Viewpoint - June 9, 2011

Israel, Syria and Western Hypocrisy
From: sweetpotatoandyam.blogspot.com

If Cuba attacked and took a part of Florida, the US would have the right to counterattack and liberate its territory. As long as Cuba continued to occupy American land, the US could fire on Cuban troops, according to international law, even outside of the occupied territory.

This makes sense to most people when the US is used as an example. But if the occupied territory is in Lebanon, Syria, or Palestine, the rules change and any attempts at self defense are labeled as terrorism. There is no logical difference between the scenarios, but Westerners are conditioned to reserve special rights for themselves without even thinking about it.

Israel has accused Syria of inciting Arab protests along the Syrian border, behaving as if peaceful protests are an attack on Israel's sovereignty. Israel is lucky Syria doesn't exercise its right to fire on Israeli troops because the Golan Heights is Israeli-occupied Syrian territory.

The Christian Science Monitor recently featured an article that was supposed to provide some background on the Golan Heights, which it described as "Israeli-occupied." This factually accurate statement prompted Israel's rabid supporters to accuse the author of anti-Semitism.

The article also made the misleading statement that Israel captured the Golan Heights in the Six Day War. Israel captured the West Bank and Gaza Strip during the war, but advanced its positions in Syria after the UN-brokered ceasefire. This is often ignored by the media, but it is significant because Israel promised to cease hostilities and then broke the agreement by taking more territory.

The United Nations responded by passing resolutions demanding that Israel leave all of the territories, including the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and the Golan Heights. Israel has ignored this demand for over 40 years.

Israel initially said it took the strategic heights because
they posed a serious threat to Israel's security, but later admitted they wanted the agricultural land. In any case, when the US tried to get Israel to sign a peace agreement and return the territory to Syria, they promised to put early warning systems in place to meet Israel's security needs. Israel rejected this offer.

Consider what happened to Iraq in 1990 when President Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait and the UN passed a resolution demanding withdrawal. Within days, Iraq was invaded and utterly devastated by a US-led coalition. Coalition forces not only forced Iraq to leave Kuwait, but deliberately destroyed vital infrastructure and killed thousands of innocent civilians. The infamous Highway of Death is a shocking demonstration of how the West handles recalcitrant Arabs.

Before the invasion, Saddam Hussein said he would end his occupation of Kuwait when Israel ended its occupation of Arab lands. At that time, Israel was occupying the Golan Heights, the West Bank, the Gaza Strip and southern Lebanon, all in violation of numerous UN resolutions. This stunning hypocrisy was missed in the West, but the Arabs certainly noticed.

Israel's supporters are not interested in Arab rights, and will go through wild linguistic and logical twists and turns to obscure the fact Syria is under Israeli occupation. In the comments section of the Christian Science Monitor article, any disagreement with Israel's official narrative was ferociously attacked. When cornered by facts, the Israeli side will resort to bullying, and of course, the standard accusations of anti-Semitism.

If you get them to agree that the Golan Heights is occupied, they will say it is because the Arabs started a war against Israel in 1967. If you prove that Israel started the Six Day War, they will say Israel was justified in its preemptive strike because the Arabs posed a threat. If you prove that both Yitzak Rabin and Menachem Begin said they knew the Arab countries were not a threat and chose to attack anyway, they will say that Israel must keep the land for security reasons.

So on it goes, as they dig deep in their bottomless bag of excuses for Israel's impunity. The bottom line is that, no matter who initiated the conflict, international law forbids the acquisition of territory by force. That law is enshrined in resolutions demanding withdrawal, but as usual, Israel is above the law.

Israel argues that it must keep all of the occupied territories in Palestine and Syria to provide "strategic depth" and "defensible borders." Israel has the 3rd or 4th most powerful military in the world, financed and equipped by the US, and the Arab states are comparatively weak. Why is there no concern for Arab security needs? If Jews and Arabs had the same rights, then Israelis, Syrians, Lebanese, and Palestinians would all have the right to peace and security, and they would all be expected to comply with international law.

Israel ended its occupation in most of Lebanon's territory, but continues to occupy Shaba Farms, Syria's Golan Heights, and the Palestinian West Bank and Gaza Strip, while declaring every conflict in the region is the fault of the Arabs. This is like someone who has his hand in your pocket diverting attention by continuously shouting "thief!" at the top of his lungs.

- Original Article: Israel, Syria and Western Hypocrisy

Missed an Issue? Visit the Viewpoint Archives

Check out evtv1.com for Political Videos