Obama v. Richard Falk on Israel and Occupied
Palestine
By Stephen Lendman
ccun.org, December 30, 2008
Obama leaves no ambiguity where he stands. From public
statements, campaign pledges, policy advisors, and war cabinet
selections, his positions affirm:
-- one-sided pro-Israeli
zealotry;
-- continued Palestinian oppression;
-- no
end to the Iraq war and occupation;
-- possibly attacking Iran
and/or allying with Israel to do it;
-- pursuing an imperial
agenda; targeting Pakistan, Russia and other countries;
--
expanding the size of the military; increasing expenditures for it; and
-- providing Israel annually with billions of dollars; the latest
weapons and technology; the same zero interest rate loans Wall Street
gets; liberal debt forgiveness; virtually anything Israel requests on
the pretext of security, to wage aggressive war, or expand its illegal
settlements; and
-- acquiescing and remaining silent after
Israel insulted a high UN official by harassing and detaining him, then
expelling him from the country.
Last March, Richard Falk
replaced John Dugard as the UN Human Rights Council's (UNHRC) Special
Rapporteur on Occupied Palestine. UNHRC is mandated:
-- to
promote and protect human rights globally;
-- detect and speak
out objectively against violations and violators;
-- "provide a
forum for identifying, highlighting and developing responses to today's
human rights challenges,
-- act as the principal focal point of
human rights research, education, public information, and advocacy
activities in the United Nations system," and
-- respect the
rights of everyone irrespective of nationality, ethnicity, race, gender,
language, age, or religion "as stipulated in the United Nations
Charter."
Navanethem Pillay became Human Rights High
Commissioner last July. Richard Falk has regional responsibility for
Occupied Palestine. On December 14, he arrived at Ben Gurion airport,
Tel Aviv to perform his assigned duties. He led a three-person mission
that intended to visit the West Bank and Gaza, assess conditions on the
ground, then report on Israel's compliance with human rights standards
and international humanitarian law.
Israel was informed of his
trip, his itinerary, individuals he planned to meet with, and issued
visas for himself, a staff security person, and an assistant. Falk had
no reason to expect interference, and as he put it: "I would not have
made the long journey from California, where I live, had I not been
reasonably optimistic about my chances of getting in." Nonetheless, he
was denied entry and harassed as follows:
-- despite his UN
status, he was put in a holding room with about 20 others experiencing
entry problems;
-- then "treated not as a UN representative, but
as some sort of security threat, subjected to an inch-by-inch body
search and the most meticulous luggage inspection I have ever
witnessed;"
-- separated from his two UN companions; they were
allowed entry and taken to the airport facility about a mile away;
-- required to put his luggage and cell phone in a room, then taken to a
"locked tiny room that smelled of urine and filth;"
-- five
other detainees were with him in very cramped, uncomfortable quarters;
-- he was confined there for the next 15 hours, "which amounted to
a cram course on the miseries of prison life, including dirty sheets,
inedible food and lights that were too bright or darkness controlled
from the guard office;"
-- Israel's "obvious intention (was) to
teach me, and more significantly, the UN a lesson: there will be no
cooperation with those who make strong criticisms of Israel's occupation
policy."
Israel accuses Falk of bias for making inflammatory
comments about its occupation of Palestine. He rejects the charge and
asserts that, like his predecessor John Dugard (whom Israel earlier
assailed) he assesses facts and relevant law truthfully. "It is the
character of the occupation that gives rise to sharp criticism of
Israel's approach," especially its collective punishment of 1.5 million
Gazans under siege. Although denied entry and expelled, Falk insists
that he'll continue "to use all available means to document the
realities of the Israeli occupation" and report as fully and truthfully
on them as possible.
He's mandated to assess conditions on the
ground, prepare detailed reports on what he finds, keep the UN fully
informed, the public worldwide as well, and recommend ways of
remediating violations. As an international law expert, he's eminently
qualified for the task.
Since assuming his post in May, he's
been denied entry into Israel and Occupied Palestine. On August 25, he
submitted his first report covering the first half of 2008. He
criticized the deteriorating human rights conditions for Palestinians,
called Israel's violations grave, singled out the Gaza siege and a
crackdown on free expression and peaceful assembly.
Earlier this
year, Israel denied a Bishop Desmond Tutu-headed UNHRC mission entry as
well. He was delegated to investigate the Israeli occupation force
November 2006 Beit Hanoun massacre, an appalling act of mass murder
killing 18 civilians (including seven children and six women) and
wounding 53 others. The mission had to enter Gaza from the Egyptian side
through the Rafah International Crossing Point, but even that way is
rarely easy.
Other international delegations have been
obstructed as well, including diplomats, humanitarian workers, and
journalists. Last November, the IDF stopped an EU one and one other
comprised of 20 representatives of international organizations seeking
entry into Gaza. Israel is extremely brazen, so far with no world
community condemnation of its practices.
As a UN member and
signatory to various human rights conventions, it must honor their
mandates. Nonetheless, it doesn't as well as much other international
law and UN resolutions going back to the 1947 General Assembly Partition
Plan (Resolution 181). It divided Palestine 56 - 44% for Israel.
When Arabs were nearly 70% of the population, Jews got most of the
fertile land, nearly all urban and rural territory, 400 of over 1000
Palestinian villages, but it wasn't enough. After Israel's 1948 "War of
Independence," it secured 78% of Mandatory Palestine, expelled or killed
about 800,000 Palestinians, destroyed 531 of their villages, 11 urban
neighborhoods, and committed grievous crimes of war and against
humanity. They've been documented and included:
-- cold-blooded
massacres of civilian men, women, children, the elderly and infirm;
-- destruction of homes, villages and crops;
-- mass instances
of rape; and
-- other atrocities on a vast scale;
The
State of Israel was born. The US was the first country to recognize it.
Palestinians lost 78% of their land, and in 1967 the remainder. They now
live under military occupation. It's harsh and cruel. Their rights are
ruthlessly denied. They experience daily abuse and neglect. Their
refugees aren't able to return. Conditions on the ground are
intolerable, and UNHRC is mandated to assess and report on them. Richard
Falk, like John Dugard before him, is dedicated to do it.
"Slouching toward a Palestinian Holocaust"
In July 2007, Falk's
used this title for an article, and Israel noticed. He wrote: "it is
especially painful for me, as an American Jew, to feel compelled to
portray the ongoing and intensifying abuse of the Palestinian people by
Israel through a reliance on such an inflammatory metaphor as
'holocaust'....Is it an irresponsible overstatement to associate the
treatment of Palestinians (in such terms)? I think not."
He
condemned Israel's actions in Gaza and referred to subjecting "an entire
human community to life-endangering conditions of utmost cruelty." He
called it "a holocaust-in-the-making" and appealed to world governments
and international public opinion "to act urgently to prevent these
current genocidal tendencies from culminating in a collective tragedy."
He urged concerted action to spare Gazans "from further pain
and suffering." He took umbrage with how America supports Israel and
with European governments for having "lent their weight to recent
illicit (and overt) efforts to crush Hamas as (the legitimate)
Palestinian (government)." He referred to "Israel's impunity under
America's geopolitical umbrella," and the immorality of the
international community watching Gaza's "ugly spectacle unfold while
some of its most influential members actively encourage and assist
Israel" in its efforts.
He called Gaza "a cauldron of pain and
suffering....with more than half (the population) living in miserable
refugee camps," dependent on humanitarian aid, and living under military
occupation in spite of the sham 2005 "disengagement." He condemned world
leaders for not recognizing the legitimately elected Hamas government,
calling it a "terrorist organization" when, in fact, it's not, and
failing to recognize how its leaders reached out to Israel in peace,
declared a unilateral 18 month ceasefire, did it again for another six
months, then ended it in self defense after repeated Israeli violations.
He condemned Israel for being "more determined than ever to foment
civil war in Palestine," arm and pit Fatah against Hamas, "make Gazans
pay with their well being and lives," crush their will, and maintain
separate Gaza and West Bank "destinies."
Israel intends to
isolate Gaza, cantonize the West Bank, seize Palestinian land, expand
its illegal settlements, and appropriate "the whole of Jerusalem" as its
capital by grabbing all areas Palestinians have and expelling them.
While talking peace, Israel wages war, won't compromise, doesn't respect
international law, commits grievous crimes against humanity, denies
"Palestinians their right of self-determination," and treats the entire
population as an "enemy" of the State.
"To persist with such an
approach under present circumstances is indeed genocidal, and risks
destroying an entire Palestinian community...." This prospect sends a
"warning of a Palestinian holocaust in the making, and should remind the
world of the famous post-Nazi pledge of 'never again.' "
On
December 9, 2008 (five days before Falk arrived in Israel), he issued
the following statement titled: "Gaza: Silence is not an option." He
highlighted the plight of the people, the unacceptable conditions and
desperate urgency to act, the cruelty and lawlessness of the blockade,
and yet Israel "maintains its Gaza siege in its full fury, allowing only
barely enough food and fuel to enter to stave off mass famine and
disease."
He called this action "flagrant and (a) massive
violation of international humanitarian law" under Geneva and other
human rights conventions. He said it's long past time for talk. "The UN
is obligated to respond under these conditions." World governments are
complicit for going along or remaining silent. The "UN (and)
international society (are obligated to discharge) their fundamental
moral and legal duty to render protection to the Palestinian people."
Israel ruthlessly prevents them.
Little wonder Falk, or others
with these views, are persona non grata at the least or targeted for
something far worse, including assassination. Israel is unyielding in
its position, yet officials like Falk and human rights activists speak
out and act, even at the risk of their safety and well-being.
What to Expect From Obama
A new administration is taking shape.
Nearly all of its top officials have been announced. In less than a
month, it will assume office, so how will it address Occupied Palestine?
Negligently and with disdain from the man James Petras calls "America's
First Jewish President," Barack Obama, in quoting a prominent Chicago
Jew, a former congressman, federal judge, Clinton White House Counsel,
and early Obama supporter - Abner Mikvner.
Obama has been
carefully groomed and vetted for his job, surrounded by pro-Israeli
zealots, transformed into a committed "Israel-Firster," well-indocrinated,
funded and considered safe. As Petras states:
"By the end of the
1990s, Obama was firmly embedded in the liberal Zionist Democratic Party
network and through it he teamed up with two key Zionist figures who
were crucial to his presidential campaign: David Axelrod," a long-time
Chicago political strategist, and "Obama's chief (one) since 2002 and
the chief architect and tactician of his presidential campaign in 2008;
Bettylu Salzman, daughter of Phillip Klutznick (now deceased), a
billionaire real estate developer, slumlord, zealous Israel-Firster,"
and Jimmy Carter's Commerce Secretary from 1980 - 1981.
Chicagoan Penny Pritzker (of the wealthy Pritzker Hyatt Hotels family)
was Obama's main fund fundraiser. Called by some the most powerful woman
in America, she's certainly notable, one of the richest, an influential
American Jew, and staunchly pro-Israel as is her family.
She had
a sordid involvement in subprime mortgage lending, made millions by
defrauding the poor, was one of Obama's Transitional Economic Advisory
Board members, and Warren Buffett calls her the person to call when you
want something done. She'll have a seat at the table in the new
administration behind the scenes, her preferred role in business and
politics.
Other figures will be active and prominent, Dennis
Ross for one. He was Director of the State Department's Policy Planning
office under GHW Bush, after which he became Clinton's Special Middle
East Coordinator. He's also a co-founder of the AIPAC-backed Washington
Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), an extremist pro-Israeli front
group with prominent American Jews in it like Ross (on his mother's
side) who remains a consultant. WINIP's Board of Advisors is a who's who
rogues gallery with names like Richard Pearle, Alexander Haig, George
Shultz, James Woolsey, Lawrence Eagleburger, and others.
Petras
calls Ross "a virulent Zionist advocate of Israel's ultra-militaristic
policies, including an armed preemptive attack on Iranian nuclear and
military installations. Ross is an unconditional supporter of the
Israeli starvation siege of the 1.5 million (Gazans) and fully backed
Israel's savage air attacks against civilian targets in Lebanon." His
closeness to Obama signals a continued pro-Israeli hardline agenda, no
letup in the persecution of Palestinians, and the possibility of an even
greater regional war. So far no official announcement of his role has
been made, but he'll be prominent either publicly or behind the scenes.
Various positions mentioned include Undersecretary of State for
Political Affairs (number three behind Clinton), Deputy Secretary of
State, Deputy National Security Advisor, or Special Middle East Envoy.
In recent months, Ross has been affiliated with the Washington-based
Bipartisan Policy Center that was founded in 2007 by former senators
George Mitchell, Howard Baker, Tom Daschle and Bob Dole. It presents
itself as centrist, but, in fact, on key issues is militant and hard
line, especially on the Middle East. It advocates coercing Iran to
surrender its sovereignty, knuckle under to Washington, or be
unilaterally attacked if it won't, and gets its advice from "two leading
Iran experts:"
-- Michael Rubin of the right wing American
Enterprise Institute, a former Giuliani advisor, closely allied to Bush
neocons; and
-- Ken Katzman of the Congressional Research
Service, a Middle East specialist who's ideologically allied with the
right and no friend of Iran.
They, Ross and others produced the
2008 report: "Meeting the Challenge: US Policy Toward Iranian Nuclear
Development." It argues that Iran's commercial program, contrary to
available evidence, aims to develop nuclear weapons and threatens "US
and global security, regional stability, and the international
nonproliferation regime." In stark contrast, the November 2007 National
Intelligence Estimate refuted this claim and stated that Iran has no
current nuclear weapons program. Washington ideologues like Ross dismiss
it, press their case for war, recommend a major military presence in the
Gulf, and pressuring Russia to cease efforts to aid the Islamic
Republic.
He's also current chairman of The Jewish People Policy
Planning Institute (JPPPI), another pro-Israeli front group that
includes past and present prominent Israeli government officials in its
membership as well as influential American Jews. During his Clinton
years, he was hostile to Iraq and Iran, advocated war, and subverted all
efforts for an equitable resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
A noted Arab said about him: "In the 1990s, the "perception
always was that Dennis (Ross) started from the Israeli bottom line, that
he listened to what Israel wanted, and then tried to sell it to the
Arabs....He was never looked at....as a trusted world figure or honest
broker." All along he flacked for Israel, and ideologically he's closely
aligned with Republican neocons and their permanent war agenda.
According to the Jewish publication, Ynetnews.com, he may not become
Middle East Envoy with Colin Powell now considered a "serious option"
for the job. That is, if he wants it and if Hillary Clinton will accept
a notable figure like him circumventing her and reporting directly to
Obama. Another possible candidate, besides Ross, is Daniel Kurtzer,
former US ambassador to Israel and Egypt, and in other Middle East
posts, including as Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern
Affairs. He now has a Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International
Affairs chair in Middle East Studies.
On December 14, Barak
Ravid wrote in Haaretz that "Obama (will) base his Middle East policy on
(an) army of envoys," and he named four possibilities - Dennis Ross most
prominently, Colin Powell, Dan Kurtzer, and Martin Indyk.
He
suggested that besides a Middle East Envoy, others would be appointed
to:
-- Iraq to work with the government; the puppet one, that
is, to assure America's permanent occupation, total control over state
policy, and unchallenged regional influence;
-- Iran to open
dialogue and "participate in international discussions on an incentive
package;" in fact, for the government to cease its legal commercial
nuclear development, surrender to America's will, and become a vassal
state or risk possible attack and mass destruction;
--
Afghanistan and Pakistan "to stabilize the security situation;" in fact,
a major effort may be undertaken to destabilize it as part of a broader
agenda to stoke violence, increase Washington's presence in the region,
double US forces in Afghanistan to 60,000 or more according to recent
reports, and "Balkanize" each country, Iraq and possibly Syria into
separate autonomous states; and
-- North Korea "to watch over
denuclearization and the lifting of international sanctions;" in fact,
plans for North Korea include ending its nuclear program, lessening the
country's ability to defend itself, bringing it into the US orbit, and
making it subservient to America's will.
Martin Indyk
He's a lobbyist and very much a pro-Israeli zealot. He's also a former
US ambassador to Israel, the only foreign-born one (to a London Jewish
family), an Assistant Secretary of State for Near East affairs in the
Clinton administration, and currently a senior foreign policy fellow and
head of the Washington-based Brookings Institution's Saban Center for
Middle East Policy.
In the early 1980s, he began his Washington
career as deputy director of research for AIPAC. In 1985, he co-founded
WINEP (described above). In the November-December 2000 issue of New Left
Review, Edward Said said this about him:
"On the eve of
Clinton's inauguration in January 1993, it was announced that Indyk - an
Australian national of Jewish origin, born in London - had been sworn in
as an American citizen at the express command of the President-elect,
overriding all normal procedures in an act of peremptory executive
privilege, to allow him to be parachuted immediately into the National
Security Council, with responsibility for the Middle East. What had
Indyk been or done to merit such extraordinary favour? He had been head
of (WINEP) that lobbies for Israel in tandem with AIPAC."
Said
added that the consensus in Washington that Israel is a model democracy
"is virtually impregnable." If there's ever a sign of slippage, in
pours a phalanx of Zionist lobbyists like Indyk. They constitute an
ideological pro-Israeli trump card along with Congress, especially the
Senate. Virtually "the entire (body) can be marshalled in a matter of
hours into signing a letter to the President on Israel's behalf."
Regarding Hillary Clinton at the time, Said said that no one better
"exemplifies the sway of AIPAC better." She "outdoes even the most
right-wing Zionists in fervour for Israel in her avid clawing for power
in New York" and will stoop at nothing to get it. She's Machiavellian
and very dangerous.
So is Indyk (Dennis Ross and others) in
service to Israel. At WINEP in 1993, he outlined his notion of dual Iran
and Iraq containment, and it became policy under Clinton. It postulated
that outlier Middle East states be "contained," isolated, and threatened
to weaken them politically, economically, and perhaps militarily.
For Iraq, it recommended continued sanctions, an economic embargo, and
if "Saddam's regime crosses clearly drawn lines of appropriate behavior,
particularly with regard to its weapons of mass destruction programs and
its threats to other countries, the United States should punish it
severely."
A more flexible approach was taken on Iran, saying
that its "geopolitical importance is greater than Iraq's and the
challenge it represents is more complex. Given (America's) military
presence (in the region), Iran does not currently pose a threat of
military aggression, but its long-term policies could destabilize the
region."
The report accused Iran of opposing the
Israeli-Palestinian "peace process," promoting Islamic militancy,
supporting terrorism and subversion, and seeking nuclear weapons. Rather
than war, it recommended "a more nuanced approach," but if Iran
initiated a "special provocation....clear retaliatory measures" would be
called for.
Targeting Iraq and Iran benefits Israel by weakening
or eliminating its two main regional rivals. Iraq is now neutralized,
not Iran, but harsh sanctions against it are in place. Pro-Israeli
zealots, like Indyk and Ross, want them tightened. They also support war
to destroy the country's nuclear infrastructure and much of its military
capacity.
This is Obama's team with others on it, like Hillary
Clinton and Robert Gates, as belligerent. It suggests that peace in the
Middle East is a nonstarter; the occupation of Iraq and Palestine will
continue; Iran may be targeted; Pakistan as well; the war in Afghanistan
will be expanded; imperial adventurism will be stressed; so will
permanent war and homeland repression; and human rights advocates like
Richard Falk will be sorely tested in their jobs.
Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the Centre for
Research on Globalization. He lives in Chicago and can be reached at
lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.
Also visit his blog site at
sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to The Global Research News Hour on
RepublicBroadcasting.org Monday through Friday at 10AM US Central time
for cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on world and
national issues. All programs are archived for easy listening.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=11378
Fair Use
Notice
This site contains copyrighted material the
use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance
understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic,
democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this
constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for
in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C.
Section 107, the material on this site is
distributed without profit to those
who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information
for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of
your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the
copyright owner.