Progressivt å støtte fundamentalister?

En virkelig “Freedom Flotilla” hadde seilt til Gaza for å frigjøre folket fra herskerne. Når ble det progressivt å støtte fundamentalister i et teokrati? Det spør Leon Wieseltier i noe av det mest ettertenksomme og fornuftige jeg har lest om saken. Han undersøker ikke minst Henning Mankells rolle:

Consider the case of Henning Mankell, the Swedish writer of thrillers (and the son-in-law of Ingmar Bergman) who was a passenger on one of the boats in the “Freedom Flotilla.” In his youth he took part in anti-Vietnam and anti-apartheid demonstrations, presumably in the spirit of secular reason. For a while he lived in Norway and participated in the activities of a radical Maoist party: let us call that secular unreason. Now he does the work of Hamas and its mullahs. Last year Mankell attended the Palestine Festival of Literature in east Jerusalem—or would have attended it, if the Israeli authorities had not idiotically closed it down. When he returned to Sweden, he wrote: “The state of Israel in its current form has no future. Moreover, those who advocate a two-state solution have not got it right. … The question is whether it will be possible to talk sense into the Israelis in order for them to willingly accept the end of their own apartheid state.” This man has rights, at sea and on land, but he can hardly be lauded as a champion of peace and reconciliation. You are not for co-existence if you advocate the disappearance of one of the terms.

Men, sier Leon Wieseltier, Mankells sterkt anti-israelske holdninger rettferdiggjør overhodet ikke angrepet på Mavi Marmara. Det paradoksale er at Gaza-konvoien kan ha gjort det enda vanskeligere å få slutt på Gaza-blokaden. Begrunnelsen for den er nemlig svært uklar, ifølge Yaacov Lozowick:

To the best of my knowledge no Israeli government since the onset of the blockade in early 2006 has clearly stated what it’s for, what it’s intended to achieve, and what benchmarks are in use to determine its extent, duration, and eventual lifting. It started, I think, as a response to the electoral victory of Hamas; it was strengthened, if memory serves, after the kidnapping of Gilad Shalit; it has been tightened or loosened in some form of correspondence to the rocket fire from Gaza. At one point Ehud Olmert, then prime minister, said clearly that the blockade would be lifted when Shalit came home; if that’s the policy still then it isn’t about smuggling weapons – but perhaps the policy has changed. I honestly don’t think it has ever been publicly discussed.

Yaacov Lozowick mener statsminister  Benjamin Netanyahu burde holde denne korte talen – hvis han har et snev av klokskap:

Israel recognizes that the blockade of Gaza is causing human suffering, and wishes to end it as soon as possible. Since there are no Israeli forces or citizens in Gaza, and the border between it and Israel is undisputed, all that remains for Israel to fully desist from any sort of intervention in the lives of the Gazans is that they not interfere in the lives of Israelis. This means they must return the single Israeli still in Gaza, Gilad Shalit; they must desist from any form of aggression against Israel; and they must pay the bill for whatever services they receive from Israel such as electricity or medical bills of Gazan citizens. Should these terms be met, the blockade will be lifted completely and immediately.

Israel now turns to the United States, to Turkey, and to the United Nations. We hereby announce that it is our urgent wish to lift the blockade from Gaza so as to enable the Gazans to live their lives independently of us. We will take this measure as soon as you can assure us of the following:

1. There will be no attacks from Gaza on Israel.
2. Imports of aggressive weapons into Gaza will not happen.
3. Gilad Shalit has returned to his family.

Israel has decided that Gaza is the test for the continuation of the peace process. Should the international community in collaboration with the Palestinians be able to deliver the three simple conditions described above, Israel will be eager to move forward in negotiations regarding the West Bank. If these three simple conditions cannot be met by the Palestinians, or cannot be guaranteed by the US, Turkey and the United Nations, how can Israel lower its defensive abilities on the West Bank?
The onus is now on you: Gazans, the United States, Turkey, and the United Nations. Please hurry, since the populace of Gaza is suffering, and we wish to end our part of that suffering as soon as possible.

As Prime Minister of Israel, it is my intention to repeat this short speech once a week, every Monday morning New York/Washington time, until we are able to lift the blockade.

Hadde Netanyahu holdt en slik tale, ville han trolig møtt fram i Oslo Rådhus for å få fredsprisen. Vi kan nok være trygge på at han ikke er så fornuftig.

2 thoughts on “Progressivt å støtte fundamentalister?

  1. Liv er gått tapt i dette forsøket på å bringe nødhjelp til Gazas lidende befolkning. Jeg støtter ikke Israels okkupasjon og blokade, men kan heller ikke akseptere at aktivister utenfra driver sin egen krig. Forsøket på å bryte blokaden var heller ikke så uskyldig. Noen må ha skutt tilbake på de israelske soldatene, for 10 av dem er blitt såret. Fred i Midt-Østen kan ikke skapes gjennom en opptrapping av krigføringen. Og fremdeles bør spørsmålet om å gå til krig og opprettholde fred være en sak for stater, ikke enkeltpersoner. Noe annet er faktisk terrorisme.

Legg igjen en kommentar

Fyll inn i feltene under, eller klikk på et ikon for å logge inn:

WordPress.com-logo

Du kommenterer med bruk av din WordPress.com konto. Logg ut / Endre )

Twitter picture

Du kommenterer med bruk av din Twitter konto. Logg ut / Endre )

Facebookbilde

Du kommenterer med bruk av din Facebook konto. Logg ut / Endre )

Google+ photo

Du kommenterer med bruk av din Google+ konto. Logg ut / Endre )

Kobler til %s