Peace and Justice Post

By Edward Herman, Z Magazine, April 2011

The upheavals in the Middle East have created acute problems for establishment officials and pundits, and their discomfiture, squirming, and gyrations have added further pleasure to the shifting political scene. “We” are allegedly strongly in favor of democracy and hostile to one-party rule and repression, but sometimes geopolitical calculations (also called “our interests”) override this democratic proclivity. But in reality, the public has nothing to do with making these decisions; the public never voted to seek favorable climates of investment over the entire globe, or to move to a permanent war system, or to keep pumping up the arms business as the civil society cries out in pain. These have been elite decisions, reflecting elite interests and values. The use of “we” and “our” in this context is thus deceptive and trickery.

Furthermore, can democracy be “our” true value if it is so systematically overridden? Is it a true value even at home if the more aggressive quest for a favorable climate of investment in the United States itself has steadily weakened the electoral choices and effective political participation of ordinary citizens and brought with it intensified and savage class warfare? (See my “Toward a Homeland Favorable Climate of Investment,” Z Magazine, March 2011.)

Continues >>

By Ben White, Eurasia Review, April 4, 2011

The publication of Richard Goldstone’s op-ed in The Washington Post on Friday heralded a weekend of frenzied hasbara. Goldstone’s “retraction” (though ‘qualification’ is more accurate) of the report into Operation Cast Lead was welcomed by Israeli leaders, Israel advocates in the USA, and others. Ha’aretz columnist Aluf Benn described Goldstone’s op-ed has “a major public relations coup”, claiming that Goldstone had “retracted his allegations that Israel had committed war crimes and crimes against humanity during Operation Cast Lead”.

These responses ironically paralleled the fallout to the Report itself, with sound and fury (and in this case, delight) preferable to cold facts. Since the Israeli government and its propagandists have a track record in establishing certain ‘myths’ and ‘truths’ that are then repeated for years to come, here are five points about the Goldstone op-ed and the fallout.

Continues >>

Uruknet.info, April 4, 2011

Source: AlJazeera.net

At least 15 anti-government protesters killed as troops – some stationed on rooftops – open fire on crowd.

April 4, 2011

Yemeni security forces have shot dead at least 15 anti-government demonstrators and wounded 30 in the city of Taiz, south of the capital Sanaa, medics said.

The violence began when thousands of protesters marched through Taiz toward Freedom Square, where demonstrators have been camped out.

As the march passed the governor’s headquarters, troops stationed there blocked the procession, and clashes broke out, with some protesters throwing stones, witnesses said.

Troops on nearby rooftops opened fire with live ammunition on the crowd and the marchers then turned to besiege the governor’s headquarters, said Bushra al-Maqtara, an opposition activist in Taiz, and other witnesses.

Continues >>

Global Research, April 3, 2011

Two-state theatre is destructive – the refugee resolution shows the way

A Palestinian state alongside Israel has never been further from reality than it is today. Negotiations for a two-state solution have again capsized despite the Palestinian coup regime’s pronounced wish (if one is to believe Wikileaks) to sell off the Palestinians’ core rights in exchange for some measly Bantustan areas.

Meanwhile Israel, contrary to international law, continues to build settlements and steal Palestinian land, in a colonisation with ethnic cleansing, as it has done for more than a hundred years. The politics of genocide against the Palestinians have actually been facilitated by the UN suggestion for partition in 1947 and the Oslo Agreement in 1993 that launched the idea of a two-state solution.

Support for the idea of a two-state solution is dwindling among the Palestinians. Fatah, the movement that seized power through a coup after Hamas had won the election, has the two-state idea on its programme, but is losing supporters since the latest events. Hamas, formerly a bitter enemy of the idea, in attempt to achieve agreement, has suggested a provisional two-state solution connected to the UN Resolution 194 concerning the Palestinian refugees’ inalienable right to return. A right that Israel categorically denies as it is incompatible with the preservation of Israel as a Jewish state, as its Jewish majority would be threatened for demographic reasons.

Continues >>

By Kranti Kumara and Keith Jones, wsws.org, April 1, 2011

A senior officer in the Indian Army, Major-General I.S. Singha, has lavished praise on Narendra Modi, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) chief minister of Gujarat, in an incident that, according to the Times of India, has “sent ripples across India’s armed forces.”

Modi, who is known to harbor national political ambitions, was instrumental in instigating the 2002 anti-Muslim pogrom in Gujarat. In an orgy of violence during which state security forces largely “stood down,” more than 1,400 people, most of them Muslims, were killed, according to government figures. Other estimates put the death toll at 2,000 or more. To this day, tens of thousand of Muslims who were chased from their homes during the pogrom languish in squalid refugee camps.

Speaking alongside Modi at the March 14 opening of a “Know Your Army” exhibition in Ahmedabad, Gujarat’s capital, Singha praised Modi for his “vision of development for the state and nation.”

Continues >>

by Ali Jawad, Dissident Voice,  April 2nd, 2011

While Syria’s protesters demand freedom, President has stark message for his people

AFP/GETTY IMAGES 

President Bashar al-Assad addresses parliament yesterday

He was not a humble President. He did not give way. There were hints, of course – an end to emergency legislation, “reforms” – but when he spoke yesterday, trying to calm a crisis that has seen more than 60 people killed in a fortnight and threatens his very office, President Bashar al-Assad of Syria did not give the impression of a man on the run.

Was it Libya that gave him the “oomph” to go on, the encouragement to stand up and say that “reform is not a seasonable issue” – an accurate translation of his belief that Syria does not have to conform to the Middle East revolution? Either way, the Baath party is going to fight on. Assad remains the President of Syria. No change.

Continues >>

Arab Leaders think that chaos would rule if they do not rule themselves their people, under heavy dictatorship.

Moubarak was utterly convinced of that: a few days before leaving power, he gave an interview to ABC Channel where he said:

“You don’t understand the Egyptian culture and what would happen if I step down now.”
He added: “ if I resign today, it would be chaos”

This belief, that the Egyptian “culture”, or more extensively, the “Arab culture” is naturally going to lead to chaos if the dictator steps down is shared by almost all policy makers and leaders in the Middle East.

Israeli policy makers are convinced of the same thing: without a dictator ruling, it would be the chaos opening the road for sectarian strife that would result in islamists taking power. They bear in mind the example of Lebanon: a sectarian civil war that led to the emergence of Hezbollah, now their worst ennemy and nightmare. Israeli leaders thus think the end of Assad would open a sectarian strife in Syria that will end with the emergence of a new enemy worse than Assad.

Israelis would love to see Assad go but they are much more afraid of what could come next. As one member of the Netanyahu cabinet puts it: “We know Assad. We knew his father. Of course, we’d love to have a democratic Syria as our neighbour. But do I think that’s going to happen? No.”

Israel leaders can not even imagine a democratic Syria and are equally convinced that anything that happens in Syria will be against them. Israel thinks it is the primary concern of all Arabs, just as Assad thinks Syrians will automatically buy a conspiracy theory involving Israel.

Continues >>

Yahoo! News, April 1, 201

MANAMA, Bahrain – The official line: Bahrain is back to business as usual. Shiite protesters are off the streets after a month of paralyzing demonstrations. A state-run newspaper’s headline declares the Persian Gulf island to be “Back on Track.”

But police checkpoints dot the highways around the tiny Sunni-led kingdom. Tanks are deployed around the lavish shopping malls in the capital.

And security forces are carrying out nightly raids in the impoverished Shiite villages around Manama, smashing down doors, destroying furniture and spraying graffiti on the walls, residents told The Associated Press.

One Bahraini human rights activist told the AP that he was beaten and hit with shoes by armed, masked men, who threatened him with rape and told to go back to Iran, the Shiite powerhouse across the Gulf.

The relentless crackdown has made major new protests a virtual impossibility for the time being, analysts and Shiite residents say. But the pressure is generating new anger among protesters who had been calling for democratic reform and equal rights for Shiites. Another explosion of unrest in the home of the U.S. Navy’s 5th Fleet now seems inevitable, they say.

Continues >>

by Pepe Escobar, CommonDreams.org, April 1, 2011

Source: Asia  Times

You invade Bahrain. We take out Muammar Gaddafi in Libya. This, in short, is the essence of a deal struck between the Barack Obama administration and the House of Saud. Two diplomatic sources at the United Nations independently confirmed that Washington, via Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, gave the go-ahead for Saudi Arabia to invade Bahrain and crush the pro-democracy movement in their neighbor in exchange for a “yes” vote by the Arab League for a no-fly zone over Libya – the main rationale that led to United Nations Security Council resolution 1973.

U.S. Defence Secretary Robert Gates (front L) is greeted by Saudi field marshal Saleh al-Muhaya (C), the Chief of Generals staff of the Saudi Arabian Army, upon his arrival at King Khalid International Airport on March 10, 2010 in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Days later, the Saudi military entered Bahrain. (PHOTO BY Jim Watson-Pool/Getty Images) The revelation came from two different diplomats, a European and a member of the BRIC group, and was made separately to a US scholar and Asia Times Online. According to diplomatic protocol, their names cannot be disclosed. One of the diplomats said, “This is the reason why we could not support resolution 1973. We were arguing that Libya, Bahrain and Yemen were similar cases, and calling for a fact-finding mission. We maintain our official position that the resolution is not clear, and may be interpreted in a belligerent manner.”

Continues >>