The situation in the Middle East has within a short period after Afghanistan, again brought to the core the contradictions, hypocrisy and double standards practised in world politics. Taking a historical view, the collusion of Britain, the Zionists and America to impose and maintain a state upon a people is the climax of the abuse of power and exercise in hypocrisy. Reeling from the abuse suffered in Europe prior to but especially during the Second World War at the hands of fellow Europeans, the Zionists had a clear aim - the establishment of a state that would be made of up Jews so that they can be free from the abuse and discrimination suffered at the hands of the Nazis and other Europeans. The British, in their trademark disregard for the welfare of others, acted with the treachery that has characterised their dealings with all they colonised resulting in the dispossession of the Arabs who lived around the area currently called Palestine. The knee-jerk reaction to the atrocities committed against the Jews by fellow Europeans and the guilt that reaction created in the Europeans gave impetus to the drive to create a home for the Jews at whatever cost and at the expense of the whatever people. This led to the selection of a few countries around the world, our dear Uganda included, to forcibly take from the people who were its current inhabitants to create a shelter for the Jews. This is the epitome of hypocrisy. Put another way, I come into your house, kill you and some members of your family and make life unbearable and risky for the rest of your family. My brother then out guilt feels sorry for your family, looks around the neighbourhood and decides that your family needs a house. He then picks a house and tells the occupants that their house is going to be divided into two and one part is going to be given to your family because your family has suffered so much. To those who happen to occupy the part of the house where your family is going to be settled, they have to leave or be thrown out. Whilst acting as God and carving out the little that that poor family has and giving it to your family, my brother has over fifty houses and could have comfortably given one of his houses to your family. This is basically what happened. Since it was the Europeans who were responsible for the near-extermination of the Jews, why didn't they carve out a part of Germany or those countries that colluded with Hitler to kill the Jews as a punishment for their aggression and human rights abuses? Better yet, why wasn't a part of the United States with its vast expanse of land not carved to settle the Jews? Why was the land of people who had nothing to do with the atrocities against the Jews forcibly taken and given to the Jews to nurse the hypocritical guilt of those who colluded with the Nazis actively or by not taking action early enough to avert the Holocaust? Why Palestine of all the countries chosen? The reason is because of the erroneous concept that the Jews originated from that part of the Middle East. The Biblical Jews did live there. However, the Jews currently residing in the state of Israel are Europeans who converted to Judaism and who, generation after generation have practised Judaism. A trace of their ancestry reveals that they are a mixture of Finns and Turks. What is done is however done and dwelling on the past will not create a solution for present ills. With that in mind, we fast-forward to the current crisis and the issues around it.

The basic thrust of this piece is to highlight and bring to the core, the hypocrisy and double standards of the United States in particular and the Europeans in general with regard to the Middle East conflagration in its present status juxtaposed against their positions in other crises. As the supposed defender of democracy, good governance and human rights, the United States does certainly have a chameleonic approach to the implementation of the principles that define its policies. What is black is black in some instances and not others and what is white is white only in some instances but not others. After being the victim of the September 11th. attacks, the United States was quick to manufacture a strict definition of terrorism and widen its application to not only terrorists but those who harbour and support them in any way or form. This has resulted not only in the undue victimisation of states but also individuals.

 The unclear and interest-based definition of what constitutes terrorism highlights the first aspect of the inconsistencies inherent in Western policy. When America becomes the victim of terrorism, the whole world stops yet when America carries out terrorism, the world is caught yawning. When the Palestinian suicide bombers carry out suicide missions against Israel, America and the West scream at the top of their voices. When Israel uses American fighter planes and other Western weapons of destruction, financed for the most part by America, everyone is either silent or busy trying to justify why Israel has to do this. Using suicide bombers to kill innocent Israelis or transforming commercial airlines into exploding projectiles to kill innocent Americans is morally reprehensible. However, using American-made weapons to kill innocent Palestinians no matter how sugar-coated is equally reprehensible. American "smart-bombing" of innocent Iraqis and others and the unjustifiable impostion of sanctions which result in the deaths of hundreds of thousand of innocent Iraqi children, women and men is equally reprehensible. Death by design whether perpretrated through Palestinian suicide bombers, Israeli or American forces or through sanctions which result in the death of innocent civilians are all the same - comtemptible and acts of terrorism which need to be condemned.

 The participation of America as a referee and broker of peace in the Middle East conflict is another demonstration of hypocrisy asAmerica is a party to the conflict despite the fact it is situated thousands of miles away. A referee is supposed to be a neutral being in a conflict. America is not in any way neutral in this conflict. It is in fact a party to the conflict. How can a just settlement be reached in a conflict where one party and the referee are sided against the other party? How can America mediate a just resolution to the conflict when it is clearly and openly biasd in favour of Israel and the election and survival of American administrations to a large extent depend on their policies towards Israel? How can America negotiate a just peace when the American peace envoy is reported to have publicly shown his disgust for Arafat by calling him a liar and someone who cannot be depended upon? How can America be a party to the negotiation when its vice-president showed his disdain for Arafat by sidestepping him on his peace journey to the Middle East?

 The failed attempt by America and Israel to nullify the relevance of Arafat as the leader of the Palestinian people also demonstrates double standards. As the proponent of democracy and elections, America's attempt to sideline the democratically elected leader of the Palestinian people speaks volumes. Arafat is the only legitimate leader of the Palestinian people and as such he should be a participant in any peace iniative. If Arafat were to disappear from the scene today especially through Israeli under-handedness or heavy-handedness, the situation will become untenable. The argument that Arafat is an obstacle to peace is equally true of Sharon yet no one is talking about sidelining Sharon and his government in the search for peace in this conflict.

The whole Western world presses the Palestinian authority to rein in the terrorists and disrupt their network and activities. However, no one tells Israel to scale down its army or reduce its weapons of mass destruction. Everyone gets on Arafat's case and insists that he fights Hamas and other militant organisations. Is this a reasonable request? Is it reasonable for the West to continue to arm Israel with the latest hi-tech weaponry making Israel's army the fourth strongest in the world whilst pressuring Arafat to get rid of the arms the Palestinian people have? Is it reasonable for the West to strengthen Israel's bargaining chip, its army, and ask the Palestinians to get rid of its bargaining chip?

 The fact that when a suicide mission is carried out Arafat is held responsible also demonstrates hypocrisy on a massive scale. When Israel systematically destroys the assets and logistics components of the Palestinian Authority (PA), every one is silent. When the PA's communications facilities, its boats, vehicles, buildings are destroyed and its security forces constantly incapacitated and even killed and Arafat is made a prisoner in the PA compound, no one says anything. Then a suicide bomber strikes and Arafat is held personally responsible for it. Isn't this logic a bit twisted? Even in countries like Great Britain, France, Spain etc. where the security forces have the infrastructure and logistics necessary to combat terrorism, terrorists strike at whim and quite frequently. Why aren't their leaders held responsible? How can one hold Arafat responsible when he is basically a prisoner, his security forces cannot function properly because their buildings, equipment etc. are continually attacked and destroyed by Israel?

 Another display of hypocrisy is the application of UN resolutions. When the UN passes resolutions against countries like Iraq, Libya etc., compliance is expected to the full and the slightest deviation brings the wrath of America and its allies through massive, indiscriminate bombings resulting in the deaths of thousands of civilians and the wanton destruction of property which is skillfully marketed as "smart bombing", "intelligent bombing" etc. and the related horrors masterfully hidden by the media. When the UN debates resolutions which are even slightly critical, America uses its veto power to kill such resolutions. When resolutions are passed against Israel by some stroke of a miracle, it arrogantly flaunts it with impunity. America and the West "urge" Israel to comply which it conveniently ignores and nothing happens.

TO BE CONTINUED.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~