n***@spam.me
2009-01-18 18:08:03 UTC
Israeli Assault Injures 1.5 Million Gazans
By Jonathan Cook
In addition to the 1,000 deaths, there are some 1.5 million injured in
Gaza. How has such an astounding figure passed the world's media by?
This week the death toll in Gaza passed the 1,000 mark, after nearly
three weeks of Israeli air and ground attacks. But surprisingly, no
one has reported an even more appalling statistic: that there are some
1.5 million injured Palestinians in Gaza. How is is possible that such
an astounding figure could have passed the world's media by?
The reason apparently is that they have been relying on the highly
unreliable statistics provided by official Palestinian sources. It
appears that the Palestinian health ministry only records as wounded
those Gazans who need to stay in hospital because of the severity of
their injuries.
That means they only count the more than 4,500 Gazans who have
suffered injuries such as severe burns from exploding Israeli
phosphorus shells; shrapnel wounds from artillery rounds; broken or
lost limbs from aerial bombardment; bullet wounds; physical trauma
from falling building debris; and so on.
But in fact there is another, far more reasonable standard for
assessing those injured, one that provides the far higher total of 1.5
million Gazans -- or every surviving Palestinian in Gaza. The measure
I am referring to is the one employed by Israel.
Here is an example of its use. In September 2007, the international
media reported that 69 Israeli soldiers had been wounded when
Palestinian militants fired a rocket into the Zikim army base near the
Gaza Strip. The rocket struck a tent where the soldiers were sleeping.
It is worth noting the details of the attack. Israeli officials
related that, of the 69 wounded, 11 had moderate or severe injuries
and one was critically injured. A few more had light wounds. The rest,
probably 50 or more, were injured in the sense that they were
suffering from shock.
So, if we apply the same standard to Gaza, that would mean 1.5 million
Gazans have been wounded. Or is there still some doubt about whether
the weeks of bombardment of Gaza, one of the most densely populated
places on earth, have left the entire civilian population in a deep,
and possibly permanent, state of shock?
Talking of Gaza's civilians, where did they all go? Israel's so-called
"war" on Gaza must be the first example in human history of a conflict
where there are apparently no civilians. Or, at least, that is the
impression being created by the world's leading international bodies,
from the World Health Organisation to the United Nations. Instead they
refer to a new category of "women and children".
Thus, those 1,000-plus dead Gazans are broken down into percentages
defined in terms of "women and children" and the rest. The earliest
figures stated that about 25 per cent of Gaza's dead were "women and
children", and that has steadily climbed close to the 50 per cent mark
since Israel's ground invasion got under way.
The implication -- one with which Israel is presumably delighted -- is
that the rest are Palestinian fighters, or "terrorists" as Israel
would prefer us to call them. It also suggests that every man in Gaza
over the age of 16 is being defined as a non-civilian -- as a
combatant and, again by implication, as a terrorist. In short, all
Gaza's men are legitimate targets for Israeli attack.
This is not very far from the position recently attributed to Israeli
policymakers by the daily Jerusalem Post. The newspaper reported that
officials had come to the view that "it would be pointless for Israel
to topple Hamas because the population [of Gaza] is Hamas".
On this thinking, Israel is at war with every single man, woman and
child in Gaza, which is very much how it looks. Maybe we should be
glad that the category of "women and children" is still being
recognized -- at least, for now.
The myths about the blockade of Gaza are so legion it is almost
impossible to disentangle them. But let's try tackling a few.
The first is that the blockade was a necessary response to the
election of Hamas.
Tell that to John Wolfensohn, special envoy to the Quartet, comprising
the US, UN, Europe and Russia, from May 2005. His job was to oversee
the disengagement. Wolfensohn was succeeded by the far less principled
Tony Blair, the former British prime minister.
In an interview with the Haaretz newspaper in 2007, Wolfensohn
explained why he had resigned a year into his job, in April 2006.
Shortly after the disengagement in summer 2005, he said, Israel and
the US had violated the understandings made to ensure the border
crossings into Gaza remained open after the Jewish settlers left.
"Every aspect of that agreement was abrogated," he said.
The economy collapsed as a result, as Gaza's farmers saw their produce
rot at the crossings, and unemployment and disillusionment among
Gazans rocketed. "Instead of hope, the Palestinians saw that they were
put back in prison. And with 50 per cent unemployment, you would have
conflict."
It was the closure of the crossings that Wolfensohn believes partly
explains Hamas' success in the subsequent elections, in early 2006.
So, according to Wolfensohn, Israel's blockade pre-existed Hamas' rise
to power and began when Fatah were still the rulers of Gaza.
The second myth is that the blockade was an attempt, if a futile one,
to get Hamas to recognize Israel's "right to exist".
Tell that to Dov Weisglass, former prime minister Ariel Sharon's fixer
in Washington. It was he who suggested the true goal of the blockade,
which Israel intensified immediately following Hamas' electoral
triumph. The policy would be "like an appointment with a dietician.
The Palestinians will get a lot thinner, but won't die."
In short, according to Weisglass, Israeli policy in Gaza was
"collective punishment" inflicted on the civilian population for
choosing Hamas -- a policy that, should it need pointing out, is a
grave violation of international law and a war crime.
The hope, it seems, was that Gazans would, as they sank into abject
poverty, manage to summon up the energy to overthrow Hamas. It didn't
happen.
The third myth is that the blockade was designed to put pressure on
Hamas to end the rocket fire into Israel.
Tell that to Ehud Barak, the defense minister, and Matan Vilnai, his
deputy. This pair were plotting an invasion of Gaza throughout the
six-month ceasefire with Hamas, and in fact much earlier.
In truth, they ignored every diplomatic overture from Hamas, including
offers of indefinite truces, while they invested their energies in the
coming ground invasion. In particular they worked on plans, noted in
the Israeli media back in spring 2008, to "level" Gaza's civilian
neighbourhoods and create "combat zones" from which civilians could be
expelled.
One aspect of the blockade that seems to have been overlooked is the
way it has been used to "soften up" Gaza, and Hamas, before Israel's
attack. For three years Gaza's population has been denied food,
medicines and fuel.
Every general knows it is easier to fight an army -- or militia --
that is cold, tired and hungry. Could there be a better description of
the Hamas fighters, as well as those "women and children", currently
facing Israel's tanks and warplanes?
A version of this article appeared in Al-Ahram Weekly published in
Cairo.
By Jonathan Cook
In addition to the 1,000 deaths, there are some 1.5 million injured in
Gaza. How has such an astounding figure passed the world's media by?
This week the death toll in Gaza passed the 1,000 mark, after nearly
three weeks of Israeli air and ground attacks. But surprisingly, no
one has reported an even more appalling statistic: that there are some
1.5 million injured Palestinians in Gaza. How is is possible that such
an astounding figure could have passed the world's media by?
The reason apparently is that they have been relying on the highly
unreliable statistics provided by official Palestinian sources. It
appears that the Palestinian health ministry only records as wounded
those Gazans who need to stay in hospital because of the severity of
their injuries.
That means they only count the more than 4,500 Gazans who have
suffered injuries such as severe burns from exploding Israeli
phosphorus shells; shrapnel wounds from artillery rounds; broken or
lost limbs from aerial bombardment; bullet wounds; physical trauma
from falling building debris; and so on.
But in fact there is another, far more reasonable standard for
assessing those injured, one that provides the far higher total of 1.5
million Gazans -- or every surviving Palestinian in Gaza. The measure
I am referring to is the one employed by Israel.
Here is an example of its use. In September 2007, the international
media reported that 69 Israeli soldiers had been wounded when
Palestinian militants fired a rocket into the Zikim army base near the
Gaza Strip. The rocket struck a tent where the soldiers were sleeping.
It is worth noting the details of the attack. Israeli officials
related that, of the 69 wounded, 11 had moderate or severe injuries
and one was critically injured. A few more had light wounds. The rest,
probably 50 or more, were injured in the sense that they were
suffering from shock.
So, if we apply the same standard to Gaza, that would mean 1.5 million
Gazans have been wounded. Or is there still some doubt about whether
the weeks of bombardment of Gaza, one of the most densely populated
places on earth, have left the entire civilian population in a deep,
and possibly permanent, state of shock?
Talking of Gaza's civilians, where did they all go? Israel's so-called
"war" on Gaza must be the first example in human history of a conflict
where there are apparently no civilians. Or, at least, that is the
impression being created by the world's leading international bodies,
from the World Health Organisation to the United Nations. Instead they
refer to a new category of "women and children".
Thus, those 1,000-plus dead Gazans are broken down into percentages
defined in terms of "women and children" and the rest. The earliest
figures stated that about 25 per cent of Gaza's dead were "women and
children", and that has steadily climbed close to the 50 per cent mark
since Israel's ground invasion got under way.
The implication -- one with which Israel is presumably delighted -- is
that the rest are Palestinian fighters, or "terrorists" as Israel
would prefer us to call them. It also suggests that every man in Gaza
over the age of 16 is being defined as a non-civilian -- as a
combatant and, again by implication, as a terrorist. In short, all
Gaza's men are legitimate targets for Israeli attack.
This is not very far from the position recently attributed to Israeli
policymakers by the daily Jerusalem Post. The newspaper reported that
officials had come to the view that "it would be pointless for Israel
to topple Hamas because the population [of Gaza] is Hamas".
On this thinking, Israel is at war with every single man, woman and
child in Gaza, which is very much how it looks. Maybe we should be
glad that the category of "women and children" is still being
recognized -- at least, for now.
The myths about the blockade of Gaza are so legion it is almost
impossible to disentangle them. But let's try tackling a few.
The first is that the blockade was a necessary response to the
election of Hamas.
Tell that to John Wolfensohn, special envoy to the Quartet, comprising
the US, UN, Europe and Russia, from May 2005. His job was to oversee
the disengagement. Wolfensohn was succeeded by the far less principled
Tony Blair, the former British prime minister.
In an interview with the Haaretz newspaper in 2007, Wolfensohn
explained why he had resigned a year into his job, in April 2006.
Shortly after the disengagement in summer 2005, he said, Israel and
the US had violated the understandings made to ensure the border
crossings into Gaza remained open after the Jewish settlers left.
"Every aspect of that agreement was abrogated," he said.
The economy collapsed as a result, as Gaza's farmers saw their produce
rot at the crossings, and unemployment and disillusionment among
Gazans rocketed. "Instead of hope, the Palestinians saw that they were
put back in prison. And with 50 per cent unemployment, you would have
conflict."
It was the closure of the crossings that Wolfensohn believes partly
explains Hamas' success in the subsequent elections, in early 2006.
So, according to Wolfensohn, Israel's blockade pre-existed Hamas' rise
to power and began when Fatah were still the rulers of Gaza.
The second myth is that the blockade was an attempt, if a futile one,
to get Hamas to recognize Israel's "right to exist".
Tell that to Dov Weisglass, former prime minister Ariel Sharon's fixer
in Washington. It was he who suggested the true goal of the blockade,
which Israel intensified immediately following Hamas' electoral
triumph. The policy would be "like an appointment with a dietician.
The Palestinians will get a lot thinner, but won't die."
In short, according to Weisglass, Israeli policy in Gaza was
"collective punishment" inflicted on the civilian population for
choosing Hamas -- a policy that, should it need pointing out, is a
grave violation of international law and a war crime.
The hope, it seems, was that Gazans would, as they sank into abject
poverty, manage to summon up the energy to overthrow Hamas. It didn't
happen.
The third myth is that the blockade was designed to put pressure on
Hamas to end the rocket fire into Israel.
Tell that to Ehud Barak, the defense minister, and Matan Vilnai, his
deputy. This pair were plotting an invasion of Gaza throughout the
six-month ceasefire with Hamas, and in fact much earlier.
In truth, they ignored every diplomatic overture from Hamas, including
offers of indefinite truces, while they invested their energies in the
coming ground invasion. In particular they worked on plans, noted in
the Israeli media back in spring 2008, to "level" Gaza's civilian
neighbourhoods and create "combat zones" from which civilians could be
expelled.
One aspect of the blockade that seems to have been overlooked is the
way it has been used to "soften up" Gaza, and Hamas, before Israel's
attack. For three years Gaza's population has been denied food,
medicines and fuel.
Every general knows it is easier to fight an army -- or militia --
that is cold, tired and hungry. Could there be a better description of
the Hamas fighters, as well as those "women and children", currently
facing Israel's tanks and warplanes?
A version of this article appeared in Al-Ahram Weekly published in
Cairo.