October
25, 2023
At
one time, the ‘Arab-Israeli Conflict’ was Arab and Israeli. Over many years,
however, it was rebranded. The media is now telling us it is a ‘Hamas-Israeli
conflict.’
But
what went wrong? Israel simply became too powerful.
The
supposedly astounding Israeli victories over the years against Arab armies have
emboldened Israel to the extent that it came to view itself not as a regional
superpower but as a global power. Israel, per its own definition, became
‘invincible.’
Such
terminology was not a mere scare tactic aimed at breaking the spirit of
Palestinians and Arabs alike. Israel believed this.
The
‘Israeli miracle victory’ against Arab armies in 1967 was a watershed moment.
Then, Israeli ambassador to the United Nations, Abba Eban, declared in a speech
that “from the podium of the UN, I proclaimed the glorious triumph of the IDF
and the redemption of Jerusalem.”
In
his thinking, this could only mean one thing: “Never before has Israel stood
more honored and revered by the nations of the world.”
The
sentiment in Eban’s words echoed throughout Israel. Even those who doubted
their government’s ability to prevail over the Arabs completely joined the
chorus: Israel is unvanquishable.
Little
rational discussion took place back then about the actual reasons why Israel
had won and if that victory would have been possible without Washington’s
complete backing and the West’s willingness to support Israel at any cost.
Israel
was never a graceful winner. As the size of territories controlled by the
triumphant little state increased three-fold, Israel began entrenching its
military occupation over whatever remained of historic Palestine. It even
started building settlements in newly occupied Arab territories, in Sinai, the
Golan Heights and all the rest.
Fifty
years ago, in October 1973, Arab armies attempted to reverse Israel’s massive
gains by launching a surprise attack. They initially succeeded, then failed
when the US moved quickly to bolster Israeli defenses and intelligence.
It
was not a complete victory for the Arabs, nor a total defeat for Israel. The
latter was severely bruised, though. But Tel Aviv remained convinced that the
fundamental relationship it had established with the Arabs in 1967 had not been
altered.
And,
with time, the ‘conflict’ became less Arab-Israeli and more
Palestinian-Israeli. Other Arab countries, like Lebanon, paid a heavy price for
the fragmentation of the Arab front.
This
changing reality meant that Israel could invade South Lebanon in March 1978 and
then sign the Camp David Peace Accords with Egypt six months later.
While
the Israeli occupation of Palestine grew more violent, with an insatiable
appetite for more land, the West turned the Palestinian struggle for freedom
into a ‘conflict’ to be managed by words, never by deeds.
Many
Palestinian intellectuals argue that “this is not a conflict” and that military
occupation is not a political dispute but governed by clearly defined
international laws and boundaries. And that it must be resolved according to
international justice.
That
is yet to happen. Neither was justice delivered nor an inch of Palestine
retrieved, despite the countless international conferences, resolutions,
statements, investigations, recommendations, and special reports. Without
actual enforcement, international law is mere ink.
But
did the Arab people abandon Palestine? The anger, the anguish, and the
passionate chants by endless streams of people who took to the streets
throughout the Middle East to protest the annihilation of Gaza by the Israeli
army did not seem to think that Palestine is alone – or, at least, should be
left fighting on its own.
The
isolation of Palestine from its regional context has proven disastrous.
When
the ‘conflict’ is only with the Palestinians, Israel determines the context and
scope of the so-called conflict, what is allowed at the ‘negotiations table,’
and what is to be excluded. This is how the Oslo Accords squandered Palestinian
rights.
The
more Israel succeeds in isolating Palestinians from their regional environs,
the more it invests in their division.
It
is even more dangerous when the conflict becomes between Hamas and Israel. The
outcome is a whole different conversation that is superimposed on the truly
urgent understanding of what is taking place in Gaza, in the whole of Palestine
at the moment.
In
Israel’s version of events, the war began on October 7, when Hamas fighters
attacked Israeli military bases, settlements, and towns in the south of Israel.
No
other date or event before the Hamas attack seems to matter to Israel, the West
and corporate media covering the war with so much concern for the plight of
Israelis and complete disregard for the Gaza inferno.
No
other context is allowed to spoil the perfect Israeli narrative of ISIS-like
Palestinians disturbing the peace and tranquility of Israel and its people.
Palestinian
voices that insist on discussing the Gaza war within proper historical contexts
– the ethnic cleansing of Palestine in 1948, the occupation of Jerusalem, the
West Bank and Gaza in 1967, the siege on Gaza in 2007, all the bloody wars
before and after – are denied platforms.
The
pro-Israel media simply does not want to listen. Even if Israel did not make
unfounded claims about decapitated babies, the media would have remained
committed to the Israeli narrative, anyway.
Yet,
suppose Israel continues to define the narratives of war, historical contexts
of ‘conflicts,’ and the political discourses that shape the West’s view of
Palestine and the Middle East. In that case, it will continue to obtain all the
blank checks necessary to remain committed to its military occupation of
Palestine.
In
turn, this will fuel yet more conflicts, more wars and more deception regarding
the roots of the violence.
For
this vicious cycle to break, Palestine must, once more, become an issue that
concerns all Arabs, the whole region. The Israeli narrative must be countered,
western bias confronted, and a new, collective strategy formed.
In
other words, Palestine cannot be left alone anymore.
No comments:
Post a Comment