
Smile On
The Face Of The Tiger
By John Pilger
June 11, 2009 "Information Clearing House" -- At 7.30 in the
morning on 3 June, a seven-month-old baby died in the
intensive care unit of the European Gaza Hospital in the
Gaza Strip. His name was Zein Ad-Din Mohammed Zurob,
and he was suffering from a lung infection which was
treatable.
Denied basic equipment, the doctors in Gaza could do
nothing. For weeks, the childs parents had sought a
permit from the Israelis to allow them to take him to a
hospital in Jerusalem, where he would have been saved.
Like many desperately sick people who apply for these
permits, the parents were told they had never applied.
Even if they had arrived at the Erez Crossing with an
Israeli document in their hands, the odds are that they
would have been turned back for refusing the demands of
officials to spy or collaborate in some way. Is it
an irresponsible overstatement, asked Richard Falk,
the United Nations special rapporteur for human rights in
the occupied Palestinian territories and emeritus
professor of international law at Princeton University,
who is Jewish, to associate the treatment of
Palestinians with [the] criminalised Nazi record of
collective atrocity? I think not.
Falk was describing Israels massacre in December
and January of hundreds of helpless civilians in Gaza,
many of them children. Reporters called this a war.
Since then, normality has returned to Gaza. Most children
are malnourished and sick, and almost all exhibit the
symptoms of psychiatric disturbance, such as horrific
nightmares, depression and incontinence. There is a long
list of items that Israel bans from Gaza. This includes
equipment to clean up the toxic detritus of Israels
US munitions, which is the suspected cause of rising
cancer rates. Toys and playground equipment, such as
slides and swings, are also banned. I saw the ruins of a
fun fair, riddled with bullet holes, which Israeli settlers
had used as a sniping target.
The day after Baby Zurob died in Gaza, President
Barack Obama made his historic speech in
Cairo, reaching out to the Muslim world,
reported the BBC. Just as it devastates Palestinian
families, the continuing humanitarian crisis in Gaza,
said Obama, does not serve Israels security.
That was all. The killing of 1,300 people in what is now
a concentration camp merited 17 words, cast as concern
for the security of the killers. This was
understandable. During the January massacre, Seymour
Hersh reported that the Obama team let it be known
that it would not object to the planned resupply of
smart bombs and other hi-tech ordnance that
was already flowing to Israel for use in Gaza.
Obamas one criticism of Israel was that the
United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued
Israeli settlements . . . It is time for these
settlements to stop. These fortresses on
Palestinian land, manned by religious fanatics from
America and elsewhere, have been outlawed by the UN
Security Council and the International Court of Justice.
Pointedly, Obama made no mention of the settlements that
already honeycomb the occupied territories and make an
independent Palestinian state impossible, which is their
purpose.
Obama demanded that the cycle of suspicion and
discord must end. Every year, for more than a
generation, the UN has called on Israel to end its
illegal and violent occupation of post-1967 Palestine and
has voted for the right of the Palestinian people
to self-determination. Every year, those voting
against these resolutions have been the governments of
Israel and the United States and one or two of Americas
Pacific dependencies; last year Robert Mugabes
Zimbabwe joined them.
Such is the true cycle in the Middle East,
which is rarely reported as the relentless rejection of
the rule of law by Israel and the United States: a law in
whose name the wrath of Washington came down on Saddam
Hussein when he invaded Kuwait, a law which, if upheld
and honoured, would bring peace and security to both
Palestine and Israel.
Instead, Obama spoke in Cairo as if his and previous
White House administrations were neutral, almost divine
brokers of peace, instead of rapacious backers and
suppliers of the invader (along with Britain). This
Orwellian illogic remains the standard for what western
journalists call the Israel-Palestine conflict,
which is almost never reported in terms of the law, of
right and wrong, of justice and injustice Darfur,
yes, Zimbabwe, yes, but never Palestine. Orwells
ghost again stirred when Obama denounced violent
extremists in Afghanistan and now Pakistan [who are]
determined to kill as many Americans as they possibly can.
Americas invasion and slaughter in these countries
went unmentioned. It, too, is divine.
Naturally, unlike George W Bush, Obama did not say that
youre either with us or against us. He
smiled the smile and uttered many eloquent mood-music
paragraphs and a smattering of quotations from the Holy
Quran, noted the American international lawyer John
Whitbeck. Beyond this, Obama offered no change, no plan,
only a tired, morally bankrupt American mantra [which]
essentially argues that only the rich, the strong, the
oppressors and the enforcers of injustice (notably the
Americans and Israelis) have the right to use violence,
while the poor, the weak, the oppressed and the victims
of oppression must . . . submit to their fate and accept
whatever crumbs their betters may magnanimously deign
suitable to let fall from their table. And he
offered not the slightest recognition that the worlds
most numerous victims of terrorism are people of Muslim
faith a terrorism of western origin that dares not
speak its name.
In his reaching out in Cairo, as in his
anti-nuclear speech in Berlin, as in the
hope he spun at his inauguration, this clever
young politician is playing the part for which he was
drafted and promoted. This is to present a benign,
seductive, even celebrity face to American power, which
can then proceed towards its strategic goal of dominance,
regardless of the wishes of the rest of humanity and the
rights and lives of our children.
www.johnpilger.com
|