"Nameless, faceless Palestinians" . . . Israeli air strikes on Gaza killed renowned Palestinian writer, poet, and professor Refaat Alareer and six members of his family on 6 December 2003. In his writing, Alareer captured the stories of a resilient community and advocated for the rights of Palestinians. Image: Al Jazeera screenshot APR
This unpublished “heartfelt” letter sent to The Press this week criticising its April 6 editorial about a “turning point” in the deadly war on Gaza by Earthwise co-presenter Lois Griffiths of Christchurch is published here in the public interest.
Historian Howard Zinn stressed the importance of historical background if one wants to understand today’s world. The past cannot be changed. But learning about the past makes it easier to understand the present and how to strive for a better future.
Every Gaza war article, including the [6 April 2024] Press editorial “A turning Point in Gaza”, begins with Hamas attacking Israel last October and then Israel retaliating. No historical background is needed.
Yet UN Secretary-General António Guterres said that “October 07 did not happen in a vacuum”.
Maybe, just maybe, he reads history. Maybe he is thinking of the Nakba of 1948, the regular Israel bombing campaigns with names like “Operation Cast Lead”.
If Israel has the right to retaliate, maybe Palestinians do too?
The same Press article refers to “Western media and its consumers” not being able to identify with “faceless, nameless Palestinians” .
“Nameless, faceless Palestinians” . . . Israeli air strikes on Gaza killed renowned Palestinian writer, poet, and professor Refaat Alareer and six members of his family on 6 December 2003. In his writing, Alareer captured the stories of a resilient community and advocated for the rights of Palestinians. Image: Al Jazeera screenshot APR
Palestinians aren’t “faceless or nameless”. I’ve read about and seen pictures of some of the Palestinian journalists targeted. Refaat Alareer, a well-loved Gazan academic, writer, and story-teller, was targeted.
Our commitment to humanity challenges us to follow Howard Zinn’s advice and believe that another, kinder, world is possible.
Quoting Bethlehem Lutheran Pastor Munther Isaac, “Gaza today has become the moral compass of the world.”
Pro-independence protesters and a sea of "Kanaky" flags take over the Place des Cocotiers in the heart of the New Caledonian capital of Nouméa today. Image: @knky987
Security forces reinforcements were sent from France ahead of two rival marches in the capital Nouméa today, at the same time and only two streets away one from the other.
One march, called by Union Calédonienne party (a component of the pro-independence FLNKS umbrella) and its CCAT (field action group), was protesting against planned changes to the French Constitution to “unfreeze” New Caledonia’s electoral roll by allowing any citizen who has resided in New Caledonia for at least 10 years to cast their vote at local elections — for the three Provincial assemblies and the Congress.
The other march was called by pro-France parties Rassemblement and Les Loyalistes who support the change and intend to make their voices heard by French MPs.
The constitutional bill was endorsed by the French Senate on April 2.
However, as part of the required process before it is fully endorsed, the constitutional bill must follow the same process before France’s lower House, the National Assembly.
Debates are scheduled on May 13.
Then both the Senate and the National Assembly will be gathered sometime in June to give the final approval.
Making voices heard
Today, both marches also want to make their voices heard in an attempt to impress MPs before the Constitutional Bill goes further.
The pro-France march is scheduled to end at Rue de la Moselle in downtown Nouméa, two streets away from the other pro-independence march, which is planned to stop on the Place des Cocotiers (“Coconut square”).
The pro-independence rally in the heart of Nouméa today. Image: @knky987
At least 20,000 participants were estimated to take part.
Security forces reinforcements have been sent from France, with two additional squads (140) of gendarmes, French High Commissioner Louis Le Franc said yesterday.
While acknowledging the “right to demonstrate as a fundamental right”, Le Franc said it a statement it could only be exercised with “respect for public order and freedom of movement”.
“No outbreak will be tolerated” and if this was not to be the case, then “the reaction will be steadfast and those responsible will be arrested,” he warned.
Le Franc also strongly condemned recent “blockades and violence” and called for everyone’s “calm and responsibility” for a “Pacific dialogue in New Caledonia”.
CCAT spokesman Christian Téin, Arnaud Chollet-Leakava (MOI), Dominique Fochi (UC) and Sylvain Boiguivie (Dus) during a press conference on Thursday at the Union Calédonienne headquarters. Image: LNC
Tight security to avoid a clash New Caledonia’s Southern Province vice-president and member of the pro-France party Les Loyalistes, Philippe Blaise, told Radio Rythme Bleu he had been working with security forces to ensure the two opposing marches would not come close at any stage.
“It will not be a long march, because we are aware that there will be families and old people,” he said.
“But we are not disclosing the itinerary because we don’t want to give bad ideas to people who would like to come close to our march with banners and whatnot.
“There won’t be any speech either. But there will be an important security setup,” he reassured.
Earlier this week, security forces intervened to lift roadblocks set up by pro-independence militants near Nouméa, in the village of Saint-Louis, a historical pro-independence stronghold.
The clash involved about 50 security forces against militants.
Tear gas, and stones Teargas and stones were exchanged and firearm shots were also heard.
On March 28, the two opposing sides also held two marches in downtown Nouméa, with tens of thousands of participants.
No incident was reported.
The UC-revived CCAT (Field Actions Coordination Cell, cellule de coordination des actions de terrain), which is again organising today’s pro-independence march to oppose the French Constitutional change, earlier this month threatened to boycott this year’s planned provincial elections.
CCAT head Christian Tein said they were demanding that the French Constitutional amendment be withdrawn altogether, and that a “dialogue mission” be sent from Paris.
“We want to remind (France) we will be there, we’ll bother them until the end, peacefully”, he said.
“Those MPs have decided to kill the Kanak (Indigenous) people . . . this is a programmed extermination so that Kanaks become like (Australia’s) Aborigines,” he told local media.
“Anyone can cause unrest, but to stop it is another story . . . now we are on a slippery slope,” he added.
War of words, images over MPs Pro-France leader Sonia Backès, during a the March 28 demonstration, had also alluded to “causing unrest” from their side and its ability to “make noise” to ensure their voices are heard back in the French Parliament.
“The unrest, it will come from us if someone tries to step on us,” she lashed out at that rally.
“We have to make noise, because unfortunately, the key is the image,” she said.
“But this little message with the ballot box and Eloi Machoro’s picture, this is provocation.
“I am receiving death threats every day; my children too,” she told Radio Rythme Bleu.
The CCAT movement is placing a hatchet on a ballot box, recalling the Eloi Machoro protest. Image: 1ère TV screenshot APR
Hatchet and ballot box – the ghosts of 1984 During the CCAT’s press conference earlier this month, a ballot box with a hatchet embedded was on show, recalling the famous protest by pro-independence leader Eloi Machoro, who smashed a ballot box with a hatchet to signify the Kanak boycott of the elections on 18 November 1984.
The iconic act was one of the sparks that later plunged New Caledonia in a quasi civil war until the Matignon Accords in 1988. Both pro-France leader Jacques Lafleur and Lanak leader Jean-Marie Tjibaou shook hands to put an end to a stormy period since described as “the events”.
On 12 January 1985, Machoro was shot by French special forces.
The territorial elections day in New Caledonia on 18 November 1984 when Eloi Machoro smashed a ballot box in the small township of Canala. Image: RNZ/File
Patrick Decloitre is the RNZ Pacific correspondent French Pacific desk. This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ and Asia Pacific Report.
On Friday, March 22, a video circulated of TNI (Indonesian military) soldiers torturing a civilian in Papua. In the video, the victim is submerged in a drum filled with water with his hands tied behind his back.
The victim was alternately beaten and kicked by the TNI members. The victim’s back was also slashed with a knife.
The video circulated quickly globally and was widely criticised.
Gustav Kawer from the Papua Association of Human Rights Advocates (PAHAM) condemned the incident and called for the perpetrators to be brought to justice.
This was then followed by National Human Rights Commission (Komnas HAM), Indonesian Human Rights Watch (Imparsial), the Diocese, the church and students.
Meanwhile, Cenderawasih/XVII regional military commander (Pangdam) Major-General Izak Pangemanan tried to cover up the crime by saying it was a hoax and the video was a result of “editing”.
This argument was later refuted by the TNI itself and it was proven that TNI soldiers were the ones who had committed the crime. Thirteen soldiers were arrested and accused over the torture.
The torture occurred on 3 February 2024 in Puncak Regency, Papua.
Accused of being ‘spies’
The victim who was seen in the video was Defianus Kogoya, who had been arrested along with Warinus Murib and Alianus Murib. They were arrested and accused of being “spies” for the West Papua National Liberation Army-Free Papua Organisation (TPNPB-OPM), a cheap accusation which the TNI and police were subsequently unable to prove.
Indonesia human rights: 13 soldiers arrested after torture video. Video: Al Jazeera
The three were arrested when the TNI was conducting a search in Amukia and Gome district. When Warinus was arrested, his legs were tied to a car and he was dragged for one kilometre, before finally being tortured.
Alianus, meanwhile ,was also taken to a TNI post and tortured. After several hours, they were finally handed over to a police post because there was not enough evidence to prove the TNI’s accusations.
Defianus finally fainted, while Warinus died of his injuries. Warinus’ body was cremated by the family the next day on February 4.
Defianus is still suffering and remains seriously ill. This is a TNI crime in Papua.
But that is not all. On 22 February 2022, the TNI also tortured seven children in Sinak district, Puncak. The seven children were Deson Murib, Makilon Tabuni, Pingki Wanimbo, Waiten Murib, Aton Murib, Elison Murib and Murtal Kurua.
Makilon Tabuni died as a result.
Civilians murdered, mutilated
On August 22, the TNI murdered and mutilated four civilians in Timika. They were Arnold Lokbere, Irian Nirigi, Lemaniel Nirigi and Atis Tini.
The bodies of the four were dismembered: the head, body and legs were separated into several parts, put in sacks then thrown into a river.
Six days later, soldiers from the Infantry Raider Battalion 600/Modang tortured four civilians in Mappi regency, Papua. The four were Amsal P Yimsimem, Korbinus Yamin, Lodefius Tikamtahae and Saferius Yame.
They were tortured for three hours and suffered injuries all over their bodies.
Three days later, on August 30, the TNI again tortured two civilians named Bruno Amenim Kimko and Yohanis Kanggun in Edera district, Mappi regency. Bruno Amenim died while Yohanis Kanggun suffered serious injuries.
On October 27, three children under the age of 16 were tortured by the TNI in Keerom regency. They were Rahmat Paisel, Bastian Bate and Laurents Kaung. They were tortured using chains, coils of wire and water hoses.
The atrocity occurred in the Yamanai Village, Arso II, Arso district.
On 22 February 2023, TNI personnel from the Navy post in Lantamal X1 Ilwayap tortured two civilians named Albertus Kaize and Daniel Kaize. Albertus Kaize died of his injuries. This crime occurred in Merauke regency, Papua.
95 civilians tortured
Between 2018 and 2021, Amnesty International recorded that more than 95 civilians had been tortured and killed by the TNI and the police. These crimes target indigenous Papuans, and the curve continues to rise year by year, ever since Indonesia occupied Papua in 1961.
These crimes were committed one after another without a break, and followed the same pattern. So it can be concluded that these were not the acts of rogue individuals or one or two people as the TNI argues to reduce their crimes to individual acts.
Rather, they are structural (systematic) crimes designed to subdue the Papuan nation, to stop all forms of Papuan resistance for the sake of the exploitation and theft of Papua’s natural resources.
The problems in Papua cannot be solved by increasing the number of police or soldiers. The problems in Papua must be resolved democratically.
This democratic solution must include establishing a human rights court for all perpetrators of crimes in Papua since the 1960s, and not just the perpetrators in the field, but also those responsible in the chain of command.
Only this will break the pattern of crimes that are occurring and provide justice for the Papuan people. A human rights court will also mean weakening the anti-democratic forces that exist in Indonesia and Papua — namely military(ism).
Garbage of history
A prerequisite for achieving democratisation is to eliminate the old forces, the garbage of history.
The cleaner the process is carried out, the broader and deeper the democracy that can be achieved. This also includes the demands of the Papuan people to be given the right to determine their own destiny.
This is not a task for some later day, but is the task of the Papuan people today. Nor is the task of the United Liberation Movement for West Papua (ULMWP) political elite or political activists alone, but it is the task of all Papuan people if they want to extract themselves from the crimes of the TNI and police or Indonesian colonialism.
Independence can only be gained by the struggle of the ordinary people themselves. The people must fight, the people must take to the streets, the people must build their own ranks, their own alternative political tool, and fight in an organised and guided manner.
Sharon Muller is a leading member of Indonesia’s Socialist Union (Perserikatan Sosialis, PS) and a member of the Socialist Study Circle (Lingkar Studi Sosialis, LSS). Arah Juang is the newspaper of the Socialist Union. The English language version is republished from Asia Pacific Report.
References
Gemima Harvey’s report The Human Tragedy of West Papua, 15 January 2014. This reports states that more than 500,000 West Papua people have been slaughtered by Indonesia and its actors, the TNI and police since 1961.
Veronica Koman’s chronology of torture of civilians in Papua. Posted on the Veronica Koman Facebook wall, 24 March 2024.
Who would not condemn the Hamas attack of 7 October 2023 when hundreds of Israeli civilians, as well as hundreds of military and security personnel were killed? Why then is Hamas so popular among Palestinians and in the wider Muslim world?
March 2024 polling by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research (PCPSR) shows that 70 percent of Gazans continue to believe the October 7 attacks were justified. Support for Hamas remaining in control of Gaza has increased by 14 points.
In a two-way competition between Hamas’s Ismail Haniyeh and Fatah’s Mahmoud Abbas, the Hamas leader would garner 70 percent of the vote.
Ramallah-based political analyst Esmat Mansour told US news agency The Media Line that a lack of political horizons fed Palestinian sentiment.
“After three decades of no progress on the political front, like it or not, Hamas’ actions brought attention back to the Palestinian cause,” he said.
International lawyer John V Whitbeck has worked on Middle Eastern issues for decades, including previously advising Palestinian negotiating teams. He said in a recent newsletter:
“Demonising Hamas has, ever since the resistance group’s inception, been essential to delegitimising Palestinian resistance to perpetual occupation and oppression and, now, is essential to legitimising genocide in Western eyes.”
Prior to October 7, Hamas had, since emerging in the 1980s, only killed a few hundred Israelis. I am not disrespecting those lives, I am simply indicating the scale.
For those actions, Hamas people have been described as “monsters”, “ISIS”, “not human, savages”, “Nazis” . . . and a lurid parade of terms designed to dehumanise rather than contextualise.
US and Israeli propaganda added fiction to the unquestioned facts when they promoted the false and now discredited narratives that Hamas beheaded dozens of babies and committed systematic rape during the October 7 attacks. Al Jazeera’s excellent October 7 documentary administers a valuable truth serum.
Few in the West know that prior to October 7, 95 percent of the victims of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict were Palestinian. Ponder that lop-sided statistic: 95 percent of the victims are the indigenous people.
Why didn’t Hamas try peaceful tactics — like Mahatma Gandhi did? Again, I’m stunned at how few of the people I ask know anything substantive about the Palestinian embrace of the Oslo Accords, the desperation that led to the first and second Intifadas (civil uprisings) or the March of Return in 2018 and 2019.
The 1987 intifada had been “sparked off by the dreadful and inhumane conditions endured by the Palestinians for many years and the humiliation and degradation to which they had been subjected,“ Azzam Tamimi says in Hamas: A History from Within.
Hamas won elections across Palestine in 2006 — in both the West Bank and Gaza. Nobody questions the legitimacy of those elections.
Rather than accept the democratic mandate of the people, the US, Israel and Fatah (PLO) cooperated to subvert democracy. Fatah seized control in the West Bank and with Israeli-US help drove Hamas underground.
In Gaza, Hamas held on and remains the only legally-elected government.
In the 2018 Great March of Return, Gazans, in their tens of thousands, walked peacefully up to the barrier with Israel to demand a lifting of the brutal, suffocating siege imposed by Israel on Gaza and the right of return to the lands and homes that had been stolen from them by the Israelis.
“The Palestinians felt deserted and they needed to remind the world they were still there. They were still hoping to return to their homes,” says Tamimi.
Israeli forces lined up against the mums, dads, sisters, brothers, grandparents who marched, sang, waved banners, had picnics, and approached the security fence. Hundreds of people were gunned down, dozens of children killed, and thousands maimed for life.
Responding to the massacres, UN General Assembly Resolution ES-10/20 states that the UN:
“Deplores the use of any excessive, disproportionate and indiscriminate force by the Israeli forces against Palestinian civilians in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and particularly in the Gaza Strip, including the use of live ammunition against civilian protesters, including children, as well as medical personnel and journalists, and expresses its grave concern at the loss of innocent lives.”
“Non-violent resistance is based on the following premise: you’re never going to convince your enemy that what they are doing is wrong. They are too hardened in their beliefs, in their convictions, in their moral corruption or depravity. The whole point of non-violent resistance is to try to convince the passive bystanders to do something out of a sense of pity.”
He’s referring to us and our governments.
Finkelstein says the 1960s civil rights movement in the southern states of the USA was designed to trigger national outrage at the mistreatment of blacks.
“If the Federal troops hadn’t been sent in, at some point, people would have concluded — like the people concluded in Gaza — that non-violence doesn’t work and they would have chosen more violent, militant tactics. What happened with the Great March of Return [in Gaza] is it failed to move the international community . . . which was totally unresponsive.
“They stayed non-violent in the face of the targeting of children, medics, journalists, the disabled — and the disabling of thousands of young people for life. It wasn’t their failure. It was our failure.”
What a thought! By our failure to respond to the persecution of the Palestinians we helped create the conditions for October 7. It begs the question: what is so wrong with our own culture that we can live in a world that tolerates genocide being committed by two of our closest allies and, rather than reflect on what it says about us, so many simply parrot the Israeli-Pentagon lines about Hamas.
Hamas leadership – and their military wing the al-Qassam Brigades — however, did take note.
“What was the response of the international community?” asks Dr Bassem Naim, in the outstanding Al Jazeera documentary October 7.
“Nothing. Keeping the ears and eyes always closed. Generally, there was a consensus in the political bureau: We have to move, we have to take action. If we don’t do it, Palestine will be forgotten — totally deleted from the international map.”
Benjamin Netanyahu had imagined just this when he presented a map of “A New Middle East” to the United Nations last year — Gaza and the West Bank had indeed been erased — incorporated into a Zionist state that ran from the river to the sea.
I rewound and listened to Dr Naim’s comments several times. They give a context — and a challenge to us in our cosy condemnation. Why did the massacre of people at the Israeli Nova music festival on October 7 trigger an explosion of anger across the white world, but shooting Palestinian men, women and children like ducks in a barrel produces only yawns and amnesia?
I’m not suggesting we should agree with everything Hamas has done — but if we are to achieve moral and intellectual integrity we should at least make a genuine effort to understand people in their own words and terms. I only recently read the Hamas Charter.
I was surprised when I found my local library had a copy of Dr Tamimi’s book. It is a compelling history of an organisation born in slavery, under brutal daily oppression. It captures the atmosphere of a resistance movement surviving constant assassinations, deportations, imprisonment and torture of its members — and the necessity to move much of the senior leadership outside Palestine to ensure their survival and the continuation of organised resistance.
Viewed through this lens, the term terrorist is problematic. It opens the question: who is the real terrorist — the militia group known to its own community as “the Resistance”, or the powerful state that immiserates the lives of millions, that kills tens of thousands with impunity and steals more land every day? Under international law an occupied people has the right to violent resistance if other ways have failed.
Can we think our way past the mental slavery imposed on us by the Western elites’ massive global PR machine that has invested billions in getting you to connote “Hamas” with “evil” — and the inverse: that Israel is somehow a plucky battler fighting for democracy in a rough neighbourhood?
Sheikh Ahmad Yassin, the first leader of Hamas, said some time before his assassination in 2004: “The intifada will go on and the suffering of the Palestinian people will continue. But so will our absolute determination to pursue the struggle.”
It is time to de-demonise Hamas.
Eugene Doyle is a community organiser and activist in Wellington, New Zealand. He received an Absolutely Positively Wellingtonian award in 2023 for community service. His first demonstration was at the age of 12 against the Vietnam War. This article was first published at John Menadue’s public policy journal Pearls and Irritations and is republished here with permission.
This may seem like a dumb question — but how come Israel has managed to kill at least 33,000 Palestinian civilians in Gaza, including over 13,000 children? Of course, saturation aerial bombing and artillery shelling of densely populated civilian neighbourhoods will do that.
All of this — including the imminent death by starvation of the entire population of Gaza — can be rationalised by Israel’s supporters as means of putting negotiating pressure on Hamas. Yet around the world, such actions are increasingly being seen as evidence of Israel’s genocidal intent.
But there has been something else. Thanks to in-depth investigative reporting by the Israeli journalist Yuval Abraham and his colleagues, we now know that an Artificial Intelligence system called “Lavender” has been used by the IDF to create ‘”kill lists” of Palestiniains targeted for assassination.
This marking is appllied because they were thought to be members of Hamas, or sympathetic to it, or suspected of being related to someone who might be either a member or a supporter. (It can be a very loose definition.)
Lavender’s appeal to the IDF has been that it has removed the “human bottleneck” involved in locating human targets, and approving their killing:
Human ‘rubber stamp’ During the early stages of the war, the army gave sweeping approval for officers to adopt Lavender’s kill lists, with no requirement to thoroughly check why the machine made those choices or to examine the raw intelligence data on which they were based. One source stated that human personnel often served only as a “rubber stamp” for the machine’s decisions, adding that, normally, they would personally devote only about “20 seconds” to each target before authorising a bombing….
This was despite knowing that the system makes what are regarded as “errors” in approximately 10 percent of cases, and is known to occasionally mark individuals who have merely a loose connection to militant groups, or no connection at all.
Crucially, the Lavender system has been operating within parameters that treat the killing of entire families in their homes as a strategically acceptable (or even desirable) outcome:
Moreover, the Israeli army systematically attacked the targeted individuals while they were in their homes — usually at night while their whole families were present — rather than during the course of military activity. According to the sources, this was because, from what they regarded as an intelligence standpoint, it was easier to locate the individuals in their private houses.
Additional automated systems, including one called “Where’s Daddy?” . . . were used specifically to track the targeted individuals and carry out bombings when they had entered their family’s residences. The result, as the sources testified, is that thousands of Palestinians — most of them women and children or people who were not involved in the fighting — were wiped out by Israeli airstrikes, especially during the first weeks of the war . . .
To repeat: this killing of entire families has been a deliberate part of the IDF strategy, and is a valued feature of its AI programmes:
“We were not interested in killing [Hamas] operatives only when they were in a military building or engaged in a military activity,” A., an intelligence officer told [the reporters]. “On the contrary, the IDF bombed them in homes without hesitation, as a first option. It’s much easier to bomb a family’s home. The system is built to look for them in these situations.”
Kill ratio calculus
There was also a kill ratio calculus in play. Meaning: within the IDF, it was deemed to be generally acceptable for 15-20 Palestinian civilians to be killed in order to eliminate one lowly ranked Hamas member or supporter, and for more than 100 civilians to die if a senior Hamas figure was the target.
. . . The [Israeli] army also decided during the first weeks of the war that, for every junior Hamas operative that Lavender marked, it was permissible to kill up to 15 or 20 civilians; in the past, the military did not authorise any “collateral damage” during assassinations of low-ranking militants. The sources added that, in the event that the target was a senior Hamas official with the rank of battalion or brigade commander, the army on several occasions authorised the killing of more than 100 civilians in the assassination of a single commander.
Despite the 15 (or 20) to one kill ratio for low ranking Hamas-related individuals, the toll was often higher. This was because when only a junior Hamas figure was being targeted, the IDF would drop so-called “dumb bombs” on their homes.
These bombs would flatten entire apartment buildings and cause mass casualties, because it was felt to be too expensive to use “smart” precision weaponry to eliminate only a relatively junior Hamas operative or supporter.
“You don’t want to waste expensive bombs on unimportant people — it’s very expensive for the country, and there’s a shortage [of those bombs],” said one IDF intelligence officer.
Another source said that they had personally authorised the bombing of “hundreds” of private homes of alleged junior operatives marked by Lavender, with many of these attacks killing civilians and entire families as “collateral damage”.
So much for the IDF lies and propaganda — dutifully recycled for months by Western media — that Israel has been using precision weaponry in Gaza, and doing its best to minimise civilian casualties, routinely said to be “unintentional”. It is no wonder so many children are being killed. The bombings and shelling are being preferentially aimed at their family homes.
Pressure on Netanyahu, no sweat US President Joe Biden has been a fervent supporter of Israel for more than 40 years and, evidently, nothing much has changed. By mid-December last year, the Palestinian death toll in Gaza was already over 15,000, and it had been 10 days since Israel had launched its ground assault into southern Gaza, hitherto regarded as a safe zone.
You cannot say there’s no Palestinian state at all in the future. And that’s going to be the hard part. But in the meantime, we’re not going to do a damn thing other than protect Israel in the process. Not a single thing.
Oh, and Biden said this, too:
Bibi and I talk a lot. I’ve known him for 50 years. Some of you know he has a picture on his desk — at least when I’m there, he has it on it. (Laughter.) Eight and a half by eleven, with a picture of — where I wrote, “Bibi . . .” — when we were both young men, he was at the embassy here and I was a senator.
I said, “Bibi, I love you, but I don’t agree with a damn thing you have to say.” (Laughter.) That remains to be the case. (Laughter.)
As a junior senator in 1982, Biden reportedly shocked Israel’s then far right PM Menachem Begin with his zealous, unconditional support for Israel’s invasion of southern Lebanon. Over Begin’s objections, Biden had brushed aside the massive civilian casualties that were occurring, and the accusations that Israel’s use of force has been disproportionate.
Begin later told the Israeli media that he’d criticised Biden for his devaluing of civilian life:
The senator [Biden] said he would go even further than Israel, adding that he’d forcefully fend off anyone who sought to invade his country, even if that meant killing women or children. “I disassociated myself from these remarks,” Begin said.
“I said to him: “No, sir; attention must be paid. According to our values, it is forbidden to hurt women and children, even in war… Sometimes there are casualties among the civilian population as well. But it is forbidden to aspire to this. This is a yardstick of human civilisation, not to hurt civilians.”
Flash forward
The Biden/Begin disagreement is reported here and here. Flash forward to now . . . since the current Gaza offensive began, Biden has ensured that Israel continues to be supplied with all the weapons and economic aid it asks for. Annelle Sheline, a senior official in the State Department, has resigned in protest at the Biden policy towards Israel and Gaza.
As Sheline recently told the Nation magazine, many of the State Department officials who had survived the Trump years had assumed the Biden administration would advocate for US participation in international institutions, and would re-assert America’s commitment to the rules of international law.
“I think people were just extremely horrified to see the ways in which all of that went out the window.”
In recent weeks, Biden has held a strained White House meeting with a small Muslim delegation — from which a doctor walked out, and during which Biden refused to look at photos of the carnage occurring in southern Gaza. Biden has also ratcheted up his public and private criticisms of Israel, but without making any significant change to US policy.
As The Nation pointed out, Biden routinely threatens in words what he refuses to carry out in action. His belated call for “an immediate ceasefire” in Gaza has been ignored by Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu, without consequences. Three aid corridors were belatedly opened.
Why is Biden even (reluctantly) going through the motions? It is mainly for domestic political reasons. His Gaza policy is deeply unpopular within the Democratic Party that he needs to mobilise to win re-election.
According to a Gallup poll released on March 27, 75 percent of Democrats oppose Israel’s actions in Gaza while only 18 percent support Israel’s conduct. Among independent voters, 60 percent oppose the conduct of the Gaza war, while 29 percent support it. Even among Republican voters, support for the war appears to be on the slide. Currently 64 percent support the war, and 30 percent are opposed — down from November’s figures, when 71 percent of Republicans supported the war and 23 percent opposed it.
In other words, Biden has been staging a series of manifestly inadequate performative acts — such as aid air drops, and the building of a pier to create a minor maritime aid corridor into Gaza. He has also been talking tough to appease the clear majority of Americans who now oppose the Gaza war. This change of tone is especially aimed at placating the Democratic base and independent voters, but without actually doing anything that could be construed as being harmful to Israel’s interests.
With a few exceptions, the Western media has shown limited ability (or interest) in putting this pantomime into context. Instead, it has been fostering the illusion that substantive conflict exists between Israel and the Biden White House. In reality, such conflicts have had precious little substance, so far.
Gordon Campbell is an independent progressive journalist and editor of Scoop’s Werewolf magazine. This article has been republished with the author’s permission.
"The fact that the Western press keep giving Israel the benefit of the doubt whenever reports like this emerge after they’ve been caught in so very many lies means the Western press are just as culpable for the circulation of Israeli lies as Israel itself." Image: caitlinjohnstone.com.au
COMMENTARY: By Caitlin Johnstone
CNN has a new report out showing that (surprise!) Israel lied about the Flour Massacre in which Israeli Defence Force (IDF) troops fired machine guns into a crowd of starving Gazans waiting for food this past February, killing over a hundred people. CNN found that Israel’s timeline and version of events doesn’t line up with video footage, witness testimony, and forensic evidence.
Which of course was obvious from the beginning to anyone who isn’t deeply invested in pretending Israel ever tells the truth about these things.
Within hours of the massacre, Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor had a preliminary report up saying that video, audio and material evidence shows that the IDF had been firing into the crowd in contradiction of Israel’s claims that the injuries and deaths sustained on the scene were mostly due to Gazans trampling on each other in a mad rush upon the convoy of aid trucks.
CNN also repeatedly refers to the killings as “food aid deaths”, as though it’s the food aid that killed them and not the military of a very specific state power.
I don’t know if there’s a word for when a government does something evil and then churns out a bunch of easily disprovable lies with the understanding that by the time those lies are debunked public attention will have moved on from the controversy, but there should be.
Over and over again we’ve seen the Israeli regime do just enough lying to dampen the initial burst of attention and outrage and get people doubting themselves, only to discover far too late that it was all a bunch of crap after the initial crime has been forgotten.
This is exactly what happened with Israel’s initial assault on al-Shifa Hospital back in November, when Israel was cranking out propaganda claiming the hospital was being used as a command center for Hamas. Not until the end of December did The Washington Postshow up to acknowledge the abundantly obvious fact that there was no evidence for Israel’s claims, which independent outlets like Consortium News had been reporting since mid-November.
Back in October Israel and its apologists were shrieking with outrage that anyone would dare suggest that Israel would ever attack a hospital at all, saturating the media with bogus evidence that it falsely claimed proved its innocence.
It’s a weaponisation of the adage “A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth even puts its boots on.” They know all they have to do is lie really hard for a week or two, and then when the truth inevitably surfaces it won’t matter, because the truth will never be able to have the impact their lies had when it mattered.
It’s so obnoxious how even after all this time Israel is still given the benefit of the doubt on such claims by the Western political-media class until they’re debunked weeks or months later, long after the outcry over the incident has been muted and neutered by Israeli lies.
If a state power is preventing journalists and human rights groups from investigating the facts on the ground in a given area, then it is not legitimate to give their claims about what happens in that area weighted consideration when their track record and all the facts in evidence say they’re probably lying.
The fact that the Western press keep giving Israel the benefit of the doubt whenever reports like this emerge after they’ve been caught in so very many lies means the Western press are just as culpable for the circulation of Israeli lies as Israel itself.
In journalism you’re taught that if someone says it’s raining and someone else says it’s dry, your job isn’t to quote them both and treat both claims as equal, your job is to go look out the window and see which is true.
The fact that the imperial media take so long to drag their asses to the window serves nobody but Israel and the globe-spanning Empire of which it is a part.
"Black day" . . . . How the New Zealand Herald today featured the massive news of plans to cut TV3's entire Newshub team and TVNZ slashing 68 media jobs. Image: NZH screenshot APR
A grim 48 hours for news media has resulted in many jobs being lost in the sector — as TV3 confirmed the closure of Newshub, and TVNZ announced it was going ahead with axing its current affairs flagship Sunday, consumer affairs Fair Go and two news bulletins.
About 250 jobs are being lost in the shutdown of Three’s national news service, which will close in July.
How the country’s largest daily newspaper, The New Zealand Herald, reported the news and current affairs closure plans today. NZH screenshot APR
He was among seven senior Newshub journalists who pushed back against the company’s proposal and put forward their own plan.
The proposal, led by his colleague Michael Morrah, was “radical”, “aggressive” and would have pared the news operation back to the bone, he said.
It centred on the 6pm bulletin which brought in a lot of advertising revenue, retain the website and would later build up the digital operation.
“Basically it was a cutdown radical proposal to hang on to the 6pm bulletin and find digital solutions out into the future.”
While management gave them access to figures and helped them in other ways they ultimately decided not to go ahead.
Newshub journalist Paddy Gower . . . “It’s gonna be a dark time for news in this country.” Image: RNZ/Nick Monro
He said when the closure was confirmed, there was a feeling of “the weight of history” at the loss of a taonga which Kiwis would miss when it disappeared.
“It’s gonna be a dark time for news in this country,” he said.
Gower said Warner Bros Discovery would have “a helluva time” keeping viewers without Newshub providing news and current affairs.
“We tried. That’s the Kiwi way. That’s the Newshub way.”
He said another media company, such as Stuff or NZME, could now come in and further their own news brand and their reputation by saving part of a significant news operation.
They would oversee the making of a 6pm news bulletin that would be sold to Warner Bros Discovery and in the process be working with one of the world’s leading media companies.
“That has to be a possibility . . . They would be seen to be saving news in New Zealand and that’s a big ups for them . . .
“The company that is able to get that deal done …. is going to get some incredible journalists on board to help them do it,” Gower said.
It would probably save about 40 to 50 jobs, he said.
Warner Brothers Discovery declined to be interviewed by Morning Report.
NZ’s Media and Communications Minister Melissa Lee . . . accused of “having no vision at all” for media. Image: RNZ/Angus Dreaver
Broadcasting Minister accused of lack of vision Former head of news at TV3 Mark Jennings believed Broadcasting Minister Melissa Lee was “all at sea” as the country veered towards a media crisis.
He found her response to the Newshub closure confusing and did not believe the cabinet paper she has been working on would provide anything beneficial.
“I think you’re likely to have three parties, New Zealand First, ACT and National, all with different points of view and I can’t see them agreeing on any forward course of action, particularly not with Melissa Lee who appears to have no vision here at all.”
Jennings said he was notsurprised the Morrah-Gower plan did not succeed, because employers had considered other options and then made up their minds before the consultation period began.
If an offer from an outside organisation did get the go-ahead, it would be a “basic product” and would be “news-light”, he said.
It might be shot on i-Phones and edited by journalists and would not resemble Newshub’s current flagship bulletin.
While both the pandemic and social media had lowered the quality threshold of what viewers might accept, it would still be compared to what TVNZ was screening.
“The challenge will be for them to hold on to their ratings and more importantly, their share. Their share has been decreasing over time and if it gets too much lower, they’ll find themselves back at square one really.”
Minister Lee was unwilling to be interviewed by Morning Report.
She said she was focused on ensuring New Zealand’s media industry was sustainable and modernised, and she was looking at reviewing the Broadcasting Act.
Lee said she had talked to international companies on how they could support and increase New Zealand screen production, but it would not include a quota.
She said it would not have helped the situation at Newshub.
Not much scope for NZ on Air
New Zealand on Air chief executive Cam Harland said the agency had a limited ability to intervene because its remit was to provide funding for a large number of audiences across a range of genres.
He heads the agency responsible for distributing public funds but its budget isn’t nearly enough to address shortfalls.
Daily television news was expensive to produce, so he considered it unlikely NZ on Air would help much, he told Morning Report.
The loss of jobs and talent was “monumental” and NZ on Air bosses intended to meet with TVNZ and Newshub as well as senior journalists, such as Jennings, to get more information before making any decisions.
“We absolutely want to help . . . so I guess our view now is: Can we be more innovative with what we’re funding, can we get more bang for the buck?”
The organisation was also faced with reviewing its spending in line with the government’s requirements for the public sector.
Union files claim against TVNZ
Michael Wood . . . “It’s an urgent matter now . . .” Image: RNZ/Angus Dreaver
The union representing journalists has filed a claim against TVNZ alleging the company breached its own consultation requirements in its job cuts process.
E Tu’s negotiation specialist, Michael Wood, said the broadcaster should have involved its employees before the proposal was presented.
Talks were continuing with the Employment Relations Authority to see if a legal case could be heard as quickly as possible.
“It’s an urgent matter now . . . We’ll be trying to get an outcome there as soon as possible and we want to see an outcome that respects the process.”
He said mediation between the parties might be a part of the process.
While the union and employees had a small victory with a handful of jobs being saved, there was still “a massive loss of capacity” with the axing of several programmes.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ and Asia Pacific Report.
Fresh clashes in New Caledonia have erupted in the suburbs of Nouméa between security forces and pro-independence protesters who oppose a nickel pact offering French assistance to salvage the industry.
The clashes, involving firearms, teargas and stone-throwing, went on for most of yesterday, blocking access roads to the capital Nouméa, as well as the nearby townships of Saint-Louis and Mont-Dore.
Traffic on the Route Provinciale 1 (RP1) was opened and closed several times, including when a squadron of French gendarmes intervened to secure the area by firing long-range teargas.
The day began with tyres being burnt on the road and then degenerated into violence from some balaclava-clad members of the protest group, who started throwing stones and sometimes using firearms and Molotov cocktails, authorities alleged.
Security forces said one of their motorbike officers, a woman, was assaulted and her vehicle was stolen.
Two of the protesters were reported to have been arrested for throwing stones.
Banners were deployed, some reading “Kanaky not for sale”, others demanding that New Caledonia’s President Louis Mapou (pro-independence) resign.
Northern mining sites also targeted Other incidents took place in the northern town of La Foa, in the small mining village of Fonwhary, near a nickel extraction site, where Société Le Nickel trucks were not allowed to use the road.
Pro-independence protesters banners demand territorial President Louis Mapou resign. Image: 1ère TV
Mont-Dore Mayor Eddy Lecourieux told local Radio Rythme Bleu they had the right to demonstrate, “but they could have done that peacefully”.
“Instead, there’s always someone who starts throwing stones.”
At dusk, the Saint-Louis and Mont-Dore areas were described as under control, but security forces, including armoured vehicles, were kept in place.
“On top of that, there are more marches scheduled for this weekend,” Lecourieux said.
Pro-independent parties, however, strongly oppose the project, saying this would be tantamount to making indigenous Kanaks a minority at local polls, and would open the door to a “recolonisation” of New Caledonia through demographics.
A similar high-risk configuration of two marches took place on March 28 in downtown Nouméa, with more than 500 French security forces deployed to keep both groups away from each other.
French authorities are understood to be holding meeting after meeting to fine-tune the security setup ahead of the weekend.
Florent Perrin, the president of Mont-Dore’s “Citizens’ Association”, told media local residents were being “taken hostage” and the unrest “must cease”.
He urged political authorities to “make decisions on all political and economic issues” New Caledonia currently faces.
Perrin called on the local population to remain calm, but invited them to “individually lodge complaints” based on “breach of freedom of circulation”.
“On our side too, tensions are beginning to run high, so we have to remain calm and not respond to those acts of provocation,” he said.
Pro-independence indigenous Kanak protesters in New Caledonia blockade the village of La Foa yesterday. Image: 1ère TV
In return, France is asking that New Caledonia’s whole nickel industry should undergo a far-reaching slate of reforms in order to make nickel less expensive and therefore more attractive on the world market.
The pact aims to salvage New Caledonia’s embattled nickel industry and its three factories — one in the north of the main island, Koniambo (KNS), and two in the south, Société le Nickel (SLN), a subsidiary of French giant Eramet, and Prony Resources.
KNS’ nickel-processing operations were put in “sleep”, non-productive mode in February after its major financier, Anglo-Swiss Glencore, said it could no longer sustain losses totalling 14 billion euros (NZ$25 billion) over the past 10 years, and that it was now seeking an entity to buy its 49 percent shares.
The other two companies, SLN and Prony, are also facing huge debts and a severe risk of bankruptcy due to the new nickel conditions on the world market, now dominated by new players such as Indonesia, which produces a much cheaper and abundant metal.
New ultimatum from Northern Province On Tuesday, Northern province President Paul Néaoutyine added further pressure by threatening to suspend all permits for mining activities in his province’s nine sites, where southern nickel companies are also extracting.
In a release, Néaoutyine made references to payment guarantees deadlines on April 10 that had not been honoured by SLN.
It is understood SLN’s owner, Eramet, was scheduled to meet in a general meeting in Paris later on Tuesday.
The French pact — France is also a stakeholder in Eramet — would also help SLN provide longer-term guarantees.
Southern province President and Les Loyalists (pro-France) party leader Sonia Backès alleged on Tuesday that Néaoutyine wants to do everything he can to shut down SLN and block the nickel pact
“Now things are very clear — before it was all undercover; now it’s out in the open,” she said.
“Now we will do everything to maintain SLN, because this means 3000 jobs at stake.”
Congress dragging its feet Yesterday, New Caledonia’s Congress was holding a meeting behind closed doors to again discuss the French pact.
The Congress decided to postpone its decision and, instead, suggested setting up a “special committee” to further examine the pact and the condition it is tied to, and more generally, “the nickel industry’s current challenges”.
Opponents to the agreement mainly argue that it would pose a risk of “loss of sovereignty” for New Caledonia on its precious metal resource.
They also consider the nickel industry stake-holding companies are not committing enough and that, instead, New Caledonia’s government is asked to raise up to US$80 million (NZ$132 million), mainly by way of new taxes imposed on taxpayers.
Last week, a group of Congressmen, mostly from pro-independence Union Calédonienne, one of the four components of the pro-independence FLNKS, with the backing of one pro-France party, Avenir Ensemble, had a motion adopted to postpone one more time the signing of the pact.
President Mapou defies pro-independence MPs President Louis Mapou, himself from the pro-independence side, urged the supporters of the motion to “let [him] sign” last week during a Congress public sitting.
“Let’s do it . . . Authorise us to go at it . . . What are you afraid of?” he said.
“Are we afraid of our militants?”
Mapou said if there was no swift Congress response and support to sign the pact, for which he himself had asked the Congress for endorsement, he would “take [his] responsibility” and go ahead anyway.
“I will honour the commitment I made to the French State.”
He said if they wanted to to sanction him with a motion of no confidence to go ahead. He was not afraid of this.
Mapou also told the pro-independence side in Congress that he believed they khad ept postponing any Congress decision “because you want to engage in negotiations as part of [New Caledonia’s] political agreements”.
Last week, Backès, who expressed open support for Mapou’s “courage”, told Radio Rythme Bleu she and Mapou had both received death threats.
Patrick Decloitre is the RNZ Pacific correspondent French Pacific desk. This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ and Asia Pacific Report.
Fiji’s stance over Israel . . . implications for the safety and security of Fijian peacekeeping troops deployed in the Middle East. Image: Republic of Fiji Military Forces/Islands Business
South Africa’s genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has been described as involving two competing narratives: one, about a displaced Palestinian people denied their right to self-determination, and the other, about the Jewish people who, having established an independent state in their historical homeland after generations of persecution in exile, have been under threat from hostile neighbours ever since.
When Fiji joined the United States as the only two countries to support Israel’s occupation of the Palestinian territory at the ICJ in February, it was seen as walking head-on into one of the longest running conflicts in history, leaving Fijians, as well as the international community struggling to figure out which narrative that position fits into.
Following Hamas’ unprecedented attack on Israel in October, Israel’s retaliatory campaign against Gaza has provoked international consternation and has seen a humanitarian crisis unfolding, resulting in the motions against Israel in the ICJ.
Shame on you Tarakinikini” . . . a placard at a weekly Black Thursday protest held by the Fiji Women’s Crisis Centre in solidarity with Palestine and calling for an immediate ceasefire in Israel’s War on Gaza. Image: FWCC
And since then other cases such as Nicaragua this month against Germany alleging the enabling by the European country of the alleged genocide by Israel as the second-largest arms supplier.
Fiji’s pro-Israel position was on another matter — the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) had requested the ICJ’s advisory opinion into Israel’s policies in the occupied territories.
Addressing the ICJ, Fiji’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations, retired Colonel Filipo Tarakinikini said the ICJ should not render an advisory opinion on the questions posed by the General Assembly. He said the court had been presented “with a distinctly one-sided narrative. This fails to take account of the complexity of this dispute, and misrepresents the legal, historical, and political context.”
How Islands Business introduced the Fiji and Israel policy article. Image: IB screenshot APR
The UNGA request was “a legal manoeuvre that circumvents the existing internationally sanctioned and legally binding framework for resolution of the Israel-Palestine dispute,” said Tarakinikini.
“And if the ICJ is to consider the legal consequences of the alleged Israeli refusal to withdraw from territory, it must also look at what Palestine must do to ensure Israel’s security,” he said.
On the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, “Fiji notes that the right to self-determination is a relative right.
“In the context of Israel/Palestine, this means the Court would need to ascertain whether the Palestinians’ exercise of their right to self-determination has infringed the territorial
integrity, political inviolability or legitimate security needs of the State of Israel,” he added.
Crossing the line
Long-standing Fijian diplomats such as Kaliopate Tavola and Robin Nair said Fiji had crossed the line by breaking with its historically established foreign policy of friends-to-all -and-enemies-to-none.
Nair, Fiji’s first ambassador to the Middle East, said Fiji had always chosen to be an international peacekeeper, trusted by both sides to any argument or conflict that requires its services.
“The question being asked is, how is it in the national interest of Fiji to buy into the Israeli-Palestine dispute, particularly when it has been a well-respected international peacekeeper in the region?
“Fiji has either absented itself or abstained from voting on any decisions at the United Nations concerning the Israeli-Palestinian issues, particularly since 1978 when Fiji began taking part in the UN-sponsored peacekeeping operations in the Middle East,” Nair told Islands Business.
Nair said it was worth noting that in keeping with its traditionally neutral position on Israeli-Palestinian issues, Fiji had initially abstained on the UN General Assembly resolution asking the ICJ for an advisory opinion.
Former Ambassador Kaliopate Tavola asks why that position has changed. “Fiji’s rationale for showing interest now is not so much about the real issue on the ground — the genocide taking place, but the niceties of legal processes. Coming from Fiji with its history of coups, it is a bit over-pretentious, one may say”.
At odds with past conduct
Former Deputy Commander of the Republic of Fiji Military Forces, now professor in law at the University of Fiji, Aziz Mohammed, says the change of position does not reconcile with Fiji’s past endorsement of international instruments and conventions, including the International Criminal Court (ICC) statute on war crimes at play in the current proceedings at the ICJ.
“That endorsement happened by the government that was in power at the time of the current Prime Minister (Sitiveni Rabuka’s administration in the 1990s),” says Mohammed.
“We became the fifth country to endorse it. So, it was very early that we planted a flag to say, ‘we’re going to honour this international obligation’. And that happened. But subsequently, we brought the war crimes (section from the ICC statute) into our Crimes Act. Not only that, but we also adopted the international humanitarian laws into our laws — three Geneva Conventions, and three protocols. So, in terms of laws, most countries only have adopted two, but we have adopted all the international instruments. But then we’re not adhering to it.”
Fiji was among six Pacific Island countries — including Papua New Guinea, Tonga, Nauru, Marshall Islands, and the Federated States of Micronesia — that voted against a UN resolution in October calling for a humanitarian truce in Gaza.
That vote caused significant political ruptures. One of Rabuka’s two coalition partners, the National Federation Party (NFP), said Fiji should have voted for the resolution. “It was a motion that called for peace and access to humanitarian aid, and as a country, we should have supported that,” said NFP Leader, Professor Biman Prasad, who is Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister.
Prasad’s fellow party member and former NFP Leader, Home Affairs Minister, Pio Tikoduadua, served in the Fiji peacekeeping forces deployed to Lebanon in the 1990s, and recounted the horrors of war he had seen in the region.
“I can still vividly remember the blood, the carnage and the mothers weeping for their children and the children finding out that they no longer had parents,” he said.
“In any war, no matter how justified your cause may be, it is always the innocent that suffer and pay the price. Those images, those memories are seared into my memory forever . . . that is why NFP has taken the position of supporting a ceasefire in Gaza contrary to Fiji’s position at the UN.”
Commander of the Republic of Fiji Military Forces, Major-General Jone Kalouniwai said the “decision has significant implications for the safety and security of RFMF troops currently deployed in the Middle East” and called on the government to reevaluate its stance on the Israel-Hamas issue.
“Their safety and security should remain a top priority, and it is crucial that their contribution to international peacekeeping efforts are fully supported and respected,” an RFMF statement said.
Interesting cocktail
Writing in the Asia-Pacific current affairs publication, The Diplomat, Melbourne-based Australia and the Pacific political analyst, Grant Wyeth said Pacific islanders’ faith and foreign policy make an “interesting cocktail” that drives their UN votes in favour of Israel. He knocks any theories about the United States having bought off these island nations.
“Rather than power, faith may be the key to understanding the Pacific Islands’ approach,” writes Wyeth. “Much of the Pacific is highly observant in their Christianity, and they have an eschatological understanding of humanity.”
He notes that various denominations of Protestantism see the creation of Israel in 1948 as the fulfillment of a Biblical prophecy in which the Jewish people — “God’s chosen” — return to the Holy Land.
“Support for Israel is, therefore, a deeply held spiritual belief, one that sits alongside Pacific
Islands’ other considerations of interests and opportunities when forming their foreign policies.”
In September, Papua New Guinea moved its embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Prime Minister James Marape was quoted as saying at the time: “For us to call ourselves
Christian, paying respect to God will not be complete without recognising that Jerusalem is the universal capital of the people and the nation of Israel.”
“I am ashamed of my own government” protester placards at a demonstration by Fijians outside the Fiji Women’s Crisis Centre (FWCC) . . . commentators draw a distinction between the matter of political recognition/state identity and the humanitarian issues at stake. Image: FWCC
Political vs humanitarian
The commentators draw the distinction between the matter of political recognition/state identity and the humanitarian issues at stake.
Says Mohammed: “This is not about recognising the state of Israel. This is about a conflict where people wanted to protect the unprotected. All they were saying is, ‘let’s’ support a ceasefire so [that] women, children, elderly … could get out [and] food supplies, medical supplies could get in …’ and it wasn’t [going to be] an indefinite ceasefire, which we [Fiji]
agreed to later.”
Fiji eventually did vote for the ceasefire when it came before the UN General Assembly again in December, following a major outcry against its position at home. The key concern going forward is the impact on the future of Fiji’s decades-long peacekeeping involvement in the Middle East.
Fiji-born political sociologist, Professor Steven Ratuva, is director of the Macmillan Brown Centre for Pacific Studies and professor in the Department of Anthropology and Sociology at the University of Canterbury.
“The security of Fijian soldiers overseas will be threatened, as well as Fijian citizens themselves,” says Ratuva. “There are already groups campaigning underground for a tourist boycott of Fiji. I’ve personally received angry emails about ‘your bloody dumb country.’”
Nair says when 45 peacekeeping Fijian soldiers were taken hostage by the al Qaeda-linked Syrian rebel group al-Nusra Front in the Golan Heights in 2014, when all else — including the UN — had failed to secure their release, Fiji’s only bargaining power was the value of its peacekeeping neutrality.
“No international power stepped up to help Fiji in its most traumatic time in international relations in its entire history. Fiji had to fall back on itself, to use its own humble credentials. I successfully used our peace-keeping credentials in the Middle East and over many decades, including the shedding of Fijian blood, to ensure peace in the Middle East, to free our captured soldiers.”
Punishing the RFMF?
Mohammed agrees with the concern about the implications of Fiji’s compromised neutrality.
“I think what’s on everybody’s mind is whether we’re going to continue peacekeeping or suddenly, somebody is going to say, ‘enough of Fiji, they have compromised their neutrality, their impartiality, and as such, we are withdrawing consent and we want them to go back,’” he says.
Fiji’s Home Affairs Minister, Pio Tikoduadua has been dismissive of such concerns, saying Fiji’s position on Israel at the ICJ did not diminish the capability of its peacekeepers because Fiji had “very professional people serving in peacekeeping roles”.
Mohammed, with an almost 40-year military career and having held the rank of Deputy Commander and once a significant figure on Fiji’s military council, asks whether Fiji’s position on Israel is a strategic manoeuvre by the government to reign in the military.
“Do they really want Fijian peacekeepers out there? Or are they going to indirectly punish the RFMF [Republic of Fiji Military Forces]?” he said in an interview with Islands Business.
He floats this theory on the basis that Fiji’s position on Israel came from two men acutely aware of what is at stake for the Fijian military — Prime Minister Rabuka and Tarakinikini, both seasoned army officers with extensive experience in matters of the Middle East.
“We all know that in recent times, the RFMF has been vocal (in national affairs). And they have stood firm on their role under Article 131 (of Fiji’s 2013 Constitution which states that it is the military’s overall responsibility to ensure at all times the security, defence and well-being of Fiji and all Fijians).
“And they have pressured the government into positions, so much so, the government has had difficulty. And they (government) say, ‘the RFMF are stepping out of position. Now, how do we control the RFMF? How do we cut them into place? One, we can basically give them everything and keep them quiet, or two, we take away the very thing that put them in the limelight. How do we do that? We take a position, knowing very well that the host countries will withdraw their consent, and the Fijians will be asked to leave’.
“Fiji will no longer have peacekeepers. No peacekeeping engagements, the numbers of the RFMF will have to be reduced. So, all they will do is be confined to domestic roles.
“People are questioning this,” says Mohammed. “Military strategists are raising this issue because the government knows they can’t openly tell the Fijian public that we are withdrawing from peacekeeping. There’ll be an outcry because every second household in Fiji has some member who has served in peacekeeping.
“So, strategically, we [government] take a position. It may not be perceived that way. But the outcome is happening in that direction.”
Richard Naidu is editor of Islands Business. This article was published in the March edition of the magazine and is republished here with permission.
"We cannot allow [the Western political-media class] to neuter this political moment with spin and propaganda. We need to make sure their criminality remains front and centre of public awareness, and we need to push for the real revolutionary changes that Gaza plainly proves are needed." Image: caitlinjohnstone.com.au
COMMENTARY: By Caitlin Johnstone
Opposition to the slaughter in Gaza appears to be getting more mainstream, which is obviously great, but when political impulses go mainstream it means there’s going to be a massive and concerted effort to funnel public sentiment in a direction that doesn’t damage the interests of the Empire.
They’re going to try to blame this all on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
They’re going to insist that Israel itself is fine and the only thing that went wrong was a fluke incident in which an aberrational rightwing faction briefly got into power.
They’re going to try to wash the Western Empire’s hands of the mass atrocities it directly facilitated in Gaza.
They’re going to try to frame Biden as a basically decent politician who found himself trapped in an impossible situation.
They’re going to keep pretending a two-state solution is right around the corner and doing everything they can to stall out meaningful change on Palestinian rights, while blaming any obstacles to peace on the Palestinian resistance.
They’re going to pollute the information ecosystem with a deluge of messaging which is all designed to counter the notion that Gaza means the entire status quo needs to be overhauled — with regard to Israel-Palestine, with regard to US foreign policy, with regard to the US government itself, and with regard to the Western power structure in general.
Opposition to the slaughter in Gaza appears to be getting more mainstream, which is obviously great, but when political impulses go mainstream it means there’s going to be a massive and concerted effort to funnel public sentiment in a direction that doesn’t damage the interests… pic.twitter.com/BD3TBs5TU7
Ensuring the status quo
They’re going to say everything they need to say to ensure that everyone understands that the basic status quo in Israel, the United States and the Western world is working perfectly fine, and this was all just an innocent little oopsie poopsie caused by a few bad apples.
They’ll justify, they’ll excuse, they’ll exonerate, and then they’ll distract, moving public attention on to the next big thing and allowing the amnesia of the daily news churn to wash Gaza from our attention — all while pretending to be on our side.
This messaging will need to be fought tooth and claw. We cannot allow them to neuter this political moment with spin and propaganda. We need to make sure their criminality remains front and centre of public awareness, and we need to push for the real revolutionary changes that Gaza plainly proves are needed.
Let mainstream sentiment turn against the current Israeli regime and bring an end to the butchery in Gaza, but don’t let the imperial narrative managers co-opt anything. Don’t let them hijack the zeitgeist that’s been building.
View all words and actions of the Western political-media class with aggressive scepticism, and push back forcefully every time they try to push public sentiment in a direction that advantages the Empire.
![We cannot allow [the Western political-media class] to neuter this political moment with spin and propaganda](https://davidrobie.nz/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Ceasefire-Now-CJ-1300wide-696x429.png "Ceasefire Now CJ 1300wide")
