Sunday, September 23, 2007

LA TIMES EDITORIAL BLAMES ALL OF GAZA'S PROBLEMS ON ISRAEL

Everything But Dandruff (BackSpin)
Except perhaps for dandruff, UCLA Professor Saree Makdisi blames just about all of Gaza's problems on Israel. He writes in the LA Times:

Israel says that its policies in Gaza are designed to put pressure on the Palestinian population to in turn put pressure on those who fire crude home-made rockets from Gaza into the Israeli town of Sderot. Those rocket attacks are wrong. But it is also wrong to punish an entire population for the actions of a few -- actions that the schoolchildren of Gaza and their beleaguered parents are in any case powerless to stop.

It is a violation of international law to collectively punish more than a million people for something they did not do. According to the Geneva Convention, to which it is a signatory, Israel actually has the obligation to ensure the well-being of the people on whom it has chosen to impose a military occupation for more than four decades.

Benny Morris wrote an opposing commentary. Here are some additional points to consider:

• Israel disengaged from the Gaza Strip. The well-being of Gaza's population is the responsibility of the Palestinian leadership. Despite Makdisi's assertions about Israeli responsibility, international law isn't clear cut.

• We appreciate Makdisi's condemnation of the Qassams. In the absence of Hamas (or any other Palestinians) curbing the problem, does the professor offer an alternative solution?

• Do the beleaguered Gaza parents who elected Hamas into power have any responsibility for the sorry state of affairs?

But, for a stronger rebuttal (Hat tip: CAMERA), see blogger Carlos' "Collective Hypocrisy: Justifying Gaza's Rocket War."

Also, Marty Peretz addresses the charge that Israel's move is a violation of international law:

Immediately comes Ban Ki-moon, the secretary general of the United Nations, saying that this would violate international law. What international law? He didn't specify. Because there isn't any that prohibits such action in these circumstances. When does a designated enemy which is attacked daily supply enemy territory and an enemy population with provisions necessary to carry out aggressive action?

No comments: