Jumat, 02 Januari 2009

[daarut-tauhiid] Chomsky: Guillotining Gaza

Bismillahirahmanirrahim,
Assalamu'alaikum wr. wb.,

Artikel tahun lalu sekedar untuk memperkaya wawasan. FYI, Noam Chomsky
adalah seorang Profesor Linguistik MIT berdarah Yahudi yang selalu
bersikap opposan terhadap Israel dan kebijakan politik LN Amerika
Serikat. Kritik beliau tentang hegemoni politik Amerika Serikat
sejalan dengan para dissidents lainnya seperti John Pilger dan Naomi
Klein, yang secara umum bisa di baca di buku "Understanding Power."
(Dulu ada di Borders, Sydney, tapi nggak ada di UNSW Bookshop;-P)

Wassalamu'alaikum wr. wb.,
Andri


Source: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18092.htm

---article begins---

Guillotining Gaza

By Noam Chomsky

07/30/07 -- -- - 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.

Noam Chomsky is a professor of linguistics at the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology and the author, most recently, of Hegemony or
Survival Americas Quest for Global Dominance.

---article ends---

------------------------------------

===================================================
Menuju Ahli Dzikir, Ahli Fikir, dan Ahli Ikhtiar
===================================================
website: http://dtjakarta.or.id/
===================================================Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/daarut-tauhiid/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/daarut-tauhiid/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:daarut-tauhiid-digest@yahoogroups.com
mailto:daarut-tauhiid-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
daarut-tauhiid-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Tidak ada komentar: