[R-G] The Other Oil Spill

[Sid Shniad]

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/09/09-2

 CommonDreams.org <http://www.commondreams.org/>
                                     September 9, 2010 The Other Oil Spill

*When the victims of a massive oil spill are not the predominantly white
residents along the northern shores of the Gulf of Mexico, but instead are
Arabs living in the eastern Mediterranean, the reaction from Congress and
environmentalists is very different.*

by Stephen Zunes

Leading congressional Democrats are outraged at British Petroleum and others
responsible for the massive oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. But that stands
in sharp contrast to their outspoken support of those responsible for a
major oil spill in the eastern Mediterranean in 2006, the largest in that
region's history.

On July 13 and 15 of that year, as part of a major bombardment of the
civilian infrastructure of Lebanon, Israeli planes bombed the fuel tanks for
the Jiyeh power plant on the coast near Beirut, releasing 10,000-15,000 tons
of oil.  A giant oil slick spread northward by Mediterranean currents,
contaminated the Lebanese and Syrian coasts, and went as far as Turkey and
Cyprus. Meanwhile, large deposits of the densest parts of the heavy oil dropped
to the seabed to form black toxic mats, destroying sea life below.

The ongoing Israeli navy blockade of the Lebanese coast made an emergency
response impossible in the critical early hours and days of the disaster.
Israeli airstrikes in the immediate area kept firefighters and others away
from the disaster site, while damaged roads and bridges from other
airstrikes prevented crews and equipment from dealing with the growing
spill. With the support of both parties in Congress, the Bush administration
blocked efforts at the United Nations to impose a ceasefire for another five
weeks. Full-scale operations to contain and clean up the spill therefore did
not get underway until well into August, by which time the spill had already
stretched hundreds of miles.  As a result, two months after the spill, only
3 percent of the oil had been cleaned up. Indeed, it took a full six months
before the spill was even contained. It took a full year before most of the
beaches had been cleaned, primarily by local young volunteers.
Legacy of the Spill

Lebanese Environmental Minister Yacoub Sarraf called the spill "the biggest
environmental disaster in Lebanon's history." Scientists, fishermen, and
activists were particularly concerned for local marine ecosystems. Eggs from
bluefin tuna, a species already driven to the edge by overfishing, are
particularly sensitive to such contamination. The oil covered the beaches
just as endangered sea turtles were hatching, killing an untold number of
hatchlings.

The costs of the disaster, in terms of fishing, tourism, and cleanup, have
been estimated at up to $200 million. Although the United States provided
Israel with the jets and ordinance that caused the oil spill, the U.S.
government refused to contribute more than $5 million to the cleanup effort.

The environmental damage was not restricted to the oil spill. The total fuel
capacity of the storage tanks at the Jiyeh plant was approximately 75,000
cubic meters. None of the oil was salvaged, meaning that what did not spill
into the sea or seep into the ground burned up. The blaze lasted 10 days,
sending toxic fumes into the surrounding area, including greater Beirut,
with a population of over two million residents. Plumes of black smoke were
visible for over 40 miles. Ash deposits covered a wide area, more than a
foot deep in some places.
Contrasting Reactions in Congress

Congressional Democrats in large part recognized the extent of the disaster
in the Gulf of Mexico, and were outspoken in their denunciation of BP and
others responsible. For example, Rep. Jan Schakowski (D-IL) declared that
"the environmental catastrophe in the Gulf region is one of biblical
proportions, and the economic and emotional toll on the people there is
beyond devastating," insisting that the "responsible parties must be held
accountable." Similarly, Diana DeGette (D-CO) declared, "This is a massive
environmental disaster that we are really going to be living with and
dealing with for many years to come...We're really going to have to hold
BP's feet to the fire and make sure businesses are adequately compensated."
Other members of Congress were clear that they would insure that those at
fault would be held responsible, with Majority Whip Jim Clyburn (D-SC)
declaring that "it is important that BP be held fully accountable for their
negligence" and Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) insisting,  "We need to make companies
pay."

Yet when the victims of a massive oil spill are not the predominantly white
residents along the northern shores of the Gulf of Mexico, but instead are
Arabs living in the eastern Mediterranean, their perspective is very
different. Shakowski, DeGette, Clyburn, and DeLauro - along with the
overwhelming majority of their House Democratic colleagues - joined their
Republican counterparts in not only refusing to demand Israel be held
accountable, but actually defending the Israeli assault. Like most targets
of the Israeli war on Lebanon that summer, the Jiyeh power plant and its
fuel tanks had no relation with the militant group Hezbollah, the alleged
target of the Israeli attacks. Just two days after the bombing and the
resulting oil spill, however, the U.S. House of Representatives - in a
resolution that passed by a 410-8  vote, referred to the Israeli attacks as
"appropriate action[s] to defend itself." Congress even went as far as
claiming that such attacks against Lebanon's civilian infrastructure were
"in accordance with international law."

Such an assertion runs counter to a broad consensus of international legal
authorities, however. For example, Amnesty International concluded, after
extensive research and analysis that included a review of Israeli
interpretations of the laws of war, that the "Israeli forces committed
serious violations of international human rights and humanitarian law,
including war crimes." The International Red Cross, long recognized as the
guardian of the Geneva Conventions on the conduct of war, declared that
Israel violated the principle of proportionality in the conventions as well
as the prohibition against collective punishment. Similarly, UN High
Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour - who served as a prosecutor in
the international war crimes tribunals on Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia -
noted how the Israeli government was engaging in war crimes and Jan Egeland,
head of United Nations relief operations, referred to the "disproportional
response" by Israel to Hezbollah's provocations - such as the attack on the
Jiyeh power plant - as "a violation of international humanitarian law."

The House resolution also insisted that the Israeli attacks on Lebanon were
in accordance with Article 51 of the UN Charter, which grants the right of
self-defense. None of the congressional offices I contacted, however, was
able to explain how this kind of environmental warfare constituted
legitimate self-defense. Furthermore, a reading of the UN Charter reveals
that Article 33 requires all parties to "first of all, seek a solution by
negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial
settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful
means of their own choice," which Israel had refused to do. John B. Larson
(D-CT), speaking in reference to Republican apologists for the major oil
companies, declared, "I don't know how anyone could side with the CEO of BP
over the victims of the Gulf oil spill at a time like this." He has been
unable to explain, however, how he and his fellow Democrats could side the
Israeli government in this heinous act of environmental warfare.
Political Fallout?

Interestingly, the willingness by such congressional representatives to
accept such large-scale environmental destruction and other war crimes as
legitimate acts of self-defense did not prompt any major environmental
groups or other key liberal constituencies to withdraw their support.
Instead, leading environmental groups endorsed the re-election of scores of
Democratic supporters of Israel's attacks on Lebanon, essentially
communicating that politicians who defend serious acts of ecological
sabotage need not worry about the political consequences of their actions.

One of the most important lessons of environmentalism is the understanding
of the interconnectedness of the world's ecology: that we are living on one
planet.  The willingness of so many Democrats in Congress to
self-righteously decry the negligence of BP for causing a massive oil spill
on America's shores only to defend the wanton destruction of U.S.-provided
weaponry that caused a massive oil spill on foreign shores primarily
affecting people of color may be indicative of a kind of environmental
racism.

If the planet is going to survive, both politicians and self-described
environmental organizations must defend the environment whatever the
geopolitics of a particular region and whoever the most immediate victims of
its destruction may be.
Stephen Zunes is Middle East editor for Foreign Policy In
Focus<http://www.fpif.org/>.
He is a professor of Politics at the University of San Francisco and the
author of Tinderbox: U.S. Middle East Policy and the Roots of
Terrorism<http://www.amazon.com/dp/1567512267?tag=commondreams-20&camp=0&creative=0&linkCode=as1&creativeASIN=1567512267&adid=11NWY1THTC6R55VDABP5&>(Common
Courage Press, 2003.)