Twelfth instalment of the chronicle about the Palestine


Often Israel has been defined as a democratic country, a free nation. Can this kind of State be defined as being democratic? First of all one needs to see what one considers democracy to be. Unfortunately, democracy is often defined as the simple abuse of authority of the majority, or little more. Naturally this type of concept of democracy is unacceptable. Should it be applied, infact, to a majority of degenerates, for example, laws in favour of paedophilia could even be passed. Usually however, things are not as clear as this to many people. Often one rather witnesses the action of States which, although they have Constitutions and other instruments destined to not end up as a simple abuse of authority, which then becomes dictatorship of the majority, are instead only those which are considered to be the "elite". This recalls the case of the United States of America, which have a pseudo-democratic regime, that is of a formal democracy, empty and unsubstantial, given that they try to impose themselves, in the name of democracy, an a way that is far from democratic. Above all, they do not have the moral authority to do so; having a past and a present which are not exemplary (they have, for example, caused three million deaths in Vietnam, just to quote one of the several examples possible).

 It must be these same people who wish to change certain situations, but only if they really want it, a thing which is not impossible, if we recall the case of the Afghans, helped only indirectly by other States against the Soviets. Returning to the matter of Israel, one must again remember that it does not have a Constitution. Democracy cannot be reduced to an electoral mechanism. Israel cannot be defined as democratic, as you cannot be democratic only one side of the inhabitants. Even if the Palestinians within Israel have formally the right to vote, they are second-class citizens, but it is certainly no the only problem. The right to vote however important it may be is absolutely not the only thing. When assassinations and torturing are legalised, both of which occurred in Israel, you cannot legitimately define yourself democratic, due to the fact that the right to live and of safety come well before the right to vote. When you are dead you cannot vote. Democracy must not be pure abuse of authority of the majority: in which case open dictatorship has at least the advantage of not being hypocritical. Even if it is human nature not to be able to reach absolute perfection, and there can be different levels of democracy, surely when they are lifted to the torturing and murdering system level of political adversaries, then the limit has been exceeded, and you cannot speak of democracy any more. There are also other signs of the Jewish Israeli society going backwards, with the historian Benny Morris, which highlighted many aspects of the expulsions of 1948, which now remembers nostalgically that the deportations had not been completed, and with the case of the student from the University of Haifa, expulsed in December 2000 due to the fact that he had proven without doubt the massacre of Tantura (which had always been well-known about amongst the Palestinians).


French writer Jean Genet

 Regarding the allowed torturing in Israel, one can further reinforce the matter by having a quick look also at this link in Internet, taken from the Israeli organisation B'tselem: Israel constantly applies the criteria of the two weights and the two measures: for example, he besieged Arafat for months, up until obtaining in 2002 the arrest on behalf of the forces of the very Arafat of the Palestinians of the Palestinian Popular Liberation Front, responsible for the assassination of the dangerous Israeli minister Rehavam Zeevi (one of the most extremist Zionists), whilst the same Jewish government openly orders assassinations of the Palestinian political exponents.

Palestinian wounded in Liban by Israelis


Amongst the devastating weapons used by the Israelis there is also napalm, used especially in the war in 1967, during which several thousands of civil Palestinians were killed. Then there is also the suspicion that the Israeli population use depleted uranium, devastating for the ecological and sanitary equilibriums (like the Americans in Serbia and in Iraq). The Palestinian problem is spoken about very often, but it is not spoken about very often in a correct manner: sometimes it is as though it is implicit that the Palestinians had been and got themselves into trouble; in reality what has happened is substantially an unmotivated catastrophe, and the problem is the matter of the aggressive and expansionist nature which has become second nature to Zionism, which has built on ground belonging to others an entity called Israel. Still regarding the impunity of which the Zionist criminals take advantage, they are paradigmatic also in the cases of the American Rachel Corrie and the young English boy belonging to the International Solidarity Movement, both of which were assassinated by the Israeli, without these ever being punished for such crimes. The American Rachel was horribly crushed by a bulldozer in March 2003, whilst she tried to defend some poor Palestinian homes with her body; the young English boy was killed whilst he defended Palestinian children from the Zionist shooting. Both these courageous young people have not had justice not even after their death. In particular, the Bush Jnr. government did not minimally protest the barbarous assassination of Rachel (we remember that the Palestinians had warned the Israeli Jewish soldiers that Rachel was using her body as a shield to protect the houses in Rafah, but the delinquents in uniform had gone ahead). Concerning this, the words of Israel Shamir are still very useful, which define the Zionists as also slaves of money ("Mammonites", from the ancient Aramaic Mammon term, used in the Gospels). Here is what he says: "The Mammonites do not care at all about the inhabitants of the United States of America, but they use them as their instrument in order to reach the worldwide dominion.

 Their ideal paradigm of the world is ancient, or futuristic: they dream of a world of slaves or of owners. And in order to fulfil this, the Mammonites try to destroy in every way the cohesiveness of the social and national unity". The quotation has been taken from the work "The Tanks and Olives of Palestine. The crash of silence “(edition Ctr, Pistoia 2002). From this work other important quotations can be taken on the greediness of money, in this case referring both to the Zionists and to the governors of the U. S. A.: "Neither Christ nor Mahomet are not in the interest of the new elite of power, it is true, but they have a deep sense of devotion towards another ancient deity Mammon. This ancient god of meanness was so loved by the Pharisees two thousand years ago, as we learn from the Gospels [...] Karl Marx came to a revolutionary conclusion: the faith in Mammon, became the true religion of the American elite. [...] The Mammonites need immigrants for themselves. [...] The immigrants [...] cannot possibly understand that the Mammonites desire them just as the vampires desire fresh blood [...] Many honest people hate Zionism, because it has caused this massive destruction of the marvellous soil of Palestine and has uprooted the Palestinians [...] His eldest brother, the Mammonite, is a worldwide curse which wants to reduce the world to a <<Big Israel>>, with many shopping centres and villages destroyed, settlements for some privileged people and many, many refugees as sources of cheap labour. The Zionists have ruined the nature of Palestine; the Mammonites have ruined the entire worldwide environment. The Zionists have uprooted the Palestinians, the Mammonites have uprooted everyone."

Rachel Corrie


 Instead, as regards the political line of Arafat, it is indisputable that he had contemplated too many yieldings and subjections. When you give in on so many matters, furthermore, you cannot even offer counterparties whilst one us trying to obtain yieldings on the behalf of the other party. The risk is that of the selling-off of the cause, a problem which presented itself already in 1992 by the Palestinian Hanan Ashrawi, belonging to the small Palestinian Anglican community, of protestant derivation, and a name well-known in the Palestinian political culture. Arafat has therefore had many failures, even if he had the extenuating circumstances to undergo the unfair American mediation. The Israeli and Palestinian parties, as for position of strength, they are on a footing which is certainly not one of equality. This is certainly not for a major Israeli value, but for present worldwide balances (or quite the opposite unbalances). The same colonies, according to a survey carried out by Peace Now, even if they believed that they had the authority to steal the Palestinian land, they are only prepared minimally to fight to maintain the possession of it. It is not, therefore a question of major military value on behalf of the Jews. However, despite certain aspects of Arafat’s politics are to be looked with a critical eye, it is right to defend when Sharon besieges him at Ramallah and threatens him with death. Even as regards other matters he complains to Arafat (persona management, widespread corruption within his entourage) he is not absent in the various Israeli governments, especially after the repeated financial scandals during the Netanyahu and Sharon governments. Furthermore, one should not let oneself be intimidated by the usual anti-Semitic accusation with which the critics have already been labelled, without distinguishing the right from the left, of the Israeli government. It is necessary to ask oneself: What is anti-Semitism? Sometimes with this the criticism is indicated as the presupposition of Zionism. In reality it deals with Anti-Zionism, which proves to be decisively legal and morally dutiful for those who understand the matter, in order to oppose politics of pure predominance towards those who are not Jewish. At other times it is indicated by Anti-Semitism the criticism of the same Jewish religion: but the criticism of the religion is part of the freedom of thought, and certainly this does not mean that one is automatically a criminal. What is to be avoided is to consider people as rivals for their pure ethnic origins, whatever that ethnic origin may be. However, the positive way in which for example Israel Shamir, the Christian of Jewish origin, in turn contrary to Zionism, makes people understand how the problem in this conflict is certainly not due to ethnic origin. Instead, most Israeli politicians have the project of not granting the Israeli citizenship to people of Jewish origin who convert themselves to other religions, but actually the proposal has not been put into force. It is possible not to grant the Israeli citizenship to Palestinians considered to be guilty of terrorism, but not to Jewish terrorists. It then remains to remember, once again, the inexactness of the same Anti-Semitic term, when the great majority of the Semites is not Jewish. As regards the fact that often the Palestinians are called extremists, one has to ask oneself: What does one mean by moderate Arabian countries? Countries called in this way simply follow a policy of submission to the U. S. A., as in Kuwait, where the women cannot vote (whilst they vote in Iran, often indicated as being of an archaic structure: but Iran has a revolutionary foreign policy hated by the Americans).

 The Palestinian society, of patriarchal roots, has become one of the most developed societies of the Arab world, integrating tradition and modernity, with a non-marginal role for women: Divorce, is possible, for example, also upon the woman’s initiative (divorce is allowed by the Koran, even if it is considered to be the last option to be chosen in case of marital problems). Also Hamas does not impose the veil, which is not even directly prescribed by the Koran, but which is often used as a symbol of orderly dressing, giving it in this way also a religious value: however, its most important meaning is to be essentially part of the local fashion trend, and it was widespread amongst the Arabs also in Pre-Islamic times. And it is not true that the Palestinians and the Arabs have opposed the Zionists only due to the fact that the latter are Jews: the Palestinians have opposed also the Jordanians when they wanted to govern them. So, in Africa the Saharawi, the Arabic-Berberian population of the Western Sahara, they opposed to the attempts to govern them by other two Arabic countries: Morocco and Mauritania. Which are instead the true hopes for the Palestinian population? Despite the serious situation at present, there are many reasons to believe that Palestine will return to the people who have loved and respected her. Despite the continuing Zionist invasion, every place, every village which resists, each town which remains Palestinian is a victory against the Israeli imperialism. One of the matters which has to be fought for the most is that of the right of the Palestinian refugees to return to their homes. Considering the situation of the Palestinian refugees abroad, and of their condition of continuing precariousness, similar to being in limbo, and threatened by the Israelites, it is so expressed by the radical and politically transversal French author, Jean Genet, recalling his meeting with elderly Palestinian female refugees in Djebel Hussein, in Jordan: "They could still see a Palestine which did not exist anymore since they were about sixteen years old [...] They were neither underneath, nor above, in a worrying place where the slightest movement was considered to be a false movement. Was the land still underneath the bare feet of these tragic eighty-year-olds of supreme elegance? It was less and less so. When they had escaped from Hebron under Israeli threat, here the land seemed to be solid then, everybody had become lighter and they moved within the sensuality of the Arabic language. Then, with the passing of time, it seemed as though they tested the land where they were: that the Palestinians were less and less tolerable ". Genet states again, in another excerpt: "God, the Jews said and they still say today, had promised them a land [...], and therefore this area, which did not belong to the god of the Jews (this land was full of gods), this area was inhabited by the Canaans who also had their own gods, which they fought [...]". Especially, due to the upset of the land of the refugees, Genet wrote yet again in the same work, his touching essay "Four hours to Chatila": "In the fields [...] the refugees dreamed of Palestine which they had known, no-one dared to say or admit to knowing that Israel had changed it so violently and so completely, so that where previously there had been a field of barley now there was a bank, where there had been a climbing vine, now there was a power station ". Infact, the Zionists often had even destroyed cemeteries on purpose, in a way of putting an end to civilisation. This had happened to Muslim cemeteries upon which the rue Argon in Jerusalem and the Hilton hotel in Tel Aviv had been built (near the Zion hill, from which the Zionists had derived the name of their ideology). Other than remembering that Balfour had signed his treaty in 1917, when England did not yet own that land, promising Palestine, that also the Palestinians called the land of milk and honey, to the Zionists, Genet expressed his beliefs. Infact he stated: "The choice of a privileged community, beyond that of its origins, when one belongs to those people by birthright, it is a choice that one makes by means of an unreasoned adhesion, not that the justice is not present, but it is that this kind of justice and the whole defence of such a community is carried out by virtue of a recall [...] I am French, but I completely [...] defend the Palestinians. The right is on their side [...]". Infact not by chance the Israelis fear the return of the Palestinian refugees so much, that it could put the Jewish majority of the country in danger, built on ethnic clearance. It is right therefore to support the return of the Palestinian refugees not only to the CisJordan and the Gaza Strip, but also in Israel. The Palestinians will not remain for long in the cantons in which they have been confined, similar to the Bantustan people of South Africa and the reserves for the unfortunate Red-Indians (as regards this, an analogy between the persecution amongst natives of North America and Palestinians is given purely by the circumstance that some Palestinian victims of the massacres in Sabra and Chatila were scalped: in this way some American cowboys of doing this to Red-Indians, and not vice versa as it was told instead by a black legend). At this point, a Palestinian State in the Cis-Jordan area and the Gaza Strip can infact be a solution which is, at the most temporary but probably not definite considering the Israeli attempts to unite vast areas of settlements, and the demographic growth of the Palestinian population, also in Israel. Despite the use of contraceptive techniques which have been also been approved by the very Islamic authorities (whilst the methods of abortion are not considered to be means of birth control, and the Palestine law forbids them too, except in cases in which the life of the mother is endangered), the average number of children per woman is extremely high in the Palestinian society, reaching, for example, the amount of six children per woman in the Cis-Jordan area and of eight children per woman in the Gaza Strip. And still, the demographic growth, more or less the same amongst the Palestinians included in Israel, cannot only bring with it economical difficulties, but can also contribute to the re-Arabisation of Palestine itself. The situation is precarious: also in the few mixed cultured cities of Israel, Jews and Palestinians in many cases live together whilst at the same time they ignore each other. Given the difficulties created by the hypotheses of the two States, one possible solution could be that of considering the two States at the most a temporary answer to the problem but not a definite one. A further step ahead could well be that of an unique State in all the historical area of Palestine, in which all ethnic groups of every culture can love side-by-side, in order to reach a situation in which brings the two parties onto an equal plane and to be without any form of discrimination. In order to carry out this step, however, it is opportune that the Palestinians re-acquire their own sovereignty, starting right from the Cis-Jordan area and the Gaza Strip, where the settlements, for the most part are illegal are to be broken-up. Infact, an equal plane cannot exist when the Jewish colonies continue to steal water and land. The idea of an unique State which is not mono-ethnical non in the entire historical area of Palestine is supported in reality by the deepest sentiments of the Palestinian population, and also by valid intellectual people, amongst which we can mention Edward Said, a Palestinian from Jerusalem who has recently passed away, and by the same journalist of Russian origins Israel Shamir, who propose a totally different kind of peace with respects to that of the false promises of Oslo. The peace-talks with Syria have never gone ahead, and this even with the new Syrian president Bashar El Assad (son of Hafez). The Golan is one of the Arab territories which is most densely colonised, in percentages, by Israelis. With the war in 1967, 500.000 Syrian refugees were protected in other areas of Syria, and only in 1973 there was the partial Syrian re-conquest of that territory, with the recapturing also of the important Syrian city of Quneytra. In the Golan, approximately 16,000 Syrians, have managed to remain there, but have soon been overtaken in number by the number of Jewish colonies which have illegally settled down in the territory. The Golan was annexed in 1981, but the annexation has not been recognised. Syria, supporter of firmness, has never accepted the Israeli annexation. Also as regards the Golan the Zionists have continue their well-tested technique of creating cunning divisions: the village of Ghajar, on the border between the Golan and Lebanon, in particular with the territory of Shebaa (a square patch of Lebanese land still occupied by the Israelis for strategic reasons, uninhabited and claimed by Lebanon, despite the uncertain status given to it by the United Nations, concerning its being fought over also by Syria and Lebanon), was divided from the rest of the Syrian territory of the Golan. Infact the village of Ghajar is in its framework due to its borderline position. Israel has taken advantage of the contrasts in order to try to make its presence in Ghajar definite, imposing the inhabitants to take the Israeli citizenship. The village is therefore finds itself half controlled by its Lebanese neighbours (due to an international agreement) and half by the Israelis, with the Arab farmers separated from their own land. However, the village of Ghajar is historically Syrian, and Syria has not given it up. The approximately 1,300 inhabitants of Ghajar are Alawites, and also this confessional difference of theirs from the around 15,000 Syrian Druses of the Golan have contributed in a way so that it makes it easier for Israel to isolate them. However, the inhabitants of Ghajar have opposed to the division of the village (which has infact broken off a part of the Syrian Golan, allowing it to be occupied by the Lebanese). The Zionist strategy has always been that of the division, if one considers that Israel has aided the E. L. S. from right back in 1970, that is to say from before the Lebanese Civil War, given rise to also by the Israeli manoeuvres, and that often foreign troops were involved (for example the French and American soldiers hit by the terrorist attacks by the Shiites in 1983, which caused hundreds of victims). And still, as a last analysis, the Israeli attempts to divide the Arab world have failed, especially their attempts to create divides between the Muslims and Christians of Palestine: The Palestinian Resistance has had many important Christian exponents amongst its recruits (George Habbash, Najef Hawatmeh, Wafi Haddad, only to quote a few examples of Christian Palestinians), given then that even Jesus Christ is highly honoured by Muslims as one of their prophets. Returning to the question on the Golan, the Syrian Druses managed to maintain their own Syrian citizenship, refusing the Israeli citizenship (a possibility which was not granted to the Palestinians on the Israeli borders, who did not have a part of their own State set up). The opposition of the Zionist politicians has cost the Syrian Druses a great limitation of their freedom of movement. In the Syrian area of the Golan, the Israelis have destroyed about a hundred villages. The Palestinian part of the Golan, very small and the most part of it is on the coast of the Tiberiade Lake, has seen the destruction, on behalf of the Israelis, of the Palestinian villages of Al Samra, Al Nuqayb, Al Hamma and Samakh (the original place of birth of the Palestinian author and political activist Yahya Yakhouf). The peace-talks between Israel and Syria have run aground really due to the question as to the fact if Israel will give back only the Syrian Golan or also the Palestinian Golan, with the Syria which wants the liberation of the entire area of the Golan. Obviously it is right that the Palestinian part of the Golan belongs to the Palestinians. However the matter has been remembered very little by the very Palestinian negotiators, for fear that Syria would want to maintain some kind of control over the area (and Syria is at the same time amongst the Countries which have supported the Palestinian Resistance the most). However, if it remains with Israel that territory will certainly not be given back to the Zionists, whilst a delivery into Syrian hands may only be temporary. In the end, however, that portion of the Golan is Palestinian, a circumstance which has recently been remembered also by Arafat: it is right that is should be given back, sooner or later, to the Palestinians. Above all the consciousness of the unjustness of the separation made in 1948 remains, which was decided in a dishonest manner ("Sirs, I am sorry but I must answer to hundreds of people who expect the success of Zionism. I do not have thousands of Arabs amongst my electors. “Truman had stated, in what was no different from what the American president Clinton and many other colleagues of the same nationality). If the choice had been made by the population of Palestine, certainly things would have gone differently, given that the Palestinians made up about 70% of the population, despite the massive illegal Zionist immigration. And we should not forget that the right to invasion doe not exist, especially when one comes to land belonging to others. There are approximately 200,000 Palestinians, who had tried not to allow their land being taken away from them, and who had been killed by the Zionists during the 1940s. Counting the assassinations previous to that period and the Palestinian victims killed abroad, often by the Zionists themselves, the deaths are even more, always in the order of hundreds of thousands of people. And yet, the Palestinian society is vital, and the love for one’s own land is even stronger than tyranny. Many soldiers continue to sacrifice themselves religiously against what is called al-adu al-sahyuni, which is the Zionist enemy. These fighters do not even speak about Dawlat Isra'il, (the State of Israel) but simply of al-kiyan al-sahyuni, that is of the Zionist entity. Amongst the Palestinians patriotic names are widespread, for example "Jaffa", "Haifa", "Sabra", "Shatila" (Chatila), and obviously "Palestina" ("Falastin", "Filastiin"). Mohammed-Rami Al Dura, the small Palestinian boy killed in front of the TV cameras during the second Intifada in September of 2000 (whilst his father Jamal was injured but he managed to survive), has become a symbol, and to whom songs have been dedicated, and not only in Palestinian. In the Palestinian society there are many demonstrations of cultural richness, flourishing especially in the artistic and literary fields, and above all regarding poetry, the film industry, music and philosophy (one recalls the important studies on the Italian philosopher Julius Evola, much appreciated in the Palestinian environment, especially for his studies on the mystical and esoterical aspects of Islam) and also technical-scientific fields. In historical eras, and with the changing of the present unbalancing, like those who have fallen in the crusade States in the East during the Middle Ages, in this way Palestine will return to its own people, who have never forgotten it and they have made it the most loved land of all.

The End

Antonella Ricciardi

Related article:    
Other instalments of the chronicle about the Palestine (italian only)