Al-Jazeerah History
Archives
Mission & Name
Conflict Terminology
Editorials
Gaza Holocaust
Gulf War
Isdood
Islam
News
News Photos
Opinion
Editorials
US Foreign Policy (Dr. El-Najjar's Articles)
www.aljazeerah.info
|
|
War without Context:
Fatah, Hamas and Flawed Language
By Ramzy Baroud
ccun.org, May 10, 2009
From a distance, the struggle between Hamas and Fatah appears
commonplace, a typical third world country’s political scuffle over
interpretation of democracy that went out of control, or simply a ‘power
struggle’ between two political rivals vying for international aid and
recognition. In fact, the conflict may appear as if it popped out of nowhere
and will continue as long as the seemingly power-hungry Palestinians carry
on with their self-defeating fight. Therefore, it’s typical to read
such deceptive news reports as that of Ibrahim Barzak of the Associated
Press: “Hundreds of Palestinian patients have been trapped in the Gaza
Strip, unable to travel abroad for crucial treatment for cancer and other
diseases, because of political infighting between Gaza's militant Hamas
rulers and their Palestinian rivals.” Such sinister terminology as
“Gaza’s Hamas rulers” – which happened to refer to a democratically elected
government – is now in common use, in most Western news agencies, and those
who readily recycle their reports. Barzak makes no mention of the
Israeli factor in the decried Palestinian rivalries, and the only reference
to the US in his report was that of the “U.S.-backed Palestinian President
Mahmoud Abbas, which controls the West Bank.” Is Barzak serious?
Even if we willingly overlook the fact that Palestinian rivalry has little
influence on Israel’s decision to block the Gaza borders, thus subjugate its
inhabitants, and purposely disregarded the US-led international campaign to
isolate Gaza and its government, how can one allow such a misreading of so
obvious a fact: since when does Abbas “control” the West Bank? What should
one make of the Israeli military occupation of several decades, the hundreds
of illegal Jewish settlements, the countless checkpoints, ‘bypass roads’,
numerous ‘military zones’ and the giant Israeli wall, an entire matrix of
control, in fact, which has been described by many leading international
observers as “apartheid”? True, the situation in Gaza has reached
such harrowing levels, that the injustices committed in the West Bank are
being relegated as if non-consequential. But the fact is, the Israeli
assault on Palestinian freedom, human rights and international law in the
West Bank never ceased for a moment, even when thousands of Palestinians in
Gaza were being brutally murdered. But neither the inhumane siege
and murder of Gazans, nor the suffocating occupation – with all of its
lethal and non-lethal manifestations – of the West Bank seem to awaken the
curiosity of many, who foolishly, or cunningly blame the victim for his own
misery. Of course that shouldn’t mean that Hamas and Fatah, or any
other Palestinian party should be absolved from their own missteps, such as
violations of human rights, infringement on freedom of speech or any other
aspect of which they possess even if an iota of control. If individuals from
Hamas violated human rights in Gaza, then such actions should be recognized,
condemned and corrected. The same is true when Abbas’ government continues
to violate the edicts of democracy in whatever limited jurisdiction it has;
that too must be recognized and duly censured. But for the media to make
such outrageous claims, whether indirectly blaming Hamas for the deadly Gaza
siege – and its consequences – or haphazardly granted Abbas a position of
‘control’ over the occupied West Bank, is certainly contemptible.
The manipulation of the term “democracy” is also worthy of mentioning. An
unsuspected media consumer would never guess that Hamas was elected
democratically, and that a democratic government with a majority in the
parliament cannot possibly stage a ‘coup’ against itself.
That same reader would find it hard to believe that the legal term in office
of celebrated president of the Palestinian Authority Mahmoud Abbas has
already expired, and its renewal would require re-elections or the consent
of the Hamas-dominated parliament. President Abbas, however, is
reportedly assembling a new government, which is expected to, once again,
exclude the majority-party in the parliament The government,
if formed, will likely to be headed by Salam Fayyad, whose international
prestige stems solely from the fact that top US officials, including former
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has praised him as trustworthy. Fayyad
was never elected and is little popular among Palestinians. More,
even if Hamas agrees to Abbas’ appointed government, it would be impossible
for the parliament to convene and vote, for a large number of elected
Palestinian legislators are political prisoners in Israel. That too seems
too trivial a context to mention. When a story is dominated by
selective terminology, numbers, names and dates without proper and balanced
context, a media consumer is sold nothing but misinformation.
Consider, for example, the report of the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU),
published in late 2008, which ranked and classified 167 countries based on
various democratic indicators into four categories: full democracies, flawed
democracies, hybrid regimes and authoritarian regimes. The Palestinian
Authority was ranked number 85, digressing from flawed democracy into hybrid
regime category. The explanation? According to the report: “The Islamist
Hamas movement that won the parliamentary election in early 2006, and Fatah,
who hold on to the presidency have failed to bridge their differences.
Instead, factional infighting has worsened in recent years, culminating in
the takeover of power in the Gaza Strip by Hamas while the Palestinian
president, Mahmoud Abbas, of Fatah has tried to maintain his grip on the
West Bank. Political violence has worsened.” The word, “Israel”,
was not mentioned. Not once. Despite the fact that “factional
fighting”, and failure to “bridge their differences” are largely attributed
to external pressures (for example: Israeli and American ultimatums to
Abbas, violence against Hamas, and conditional international aid to both),
Palestinians are ranked as an independent nation in complete control of its
own affairs. Meanwhile, Israel was ranked number 38, merely a “flawed’
democracy, perhaps for the sheer fact that it recognizes itself as a “Jewish
state” and discriminates against anyone who doesn’t fit the criteria.
“If you control the language, you control the debate,” it’s often said. But
when the perception of an entire nation depends on how terms are coined and
sentences are constructed, then language takes on other meanings, deceptive,
demonizing and immoral. - Ramzy Baroud (www.ramzybaroud.net)
is an author and editor of PalestineChronicle.com. His work has been
published in many newspapers, journals and anthologies around the world. His
latest book is, "The Second Palestinian Intifada: A Chronicle of a People's
Struggle" (Pluto Press, London), and his forthcoming book is, “My Father Was
a Freedom Fighter: Gaza The Untold Story” (Pluto Press, London)
|
|
|