Re: Israeli exceptionalism

[Jim Farmelant <farmelantj@xxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 08:31:53 -0400 Yoshie Furuhashi <furuhashi.1@xxxxxxx>
writes:
> At 6:10 AM -0500 10/15/03, LouPaulsen wrote:
> >  > In my view, it is insulting to the intelligence of all
> concerned --
> >>  Palestinians as well as all other peoples -- to even suggest
> that
> >>  Palestinians can't understand or don't have to abide by the
> Geneva
> >>  Conventions and other relevant international laws,  [...]
> >
> >I would be interested in hearing why Palestinians 'have to'
> >unilaterally abide by the Geneva Conventions, which have been
> >abrogated, shredded, mulched, and relegated to the status of a
> >historical footnote by the US and Israeli governments.
>
> Simply, because the Palestinian national movement is a movement for
> liberation from oppression, and no movement for liberation should
> sink, nay no movement for liberation _can afford to_ sink, to the
> level of oppressors in disregarding laws of warfare and humanitarian
>
> law.  There are things that anyone involved in any modern movement
> for liberation (from colonialism, capitalism, whatever) -- not just
> Palestinians -- should never do themselves and must, to the best of
> their knowledge and ability, try to prevent others in their own
> ranks
> from perpetrating: rape, torture, deliberate and indiscriminate
> attacks on ordinary civilians (especially unarmed children),
> mistreatment of prisoners of war, attacks on medical personnel,
> attacks on neutrals, and so on -- precisely the sort of things
> prohibited by the Geneva Conventions and other relevant
> international
> laws.

Isn't that a bit problematic?  Especially in light of the
fact that the imperialists themselves have never
been very scruplous about following the
Geneva Conventions and otherwise respecting
the laws of warfare which prohibit the deliberate
targetting of civilians.  You may recall that
less that sixty years ago, the US, UK and
the Soviet Union defeated the fascist powers
(Germany, Italy, and Japan) in a war that
was marked on both sides by extensive
violations of the laws of war, and which
in particular involved the deliberate
targetting of civilian populations.  The
US as you may recall engaged in terror
bombings of German and Japanese
cities, firebombed Dresden and Hamburg
in Germany, and Tokyo in Japan. And at
the end of the war, dropped atomic bombs
on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

And yet WW II is remembered in the US
and elsewhere as a "good war," presumably
in the sense of having been a just war.  And
yet it was a war in which the "good guys",
as much as the "bad guys" openly violated
all the traditional norms of warfare.  Given
this sort of history, by what right does anyone
have for demanding that the Palestinians
hold themselves to a higher standard?

>
> At 6:10 AM -0500 10/15/03, LouPaulsen wrote:
> >As for 'international law', I suggest that is insulting even to use
>
> >the term in the presence of a Palestinian.
>
> No movement for liberation has made as much use of international law
>
> in its political rhetoric as the Palestinian liberation movement,
> and
> no solidarity movement has made as much use of it as the Palestinian
>
> solidarity movement.  Any struggle for liberation, even an armed
> struggle for liberation, is after all a matter of winning the hearts
>
> and minds of people to its cause, and making use of international
> law
> in propaganda (in the good sense of the term propaganda) when it is
> appropriate is essential to the struggle.  In making use of
> international law, however, one can't argue that Israel must obey
> the
> Geneva Conventions and other relevant international laws while also
> saying that Palestinians can completely disregard them -- no one
> sensible buys such an argument.
>
> At 6:10 AM -0500 10/15/03, LouPaulsen wrote:
> >>especially as Palestinians themselves and their supporters
> >>frequently make references to them in criticisms of Israel and the
>
> >>United States.
> >
> >Maybe the 'references' should be made more carefully and with less
> >superstitious reverence.
>
> No need to revere international law, but the fact of the matter is
> that the Palestinian case is one that looks most favorable in the
> light of the letters of international law (much more so than cases
> of
> other liberation movements), and most Palestinians and solidarity
> activists know that, and we do well to call attention to this fact.
> Cf. John Quigley, "The Role of Law in the Palestinian-Israeli
> Accommodation,"
> <http://lawwww.cwru.edu/cwrulaw/jil/31-2/quigley.html>.
> --
> Yoshie
>
> * Bring Them Home Now! <http://www.bringthemhomenow.org/>
> * Calendars of Events in Columbus:
> <http://www.osu.edu/students/sif/calendar.html>,
> <http://www.freepress.org/calendar.php>, & <http://www.cpanews.org/>
> * Student International Forum: <http://www.osu.edu/students/sif/>
> * Committee for Justice in Palestine: <http://www.osudivest.org/>
> * Al-Awda-Ohio: <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Al-Awda-Ohio>
> * Solidarity: <http://www.solidarity-us.org/>
>

________________________________________________________________
The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!


~~~~~~~
PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.