[R-G] The Facts About Hamas and the War on Gaza

[Anthony Fenton]

January 13, 2009
Seeing Through the Lies
The Facts About Hamas and the War on Gaza
http://counterpunch.org/
By NORMAN FINKELSTEIN

The record is fairly clear. You can find it on the Israeli website,  
the Ministry of Foreign Affairs website. Israel broke the ceasefire by  
going into the Gaza and killing six or seven Palestinian militants. At  
that point—and now I’m quoting the official Israeli website—Hamas  
retaliated or, in retaliation for the Israeli attack, then launched  
the missiles.

Now, as to the reason why, the record is fairly clear as well.  
According to Ha’aretz, Defense Minister Barak began plans for this  
invasion before the ceasefire even began. In fact, according to  
yesterday’s Ha’aretz, the plans for the invasion began in March. And  
the main reasons for the invasion, I think, are twofold. Number one;  
to enhance what Israel calls its deterrence capacity, which in  
layman’s language basically means Israel’s capacity to terrorize the  
region into submission. After their defeat in July 2006 in Lebanon,  
they felt it important to transmit the message that Israel is still a  
fighting force, still capable of terrorizing those who dare defy its  
word.

And the second main reason for the attack is because Hamas was  
signaling that it wanted a diplomatic settlement of the conflict along  
the June 1967 border. That is to say, Hamas was signaling they had  
joined the international consensus, they had joined most of the  
international community, overwhelmingly the international community,  
in seeking a diplomatic settlement. And at that point, Israel was  
faced with what Israelis call a Palestinian peace offensive. And in  
order to defeat the peace offensive, they sought to dismantle Hamas.

As was documented in the April 2008 issue of Vanity Fair by the writer  
David Rose, basing himself on internal US documents, it was the United  
States in cahoots with the Palestinian Authority and Israel which were  
attempting a putsch on Hamas, and Hamas preempted the putsch. That,  
too, is no longer debatable or no longer a controversial claim.

The issue is can it rule in Gaza if Israel maintains a blockade and  
prevents economic activity among the Palestinians. The blockade,  
incidentally, was implemented before Hamas came to power. The blockade  
doesn’t even have anything to do with Hamas. The blockade came to— 
there were Americans who were sent over, in particular James  
Wolfensohn, to try to break the blockade after Israel redeployed its  
troops in Gaza.

The problem all along has been that Israel doesn’t want Gaza to  
develop, and Israel doesn’t want to resolve diplomatically the  
conflict, both the leadership in Damascus and the leadership in the  
Gaza have repeatedly made statements they’re willing to settle the  
conflict in the June 1967 border. The record is fairly clear. In fact,  
it’s unambiguously clear.

Every year, the United Nations General Assembly votes on a resolution  
entitled “Peaceful Settlement of the Palestine Question.” And every  
year the vote is the same: it’s the whole world on one side; Israel,  
the United States and some South Sea atolls and Australia on the other  
side. The vote this past year was 164-to-7. Every year since 1989—in  
1989, the vote was 151-to-3, the whole world on one side, the United  
States, Israel and the island state of Dominica on the other side.

We have the Arab League, all twenty-two members of the Arab League,  
favoring a two-state settlement on the June 1967 border. We have the  
Palestinian Authority favoring that two-state settlement on the June  
1967 border. We now have Hamas favoring that two-state settlement on  
the June 1967 border. The one and only obstacle is Israel, backed by  
the United States. That’s the problem.

Well, the record shows that Hamas wanted to continue the ceasefire,  
but only on condition that Israel eases the blockade. Long before  
Hamas began the retaliatory rocket attacks on Israel, Palestinians  
were facing a humanitarian crisis in Gaza because of the blockade. The  
former High Commissioner for Human Rights, Mary Robinson, described  
what was going on in Gaza as a destruction of a civilization. This was  
during the ceasefire period.

What does the record show? The record shows for the past twenty or  
more years, the entire international community has sought to settle  
the conflict in the June 1967 border with a just resolution of the  
refugee question. Are all 164 nations of the United Nations the  
rejectionists? And are the only people in favor of peace the United  
States, Israel, Nauru, Palau, Micronesia, the Marshall Islands and  
Australia? Who are the rejectionists? Who’s opposing a peace?

The record shows that in every crucial issue raised at Camp David,  
then under the Clinton parameters, and then in Taba, at every single  
point, all the concessions came from the Palestinians. Israel didn’t  
make any concessions. Every concession came from the Palestinians. The  
Palestinians have repeatedly expressed a willingness to settle the  
conflict in accordance with international law.

The law is very clear. July 2004, the highest judicial body in the  
world, the International Court of Justice, ruled Israel has no title  
to any of the West Bank and any of Gaza. They have no title to  
Jerusalem. Arab East Jerusalem, according to the highest judicial body  
in the world, is occupied Palestinian territory. The International  
Court of Justice ruled all the settlements, all the settlements in the  
West Bank, are illegal under international law.

Now, the important point is, on all those questions, the Palestinians  
were willing to make concessions. They made all the concessions.  
Israel didn’t make any concessions.

I think it’s fairly clear what needs to happen. Number one, the United  
States and Israel have to join the rest of the international  
community, have to abide by international law. I don’t think  
international law should be trivialized. I think it’s a serious issue.  
If Israel is in defiance of international law, it should be called  
into account, just like any other state in the world.

Mr. Obama has to level with the American people. He has to be honest  
about what is the main obstacle to resolving the conflict. It’s not  
Palestinian rejectionism. It’s the refusal of Israel, backed by the  
United States government, to abide by international law, to abide by  
the opinion of the international community.

And the main challenge for all of us as Americans is to see through  
the lies.


Norman Finkelstein is author of five books, including Image and  
Reality of the Israel-Palestine Conflict, Beyond Chutzpah and The  
Holocaust Industry, which have been translated into more than 40  
foreign editions. He is the son of Holocaust survivors. This article  
is an edited extract of the views of Finkelstein given at  
DemocracyNow.org. His website is www.NormanFinkelstein.com