Israel’s ‘right’ to defend itself — from itself

JVL Introduction

Israel’s right to defend itself is always invoked as though this was the most natural right in the world.

It isn’t, when what is involved is a conflict between an occupier and subjects under occupation as is the case about the occupied Palestinian territory.

Yes, the West Bank including east Jerusalem and the Golan Heights are under occupation.

And yes, the Gaza strip is also under occupation: Israel controls its borders and all movement into and out of the territory; it controls power supplies into Gaza; it controls fishing off Gaza’s coast. it even controls its population registry.

So the idea of two equal states in a war with each other is a catastrophically inaccurate categorisation of what is happening – as it was of all previous Israeli wars on Gaza.

And it is rich to present Israel – a state that is in daily breach of many clauses of the 4th Geneva Convention, many of which may amount to war crimes – as the victim in a conflict it provoked, with its encouragement of right-wing triumphalism in the Old City on Jerusalem Day, its invasion of the al Aqsa Mosque and much else in the days, months and indeed years leading up to this current escalation of the conflict.

 

This article was originally published by Mondoweiss on Thu 13 May 2021. Read the original here.

Israel’s ‘right’ to defend itself — from itself

”Israel has the right to defend itself”, says Joe Biden. This is the worn-out mantra uttered by US Presidents every time Israel pummels Gaza.

Haim Bresheeth poignantly responded to this claim in his recent piece on this site:

Every time Israel forces the situation into an explosive juncture, the US and its allies are insisting on Israel’s ‘right to defend itself’, as if destroying Gaza or Beirut is a form of defense, or as if the denial of rights, and imposing an illegal total blockage is a way of resolving conflict”.

But is it even true? Does Israel have the right to defend itself in this situation?

In 2014, Noura Erakat wrote an excellent piece on this legal issue – and everything there is ever so relevant to what happens today:

“No, Israel Does Not Have the Right to Self-Defense In International Law Against Occupied Palestinian Territory”, is the title.

Erekat explains cogently:

A state cannot simultaneously exercise control over territory it occupies and militarily attack that territory on the claim that it is “foreign” and poses an exogenous national security threat. In doing precisely that, Israel is asserting rights that may be consistent with colonial domination but simply do not exist under international law.

In other words, the adamant insistence on “Israel’s right to defend itself”, is there precisely because that right is not absolute, and depends upon the paradigm in which this supposed “defense” is claimed. Israel, as the occupying power, can alter the situation by relinquishing its occupation. But since it doesn’t do that, it can’t have its cake and eat it: it can’t both occupy and claim victimhood.

This principle has been regarded as a very serious matter, by very serious people, such as Naim Moussa on this site the other day, that Netanyahu, “with his legislative agenda failing to materialize… turned to his oldest trick in the book: incite and provoke the Palestinians.” While I do not reduce Netanyahu’s motivation to only that, Netanyahu is clearly pressed and desperate, not least due to the political nexus between his remaining in power and his ability to escape the consequences of his various corruption cases.

So let’s look at Netanyahu.

He’s a master of political survival, he really is. “The oldest trick in the book” really worked. His former ‘liberal’ rival, Benny Gantz, who came into politics boasting of returning Gaza to the “stone age”, has now sought to euphemize his own words, saying that “for every day of attacks on Israeli citizens, we’ll take the terror organizations back years.” Now, as Defense Minister, Gantz can show he’s the man again, after having been humiliated by Netanyahu last year– tricked into joining a unity government in which his supposed turn to be Premier never came (Israel went to new elections).

Israelis join in times of wars like in no other times. Well, the Jewish Israeli ones mostly join under their Zionism, and Palestinians who protest in solidarity with their Palestinian brethren, are seen as traitors.

So the war situation also creates the necessary societal rift, by which the Zionist vein is strengthened. This is what a right-wing leader needs, and it’s what a Zionist leader in general will often end up doing – inciting Palestinians and playing the hero. Ehud Barak was no exception, but Ariel Sharon was better at it than him, back in 2000, when the 2nd Intifada was provoked.

It’s worth reflecting upon: Netanyahu is doing whatever he can to stay in power. And he is trying to defend himself from the consequences of his court cases. For that, dozens are killed, for that, Joe Biden has to say that “Israel has the right to defend itself”. How cynical is that?

And Netanyahu, does he have the right to defend himself – in court, I mean? Well, yes, of course why not. But anyone claiming righteously that “Netanyahu has the right to defend himself” nowadays will only be scoffed at. I mean, who says that? It’s only the diehard Likudniks. In the overall paradigm of corruption and political control, Netanyahu’s political machinations and manipulations make the claim “Netanyahu has the right to defend himself” rather vacuous, or even morally repugnant. To claim such an obvious thing is beyond pedantic – it is a political statement in the court of public opinion, in defense of a corrupt leader.

Yet the comparison is insufficient, to take it back to the question of Israel’s Gaza onslaught version 2021. Because in Netanyahu’s case, he has the legal right to defend himself. In Israel’s case, it doesn’t even have the legal right. The insistence on this right is political populism, meant to overdub the simple truth, that Israel is in the wrong. If you are an occupier, if you are a single Apartheid state of Jewish supremacy from the river to the sea, then you don’t get to claim victimhood, as much as it hurts.

Palestinians have the right to protect themselves from Israel’s Apartheid and occupation brutality. When Israel stops victimizing Palestinians by Apartheid, we can talk of its right to defend itself. An Apartheid regime should not be protected.

Comments (5)

  • DJ says:

    The coloniser demanding the right to defend itself from the colonised. How dare the Palestinians exercise their human right to resist their subjugation by the occupying power. In the case of this “conflict” the rules are upside down. Israel steals Palestinian land and property and commits war crimes against them. When they resist Israel insists on its right to inflict further violence upon them. They want us to believe they are the victim when the truth is the other way round. Israeli propogandists supported by Joe Biden turn reality on its head to justify the blitz on Gaza.

    1
    0
  • Linda says:

    I’m a pragmatist so as well as “rights” I want to know about “power” and “levers”.

    The only “levers” I can see that may change the situation within Israel is if those outside Israel (chiefly the USA) become noticeably less willing to back or fund the Israeli government. The more outsiders back off, the greater the impact and voices of extremely brave Israeli protesters against the wrongs being done by their government.

    One can see changes coming. The children of the Holocaust generation are themselves getting very old; younger generations of Jews and non-Jews may well be less prepared to excuse today’s bad behaviour by the Israeli government and settlers because of the horrendous suffering from the late 1930s until 1945. The Israeli government’s cosy relationship with monsters like Trump won’t have done them any favours in the long run. It seems likely that Trump will face a series of personally embarrassing court cases over the next few years. Those who were Trump’s close allies may well find any uncovered dirt harms them as much as him.

    0
    0
  • John Higginson says:

    Why is Margaret Hodge et.al. cannot stand up in Parliament and read this article and finish with the question; Are we in this house on the wrong side of history? Have we duped ourselves in our blind support for Zionism? I can almost see it. And Hamas ? A distraction that Netanyahu knows that he can use anytime to garner US and UK outrage. The unrest within Isreal itself seems like a blossoming of hope to which the whole world can give their hearts.

    0
    0
  • Mr N Haines says:

    Well said.

    1
    0
  • DJ says:

    If a state is illegitimate does it have the right to defend itself? There is nothing legitimate about ethnic cleansing or the apartheid system the Israeli state has established to deliver Jewish supremacy over the Palestinians.

    1
    0

Comments are now closed.