In the wake of the mysterious assassination of Lebanon’s former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, US President George Bush has demanded that Syria withdraw from Lebanon. In a speech on March 4 he said, “Lebanon is a democracy and we want democracy in Lebanon to succeed, and we know it cannot succeed so long as she is occupied by a foreign power. There is no half-measure involved. When the US, France and others say withdraw, we mean a complete withdrawal. No half-hearted measures. And for those of you who are trying to analyze our foreign policy, just remember, democracy leads to peace, the peace we all want for our children and our grandchildren.”
And he gave Syria an ultimatum to withdraw before the end of May this year and even threatened the use of military force if Syria did not comply.
Now compare this with the United States’ stand on Israel’s occupation of Palestine which is the longest occupation in the modern history of mankind, if not also its most oppressive and bloody, which is unashamedly financed, armed and protected by none other than the US itself.
Palestine is a democracy and the world is united in their demand that Israel withdraw and recognize the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people; the United States is the only country, besides half a dozen banana republics such as Micronesia, which is at odds with the international community.
If President Bush has also asked Israel to comply with UNSC resolutions 242 and 338 and demand its withdrawal from the Palestinian and Arab territories it has occupied since 1967 before the Palestinian parliamentary elections due this July, he would have gained the immediate admiration and support of the Arab world and the international community at large.
Aren’t the Palestinian people entitled, to use his words, “to have the right to determine their future, free from domination by a foreign power ... and free of intimidation”?
Unlike Israel, Syria does not bombard cities and towns with F-16s, Apache helicopters and US-made tanks, and does not build racist colonies nor impose collective punishment and bulldoze houses. While it hasn’t been proven that Syria is responsible for the assassination of Hariri, Israel boasts of its responsibility for the assassinations of tens of Palestinian and international leaders and activists.
George Bush speaks of freedom as a divine right to humanity, yet closes his eyes on the Palestinian people who have been denied not only their freedom but also their most basic human rights. These are the ones George Bush has turned his back on, and appeases their occupiers, oppressors and war criminals.
When Bush gives his sermons on freedom, democracy and occupation in the Middle East and claims that Syria occupies Lebanon, without saying one single word on the bloodiest and most oppressive occupation in the region, it is like an exposed criminal preaching honesty, lawfulness and morality. The only effect he will have on the audience is one of disgust and resentment.
In his speech at the National Defense University on March 8, Bush said “progress in the Middle East is threatened by weapons of mass destruction and their proliferation.” But while he referred this to Iran which does not even possess these weapons, and after he virtually destroyed Iraq and sent it back into the Dark Ages, on the false pretext that it possessed these weapons, he once again did not mention a word about the rogue state in the Middle East which actually possesses hundreds of weapons of mass destruction — nuclear, chemical and biological — and with which it threatens not only its neighbors but countries as far as Asia, Africa and Europe.
In his speeches President Bush implies that the Palestinian presidential election held on Jan. 9 this year was due to his policies. This is far from true.
The first Palestinian elections took place in January 1996 — before he and the neocons came to power. During the secret Oslo negotiations the PLO demanded to conduct democratic elections and President Arafat insisted on having two elections, one for the president and one for the Parliament. He refused to have any deal without elections.
Israel had to reluctantly accept the Palestinian demand when it realized that the negotiations would have broken down, exposing the undemocratic face of Israel.
Unlike Bush’s claim, the Palestinian people did not “cast their ballots against violence and corruption of the past”, but on the same political platform the PLO has held since 1988, to end Israel’s occupation and to gain their legitimate and inalienable rights for freedom and independence.
Does the Bush administration really want democracy in the Arab countries? I do not think so, nor do the overwhelming majority of the Arab people. One proof of this is the position President Bush and his administration took toward the most if not the only democratically elected Arab leader, the late President Yasser Arafat; Bush refused to deal with Arafat and even demanded that the Palestinians replace him with another leader acceptable to both himself and Israel!! What the US administration really want are Arab leaders who will serve the US and Israel’s interests; “democratization” is used to blackmail them to do so.
The well known Israeli writer and former deputy mayor of West Jerusalem, Meron Benvenisti has summarized some of President Bush’s intentions. In an article printed in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz on March 10, he said, “The Israelis, who are excited about the ‘winds of freedom,’ are well aware that the demand to link peace with democratization is an act of hypocrisy that was invented only in order to undermine any real step toward peace. As long as the occupation and the oppression of the Palestinian people continues, democratization in Arab countries will lead to a distancing of peace, as can be seen from public reactions in Egypt and Jordan. But the Israeli fans of the Bush doctrine, who are welcoming the harbingers of Arab freedom, don’t consider the continued denial of freedom for the Palestinians an act that contradicts their commitment to democracy. They see the policy of the United States in its aggressive context: Pax-Americana enables them to maintain the status quo according to the parameters of the Bush-Sharon understandings, which determined the borders of the Palestinians state of cantons and the areas where it will govern”.
The question is when is President Bush going to join the international community and demand that Israel end its occupation and withdraw completely, not half-heartedly, from Palestine and give it a similar ultimatum or threaten it with the use of military force if it refuses to do so?
— Ali Kazak is head of the General Palestinian Delegation to Australia & New Zealand and ambassador of Palestine to Vanuatu & East Timor.
