Supporters of the Palestinian cause, including the United Nations, argue that the actions of Hamas did not occur in a vacuum, and that problems are, in large part, the result of the failure of the international community to guarantee full statehood to Palestine.
Further, it has been argued that this failure exposes a Western presupposition that the Palestinians are incapable of functional self-government, or at least that self-government could create more problems than it might solve.
The reluctance of neighbouring Arab states to open their borders to fleeing Palestinians might lend weight to such an argument.
But is it all as simple as this?
Unfortunately, the history of the Middle East is one of instability. Much of this instability is internally driven ... it is sometimes sectarian, frequently tribal, and often laden with self-interest. Oftentimes it has retribution, and the settling of old scores, as a primary driver.
It was this way before intervention by colonial powers, and reflects perpetually overlapping spheres of interest, significant internal tensions, religious rivalries, and huge imbalances of power and wealth.
By and large colonial intervention has really only led to a re-configurement and re-alignment of pre-existing rivalries.
Many of the Arab states are democratic only to the extent that this is convenient.
Israel is well aware of the potential for a Palestinian state to align itself (officially or unofficially) with other Arab states ... whose intentions toward Israel may be ultimately sinister.
In spite of this, on numerous occasions, the Israelis have put forward concrete proposals for a two-state solution, none of which have been acceptable to the Palestinians.
Hamas's recent actions are seen by many as a clear effort to derail recent significant progress on this front.
It is the stated intention of a portion of the Arab world to annihilate Israel no matter the cost, and no matter how long it takes. They have not been secretive about this ... and in many respects, this is more a religious than it is a political conflict.
In such circumstances, Israel's great caution over any arrangement with its nearest neighbour is only understandable.
And Israel is eminently justified in thinking, that if push comes to shove, the United Nations could not be relied upon to act in its best interests.
Hamas initiated this conflict knowing that they would ignite anti-semitism across the globe and galvanise the world's left. Hamas does not want progress on a two-state solution, this would not advance its interests. In fact, this would be antithetical to their ultimate aim... a pan-Arab Islamic state.
The global left, including in New Zealand, has been shamefully mute with respect to the atrocities committed by Hamas, shockingly dismissive of Israel's predicament, superficial and myopic in their analyses, and sometimes blatantly anti-semitic.
The Arab world knows the game plan, and perhaps even more tragically, and to their eternal shame, so does the global left.
Tribalism has created convenient opportunities at the national, and soon-to-be global, level to divide and rule. This is and has always been the left's core modus operandi. This is what the left does very very well.
The outworking of the current conflict is heartrending, but this conflict is playing out as Hamas would have intended. To Hamas, the fate of the Palestinians is necessary collateral damage.
To Hamas, and its supporters, democracy and freedom are Western ideas, and this is why they hate these ideas, and this is partly why they hate Israel.
Democracy, even in its less-than-perfect iterations, is the pre-eminent distinguishing feature of our age. It is the closest we will ever get to a counter-force to the primal human orientation towards tribalism, with its attendant injustice and brutality. If Israel were ever to fall, this could set in motion attacks by the global left on democracy and freedom everywhere and usher in a new dark age.
Global migration, open borders, indigenous rights movements, and a fawning media have brought tribalism to the very doorsteps of the free-est countries in the world.
And in so doing they constitute the biggest threat to civilization since the barbarians encircled Rome.
None of this makes Israel unaccountable for its actions, but it at least gives some context to these, and places the spotlight on what has always been the Marxist dream ... a global revolution.
Paraphrasing a comment I read recently, "If the Palestinians put down their weapons there will be peace, if the Israelis put down their weapons there will be annihilation".
Politics aside. Cheap virtue signalling aside. This says it all really.
Things always look different when you take a wider lens.
Caleb Anderson, a graduate history, economics, psychotherapy and theology, has been an educator for over thirty years, twenty as a school principal.
And as an afterthought consider the parallels (pasted from above)
Unfortunately, the history of all indigenous societies is one of instability. Much of this instability is internally driven ... it is sometimes sectarian, frequently tribal, and often laden with self-interest. Oftentimes it has retribution, and the settling of old scores, as a primary driver.
It was this way before intervention by colonial powers, and reflects perpetually overlapping spheres of interest, significant internal tensions, religious rivalries, and huge imbalances of power and wealth.
By and large colonial intervention has really only led to a re-configurement and re-alignment of pre-existing rivalries.
Many of those most actively asserting indigenous sovereignty are democratic only to the extent that this is convenient.
6 comments:
The Gaza Inferno: A New, New World Order Strategy
Russian’s Vladimir Putin said recently the ongoing situation in the blockaded Gaza Strip is a “humanitarian catastrophe.” The Russian president also said that the principle of “collective responsibility,” in the Gaza case, where the elderly, women, children and entire families die, defies logic and decency. However, decency has nothing to do with the liberal world order’s plans for us.
Mr. Putin went on to define the New World Order as “the same old hypocrisy, double standards, claims to exclusivity, global dominance, to preserve the essentially neocolonial system. The Russian leader went on to encapsulate the goals of the Gaza catastrophe and the broader conflicts in an ongoing West versus East conflict.
“The goal, in my opinion, of all these actions is obvious – to multiply instability in the world, to divide cultures, peoples, world religions, to provoke a conflict of civilizations – all according to the well-known principle of ‘divide and rule.'”
Unfortunately, the history of the ............. is one of instability. Much of this instability is internally driven. it is sometimes sectarian, frequently tribal, and often laden with self-interest. Oftentimes it has retribution, and the settling of old scores, as a primary driver.
What country are we talking about?
This war on the west is being fought on many fronts.
The middle eastern conflict being just another. When/will it ever end.
Human decency, as championed by western democratic values is tiring under the strain.
Thankfully it is far to valuable to give up on. Many have sacrificed all they have over the centuries to maintain individual democratic freedom. We all have to understand how precarious our freedom's are.
I would like to recomend a utube series created by the New Culture Forum called Heresies.
This series demonstrates just how lucky we in the West.
You said.. Israel is well aware of the potential for a Palestinian state to align itself (officially or unofficially) with other Arab states ... whose intentions toward Israel may be ultimately sinister.
As Palestinians were living on the land that was given to the Jewish peoples in 1948, I propose that the Jews should find another land to live on. Palestinians belong in that neighbourhood more than the Jews do. The United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine, which brought the British Mandate to an end in 1948, referred to a "Jewish state" and an "Arab state" in its plans for land allotment.
You actually have no suggestion for Palestinians except the status quo and deportation to other countries. Why should they leave their land?
You state: It is the stated intention of a portion of the Arab world to annihilate
Israel no matter the cost, and no matter how long it takes.I have heard Jewish voices say the same thing about Palestinians.. Israelis want them out and act and say so daily.
The Jews lived in this region from 2nd Millennium BC ... there is irrefutable evidence of a series of Jewish kingdoms throughout this period. The mass dispersal of Jews was not largely by choice, but the result of multiple invasions, persecution and displacement by superior powers ... Babylonina, Medo-Person, Greek, Roman and Ottoman. The Jewish presence remained however throughout, dwindling to about 10-15% of the initial number. Culturally the Jews have never relinquished their belief in a Jewish state and the reestablishment of their homeland. They are more decisively indigenous to this area than any oher people group.
True, some Israeli's have been overzealous in the assertion of statehood at the expense of others and ths is lamentable ... but this is not universal and very genuine efforts under the Abraham Accord were promising ... hence Hamas's actions.
21% of Israeli citizens are Arab - they seem to be able to live peaceably with their Jewish neighbours.
Post a Comment