Warren Kennedy, Mullumbimby
My thanks to Danny Wakil, his reply to my letter confirms what I wrote – he is in denial when he refuses to accept what every impartial observer can clearly see: Israel’s occupation of Palestine is the cause of the violence. As the saying goes, there are none so blind as those who do not wish to see.
He is fooling himself if he really believes ‘Israel left Gaza completely in 2005 in the hope of peace’. First, they didn’t leave Gaza completely, they just turned it into an open air prison.
If Israel wanted peace it would have allowed Gazans to develop their economy and rebuild their devastated infrastructure but they have deliberately prevented this. If they wanted peace they would not have continued to settle Israelis in illegal West Bank settlements, stealing Palestinians’ land and water.
Israel is not acting in good faith but its plans for annexation might have been set back if Netanyahu can’t form a government after the new election. One can only hope.
Warren Kennedy needs to steer clear of the pro-Palestinian propaganda narrative to arrive at the facts. Ever since the Jews started coming to Palestine in numbers at the turn of the 20th century there was pushback from the Arab population lead by their fanatical leaders. In 1920 we saw the first outbreak of anti-Jewish violence with the Nebi Musa riots and these were followed by the 1929 Hebron massacre.
Ariel Sharon disengaged from Gaza in 2005 and Israelis who left behind greenhouses and other infrastructure saw the bloodymindedness of the Arabs there who decided to destroy what they could have utilised. However they are so infused with hate that they had to destroy what had been left behind by Israelis.
Hamas to all intentions purposes is classified internationally as a terrorist organisation and Egypt like Israel chose to blockade Gaza to protect themselves from terrorist incursions and attacks. No negotiation with terrorists is the standard policy followed by mostly Western countries.
If Kennedy thinks that Israel should be negotiating with Hamas as if they were a reputable civil organisation then he is ignorant of Hamas and its nefarious aims – the complete destruction of the state of Israel. The chant one hears incessantly at pro-Palestinian demonstrations “From the river to the sea Palestine will be free” signals clearly their desire to destroy Israel and drive the Jews into the sea.
Warren Kennedy needs to steer clear of the pro-Palestinian propaganda narrative to arrive at the facts. Ever since the Jews started coming to Palestine in numbers at the turn of the 20th century there was pushback from the Arab population and their leaders. In 1920 we saw the first outbreak of anti-Jewish violence with the Nebi Musa riots and these were followed by the 1929 Hebron massacre.
Ariel Sharon disengaged from Gaza in 2005 and Israelis who left behind greenhouses and other infrastructure saw the bloodymindedness of the Arabs there who decided to destroy what they could have utilised for their benefit.
Hamas to all intents and purposes is classified internationally as a terrorist organisation and Egypt like Israel chose to blockade Gaza to protect themselves from terrorist incursions and attacks. No negotiation with terrorists is the standard policy followed by mostly Western countries.
If Kennedy thinks that Israel should be negotiating with Hamas as if they were a reputable civil organisation then he is ignorant of Hamas and its nefarious aims – the complete destruction of the state of Israel. The chant one hears incessantly at pro-Palestinian demonstrations “From the river to the sea Palestine will be free” signals clearly one thing – their desire to destroy Israel and drive the Jews into the sea.
A major study of conflict by the World Bank showed one of the key factors that correlate with continuing conflict and the harm that casues is hte existence of diaspora from the conflcliting group or groups and the funding and publicity they bring to the conflict. Conflicts are more liekly to be resolved and less likely to rekindle, if there are not well fudned lobby groups in countries wiht access to good medai. nThe conflict in Israel and Palestine provides a good example of such a conflcit which has been fuelled on both sides by a diaspora and other supporters. The conflict in Bougainville provides a good example of a bloody conflict that few outsiders took much interest in and which was ended by the Bougainville rebels and the Government of PNG with help form Australia and others in the region ooutside the glare of international publicity.
We cannot stop the Middle East conflicts being of world interest, but outside any opportunites to support peace processes we do nothing by adding publicity to a conflict that only the concerned parties can resolve.