"When the truth is replaced by silence,"
the Soviet dissident Yevgeny Yevtushenko said, "the silence is a lie."
It may appear the silence is broken on Gaza. The cocoons of murdered children,
wrapped in green, together with boxes containing their dismembered parents and
the cries of grief and rage of everyone in that death camp by the sea, can be
viewed on al-Jazeera and YouTube, even glimpsed on the BBC. But Russia's incorrigible
poet was not referring to the ephemeral we call news; he was asking why those
who knew the why never spoke it and so denied it. Among the Anglo-American intelligentsia,
this is especially striking. It is they who hold the keys to the great storehouses
of knowledge: the historiographies and archives that lead us to the why.
They know that the horror now raining on Gaza has little to do with Hamas or,
absurdly, "Israel's right to exist." They know the opposite to be
true: that Palestine's right to exist was canceled 61 years ago and the expulsion
and, if necessary, extinction of the indigenous people was planned and executed
by the founders of Israel. They know, for example, that the infamous "Plan
D" resulted in the murderous depopulation of 369 Palestinian towns and
villages by the Haganah (Jewish army) and that massacre upon massacre of Palestinian
civilians in such places as Deir Yassin, al-Dawayima, Eilaboun, Jish, Ramle
and Lydda are referred to in official records as "ethnic cleansing."
Arriving at a scene of this carnage, David Ben-Gurion, Israel's first prime
minister, was asked by a general, Yigal Allon, "What shall we do with the
Arabs?" Ben-Gurion, reported the Israeli historian Benny Morris, "made
a dismissive, energetic gesture with his hand and said, ‘Expel them'. The order
to expel an entire population "without attention to age" was signed
by Yitzhak Rabin, a future prime minister promoted by the world's most efficient
propaganda as a peacemaker. The terrible irony of this was addressed only in
passing, such as when the Mapan Party co-leader Meir Ya'ari noted "how
easily" Israel's leaders spoke of how it was "possible and permissible
to take women, children and old men and to fill the roads with them because
such is the imperative of strategy … who remembers who used this means against
our people during the [Second World] war … we are appalled."
Every subsequent "war" Israel has waged has had the same objective:
the expulsion of the native people and the theft of more and more land. The
lie of David and Goliath, of perennial victim, reached its apogee in 1967 when
the propaganda became a righteous fury that claimed the Arab states had struck
first. Since then, mostly Jewish truth-tellers such as Avi Schlaim, Noam Chomsky,
the late Tanya Reinhart, Neve Gordon, Tom Segev, Uri Avnery, Ilan Pappe and
Norman Finklestein have dispatched this and other myths and revealed a state
shorn of the humane traditions of Judaism, whose unrelenting militarism is the
sum of an expansionist, lawless and racist ideology called zionism. "It
seems," wrote the Israeli historian Ilan Pappe on 2 January, "that
even the most horrendous crimes, such as the genocide in Gaza, are treated as
desperate events, unconnected to anything that happened in the past and not
associated with any ideology or system … Very much as the apartheid ideology
explained the oppressive policies of the South African government, this ideology
– in its most consensual and simplistic variety – has allowed all the Israeli
governments in the past and the present to dehumanize the Palestinians wherever
they are and strive to destroy them. The means altered from period to period,
from location to location, as did the narrative covering up these atrocities.
But there is a clear pattern [of genocide]."
In Gaza, the enforced starvation and denial of humanitarian aid, the piracy
of life-giving resources such as fuel and water, the denial of medicines and
treatment, the systematic destruction of infrastructure and the killing and
maiming of the civilian population, 50 per cent of whom are children, meet the
international standard of the Genocide Convention. "Is it an irresponsible
overstatement," asked Richard Falk, the United Nations Special Rapporteur
for Human Rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territory and international law
authority at Princeton University, "to associate the treatment of Palestinians
with this criminalized Nazi record of collective atrocity? I think not."
In describing a "holocaust-in-the making," Falk was alluding to the
Nazis' establishment of Jewish ghettos in Poland. For one month in 1943, the
captive Polish Jews led by Mordechaj Anielewiz fought off the German army and
the SS, but their resistance was finally crushed and the Nazis exacted their
final revenge. Falk is also a Jew. Today's holocaust-in-the-making, which began
with Ben-Gurion's Plan D, is in its final stages. The difference today is that
it is a joint US-Israeli project. The F-16 jet fighters, the 250-pound "smart"
GBU-39 bombs supplied on the eve of the attack on Gaza, having been approved
by a Congress dominated by the Democratic Party, plus the annual $2.4 billion
in war-making "aid," give Washington de facto control. It beggars
belief that President-elect Obama was not informed. Outspoken on Russia's war
in Georgia and the terrorism in Mumbai, Obama's silence on Palestine marks his
approval, which is to be expected, given his obsequiousness to the Tel Aviv
regime and its lobbyists during the presidential campaign and his appointment
of Zionists as his secretary of state, chief of staff and principal Middle East
advisers. When Aretha Franklin sings "Think," her wonderful 1960s
anthem to freedom, at Obama's inauguration on 21 January, I trust someone with
the brave heart of Muntadar al-Zaidi, the shoe-thrower, will shout: "Gaza!"
The asymmetry of conquest and terror is clear. Plan D is now "Operation
Cast Lead," which is the unfinished "Operation Justified Vengeance."
The latter was launched by Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in 2001 when, with Bush's
approval, he used F-16s against Palestinian towns and villages for the first
time. In the same year, the authoritative Jane's Foreign Report disclosed
that the Blair government had given Israel the "green light" to attack
the West Bank after it was shown Israel's secret designs for a bloodbath. It
was typical of New Labor Party's enduring, cringing complicity in Palestine's
agony. However, the 2001 Israeli plan, reported Jane's, needed the "trigger"
of a suicide bombing which would cause "numerous deaths and injuries [because]
the 'revenge' factor is crucial." This would "motivate Israeli soldiers
to demolish the Palestinians." What alarmed Sharon and the author of the
plan, General Shaul Mofaz, the Israeli Chief of Staff, was a secret agreement
between Yasser Arafat and Hamas to ban suicide attacks. On 23 November, 2001,
Israeli agents assassinated the Hamas leader, Mahmud Abu Hunud, and got their
"trigger"; the suicide attacks resumed in response to his killing.
Something uncannily similar happened on 5 November last, when Israeli special
forces attacked Gaza, killing six people. Once again, they got their propaganda
"trigger." A ceasefire initiated and sustained by the Hamas government
– which had imprisoned its violators – was shattered by the Israeli attack
and homemade rockets were fired into what used to be Palestine before its Arab
occupants were "cleansed." The On 23 December, Hamas offered to renew
the ceasefire, but Israel's charade was such that its all-out assault on Gaza
had been planned six months earlier, according to the Israeli daily Ha'aretz.
Behind this sordid game is the "Dagan Plan," named after General
Meir Dagan, who served with Sharon in his bloody invasion of Lebanon in 1982.
Now head of Mossad, the Israeli intelligence organization, Dagan is the author
of a "solution" that has seen the imprisonment of Palestinians behind
a ghetto wall snaking across the West Bank and in Gaza, effectively a concentration
camp. The establishment of a quisling government in Ramallah under Mohammed
Abbas is Dagan's achievement, together with a hasbara (propaganda) campaign
relayed through a mostly supine, if intimidated western media, notably in America,
that says Hamas is a terrorist organization devoted to Israel's destruction
and to "blame" for the massacres and siege of its own people over
two generations, long before its creation. "We have never had it so good,"
said the Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Gideon Meir in 2006. "The hasbara
effort is a well-oiled machine." In fact, Hamas's real threat is its example
as the Arab world's only democratically elected government, drawing its popularity
from its resistance to the Palestinians' oppressor and tormentor. This was demonstrated
when Hamas foiled a CIA coup in 2007, an event ordained in the western media
as "Hamas's seizure of power." Likewise, Hamas is never described
as a government, let alone democratic. Neither is its proposal of a ten-year
truce as a historic recognition of the "reality" of Israel and support
for a two-state solution with just one condition: that the Israelis obey international
law and end their illegal occupation beyond the 1967 borders. As every annual
vote in the UN General Assembly demonstrates, 99 per cent of humanity concurs.
On 4 January, the president of the General Assembly, Miguel d'Escoto, described
the Israeli attack on Gaza as a "monstrosity."
When the monstrosity is done and the people of Gaza are even more stricken,
the Dagan Plan foresees what Sharon called a "1948-style solution"
– the destruction of all Palestinian leadership and authority followed by mass
expulsions into smaller and smaller "cantonments" and perhaps finally
into Jordan. This demolition of institutional and educational life in Gaza is
designed to produce, wrote Karma Nabulsi, a Palestinian exile in Britain, "a
Hobbesian vision of an anarchic society: truncated, violent, powerless, destroyed,
cowed … Look to the Iraq of today: that is what [Sharon] had in store for us,
and he has nearly achieved it."
Dr. Dahlia Wasfi is an American writer on Palestine. She has a Jewish mother
and an Iraqi Muslim father. "Holocaust denial is anti-Semitic," she
wrote on 31 December. "But I'm not talking about World War Two, Mahmoud
Ahmedinijad (the president of Iran) or Ashkenazi Jews. What I'm referring to
is the holocaust we are all witnessing and responsible for in Gaza today and
in Palestine over the past 60 years … Since Arabs are Semites, US-Israeli policy
doesn't get more anti-Semitic than this." She quoted Rachel Corrie, the
young American who went to Palestine to defend Palestinians and was crushed
by an Israeli bulldozer. "I am in the midst of a genocide," wrote
Corrie, "which I am also indirectly supporting and for which my government
is largely responsible."
Reading the words of both, I am struck by the use of "responsibility."
Breaking the lie of silence is not an esoteric abstraction but an urgent responsibility
that falls to those with the privilege of a platform. With the BBC cowed, so
too is much of journalism, merely allowing vigorous debate within unmovable
invisible boundaries, ever fearful of the smear of anti-Semitism. The unreported
news, meanwhile, is that the death toll in Gaza is the equivalent of 18,000
dead in Britain. Imagine, if you can.
Then there are the academics, the deans and teachers and researchers. Why are
they silent as they watch a university bombed and hear the Association of University
Teachers in Gaza plea for help? Are British universities now, as Terry Eagleton
believes, no more than "intellectual Tescos, churning out a commodity known
as graduates rather than greengroceries"?
Then there are the writers. In the dark year of 1939, the Third Writers' Congress
was held at Carnegie Hall in New York and the likes of Thomas Mann and Albert
Einstein sent messages and spoke up to ensure the lie of silence was broken.
By one account, 3,500 jammed the auditorium and a thousand were turned away.
Today, this mighty voice of realism and morality is said to be obsolete; the
literary review pages affect an ironic hauteur of irrelevance; false symbolism
is all. As for the readers, their moral and political imagination is to be pacified,
not primed. The anti-Muslim Martin Amis expressed this well in Visiting Mrs.
Nabokov: "The dominance of the self is not a flaw, it is an evolutionary
characteristic; it is just how things are."
If that is how things are, we are diminished as a civilized society. For what
happens in Gaza is the defining moment of our time, which either grants the
impunity of war criminals the immunity of our silence, while we contort our
own intellect and morality, or gives us the power to speak out. For the moment
I prefer my own memory of Gaza: of the people's courage and resistance and their
"luminous humanity," as Karma Nabulsi put it. On my last trip there,
I was rewarded with a spectacle of Palestinian flags fluttering in unlikely
places. It was dusk and children had done this. No one told them to do it. They
made flagpoles out of sticks tied together, and a few of them climbed on to
a wall and held the flag between them, some silently, others crying out. They
do this every day when they know foreigners are leaving, believing the world
will not forget them.