No abnormal sin
International Viewpoint #255 April 1994
FOLLOWING Michel Warshawsky's article on the Hebron massacre in our March issue, Adel Samara, a Palestinian economist from the Occupied Territories, presents his reaction to the atrocity and its implications for the future. ADEL SAMARA - 12 March 1994
N the context of both the formal terror which surrounds us on a world scale and the culture of Zionism, Baruch Goldstein's crime at Hebron is not an abnormal sin.
On a world scale, a new form of terror started with the air raids against Libya, the occupation of Grenada and later Panama, the large scale massacre of the people and economy of Iraq, the United Nations occupation of Somalia. Terror became an aspect of the "New World Order" which developed after the collapse of the Soviet Union.
### Long list
For Israel, as a settler colonial state, killing Palestinians is a part of its culture. The Hebron massacre was not the first - and it will not be the last. The list is long: Deir Yasin and Dawaima in 1948, Kibiay in 1954, Beit Liqia in 1955, Gaza in 1956, Rishon Litsyon and Jerusalem in 1990. Killing the aborigines is the first condition for the continuity of all white settler colonies. While in America, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia, the settlers adopted the slogan of "kill and settle". For the Zionist settlers it was evict, settle and kill later.
Goldstein "typically" applied what he was always taught at home, school, university, in the army, from the rabbis — and from the imperialists as well. In our long experience with the Israelis they are in a continuous internal race to invent the most effective means for harming the Palestinians. Since the massacre, in two weeks, forty people were killed by the Israeli army, most of them in demonstrations. In the first weeks of the Intifada, Henry Kissinger, told Israel 30
### PALESTINE that the best way to quell the Intifada was to kill several thousand people in one day.
In the last few months, several Israeli army reports noted that it is expected that some Israelis might kill large numbers of Palestinians in villages and towns. Many Israeli rabbis were encouraging people to kill Palestinians. One need not have waited until the massacre to realise that Israel is still not ready for peace and historical reconciliation with Palestinians and Arabs. It will be ready for that when its Zionist culture has changed.
During nearly three years of the imperialist settlement, Israel intensified its repression in the Occupied Territories, more killings, expansion of settlements, more settlers "imported" from the former Soviet Union and other countries, a tight economic siege on the Occupied Territories. The Declaration of Principles was an indirect annexation of the Occupied Territories; it included no hint that Israel will withdraw from them and no acknowledgement of the Palestinian people's right to return. All responsibilities which Arafat and his group are going to take and conduct in the autonomous areas are civil ones, for example roads, schools, construction, direct taxes, but not even control over export and import, water and so forth.
### Victim
Saying that Israel is not ready for peace means that its racist mentality and culture have not changed. Accordingly, nothing has been done to change the mentality of Goldstein, especially when Arafat has signed an agreement which guarantees the right of settlers in the Occupied Territories, and has apologised as a victim to the killer. In one way or another, this is an incentive to other Goldsteins to commit more crimes.
On the other hand, Arab capitalist regimes are not ready to fight for a just peace. The increasing compradorisation of their economy means greater political orientation towards the imperialist centre. As a result of dependency the policy of these regimes are designed by imperialism. These regimes are unable to extract a just peace from Israel and imperialism. What is important here is that these regimes are ruling but not representing their peoples. This makes any peace agreement through them unable to last.
It is clear that in the Arab countries there are two camps, that of the dependent capitalist regimes, and that of the popular national classes. Each want a different form of peace, the first is looking for the peace of international capital, and the second is looking for a peace in a form of historical reconciliation. One important development in the region is that while Arab regimes are neither elected nor representative, they are increasingly unable to manipulate the masses. This change opens the area for several options.
### Centre
What has strengthened and even guaranteed Israel's vision and understanding for peace is the support from the imperialist centre. Last but not least is the $10 billion loan guaranteed by the USA, not as a price for peace but to increase the settlements in the Occupied Territories. The American insistence, in the UN Security Council, to not condemn or blame Israel for the massacre, and the timing of the visit of the French Minister of the Defence to Israel (two weeks after the massacre to renew the military co-operation between the countries). To justify this agreement with Israel, the French Minister said that he "discussed the visit with the PLO in Tunisia"! This means nothing for the Palestinian people and cannot cover the fact that while looking for a market for its weapons French imperialism is deliberately supporting Israel and encouraging it to insist on the imperialist settlement.
As the settlement is an economic one, it is capital [in class re-ordering in the region], Israel, imperialism and dependent Arab regimes will never look for a real and just peace. Just peace means an independent Palestinian state which might for one reason or another close its borders to Israeli exports to the Arab markets. This is one of the reasons why the designers of the imperialist settlement insisted that the Occupied Territories must be some thing down of independence and more than pure and bare
International Viewpoint #255 April 1994 or absolute occupation, which is practically "occupation". The autonomous areas will be domains for Israel, an open area which Israel can enter easily, and the Jordanians will do the same. This means a place (a large club or land of market) which gather Arab comprador with the Israeli exporters without national or political boundaries, tension or sensitivity. That is why it should not be
Developments after the 13 September 1993 made things clear. The donor countries, the World Bank, and International Monetary Fund, continuously repeated that money will not be transferred to the autonomous areas before the final Palestinian signature. They are asking the Palestinians to adopt the Israeli tax system and to sign an agreement for a joint tax and customs system with Israel, not to establish a central bank, and not to issue a local currency.
Since political independence for the Palestinians is rejected by imperialism, Israel, Arab comprador ruling classes, and the Palestinian negotiators, the idea of a real and UN military presence in the Occupied Territories is not part of the lement is not designed only for the Palestinians, but the for the Arab world as a whole. Therefore, the struggle against Israel and imperialism is not the duty of the Palestinians alone.
The most important regional factor is the role of political Islam. This new development in the Arab area is progressing rapidly. While the shape of this phenomenon is purely religious - and mainly conservative - the content is not totally connected with the shape. The content is a new popular phenomenon which is a mixture of bitterness about national dignity, poverty, underdevelopment, hatred of Israel and imperiadiscontent is today expressed by militant and politicised Islam, together with progressive nationalists and Marxists. All of these three currents are fighting to gain LINDA BEVIS, a human rights the support of the popular nationalist masses. The three currents made an alliance in some universities of the West Bank and took the majority of the student councils.
But generally speaking, the region is still not ripe for an alternative. The Palestinian and Arab popular opposition are not powerful enough. But there are some beginnings. As a result of the massacre, the Palestinian people realised that there was no chance for peace while there were settlements in the Occupied Territories. In fact, there is no chance for peace without Israeli withdrawal and the eviction of settlers from the Occupied Territories. It is only after this that peace negotiations can take place. *
Occupation and the law
THE Israeli "Open Fire Regulations", diers to shoot without warning at the vital organs of a fleeing "suspect".
Response
In effect, because many peaceful activities are criminalised in the Occupied Territories, the Open Fire Regulations legalise the execution of a
A few hours after the massacre, Araperson who poses no threat to the soldier or society. For example, an fat stated that it will not stop the negotiaunarmed youth who is running away from soldiers may be "legally" shot tions. When he saw the mass response, for no other reason than they had just painted some graffit. [These] the PLO leader and his supporters (for killings are arbitrary executions and violate international law; yet Israel example, Faisal Al-Huseini) started manoeuvring. Huseini said that the
Eighty-five percent of all Palestinian prisoners have been tortured. Israeli negotiations could not continue until the military laws and regulations contribute to systematising torture. Military settlements had been evicted and UN
Order 378 establishes the military judicial system and allows prisoners peace-keeping forces were present. Only to be held incommunicado for eighteen days before being brought a two weeks later they gave up these judge, who may then extend the period up to thirty days. Such detention without access to a lawyer, friends or family contributes to the psycholo-
The massacre, the Arab regimes, and gical disorientation of the prisoner and may constitute part of the torture.
Arafat's approval to continue the nego-
This period also allows time for marks of torture to disappear. (..] tiations was a "good" chance for the
Palestinian opposition to elaborate its
Military orders are issued to confiscate land. To date, Israel has confisposition and analysis on the basis that cated sixty percent of the West bank and thirty percent of the Gaza the imperialist settlement could not even
Strip. Once confiscated, the land is held by the military or turned mover offer the Palestinians physical protecto settlers. Israeli High Court cases have ruled that settlements and tion, and that there is no possibility of
(armed) settlers are legal, even though they are expressly prohibited by co-existence with the Israeli settlers. It is
Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention. Ironically, this Convention the first time that people shouted in was drafted in reaction to the horrors of the Holocaust and the plight of
"Down with Arafat!", demonstrations,
Europe's oppressed Jewish population. Israeli settlers now constitute fifteen percent (250 thousand people) of the population of the Occupied
Territories, including East Jerusalem, and use approximately eighty-five
But on the other hand, the people's opposition was still unable to alter the percent of the water resources. This leaves Palestinians increasingly situation. It should be borne in mind that the creation of Israel in Palestine was not designed only for Palestine, but to keep the Arab countries fragmented, dependent, and open for plunder, unequal exchange and blocked development. Accordingly, the imperialist settlawyer in the
West Bank and Gaza
Strip from
1992-93, sent us her comments on the has legalised them. (..] legality of
Israeli policy, extracts of which we publish nere.
landless, poor, and exploitable. O
----- pull-quotes on this page -----