I don't expect to read conflict analysis and find it devoid of emotion or without a semblance of subjectivity. But there is line that separates analysis (even marginally "slanted" analysis) from blatantly choosing a side and then cheerleading under the guise of analysis. This article, misleadingly entitled "Understanding the Gaza Catastrophe," is not analysis nor is it designed to bring about a measure of understanding.
Consider this:
A flicker of hope emerged some six months ago when an Egyptian arranged truce produced an effective ceasefire that cut Israeli casualties to zero despite the cross-border periodic firing of homemade rockets that fell harmlessly on nearby Israeli territory, and undoubtedly caused anxiety in the border town of Sderot.Heh. Yeah I'd say an air raid siren blaring to alert a populace that they have fifteen seconds to seek cover before a rocket explodes in a random location lends a person to feel a degree of "anxiety." Maybe tomorrow I'll lift my window open and start lobbing hand grenades willy nilly. Hopefully I won't kill anyone as when the authorities arrive I can simply fall back on an iron clad defense against the looming charges with the assertion that I was merely attempting to affect a degree of "anxiety" in my fellow citizens. And, hey, it's not like I killed anyone.
Any salient points presented (and there are some regarding the culpability of Israel; this isn't a one sided conflict in terms of fault) from here are belied by the defense attorney like terminology attributed to Hamas actions (lots of alleged and supposed) and finally obliterated by both the authors credentials (United Nations Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in the Palestinian Territories) and the conclusion that entails Israel's defiance of the Geneva Convention (recall the "harmless" rocket attacks and wonder aloud whether Hamas rule has been a boon for Palestinian human rights) as well as the patently absurd call for commitment to the "UN charter" as though the UN or the UNSC has ever taken that charter beyond political maneuver and symbolism.
Don't bullshit people by producing an opinion piece and then presenting it as analysis. If you've got an ideological dog in the hunt preface your "understanding" article with your position.
3 comments:
Did you ever make a comment about Judea, Emperor Hadrian, and the current conflict in the Middle East, Soob?
What is especially funny is that Hamas is currently engaged in a civil war against Fatah, the "national liberation" movement that was so fashionable among liberals during the 1970s and 1980s.
That the author is essentially supporting a hard-right revolt in Palestine is not important: that the revolutionaries are willing to kill friends of America is.
http://www.blackfive.net/main/2009/01/bolton-on-a-thr.html
Bolton provides an interesting solution for "regime" change. I don't think replacing Hamas with Fatah will do anything good, for at least now, Hamas the legitimate government of Palestine and that means it is more vulnerable to conventional warfare.
But regime change is the only solution. The only question is what regime will replace Hamas or can replace Hamas.
Post a Comment