(صوتك في عالم أسكتت فيه الصهيونية والحديد والنار صوت العدالة)

Ghazza and the Dissolution of National Liberation in

"Humanitarianism" and "Non-Violence"

Muhammad Abu Nasr

Some gangster once said that if you point a gun at someone's head and

threaten to kill him but then let him go, that person will be

grateful to you for the rest of his life.

The Zionists do this all the time.  They starve Ghazza and then

expect to be called humanitarians for letting some food in

as 'relief' for the suffering population - but who caused the

suffering in the first place?

They put the gun to the Palestinian head and then expect to be

called 'humanitarian' when they don't pull the trigger.

And this kind of gangster mentality is regarded as "progressive"

or "enlightened" by some people.

But the Zionists' idea, of course, is simply to shift the issue from one

of national liberation to one of humanitarian relief - which the

Zionists naturally go for because that leaves them in charge.  In

fact that's how they seek to manage the situation; manage the

Palestinians.

As far as attracting "criticism of 'Israel'" is concerned, actually

the July war of 2006 got a lot more negative press for the Zionists

than the Ghazza situation, so I don't think this 'non violent

protest' stuff which some "sympathizers" with the Palestinian cause have been suggesting necessarily arouses more popular international

interest.  But of course, if you want to measure 'international

interest' you have to keep in mind that 'interest' is largely seen

through the lense of the imperialist media, and the imperialist

powers would rather manage the Palestinian "humanitarian crisis"

(that they are all helping to cause) rather than confront the

national liberation struggle as such.  In fact, media attention

on 'non-violent protest' is largely a deliberate 'trick' to turn

attention from national liberation to 'humanitarian' issues.

So if "international interest" just translates into the Zionists

agreeing to send in a certain number of Care packages to Ghazza

through their own blockade, then that 'international interest' is not

of much use, because it is reinforcing the Zionists' own framework

for managing the situation on their terms.  That's not solidarity

with the Palestinian struggle at all.

It should be clear that writers such as Amira Hass and Henry Lowi aren't "friends" or

in any sense on the Palestinian side, because what they're doing is

precisely the opposite of promoting the national liberation of

Palestinians - in fact they're trying to eliminate the national

liberation struggle by replacing it with a humanitarian issue that

the Zionist entity will play a major role in 'solving' - after it

created it in the first place.

In other words, they're playing that gangster trick of putting the

gun to our head and then - 'under humanitarian pressure' - agreeing

not to pull the trigger.  But let's not fall for that trick.  We need

to get together to fight to get rid of the gangsters; not let them

continue to run the show and then feel grateful to them when they

don't pull the trigger.