DOSSANI : the Israeli government and many Israeli and U.S. officials argue that the current offensive against Gaza is to stop the continuing attacks on Israel by Qassam rockets fired from Gaza. But many observers say that if things were really that Israel would do everything possible to renew the ceasefire, which expired in December, which had almost completely stopped the firing of rockets. In his opinion, what are the real reasons behind the current Israeli action?
CHOMSKY: There's a theme that can be traced back to the origins of Zionism. It is a very rational, "delayed the negotiations and diplomacy as much as possible, and meanwhile build the facts on the ground". In this way Israel wants to create a basis for any possible treaty is ratified, and will be more facts the better the agreement for their own purposes. And these goals are essentially to take control of everything that has a value in the former Palestine and undermine what remains of the indigenous population. I believe that one reason popular support that this action has in the U.S. is that tend to resonate with American history. How were the United States of America? The themes are similar. There are many examples of this theme throughout the history of Israel, and the current situation is just another example. They have a very clear. Hawkish Ariel Sharon as they realized that it's crazy with a big army to protect settlers in 8000 one third of the territory with most of the scarce resources available to Gaza and the rest of society around them goes to hell. So it is better to take them away and send them into the West Bank. That is really the place that interests them and want. What has been called a "disengagement" in September 2005 was in fact a transfer. They have been absolutely clear on this. In fact, the programs have increased settlement building in the West Bank and at the same time thousands of people have withdrawn from Gaza. So Gaza would become a cage, almost a prison with the possibility for Israel to attack at will, while in the West Bank could have taken what they wanted. There was nothing secret in this. Ehud Olmert was in the U.S. in May 2006, a couple of months after the withdrawal. In a joint session of Congress, including applause, just announced that the rights of Jews throughout the history of Israel is out of the question. Announced that he called his program of convergence, which is simply a version of the traditional program, which goes back to the plane of the Apollo 1967. Under this plan, Israel would annex the territories and resources of value near the Green Line (the border of 1967). That land is now beyond the wall built by Israel in the West Bank, a wall of annexation. This means arable land, the main water resources, the pleasant suburbs around Jerusalem and Tel Aviv, the hills and so on. It would take the Jordan Valley, where he actually built settlements until the late '60s. Then they would build a couple of super highways across the whole country - there is one east of Jerusalem to the city of Ma'aleh Adumim was built mostly in the 90s, during the Oslo years, mainly due to bisect the West Bank, and two others to the north (including Ariel, Kedumim and other cities) that cut in half what is left. They made checkpoints and other systems of oppression in other areas so as to isolate the remaining population without the means to live a decent life, and if they want to go, great! Otherwise, could serve as a tourist attraction - even the silhouette of a shepherd leading a goat on a hill - while in the meantime the Israelis, including settlers, have led the super highways for "Jews only". The Palestinians may well make do with small lanes here and there where you can fall into a pit when it rains. This is the goal. And it is explicit. You can not accuse them of deception because it is explicit. It is a goal around here is acclaimed.
DOSSANI : With regard to the support of the United States, last week the UN Security Council passed a resolution to request a cease-fire. E 'indicates a change, especially in light of the fact that the United States abstained and did not exercise the right of veto, allowing the resolution to be approved?
CHOMSKY: Just after the war 1967, the Security Council approved resolutions very strong, condemning Israel's actions to expand and take control of Jerusalem. Israel simply ignored it. Because the United States caress their head and say "go on your way and violated UN resolutions." There's a whole series of resolutions since then until today condemning the settlements, as Israel and we all know, violate the Geneva Conventions. The United States, or put the veto resolutions or sometimes the vote as well, but with a wink said "go ahead anyway, and we will pay you and give you the necessary military support." It 's the usual pattern. During the Oslo years, for example, construction settlements steadily increased, violating the very objectives of the Oslo accords. And in fact the years of greatest expansion of settlements was the last year of Clinton, 2000. It continued after. Openly and explicitly. To return to the issue of motivation, Israel has enough military control over the West Bank in order to terrorize the population and reduce the liability. Now the control is increased thanks to the collaboration forces trained by the U.S. from Jordan and Egypt to subdue the population. In fact if you read the newspapers of the last two weeks, if there is a demonstration in the West Bank in support of Gaza, is annihilated by the security forces of Fatah, which now works more or less as the Israeli police force in the West Bank. But the West Bank is only part of the occupied Palestinian territories. The other part is Gaza, and nobody doubts that they form a unit. And also there is resistance in Gaza, those rockets. So yes, they want to eliminate them, so there will be no resistance at all and they can continue doing what they want without interference, while in the meantime, delaying diplomacy as much as possible to "build the facts" in their own way. Once again, this pattern can be traced to the origins of Zionism. Of course, varies depending on the circumstances, but basically the policy is the same and perfectly understandable. If you want to take control of a nation where the population does not want you, how else can you do? How this nation has been conquered?
DOSSANI : What you describe is a tragedy.
CHOMSKY: It 's a tragedy that is consumed here. The press does not speak well of the cultural world does not speak, for the most part, but the fact is that there is a political agreement on the agenda for 30 years. A bilateral agreement on international borders with possible changes in these boundaries calculator. The agreement is there officially since 1976 with a resolution of the Security Council proposed by the major Arab states and supported by the PLO (Organization for the Liberation of Palestine) that basically places in these terms. The United States vetoed the resolution setting out the history, and has since gone on like this, without change. Apart from a substantial change. During the final months of Clinton's presidency, in January 2001, there were negotiations, authorized by the United States but who have not participated, between Israel and the Palestinians, negotiations during which they came very close to an agreement.
DOSSANI : The Taba negotiations?
CHOMSKY: Yes, the Taba negotiations. The two sides came very close to an agreement. They were interrupted by Israel. But that was the only week in more than 30 years in the United States and Israel had to abandon their position of denial. It 's a real tribute to the media and other commentators that this is all over in silence. The United States and Israel are isolated. Includes virtually all the international consensus. It includes the Arab League, which has exceeded its positions and called for the normalization of relations, including Hamas. Whenever you read about in the newspapers it says Hamas: "Hamas, backed by Iran, wants to destroy Israel." Try to find a phrase that says "the party of Hamas, democratically elected, which calls for a bilateral agreement." Well, of course, is a good system of propaganda. Even in the American press have occasionally permission letters to leaders of Hamas, Ismail Haniya, and others who have said "yes, we want a bilateral agreement on international borders, like everyone else."
DOSSANI : When Hamas took this position?
CHOMSKY: This is their official position taken by Haniya, the elected leader, and Khalid Mesh'al, their political leader in exile in Syria, wrote the same thing. It 's always the case. There is no doubt that the West does not want to hear these things. And then the Hamas goal of destroying Israel. And in a sense is true. But going into a reserve of American Indians are confident that many would like to see the destruction of the United States. If you did a poll in Mexico I am sure many would not recognize the U.S. right to exist on half of Mexico, the land conquered in war. And so it is all over the world. But they are willing to accept a political agreement. While Israel and the United States no. And they are the only ones, but since the United States that made the control of politics in the world, not you. Here it is always presented as if the U.S. had a duty to get involved more, that are honest brokers, the problem that Bush was ignoring the problem. This is not the problem, but rather the opposite. The United States has been very involved, involved in blocking a deal to provide political and material support, ideological and diplomatic expansion programs, programs that are nothing but criminals. The World Court, including American ones, have ruled that any transfer of population in the occupied territories is a violation of basic international law: the Geneva Convention. Yet Israel is in agreement. In fact, even their courts agree, but somehow manage to overcome. There is no doubt about that. In some ways it is accepted in the United States that Israel is an outlaw state. The law does not apply to us. Why not talk about it ever.
Sameer Dossani, a contributor to Foreign Policy In Focus, is the director of 50 Years is Enough and blogs at shirinandsameer.blogspot.com
translation of Daniel MENNELLA
And what you're doing in the meantime? Watch Big Brother?
