Israeli Fires on Gaza City
With Ali Abunimah
Writer and Commentator
Thursday, Dec. 6, 2001; Noon EST

Israeli helicopter gunships fired missiles near the headquarters of Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat Monday morning, in apparent retaliation for weekend suicide bombings by Islamic militants.

Ali Abunimah, writer and commentator on Middle East and Arab-American affairs, was online Thursday, Dec. 6 at noon EST, to talk about the heightened military action in the Middle East and the state of Israeli-Palestinian relations.

Abunimah is a writer and commentator on Middle East and Arab-American affairs. His articles have appeared in The New York Times, The Los Angeles Times, The Chicago Tribune, The Financial Times, The Philadelphia Inquirer, The Jordan Times and Haaretz, among others. He has been featured on local, national and international radio and television programs including NPR, CNN, the BBC and others.

He is a contributor to "The New Intifada" (Verso, 2001) and recently co-founded "The Electronic Intifada" website, a resource for media activists and journalists.

A transcript follows.

Editor's Note: Washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions.

Washington, D.C.: In your op-ed piece in yesterday's New York Times, you complained that "the targeting and killing of hundreds of Palestinian civilians ... -is] considered mere background noise to Israel's drama." But Israel's troops make every effort to avoid civilian casualties -- much as our American forces do today in Afghanistan. Contrast that to Palestinian terrorists, including Arafat's own Fatah, who purposefully attack crowds of teenagers at discos and on shopping plazas and the young and elderly on public buses.

You correctly "condemn-] ... the targeting and killing of innocent civilians." Now will you finally also draw a distinction between deliberate attacks on civilians, such as we saw this weekend in Jerusalem and Haifa, and the regrettable, but expressly inadvertent, loss of life such as recently occurred with the five Palestinian boys in Gaza?

Ali Abunimah: Every human rights group that has looked into Israel's practices, including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, the Israeli group B'Tselem, and many others, have found that Israel deliberately shoots to kill unarmed Palestinian civilians, and indeed the vast majority of the nearly nine hundred Palestinian civilians killed were unarmed. Over two hundred of them are children. All the human rights groups have found a deliberate pattern of gunshots to the upper body and head. Each of them has websites, so you can easily verify this yourself. I think that the following quote from an article written by Michael Finkel in the New York Times magazine on December 24, 2000 illustrates very well the findings of every human rights group that has looked into it. He is speaking of his observations in one place in the occupied Gaza Strip:

"I spent two weeks at Karni during daylight hours, and in my time there, the Israeli Army fired live ammunition almost every day. Sometimes only two or three shots, sometimes a dozen or more. On occasion the shots were fired when cars or buses needed to enter or exit the settlement, at other times I could ascertain no reason for the shooting. Not once did I see or hear a single shot from the Palestinian side. Never during the time I spent at Karni did an Israeli soldier appear to be in mortal danger. Nor was either an
Israeli soldier or settler even slightly injured. In that two-week period, at least 11 Palestinians were killed during the day at Karni."

In addition to this, Israel plants bombs in crowded refugee camps and shells them with the inevitable and predictable result that innocent people are killed, just like the five schoolboys I mentioned in the article.

Washington, D.C.: Mr. Abunimah,

The Electronic Intifada lists the coastal city of Haifa as being in "Palestine" (http://electronicintifada.net/forjournalists/mediacontacts/palestine.html). Given that Haifa is on the Mediterranean and not in the West Bank or Gaza, how can we not believe that even supposed "mainstream" Palestinian activists envision a "Palestine from the river to the sea"?

Ali Abunimah: "Palestine" is a recognized historic term for the land between the River Jordan and the Meditterranean sea. Prior to 1948, even Jews referred to this area as Palestine, and Arab people who come from that area are still called Palestinians. Just because that territory is now in the state of Israel does not erase history or erase the names of the places and the attachments people have to them. The Palestinians entered the peace process with the declared goal of establishing a state in the territories occupied by Israel in 1967 (East Jerusalem, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip) based on the principles set out in UN Security Council resolution 242 among others. The guarantees you want will come from signed agreements which implement these resolutions, not from erasing from the memories of every living Palestinian the attachment they have to the land they were brutally expelled from 53 years ago. Just as Israelis refer to the occupied West Bank as "Judea and Samaria," Palestinians will continue to refer to all the lands they came from as "Palestine." But the rights of each state will be guaranteed by international law.

Fairfax, Va.: Hello Mr. Abunimah. Most Americans no longer believe that Arafat is working in good faith to bring under control groups like Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and even his own Fatah groups - Do you believe that Arafat will rise to the challenge and take the necessary moves to eliminate these terror threats?

Ali Abunimah: Mr. Arafat heads a quasi-authority that nominally controls only 17% of the territory of the occupied West Bank and about 65% of the occupied Gaza Strip. In reality his control over these areas is illusory because every Palestinian town and village is under total Israeli military blockade. In addition to that, the Palestinian Authority has been bombed and targeted for more than a year by Israel. Under such conditions, I do not believe anyone could stop suppress Hamas. When Israel controlled all of the occupied territories it could not stop them. Sharon and Barak, whom some people consider to be military geniuses, were unable to stop them. Basically, as long as you have a brutal military occupation suppressing the fundamental human rights of three million people, then that is going to generate resistance. Some of this resistance is going to take illegitimate forms, like the reprehensible suicide bombings.

Fairfax, Va.: Sir, Hamas and other Palestinian groups have made it pretty clear that their ultimate goal is to eliminate Israel as a sovereign nation. In other words, no set of boundaries, pre-1967 or otherwise, would be acceptable to them. In your opinion, how then should Israel defend itself against their attacks?

Ali Abunimah: The goals of the reocgnized, official representatives of the Palestinian people are for the establishment of a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, alongside Israel. Indeed, since 1993, the PLO has formally recognized the right of Israel within secure and recognized borders. This represents an enormous historic compromise for Palestinians, and one that if I were Israeli, would consider to be a very good deal. If Israel would agree to such a deal, then it would win over the majority who do want a fair and reasonable peace.

By refusing to negotiate and continuing to colonize the occupied territories, Israel is simply strengthening the hand of radicals and extremists and ensuring that those who advocate a compromise will lose all support. By the same token, there are parties within the current Israeli government who espouse the destruction of what is left of Palestine, in other words the expulsion of all the remaining Palestinians. If Palestinians argued that they couldn't negotiate with Israel until every last one of these racist extremists was eradicated, then that would make peace just as impossible as the Israeli position does today.

Philadelphia, Pa.: What will it take for the Israeli government to end the occupation of Palestinian land in the West Bank and Gaza, much as the South African white minority finally agreed to end their illegal and immoral control of the Black majority there?

Ali Abunimah: Interestingly enough, on December 2, the BBC World Service radio program "Newshour" asked Mr. Rolf Mayer, a former minister in the last Apartheid government of South Africa whether from his experience he thought that the onus was on the Israeli government or the Palestinians to act to end this conflict. Mayer said that it was not until the Apartheid government--the side with the power--gave up the dream of perpetuating white rule that South Africa could move
forward, and that therefore it was up to Israel--the side with the power--to decide to end its occupation. Mayer said that negotiations take place in the context of conflict and therefore the demand that all violence be stopped as a precondition for negotiations was one which would have doomed the South African peace talks to failure.

Washington, D.C.: Do you believe that the Palestinians as a whole accept the legitimacy of Israel to exist as a Jewish state?

Ali Abunimah: If "Jewish State" means a state that discrminates against and violates the human rights of people whom it does not define as Jewish then certainly not. If Jewish state means a state where Jews can live in peace and security according to the way of life that they choose but where non-Jewish citizens have equal rights then yes. Currently Israel is the former, not the latter, which is why it still generates so much opposition. Currently non-Jewish citizens of Israel have second class status, while Palestinians in the Israeli-occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip have no rights at all. At the same time Jewish settlers confiscate Palestinian land by force for their own exclusive colonization. This kind of raw ethnic discrimination violates every tenet of human rights and cannot be condoned no matter what the proclaimed ethnic identity of the state.

Finally, I don't think we can say anything about Palestinians "as a whole." Palestinians, like Americans, Israelis and every other people are incredibly diverse in their views and you will find many Palestinians who disagree with me.

Washington DC: Was the suicide attack on the World Trade Center a justified response to America's support of Israel? If not, why are the suicide bombers attacking civilians in Israel any different?

Ali Abunimah: Obviously not. I share in the total condemnation and rejection of the September 11 attacks that was expressed universally by the Arab American and Muslim communities. As Americans and people living in America these attacks were directed at us, and claimed the lives of many people from our communities. I have said repeatedly that I view all attacks against innocent civilians as being wholly unjustifiable and that includes specifically the suicide bombings as it does Israel's organized and systematic use of violence against Palestinians in order to suppress any resistance to its military occupation of their country.

New York, N.Y.: Sir: Do you believe that the land for peace framework which has been the basis of the Arab-Israeli peace process is still valid?

Ali Abunimah: The land for peace framework as set out in UN Security Resolution 242 calls for a full Israeli withdrawal from east Jerusalem, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip in exchange for full recognition and security for Israel. The resolution allows for minor adjustments of borders but not for the wholesale annexation and settlement of large chunks of the occupied territories by Israel. Unfortunately there has not been one single day since the Israeli-Palestinian peace accords were signed in 1993 that Israel has desisted from seizing more Palestinian lands for the exclusive use of Jewish settlers. These settlements are opposed by the United States and are a clear violation of UN Resolutions and the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention. So Israel's settlement activity undermines the very concept of "land for peace," and if this does not stop it will become impossible. Some believe that the settlements have already made a two-state solution impossible--this of course was Israel's intention when the settlement policy began.

Washington, D.C.: Sir, when Palestinians attack Isreal, Israelis denounce it as terrorism and take revenge. When the Israeli army attacks in Gaza, Palestinians denounce it as terrorism and take revenge through suicide bombings.

My question is, can BOTH sides ever realize that violence is not the answer? Can you ever trust Israel not to use military force, and can Israel ever trust Hamas and Islamic Jihad not to conduct suicide bombings?

Ali Abunimah: I think neither side is now capable of stopping the increasingly brutal and indiscriminate use of violence. The two societies are locked in grip that they cannot get themselves out of: Israel refuses to end its occupation, and the Palestinians refuse to live under it. What is needed is strong international intervention to make Israel and its occupation as quickly as possible and to guarantee a peace that allows both people to live in security. The US has a particular responsibility because it is highly doubtful that Israel would be able to maintain its belligerent military occupation without the massive economic, military and diplomatic support it receives from US taxpayers and the government.

Montreal, Canada: What happensif Arafat is obliged to quit? Who is going to replace him? Is there a risk of a civil war?

Ali Abunimah: I don't think any one really knows the answer to that. The Israeli government is busy demonizing Arafat, while many Palestinians have for a long-time seen him as a leader with many flaws. Yet for all his flaws, he represents the last vestiges of a secular Palestinian leadership that has recognized Israel and is trying to negotiate a compromise. If Israel destroys him, and it looks like they may well do that, then they will be left with Hamas as the only mass, organized movement. Needless to say, Hamas will not be as forthcoming towards Israel as Arafat has been.

Alexandria, Va.: Two days ago on this site Daoud Kuttab said that before 1967 the Arab states fought Israel because "Before 1967 Israel had been created against unilaterally and had refused to allow the refugees to return in violation of UN resoluton 194."

Are not these two conditions which caused fighting in the past still the case?

Do the Palestinians still reject peace unless Israel allows some Palestinian refugees to settle inside of Israel's pre-1967 borders?

washingtonpost.com: Read the transcript of the Live Online discussion with Daoud Kuttab.

Ali Abunimah: There are two prongs to creating a lasting peace between Israel and Palestinians. The first, a total end to Israel's military occupation of east Jerusalem, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, I have discussed in other replies. The second is a justice for Palestinian refugees. When Israel was established in 1947-48, more than 750,000 Palestinians were expelled or fled from their homes and more than 400 of their towns and villages were destroyed. The Israeli author and former deputy mayor of Jerusalem, Meron Benvenisti, has described the expulsions as "ethnic cleansing" in his book "Sacred Landscape" (2000). Under international law, refugees have an inalienable right to return to their homes, regardless of why they left. This right has been consistently recognized for the Palestinians, who today form the largest and longest-standing group of refugees. Israel has concerns that if too many refugees return then that will "destroy the Jewish character of Israel." This desire to maintain ethnic domination does not trump human rights, however. But Israel is a sovereign state and does have rights. So a just solution would allow Palestinian refugees to choose to go home, to choose to go to a Palestinian state, to resettle in a third country, and/or to receive just compensation for their losses. Such a solution has to be negotiated, but has to begin from the principle of recognizing the inherent human rights of the refugees.

Juneau, Ala.: It seems to me that international monitors are needed in this situation. What can average American citizens do to enocurage the Bush administration to ratify and not veto UN resolutions for international monitoring?

Ali Abunimah: I think the main reason that no US administration will take a strong stands towards Israel's violations of international law and human rights has to do with domestic politics and the strengh of the pro-Israel lobby. So I believe that it is very important for US citizens and tax-payers to let the President, Congress and the media know that they would support a strong US stand to end Israel's occupation, and to say that they are opposed to Israel using weapons we have given it for self-defence in order to occupy and colonize other people's land. People also need to learn about the situation, so seek out alternative sources of information. There are many websites dedicated to providing alternative perspectives to what we are told about the situation in the mainstream news media. For example, one of the most basic facts about the conflict--the fact of Israel's 34-year old military occupation is almost never mentioned in TV news reports. We need to hold the media accountable as well.

Ali Abunimah: A further comment about what US citizens can do....

Yesterday in Geneva, more than one hundred states
signatories to the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention Relative to
the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War called on
Israel to abide by the same Convention and other
international laws.

The Daily Telegraph reported that those states including the
United Kingdom and every other member of the European Union
"expressed deep concern about a "deterioration of the
humanitarian situation" in Palestinian areas, condemned
Jewish settlements there as "illegal" and urged Israel to
refrain from "grave breaches" such as "unlawful
deportation", "wilful killing" and "torture"." (December 6,
2001)

This was the first time since the Convention was signed that
the signatories have made any such declaration. Israel is a
signatory to the Convention, which establishes the rules for
protecting civilians in occupied territory, and the UN
Security has repeatedly demanded that Israel abide by it.

The session was boycotted by the United States, Israel and
Australia. The United States as one of the original High
Contracting Parties of the Convention is actually obliged
not only to participate but to enforce the Convention. It
refuses to do so. So we need to call on the US government to
live up to its treaty responsibility and enfore the
Convention. This would at a minimum mean international
protection for the Palestinians in the occupied territories.

Washington, D.C.: Given that eastern Jerusalem was annexed instead of just being occupied, why do Palestinians have any more right to that half of the city than Jews?

Ali Abunimah: Jerusalem was "annexed" in gross violation of international law. The UN Security Council has declared repeatedly that east Jerusalem is occupied territory and currently no country in the world, including even the United States, considers it part of Israel. The Palestinians have rights there because they live there and no one has the right to seize their city by force. I believe that in a peace settlement Jerusalem will have to be shared by Israelis and Palestinians on equal terms, with full guarantees of religious rights for Christians, Jews and Muslims.

Sparta, NJ: If Israel pulled its settlers out of the West Bank and Gaza, gave the land to the Palestinians along with East Jerusalem, in your opinion do you think Hamas, Hezbollah, and Islamic Jihad would stop attacking Israel?

Ali Abunimah: I don't know what Hamas and Islamic Jihad would do. Do you think that if Hamas and Islamic Jihad stopped attacking Israel that Israel would withdraw its settlers, end it occupation and recognize as it has refused to do for the past 53 years the right of self-determination of the Palestinian people?

Seriously though, the Israeli military occupation does not justify suicide attacks but nor does the existence of resistance--both legitimate and illegitimate--justify maintaining the occupation.

For two decades Israel argued that it needed to maintain its occupation of southern Lebanon in order to defend against Hizbullah. This ensured continuous conflict. Since Israel withdrew from Lebanon the border has largely been quiet, except for a few incidents on the border between Lebanon and the occupied Golan Heights (part of Syria occupied by Israel).

LExington VA: Where is your anger at your Arab 'friends' who refuse to let you into their country (Jordan)? Where is your anger at the economic neglect by your Arab brothers of the plight of your Palestinian? Where is your anger at the Egyptians for having "occupied" the West Bank prior to 1967? Shouldn't the Arab world share blame for the current situation?

Ali Abunimah: I don't know what you are talking about. My parents and many of my relatives live in Jordan and I visit them three times a year. I am greatly looking forward to my next visit.

I think your lack of knowledge is revealed by your assertion that Egypt occupied the West Bank prior to 1967.

Clinton, Whidbey Is., WA: A very recent poll of Palestinians indecated that 47% of them were in favor of the elimination of the State of Israel. ... Under those conditions, how can you maintain that it is possible to negotiate a viable, secure and lasting peace? [edited]

Ali Abunimah: Let's be serious. If you ask people living under a brutal military occupation and total siege how they feel toward their occupier, why would you expect anything other than negative feelings. Do you think these negative feelings Palestinians have towards Israel---which are mirrored in Israeli feelings towards Palestinians--emerge in a vaccuum?

Palestinians and Israelis are locked in a structural conflict that is fueled by the occupation. They are not going to like each other, let alone love each other until the occupation ends and each society is given a chance to live a normal life on the basis of equality.

Otherwise your logic follows that in the old adage "beatings will continue until morale improves."

Washington, D.C.: Do you believe that the Israeli government wants to discriminate against its own Arab population, or do you believe that this is a result of the security problems that the state faces and has faced throughout its entire history?

Ali Abunimah: I don't see how state security would justify laws that allow Israel to seize land from its non-Jewish citizens in order to hand it over to its Jewish citizens. Nor could "state security" justify enormous disparities in state funding for health and education, for example.

Israel has discriminated against its Palestinian citizens since day one. It is true that Palestinian citizens of Israel (sometimes called "Israeli Arabs") have some rights, but they do not have equal rights. For the most part, Palestinian citizens of Israel have been peaceful and productive citizens of Israel, but their patience is increasingly wearing thin because they see little change in their inferior status. We rejected "separate and unequal" here in the US as a result of the civil rights movement. Israel needs to do the same.

Leeds , England: I noticed that you, along with every other Palestinian refer to Palestine as being historicaly based from the River Jordan to the Mediteranean. Is it not true that what is now known as Jordan is situated on approximately 78 percent of Mandate Palestine? If the Palestinians could accept the loss of 78 percent of this land for the creation of a seperate independant Arab country, why were they not prepared to share the rest of the land with the Jews? You say the Intifada is the result of occupation, but ws this 'occupied' land not won from Jordan and Egypt? Where was the pre-1967 Intifada against Arab occupation?

Ali Abunimah: The area between the Jordan River and the Med. Sea is where Palestinians live and lived historically. It is the area we cultivated and cared for. It is from this area that 750,000 Palestinians were expelled, and in this area that more than 400 towns and villages were destroyed by the Zionist militias. The area that is now known as Jordan is not hte historic home of the Palestinians, and prior to the Zionists throwing the Palestinians in to the Jordanian desert, few Palestinians lived there.

Arlington, Va.: I think the gentleman (or lady) from Alexandria poorly stated his question, but it is a valid one. Kuwait and Jordan, for example, have expelled scores of Palestinians in the past. Lebanon currently forbids them from owning homes. Isn't it just easier for the Arab League to use Jewish Israel as a scapegoat, when they hardly treat the Palestinians any better?

Ali Abunimah: It is true that some Arab states have treated Palestinians very poorly, and sometimes atrociously, and there is no excuse for that. But none of that justifies Israel's abuses. The difference between Kuwait and Jordan on the one hand, and Israel on the other, is that Palestinians are actually from Israel/Palestine and are being brutally mistreated in their own country.

Washington, DC: I am afraid that there will be a military conflict in the scale we have not seen in a while in Israel / Palestine. Do you think this is likely, and what should be done to avert this?

Ali Abunimah: I'm afraid you may be right. What we need is total disengagement between the two sides, which means a rapid and complete end to Israel's military occupation and a chance for Palestinians to have total freedom in their own country.

washingtonpost.com:

That wraps up today's show. Thanks to everyone who joined the discussion.

Stay tuned to Live Online:

Author Lou Cannon on Ronald Reagan at 1 p.m. EST
Entertainment Guide: Got Plans? at 1 p.m. EST
Post's Jay Mathews on the Challenge Index at 1 p.m. EST
What's Cooking Holiday Special at 1 p.m. EST
Live Online Special Coverage: America At War

Did you know that you can follow more than one Live Online discussion at the same time? Just open another browser window and toggle back and forth between discussions! And, if you miss one, catch up with the Live Online transcripts.

Keep up with the latest in news, sports, politics and entertainment with washingtonpost.com e-mail newsletters.

NEW! Personalize your Post with mywashingtonpost.com. Get customized news, traffic, weather and more.

   |      |