Tweet
Why should Europeans protect Israel?
By ROBERT FISK
The Independent - United Kingdom; Aug 26, 2006
First, it was to be a15,000-strong foreign army to reinforce the
United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon, Unifil. Now it is to be
about 7,500. And it will not disarm Hizbollah. And anyway, Hizbollah
refuses to be disarmed.
The French would send 200 men' then they sent 400. Then the
Italians would send 3,000. Then the French would send another 2,000,
making their total contribution 2,600, including the company that
has remained in Unifil since the French were hurled out of the
peacekeeping organisation back in 1986 after fighting Shia militias
in the Lebanese village of Marrake (of which no mention will be made,
any more than it is on the BBC). And now the Belgians might send
700. And the Turks? Well, the Lebanese Armenians are objecting to
their contribution on the grounds - perfectly accurate, though the
BBC will not tell you this - that the Turkish army perpetrated the
genocide of one and a half million Christian Armenians in 1915. Oh,
what a wondrous plot we weave when first we practise to deceive.
This, of course, applies to everyone in the Lebanese
swamp. Self-deception - or self-delusion - has become a cancer
throughout both the Middle East and the west' and amid the EU countries
that are now bidding to send their young men to sacrifice their lives
in Lebanon. They are going to preserve peace, we are told' they are
going to maintain a ceasefire' they are going to save lives.
So a big Ho-Ho-Ho from the world of reality. The enlarged Nato/Unifil
force is not going to preserve "peace". It is going to maintain a
"buffer" zone to protect Israel after the latter's dismal failure to
destroy, disarm and liquidate the Iranian-armed Hizbollah guerrilla
army over the past seven weeks.
The UN may deny that it is a buffer zone for the Israelis - but if it
was a buffer zone to protect Lebanese (the numerically higher victims
of this latest war), it would be based, surely, inside the Israeli
frontier. But no, it is there to protect Israel.
Note how the Arabs have accepted this. Note how we have accepted this -
how we have sublimely gone along with the idea that Israel's security
and happiness are more important than the security and happiness of
the millions of Muslims also living in this region. Our soldiers are
to be deployed to protect Israel. Do we really think that the Arabs
don't realise this? And do we think that our western governments don't
realise this when they huff and puff over whether to send soldiers
to the Middle East?
Needless to say, the Americans and the British want no part of
this mess.
After Iraq and Afghanistan, they have no stomach to defend Israel,
let alone Lebanon. Their job is to push the European masses into the
bog they have created by their injustice and cowardice in the Middle
East. President Bush promises "intelligence" assistance to the Unifil
force - which means Israeli "intelligence", and we all know how good
that is - while Lord Blair of Kut al-Amara offers not a single hero
to give his life, which is as well after his out-rageous sacrifice
of British troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.
But while Europe's other political masters dithered this week, BBC
World Service laid down a familiar narrative for its listeners. "It
seems," said their man on The World Today, that the Europeans - how I
hate these cheap clichs - "are prepared to talk the talk but not walk
the walk." In other words, those bloody Wops and Frogs and Boche,
not to mention the Dagos and the ungrateful Finns and Norwegians,
were gutless little chicken shit when it came to standing by their
European principles.
Those principles, it is now clear, are supposed to be the sacrifice of
their soldiers' lives for the latest UN Security Council Resolution
cooked up by America and France (and, a bit, by Lord Blair) in New
York. But the BBC got it completely wrong. The Europeans are not
nervous about military losses or unclear mandates. They had plenty
of both in Bosnia.
What is happening in Europe is that a growing number of states that
had nothing to do with the Balfour Declaration or the Sykes-Picot
agreement or the 1948 Middle East war or the 1967 Middle East war or
the 1973 Middle East war or the 1982 Middle East war in Lebanon or the
1993 Israeli bombardment of Lebanon or the 1996 Israeli bombardment
of Lebanon or the latest 2006 bombardment and "petit" invasion of
Lebanon (after Hizbol-lah's outrageous provocation by crossing the
international frontier) are simply sick and tired of clearing up the
dirt after these filthy Arab-Israeli wars.
Most of Europe had no part in the Balfour Declaration. Much of Europe
had an unforgivable role in the Jewish Holocaust. But the decades pass
by, and the generations now being asked to sail to the Middle East
do not even have parental guilt to absolve for the genocide of the
Jews of Europe, any more than modern Turks can be proclaimed guilty
for their grandparents' rape and murder of one and a half million
Armenians. The Europeans, to put it mildly, are tired of being asked
to atone for the sins of their grandparents. Maybe it is time, they
are asking, for the Israelis and Arabs to pay for their own sick wars.
There is nothing immoral in this. President Bush claims that
the Israelis won their war against the Hizbollah and humbled the
organisation's supporters in Iran and Syria. Yet not even the Israelis
claim this.
Now the Europeans - and perhaps the Turks, and certainly the poor
old Lebanese army -are supposed to achieve all Israel's failed
objectives. And when they fail - as they assuredly will, because
Nato is not going to go to war with Islam - Israel will accuse them
of abandoning poor little Israel.
The French will be reminded - as they were under the first Unifil
mandate - that Vichy France handed its Jews to the Nazis, and
the Belgians will be reminded (no doubt) that half their country
was pro-Nazi and the Italians will be reminded that they elected
fascism into power, and the Spaniards will be reminded that Franco
was a fascist.
And the Arabs will sit silently by and watch the Europeans betray
them all over again. And the winners? Syria. Iran. And all those
enraged by the injustice and hypocrisy of our "democracies".
The enlarged Nato/Unifil force is not going to preserve ' peace'
By ROBERT FISK
The Independent - United Kingdom; Aug 26, 2006
First, it was to be a15,000-strong foreign army to reinforce the
United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon, Unifil. Now it is to be
about 7,500. And it will not disarm Hizbollah. And anyway, Hizbollah
refuses to be disarmed.
The French would send 200 men' then they sent 400. Then the
Italians would send 3,000. Then the French would send another 2,000,
making their total contribution 2,600, including the company that
has remained in Unifil since the French were hurled out of the
peacekeeping organisation back in 1986 after fighting Shia militias
in the Lebanese village of Marrake (of which no mention will be made,
any more than it is on the BBC). And now the Belgians might send
700. And the Turks? Well, the Lebanese Armenians are objecting to
their contribution on the grounds - perfectly accurate, though the
BBC will not tell you this - that the Turkish army perpetrated the
genocide of one and a half million Christian Armenians in 1915. Oh,
what a wondrous plot we weave when first we practise to deceive.
This, of course, applies to everyone in the Lebanese
swamp. Self-deception - or self-delusion - has become a cancer
throughout both the Middle East and the west' and amid the EU countries
that are now bidding to send their young men to sacrifice their lives
in Lebanon. They are going to preserve peace, we are told' they are
going to maintain a ceasefire' they are going to save lives.
So a big Ho-Ho-Ho from the world of reality. The enlarged Nato/Unifil
force is not going to preserve "peace". It is going to maintain a
"buffer" zone to protect Israel after the latter's dismal failure to
destroy, disarm and liquidate the Iranian-armed Hizbollah guerrilla
army over the past seven weeks.
The UN may deny that it is a buffer zone for the Israelis - but if it
was a buffer zone to protect Lebanese (the numerically higher victims
of this latest war), it would be based, surely, inside the Israeli
frontier. But no, it is there to protect Israel.
Note how the Arabs have accepted this. Note how we have accepted this -
how we have sublimely gone along with the idea that Israel's security
and happiness are more important than the security and happiness of
the millions of Muslims also living in this region. Our soldiers are
to be deployed to protect Israel. Do we really think that the Arabs
don't realise this? And do we think that our western governments don't
realise this when they huff and puff over whether to send soldiers
to the Middle East?
Needless to say, the Americans and the British want no part of
this mess.
After Iraq and Afghanistan, they have no stomach to defend Israel,
let alone Lebanon. Their job is to push the European masses into the
bog they have created by their injustice and cowardice in the Middle
East. President Bush promises "intelligence" assistance to the Unifil
force - which means Israeli "intelligence", and we all know how good
that is - while Lord Blair of Kut al-Amara offers not a single hero
to give his life, which is as well after his out-rageous sacrifice
of British troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.
But while Europe's other political masters dithered this week, BBC
World Service laid down a familiar narrative for its listeners. "It
seems," said their man on The World Today, that the Europeans - how I
hate these cheap clichs - "are prepared to talk the talk but not walk
the walk." In other words, those bloody Wops and Frogs and Boche,
not to mention the Dagos and the ungrateful Finns and Norwegians,
were gutless little chicken shit when it came to standing by their
European principles.
Those principles, it is now clear, are supposed to be the sacrifice of
their soldiers' lives for the latest UN Security Council Resolution
cooked up by America and France (and, a bit, by Lord Blair) in New
York. But the BBC got it completely wrong. The Europeans are not
nervous about military losses or unclear mandates. They had plenty
of both in Bosnia.
What is happening in Europe is that a growing number of states that
had nothing to do with the Balfour Declaration or the Sykes-Picot
agreement or the 1948 Middle East war or the 1967 Middle East war or
the 1973 Middle East war or the 1982 Middle East war in Lebanon or the
1993 Israeli bombardment of Lebanon or the 1996 Israeli bombardment
of Lebanon or the latest 2006 bombardment and "petit" invasion of
Lebanon (after Hizbol-lah's outrageous provocation by crossing the
international frontier) are simply sick and tired of clearing up the
dirt after these filthy Arab-Israeli wars.
Most of Europe had no part in the Balfour Declaration. Much of Europe
had an unforgivable role in the Jewish Holocaust. But the decades pass
by, and the generations now being asked to sail to the Middle East
do not even have parental guilt to absolve for the genocide of the
Jews of Europe, any more than modern Turks can be proclaimed guilty
for their grandparents' rape and murder of one and a half million
Armenians. The Europeans, to put it mildly, are tired of being asked
to atone for the sins of their grandparents. Maybe it is time, they
are asking, for the Israelis and Arabs to pay for their own sick wars.
There is nothing immoral in this. President Bush claims that
the Israelis won their war against the Hizbollah and humbled the
organisation's supporters in Iran and Syria. Yet not even the Israelis
claim this.
Now the Europeans - and perhaps the Turks, and certainly the poor
old Lebanese army -are supposed to achieve all Israel's failed
objectives. And when they fail - as they assuredly will, because
Nato is not going to go to war with Islam - Israel will accuse them
of abandoning poor little Israel.
The French will be reminded - as they were under the first Unifil
mandate - that Vichy France handed its Jews to the Nazis, and
the Belgians will be reminded (no doubt) that half their country
was pro-Nazi and the Italians will be reminded that they elected
fascism into power, and the Spaniards will be reminded that Franco
was a fascist.
And the Arabs will sit silently by and watch the Europeans betray
them all over again. And the winners? Syria. Iran. And all those
enraged by the injustice and hypocrisy of our "democracies".
The enlarged Nato/Unifil force is not going to preserve ' peace'