Re: NATO,Kosovo,Russia

This was sent to me direct from Tzvi


>From: Tzvi Gad <haftaa@rocketmail.com>
>To: malcolm_pratt@hotmail.com
>Subject: Re: NATO,Kosovo,Russia
>Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1999 19:41:58 -0800 (PST)
>
>Your comments on Israel are incompatible with analysis of the Kosovo
>given by Peter.
>Southern Lebanon is occupied to preven attacks on a sovereign state by
>forces which do not represent the Lebanese government. Israel has not
>resettled or forced out the population of the area.
>Fully 90% of West Bank i.e. Judea and Samaria are not indiginous to
>the area of the state of Israel but were admited there by the British
>during their occupation in the 1920s and 1930s.
>Arbitrary division of land was executed by the British and the French
>without any significant complaints from the resident Arab population
>in 'Palestine', 'Trans-Jordan' and Syria, not by Israel.
>Prior to this European subdivision, 90% of the land in these areas and
>Lebanon was owned by Turkish citizens.
>How the land was transfered from Allied administration to resident
>tribs and new arrivals is a fascinating story in itself.
>There is a universal understanding of what national territorial claims
>mean.
>Although what is being done to the Kosovo Albanian population is very
>wrong, it must be remembered that The settled in the area while it was
>under Ottoman control. If everyone pursued the logic of minority self
>government, Germany would be turned back into a patchwork map of
>pre-1871. The historical trend is for an incorporationist process of
>the periphery into the core, and in the case of the Balkans, the Serbs
>form a clear core. Do not be surprised if in a not so distant future a
>Balkan Union is proposed which will eventually merge with the European
>Union.
>
>===
>Shalom
>Tzvi
>
>

In Reply to Tzvi:

Firstly let me say that I didn't really want to get into a long 
discussion about Israel/Palestine and everything else for that matter.  
My purpose was to highlight that within the West we have complete double 
standards about who we support, what we describe as murder, genocide, 
and also my concern about the implication that the USA could act as some 
global policeman.  In fact we should still be focusing upon what is 
happening in Serbia. However, I am not going to let that rejoiner 
unanswered.  

Now we could probably start with the Frankish invasion, but I think I 
will keep this as brief as possible.  The outline of the arguement is as 
follows:

1) Israel is merely defending itself against terrorists based in the 
Lebanon.  It has no policy of expansion or policies of forced 
immigration or should we call it Transfer, and they haven't masacred 
anyone.

2) The people who were living in the West Bank were "not indiginous but 
were admited there" ie, the land was empty before then
Those who were their when the country was divided by the Europeans 
didn't care about the division ie had no conception of nation or people 
- were not a people.

3) That if there were people living there they didn't own any property 
as it was all owned by Turks etc.

4)Minority Self government will lead to the break up of nations states 
into small unworkable units.  The long term incorporationist trend will 
solve the Balkan problem.

One of the reasons for the invasion of Southern Lebanon was undoubtably 
to defend Israel's borders, but the policy was wider than simply 
detering odd forrays of missile attacks.  It was aimed at destablising 
its florishing neigbour, forcing out the Palestinian refugee population 
and seeking its dispersal further affield.  It was also part of the 
destablisation of Arab countries in the region in the hope of breaking 
up these states into smaller warring states.  Syria and Iraq being the 
prime targets.

Since the formation of Israel there has always been a policy which has 
become known as `transfer'.  The is a cover word for the policy of the 
progressive removal of the remaining Palestinian population of certain 
areas and the hopes of, especially right wing sections of the 
government, for the dispersal of Palestinains to other Arab nations. 
This policy has included siezure of land, arbitary violence and 
deportations of individuals from the occupied territories to Jordan as 
`Jordanian citizens'.

There have been numerious atrocities, invoving Israel's armed forces 
including during the invasion of the Lebanon namely the masacre at the 
Sabra and Shatilla camps in 1982, and this has been investigated and 
publicised in Israel itself.  The masacre was part of a campaign to 
drive Palestinian refugees out of the Lebanon.

There is no doubt that the region has suffered division from colonial 
rule over many centuries.  But realy what you are saying here is an old 
high school(and traditional colonizers) arguement that the land was 
empty when the first post war waves of European Jewish immigration took 
place.  That the people who were there didn't actually own anything, or 
really live there, so no compensation or right of return should be 
recognised. 

As for the last bit about minorities being recognised, I am not sure you 
are really alluding just to the Balkans here, but the Palestinian 
Authority. There seems an obvious parallel between in your arguement, 
about the Ottomans allowing Albanian's to settle and the British/French 
allowing "tribes and new arrivals" to settle. And I am afraid that 
recognising regional and national difference will immediately lead to 
the break up of larger nations.  There should be the ability to 
recognise difference and autonomy without a threat to the wider 
stability of nations or regions.  What gives the majority, the right to 
surpress the minority? Or rather incorporate them in a core.  We must 
learn to live with difference. 

In general what I would say about Tzvi's response it that, if we are 
going to discuss these problems then we have to be honest about the 
realities in the world.  That means being critical of our own 
governments and not repeating the history we recieved in high school or 
get from our daily papers.  (I come from the Uk so you can imagine what 
our history lessons were like, Queen Victoria and the Raj/ The Bliz and 
Churchil etc and the pro-US/Blair stuff we are getting now.)

Comments, Corrections and Criticisms welcomed

Malc


>
>
>---Malcolm Pratt <malcolm_pratt@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> To WSN:
>> 
>> It is good to come into work this morning an be able to find some 
>> serious discussion about what is now taking place in Europe.  
>> Having spent a large part of last night listing to the reports
>coming in 
>> on the BBC radio,I found myself completely frustrated that there is
>the 
>> common acceptance of the stage managed information briefings that the 
>> military are issuing. Our Newspapers range from mild/serious
>criticism 
>> with overall support to the celebratory, with pictures of British
>Navy 
>> Cruise missles and jingoistic comments about Serbians.
>> 
>> I agree with much of what Peter is saying, especially about Russia,
>the 
>> Serbian perception of Kosovo and the mentalitiy of the Serbian 
>> leadership.  This mornings broadcasts which have repeated the Russian 
>> statements about the outbreak of the new "cold war", give it more 
>> ressonance.  However, I am also concerned with the idea of  
>> 
>> "PS--Non-involvement will certainly lead to Albanian genocide or
>> at least continued MASSIVE displacement from Kosovo.  Were it not
>> for the Russian factor, I would approve the proposed US policy,
>> and wished that it had been applied in Rwanda & Cambodia as well!"
>> 
>> There were many peaceful ways to solve this crisis and no doubt the 
>> killing and ethnic cleansing could have been stopped, if not the
>wider 
>> conflict solved, by a negotiation and greater role for the Russians.
> It 
>> seems we are very selective about what we consider to be genocide and 
>> ethnic cleansing.  Israel is at this present time in ilegal
>occupation 
>> of the Lebanon, and has sought expressly to exterminate Palestinians
>and 
>> Lebanese citizens and yet there is not suggestion that the `world 
>> community' must inervene.  (What if Russia demanded that the British 
>> withdraw from Northern Ireland or bombing would commence.) Could we
>not 
>> go arround the world and name other countries that are doing the same 
>> and because they are considered allies, nothing is done about it.
>> 
>> At a time when America and the UK are also carrying out an undeclared 
>> war against Iraq, with US forces in now stationed in over 100
>countries, 
>> do we really believe that that if the West intervene in Kosovo,
>Rwanda 
>> or (can you believe it) Cambodia the American and European powers are 
>> doing for humanitarian reasons!  The old imperial motives must also
>be 
>> recognised.  
>> 
>> Anyway, lets see what everyone else thinks
>> 
>>     
>> 
>> Malcolm
>> 
>> 
>> Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>> 
>  
>_________________________________________________________
>DO YOU YAHOO!?
>Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
>


Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com