Defense Minister Ehud Barak (the Hebrew surname
means "lightning," German "Blitz") did it again: a historic record of over
200 Palestinians killed in a single Sabbath's blitz (Dec. 27). Polls now predict
five additional Knesset seats for his Labor Party in the coming February general
election. That's 40 Palestinian corpses per seat. No wonder he promises it's
just the beginning: at this pace, it will take Labor just about two thousand
additional corpses to go from rags to riches, from a dead political party to
an absolute majority in parliament like in the good old days. For Barak, then,
the Gaza obituaries are a matter of political survival: they are pasted up on
his party's obituary. A similar sickening logic sent former Prime Minister Shimon
Peres (Nobel Peace Prize Laureate, etc., etc.) back in 1996 to devastate southern
Lebanon and solve the problem of Hezbollah once-and-for-all in Operation Grapes
of Wrath, just weeks before the general election – in which he was defeated
by Netanyahu. When the so-called doves behave like hawks, the voters prefer
the real hawks, following the Talmudic saying "Whatever looks like an egg, a
true egg is always better." But warriors like Barak never learn.
And they are not alone in that: just two days before the pounding of Gaza
started, it was the allegedly "left-liberal" party Meretz
that officially called for military action against Hamas. You know Meretz:
the party of (Frankfurt Peace Prize Laureate, etc., etc.) Amos Oz and his ilk,
those pseudo-intellectuals who always claim to have been against
the previous war. No exception this time: they're all there, right behind
the bombers, or even ahead of them.
Over 200 corpses lying in open air behind Gaza's
hospital, which – after more than a year of Israel's blockade – cannot offer
patients anything but painkillers anyway. Guess what was the headline of Israel's
most popular daily, Yediot Ahronoth, the next day. "One and a Half Million
Gazans Under Fire"? Close, but no cigar. The actual headline (Dec. 28) read:
"Half a Million Israelis Under Fire." Indeed, a single Israeli civilian
had been killed that day by a Hamas rocket. Similarly, journalist Avirama Golan
in her Ha'aretz blog devoted a whole post to the agonies of her hysterical
pussycat in Sderot. Some journalists, especially those who consider themselves
critical, are excellent prioritizers.
Yediot Ahronoth had six columnists on its front page and several more
inside. The war's cheerleaders. Nahum
Barnea, an over-appreciated "critical" journalist, expressed his view about
the bloodbath rather succinctly: "better late than never." Dov
Weissglass, "closely linked to the peace process" as Wikipedia puts it,
was similarly outspoken: his column was called "Do Not Stop," with an exclamation
mark to make things clear. "It should be just the beginning," he advises
to the very government that has just vowed "it's just the beginning." Mirror,
mirror on the wall. Eitan
Haber, senior aide to late former Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin (Nobel Peace
Prize Laureate, etc., etc.), recycled the usual war propaganda of every Israeli
government for home consumption: as always, the right-wing opposition is extremist
and crazy, but we, the government, launch a moderate, responsible, and restrained
war. "The political argument that we could have and should have acted long ago
is neither true nor justified," Haber opens his Pavlovian service for the
government.
Gadi Taub, an ultra-conservative
young mainstreamer, wrote a column titled "Demagoguery, Anti-Semitism, Ignorance,"
with content too trivial to repeat, though fairly summarized by its first and
last title-words. But Taub's demagoguery fades compared to Ben-Dror Yemini's
(an Israeli Daniel Pipes) in Ma'ariv. In a column titled "The Most Justified
Offensive Ever" (miraculously, the very words used by his Ha'aretz twin
Ari Shavit for the Lebanon War just two years ago), Yemini draws a straight
line from Hitler to Hamas (no coincidence they both start with an H, just like
Hezbollah, Saddam Hussein, and Hemorrhoids), and explains that "Since the Nazi
ideology […], no movement has been as dangerous to world peace as political
Islam." My apologies for quoting this trash; we need an Israeli demagogue
to instrumentalize the Holocaust, and Yemini was born for such dirty jobs.
At the same time, excellent columnist B. Michael
does raise a critical voice in Yediot:
"Here it is again, the periodical 'déjà vu' war. The
ritual bleeding poured once again into the boiling basin which has for decades
been leading the entire region to hell. To be honest, our soul is weary of dividing
the seventh-day's war of the Six-Day War into 'operations,' 'wars,' 'battles,'
'actions,' and 'offensives.' They are all just one ongoing war. They are all
one big slaughterhouse. An occupier's war against the occupied, and the occupied's
war against their occupier."
B. Michael knows what most Israelis were trained to forget: that despite the
Israeli withdrawal, Gaza is still occupied. Even before the Hamas takeover,
Israel retained all the measures to ensure its effective control of the Strip:
from direct control of all the border crossings to Gaza, both for goods and
for persons, to Israeli control of Gaza's population registry. The only apparent
exception – the Rafah checkpoint – is restricted to entry into Gaza of Gaza
inhabitants only, as defined by the Israeli registry, and even this is under
Israeli supervision. But for most Israelis, Gaza is an independent, sovereign
empire, which was occupied by Israel ages ago, and now, for no reason at all,
poses an existential threat to its benevolent Jewish neighbor.
In the evening television news, careful listening
– especially to serious reporters like Shlomi Eldar – could reveal the tip of
the war-crimes iceberg yet to emerge: a Gazan prison was intentionally bombarded,
a clear war crime. Gaza's hospital suffered damages too. All this in an overcrowded
Strip in which life has already been strangled by an embargo on anything from
cement and gasoline to medical equipment. A couple of months ago, journalist
Amos Harel quoted an article of a leading military figure regarding Israel's
next war policy, be it in Lebanon, Syria, or Gaza: "Using power without any
proportion to the enemy's threat and actions, in order to damage and punish
to an extent that would require long and expensive rehabilitation processes."
Another Israeli general explained that villages from which shots are fired will
be devastated; "we consider them as military bases" (Ha'aretz, Oct. 5;
the names of the two generals – for The Hague's ICC – are Gaby Siboni and Gadi
Eisenkot). Once the war started, Maj.-Gen. (Reserve) Giora Island – former head
of the National Security Council – spelled it all out on television, without
a shade of shame: Israel should not confine its attacks to military facilities,
he said, but must hit civilian targets as well. The damage to the civil population
should be maximized, because the worse the humanitarian crisis is, the better
and the sooner the operation would end. It's the same major-general, by the
way, who just a year ago caused outrage by urging the Israeli government to
negotiate directly with Hamas. Do not to look for consistency, integrity, or
intelligence where war criminals are involved.