          | |||||
      
| |||||
|
Features A licence to kill
September 29th, 2005 -- In October 2000 13 Palestinian citizens of Israel were shot dead by police during demonstrations expressing solidarity with the plight of Palestinians in the Occupied Territories, who had just launched the Second Intifada. On 18 September Israel’s Ministry of Justice announced that there would be no criminal charges against the perpetrators of this slaughter. These are the significant facts pertaining to the conduct of the Israeli establishment towards full citizens of the state, 20% of the general population. Some background data may add a little context. There is no question that under a Labour prime minister, Ehud Barak, Israeli police fired live ammunition at demonstrating citizens. His government wasted time and money on a face-saving investigation commission chaired by a Supreme Court judge, Theodora Or. Under Barak’s successor the government allowed the perpetrators to get away with murder. It is equally clear that racism and sheer stupidity joined forces to provoke the Arab citizens once again and to inform decent Jewish citizens that the plague of racism is in the ascendant. The attempts of Attorney-General Menachem Ma’zuz to justify his ministry’s decision not to take further action were received by the enlightened population with contempt. But many others rejoiced. This division of opinion is arguably more important than the scandal itself. It defines the demarcation line between democrats, however hesitant in tracing the Zionist roots of racial discrimination in Israel, and nationalists with Jewish, rather than Israeli, political and ideological orientation. The decision to close the files and forestall any further probe was taken by the Police Investigation Unit, a section within the Justice Ministry. In Israel, the police fall under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Internal Security, and the PIU was set up in order to avoid accusations that the police were investigating themselves. PIU officials, under the blunt and almost visibly intimidating lawyer Herzl Shaviro, failed to collect sufficient evidence to indict the senior officers who ordered snipers to kill demonstrators and overlooked some serious accusations against the marksmen themselves, especially the commander of Misgav police station in the Galilee — Guy Rief, a trigger-happy killer and self-avowed Arab-hater. The Or Commission had stated that Rief used live ammunition without justification, but the PIU overruled it, using the same pretexts across the board: the bereaved families had not cooperated with the investigators, no physical evidence was found. Shaviro’s TV appearances were both frightening and risible. He protested against accusations of racism, extolled the virtues of the PIU investigators and just about fell short of blaming the dead Arab citizens for failing to testify. No one dreamt that Barak himself, or his minister of internal security, Shlomo Ben Ami, would be indicted by the PIU since their mandate was, of course, to investigate police officers. But the PIU has been exposed as a cover-up unit, Shaviro’s protestations notwithstanding. Had the victims been Jews, the perpetrators would be serving long prison terms. Honest Israelis, even the racists, are very well aware of the discriminatory nature of the PIU proceedings. But the PIU verdict angered the more rational members of the establishment, including the former Israeli ambassador to Cairo, Shimon Shamir, a classic “orientalist” in the Edward Said sense. Shamir thought, with ample justification, that the findings of the Or committee could in themselves form a firm basis for the indictment of the police officers involved in the shootings and their superiors. Similar views have been expressed by most commentators, including Ariel Sharon’s new breed of fans, out of anxiety that the PIU’s failure to indict might rally the entire Israeli Arab population against the state. In private conversations, middle-of-the-road politicians sound worried and angry. A cabinet minister told MEI on 24 September: “Like in the Watergate affair, the cover-up here is as bad as the original crime. Our generals are afraid to travel to Europe in case they are held for human rights violations. But ignoring the wanton killing of 13 citizens just because they were Arabs puts all of us in the spot. I have a safe yardstick to measure these things. If the Swedish foreign minister takes part in anti-Israeli conferences, we must be doing something wrong.” Palestinian reaction was predictably bitter and disdainfully dismissive of the PIU’s findings. Hassan Asala, a bereaved parent from the Galilee and a convinced moderate (like his dead son), spoke succinctly on behalf of all the victims’ families. His statement to Ha’aretz, was read by thousands of Israelis with awe and respect: The recommendations of the police Investigation Unit were expected in light of the deliberate failure of this unit since October 2000 until now. For each of the 13 people killed there is a murderer who shot at him, let alone those who gave the orders to kill. In addition, there are those who helped to conceal evidence and bury the truth. All of them are accomplices to the crime, and we demand their indictment forthwith.>/i> In the election year of 2001 the Zionist left ignored their natural allies, the Israeli Arabs, and decided to recommend Barak as their candidate for prime minister despite his obvious culpability in the October murders. In 1999 95% of the Palestinian electorate in Israel voted for Barak. They have not trusted a Labour Party candidate since. The alliance between the Zionist left and the Arab citizens has ceased to be an influential political factor, one that used to ensure a degree of equilibrium between right and left in Israeli political culture. Zionism, not only as a creed but also as a mental state, an emotional posture, clearly prevents a consistent political collaboration between Jews and Arabs within the Israeli state. It is a constant obstacle, an insufferable constraint that plagues the soft left at the most crucial times. It also enables the establishment to maintain the regime of discrimination in the economy, employment, education, budgetary allocations, health service provision and local government. Lip-service and extolling the merits of democracy will not do, and most intelligent Israelis are aware of it. When Barak became prime minister in 1999, not least because of massive Arab electoral support, enlightened public opinion was indifferent to the fact that he failed to consult Palestinian MKs before forming his government, let alone offer them suitable portfolios. Snubbing them in 1999 led to killing them in 2000. Now, in September 2005, Israeli society faces a profound ideological crisis which once again raises the most fundamental question: is it possible to reconcile Zionism with liberal democracy? |
| ||||
|
WHAT'S NEW? | ABOUT MEI | WHO'S WHO? | SUBSCRIPTIONS GET NEWS BY E-MAIL | FOR WEBMASTERS | LINKS | CONTACT MEI
All content ©1971-2004 Middle East International. Middle East International magazine, 1 Gough Square, London EC4A 3DE, UK. Tel: +44-207-832-1330 | Fax:+44-207-832-1339 | E-mail  | |||||
