Gaza: Lifting the veil of silence

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Max
J. Castro                                                                       Read Spanish Version 

majcastro@gmail.com

A
reader who identifies himself as “Van Gross, MD,” commenting on
my last column, which critiqued the Bush administration’s support
of the Israeli onslaught on Gaza, wrote:

“Hey
Max,
Stay away from an analysis of the Israel situation. You’re
mixing metaphors and insulting supporters of Israel who might
otherwise be ‘leftists’ like me.”

How
does one respond to the good doctor’s warning, which to me comes
across as a mix of condescension and intimidation? Should I advise
him to stay away from political and stylistic commentary and stick to
medicine? Should I ask him who qualifies to comment on this aspect of
U.S. foreign policy and who doesn’t and why? Should I suggest to my
good friend and colleague Saul Landau to stay away from analysis of
Cuba or U.S. policy toward the island?

The
reader’s comment brought back memories of the time I almost lost my
job at the University of Miami’s North-South Center not long before
I, along with all my co-workers, really lost my job there. But that’s
another story.

This
one, the near miss, happened in 2002 when the Israelis were attacking
the Palestinian refugee camp of Jenin, with predictable results — an
awful toll of civilians dead and injured. My column, which appeared
in the Miami
Herald,
was less a critique of Israel than of the Bush administration’s
feckless and fraudulent “hands off” approach, which encouraged
violence on both sides. I concluded the piece by saying that as
strongly as the United States condemns Palestinian terrorist attacks
it also should let Israel know that you don’t build peace by
crushing an entire people.

The
morning the column was published, I crossed paths with my boss, the
Center’s director, Ambler Moss, a former U.S. ambassador to Panama.
“Great column, Max,” he said. “I agree with every word.”
Then, unbeknown to me, all hell broke loose. From the Provost of the
university down to administrators at the Center and even some
colleagues, there were pressures to fire me and even accusations of
anti-Semitism. I later learned that Moss, a decent and fair man with
an unshakeable belief in academic freedom, held his ground and
responded by saying that he had read my column several times without
finding an inkling of anti-Semitism. Nevertheless, he was forced to
inform me that I should no longer include my university affiliation
and email as part of my column.

There
are many reasons why I must decline Dr. Gross’s invitation to
silence. As a citizen of a country who supports Israel — materially,
morally, and diplomatically — as it supports no other nation, I have
every right to scrutinize, analyze, and criticize our country’s
policy. As a human being, I have as many reasons as there are
innocent Palestinian men, women and children, killed, wounded and
terrorized by the Israeli attack.

I
hold no brief for Hamas, and I have no tolerance for anti-Semitism. I
am also fully aware that some innocent Israelis have died, been
wounded or terrorized as a result of the barrage of rockets fired at
southern Israel by Hamas. I condemn those attacks; these rockets also
must stop.

But
my country is not paying for those rockets nor giving political cover
to those who fire them. And the Israeli blockade of Gaza, which has
produced far more death and suffering among Palestinian civilians
than the largely ineffective rocket fire from Hamas, must also cease. 

Ultimately,
the only real solution is one that sidelines all the fundamentalists
— Islamic and Israeli, settlers and jihadists — and that will only
come when the Israelis end their occupation, dismantle, all
the settlements, and the Palestinians are able to erect a sovereign
democratic state in Gaza, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem. Given
the political will, even the problem of “the right to return” can
be given a symbolic, Solomonic solution that will give the
Palestinians some level of satisfaction without threatening the
Jewish character of the Israeli state.

Ideally,
these two states, Palestinian and Israeli, can live in peace and
practice mutual cooperation. But no one can stop terrorism
completely. The vaunted Israeli intelligence and security service was
unable to stop an Israeli terrorist from killing the country’s
Prime Minister. So, if Israel chooses to build a security wall around
its
own territory, so
be it. It has a right to do so, and to defend itself in case of
attack from the new Palestinian nation.

For
now, nothing confers on Israel the right to inflict collective
punishment against the Palestinian people or to take military actions
that — intentionally or unintentionally — will inflict death and
destruction on hundreds of innocent people.

As
to mixing apples and oranges (not metaphors), how coincidental is it
that each year at the United Nations only one nation (Israel)
consistently supports the United States on the issue of the Cuban
embargo while in last week’s UN Security Council vote calling for
an immediate and mutual ceasefire in Gaza only one nation (the United
States) out of 15 failed to vote in the affirmative?