgement and moral outrage to the Falkland Islands? Or Tibet?

Renegade Eye said...

I wonder why Anonymous is anonymous? If your cause was right, you could be open with your identity.

I admit I'm grappling, with what critical support means. Would you send $$ or arms to Hezbollah, an anti-communist group? There are other ways of opposing Zionism.

I think Israel's incursion into Lebanon, smashed the concept of little Israel, defending against hostile neighbors. Israel was the aggressor. There is evidence, this planned in advance.

Jim: Check out comments on my blog. Rightists threatening spam attack.

Anonymous said...

"Israel was the agressor."

On what planet? It was Hezbollah that crossed the blue line into Israel to kidnap their soldiers, initiating this war.

Whether the offensive *afterwards* was planned or not - great question. At least on a high level it must have been.

Israel watched Hezbollah turn southern Lebanon into a fortress for the last 6 years - while UN Resolution 1559 was supposed to be in effect.

How is Israeli planning for such an action any different than South Korean and the US planning for similar North Korean agression?

You're being hypocritical if Israel is wrong to plan to battle an enemy that has publically stated it seeks its destruction.

And you're grappling with what "critical support" means? You can't immediately say that financing blowing up civillians is murder? Talk about one-sided. Maybe Israeli life is less valuable in your eyes?

Zionism? How about British imperialism in the Falkland Islands? Why don't you ask an Argentinian how they feel about having their land stolen by British colonists? Defend this point - please. I gotta hear your argument on this.

Yeah, sure - rightist spam. My few responses to your blog count as spam. The 500+ junk e-mails in my inbox - now that's spam.

Jim Jay said...

Israel is the aggressor: yes. The idea that the conflict began with the kidnapping of the two IDF soldiers is just wrong and relies upon people having amnesia.

"Wherever Israel has withdrawn from, new attacks have come from those places." Like they did them a favour by withdrawing from their country? Unfortunately it meant having to occupy Lebanon and commit mass murder in order to get round to withdrawing - jeez - Israel is so peace loving.

If France financed bombings in the UK, you think the British government would take it? Are you saying they should attack America? Why do you think Israel has the right of self defence and nobody else. When Israel bombs Gaza with US weapons does this mean that Palestinians should bomb the US? Who would be the aggressor then?

For your info I was opposed to the Falklands war (although I haven't thought about it for a long time) and against the invasion of Tibet. If Britain or China begin a bombing campaign in either of these places you will see posts against it here. Which I would have thought was pretty obvious... ho hum.

Hi Ren: what is going on in your comments box? My money goes to the Red Cross Lebanon appeal - I've linked to various options if people want to raise money.

They are anti-communist, but I don't think we should based our politics on whether they like us or not. If Lebanon has the right to defend itself then there is only one force capable of doing that, Hezbollah - any criticism of them should be in the context of their right not to accept occupation and death lying down.

Anonymous said...

So, Israel invaded Lebanon *before* the 2 soldiers were kidnapped? Excellent history rewriting ability you have. Please tell that news to Saudi Sheik Abdulla bin Jabreen who issued a fatwa that declared it unlawful to support, join, or pray for Hezbollah because of what Hezbollah did to start this. He must be Jewish.

And let's discuss the 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon. Read history and you'll see that it was done to stop the PLO from firing artillery into nothern Israel.

Any country has the right to defend itself - not just Israel. It just happens to be the case that those "murderous" Israelis actually have a strong military to fight back with, unlike Argentina and Tibet.

If Britain or China begin a bombing campaign in either of these places you will see posts against it here.
So, you're saying that once the overwhelming force has been applied and all resistance crushed, everything's cool? Nothing to see here people. Move along. That's an amazingly myopic view you have there.

Are you saying they should attack America?
I don't have to say that. Muslims already did attack the US on 9/11. Maybe that's another piece of history you'll want to rewrite and make the US the agressor?

Jim Jay said...

Whose rewriting history?

Muslims as a whole didn't attack the US - Al Quaida did. And as a point of information the US only became an enemy of Al Quaida because of the Gulf War. Which I think involved the US giving presents to people.

US intervention in the middle east had been taking place for many decades, it's only surprising that people began to strike back in the 90's.

I have no idea what mindset can believe that the US has not been a world aggressor.

And Israel were dropping bombs and killing arabs well before the capture of the two IDF men - which was designed to allow a prisoner exchange for people who had been kidnapped by Israeli forces.

I'm not saying everything is cool once the bombing ends. But you are saying I should turn a blind eye to mass murder because the people being killed are Muslims. It looks to me like you're a racist - but I'll try to keep an open mind.

Thankfully not everyone in Israel shares your view and the number of refusniks and anti-war protesters appears to be increasing. Good on them.

By the way - what's your name?