-Caveat Lector-

http://www.dalgazette.ca/11-21/feature.html

FEATURE


WITHER THE PEACE PROCESS?
An interview with Professor Norman G. Finkelstein

Jon Elmer
Senior Columnist

Q. Professor Finkelstein, on Friday [Nov. 15] a senior Israeli military official 
declared that
the army's recent siege of Hebron had "succeeded to clean these streets of 
terrorists"- only
hours later Islamic Jihad attacked settlers and soldiers in Hebron, killing 12 people 
including
the commander of Israeli forces in Hebron  Judging by this definition of success, can 
there
be a military solution to the Israel/Palestine conflict?
A. Well, there can only be one kind of military solution to the conflict: that is to 
wipe out all
the Palestinians. It is quite clear at this point that short of either expelling or 
exterminating
the Palestinians the problem will persist.

Q. Benjamin Netanyahu - who recently said, "just say no to a Palestinian state" - will
challenge Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon for the Likud party leadership from the 
'right'
later this month [Nov. 28]  What are the implications of a Netanyahu victory for the
Palestinian intifada?
A. I think there is a lot of misapprehension in the West about exactly how the Israeli
political system, or Israeli elites, operates. The record of Netanyahu when he was in 
office
was actually rather better than his successor, Ehud Barak. For example, if you look at 
the
recent report by B'Tselem [Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied
Territories] "Land Grab" [May 2002]: on the crucial question of settlers and settlement
activity there was greater settlement growth and more housing starts under Labour
regimes than under Likud regimes. So there were more housing starts and settlement
growth under [Yitzhak] Rabin [1992-1995], than under Yitzhak Shamir [1986-1992]; and
more under Barak [1999-2001] as compared to Netanyahu [1996- 1999]. So I don't think
the issue is whether you have a "right-wing" or "left-wing" government in power - we 
are
talking about long-term Israeli policies that persist regardless of which political 
alignment
happens to be in power. If you look at the statements of Ehud Barak after Operation
Defensive Shield during March and April [2002] - an operation that was initiated by 
Ariel
Sharon and condemned by Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch as having
resorted to various war crimes - Barak said Sharon's main error was that he exercised 
too
much restraint. The danger that lurks is not due to which government is in power, but 
the
adamant refusal of the Israeli government to acquiesce in a reasonable settlement of 
the
conflict.

Q. On the topic of settlements, Peace Now reports that 68 per cent of settlers say they
would respect an Israeli government decision for them to leave the settlements, while 
75
per cent say they stay for the 'quality of life'. How do you interpret these figures?
A. The numbers are entirely consistent, the bulk of the settlers apparently would be 
willing
to respect a government order to leave, and that the overwhelming number of settlers 
are
there not for ideological reasons but because there were various sorts of government
incentives and subsidies for them to move to the settlements in order to get cheap 
housing
and so-forth.

Q. After Sept. 11, as President Bush was rallying support for an attack on 
Afghanistan, he
had a "vision" of a Palestinian state  what will a war on Iraq mean for Palestinians? 
A. I
think there is a reasonable prospect - though one can't say with certainty - that 
Israel will
use the cover of an American attack on Iraq, while all the world's attention is 
focused on
the war in Iraq and all the reporters and journalists are pulled from the Occupied
Territories and sent to cover the war from neighbouring states, that Israelis will 
exploit the
occasion of war, as they did in 1948, to expel the Palestinians. Q. What would the
implications of such a move be upon the entire region?
A. I have very little faith in this concept called the "Arab Street" - I think pretty 
much the
Arab world is a rotting corpse. What it may evoke is quite a significant increase in 
terrorist
attacks; but I think basically the United States can absorb those attacks and, 
frankly, as long
as they stay low level, the United States rather likes them.

Q. Israeli journalist Uri Avnery wrote recently in Ha'aretz: "The Sharon government is 
a
giant laboratory for the growing of the anti-Semitism virus." Can you comment on this?
A. Unless you live in that fool's paradise whereby Jews can't cause anti- Semitism: as 
the
Zionist organizations like to say: Jews don't cause anti- Semitism, anti-Semites do - 
unless
you live in that fool's paradise the fact of the matter is, the actions of Jews, or 
actions
which are taken in the name of Jews or by a government that claims to be acting in the
name of Jews, evoke a negative response among the world's population which is not
blinded by ideology and sees a crime for what it is. It is altogether unsurprising. 
During the
war in Vietnam, there was an escalation in anti-American sentiment around the world, so
why would it surprise anyone that a state which calls itself a Jewish state and claims 
to be
acting in the name of Jews - and which in fact does enjoy the overwhelming support of 
at
least American, and probably world Jewry - commits crimes it should evoke an 
anti-Jewish
reaction. That is as predictable as the U.S. crimes in Vietnam evoking anti-American
reaction.

Q. So would Netanyahu be living in the same 'fool's paradise' when he claims that "the 
root
cause of terrorism is terrorists?"
A. Those are convenient and mindless formulas  what could that possibly mean? It's like
the slogan of the national gun lobby in the U.S.: guns don't kill people, people kill 
people.
They are just meaningless and mindless slogans, which nobody upon a moment's reflection
could possibly take seriously.

Q. Late last month, Canadian media mogul Izzy Asper delivered a speech - much the same
as the ones he delivered in September when he toured here in Canada with Netanyahu -
which accused the western media of "lazy, or sloppy, or stupid, or plain and simple, 
biased
or anti-Semitic" and dishonest reporting [including: New York Times, Los Angeles Times,
Washington Post, AP, Reuters, CBS, ABC, NBC, CNN, BBC, CBC, the Guardian, Independent,
Sky News, ITV - among others]. The speech was prominently reprinted in Asper's city
newspapers, as well as the National Post. What is your take on these accusations that 
the
media is biased against Israel?
A. Unless you believe that there is a worldwide anti-Semitic conspiracy - and there are
paranoid and lunatic Jews who believe that - unless you believe that, you have several
problems with the theory. Let's start with the most obvious: there is no press in the 
world
that reports more critically on Israel than the Israeli press. So, if in fact all of 
the western
media is considered anti- Semitic and sloppy and so-forth then that must apply to the 
Israeli
press, which contains the most revealing and damaging coverage of what Israel is doing 
in
the Occupied Territories. The other problem with the theory, as I said earlier, is you 
would
have to believe in a fairly comprehensive and coherent conspiracy around the world - 
not
only including the press incidentally, but including all human rights organizations  
Amnesty
International, Human Rights Watch, and first and foremost, B'Tselem - which has been 
the
most forthright in its condemnation of Israel's human rights practice. I wouldn't call 
it a
paranoid view of the world. It is a deliberately cultivated paranoid view of the 
world, in
which Jews free themselves of any responsibility for the crimes they commit by claiming
either a) they didn't commit them or b) whatever they did they had to do in the name of
self-defense because all the Goyim, all the Gentiles, all the non-Jews in the world, 
want to
kill us. It is a deliberately calculated and cultivated paranoia in order to justify 
the crimes of
the state of Israel.

Q. One of those critical journalists in Israel is Amira Hass. She once wrote that the
responsibility of a journalist is to "monitor the centers of power". On a more 
personal note,
is it any different for a scholar?
A. I think it is the responsibility of anybody who has both the benefit of [first] a 
decent
education - which is obviously a privilege for most of the world - and, [second] the 
leisure
to investigate these questions and problems - which is also plainly a privilege - that 
he or
she accurately report what is happening so that people can make choices and act in ways
which are consistent with their moral values, but which they may not have all the
knowledge to act intelligently on. It is the responsibility of those who are in a 
position to
provide that knowledge.

Q. Professor Finkelstein, wither the peace process?
A. I think we are headed now towards a catastrophe, unless by some miracle the United
States is held back from inflicting yet another devastation on Iraq. I think there is 
a real
danger that the Palestinians will suffer; they will be dealt a devastating blow 
equivalent to,
if not worse than what happened in 1948.

Norman Finkelstein is a professor of political science at DePaul University in 
Chicago. He is
the author of numerous books and articles, including Image and Reality of the Israel
Palestine Conflict (Verso, 1995), The Rise and Fall of Palestine (University of 
Minnesota,
1996), and The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering
(Verso, 2002).


<<HOME

<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to