Israel uses white phosphorus munitions in Gaza during Operation Cast Lead.
Norman Finkelstein published a book a number of years ago entitled Gaza: An Inquest Into Its Martyrdom.
In it he looked at various major episodes in the long bloody onslaught on the people of Gaza, amongst them Operation Cast Lead and also the attack on the boat Mavi Marmara and the Goldstone Report, amongst other issues.
He could have written it yesterday about the current genocidal plans of the Israeli state.
The current Israeli offensive is just one more in a long line of massacres. This is not a review of Finkelstein’s book, though any book by him is worth reading and should be read. Rather I just want to use the book to show that what is happening now is not new, it is just more intense.
Israel has murdered before, it has lied, it has committed war crimes and it has always received the support of western states.
Above all we should be clear that we are where we are partly due to the Oslo Accord and also the role played by the Palestinian Authority and the PLO. They cannot wash their hands of the affair.
“One of the meanings of Oslo,” former Israeli foreign minister Shlomo Ben-Ami observed, “was that the PLO was . . . Israel’s collaborator in the task of stifling the intifada and cutting short . . . an authentically democratic struggle for Palestinian independence.”
Rabin (left) and Arafat shake hands on the Oslo Accords under the management of then US President Clinton. (Photo sourced: Internet)
In particular, Israel contrived to reassign to Palestinian surrogates the sordid tasks of occupation. “The idea of Oslo,” former Israeli minister Natan Sharansky acknowledged, “was to find a strong dictator to . . . keep the Palestinians under control.”
“The Palestinians will be better at establishing internal security than we were,” Israeli prime minister Yitzhak Rabin told skeptics in his ranks, “because they will not allow appeals to the Supreme Court and will prevent the Association for Civil Rights in Israel from criticizing the conditions there. . .
They will rule by their own methods, freeing, and this is most important, the Israeli soldiers from having to do what they will do.”(1)
In other words, Gaza has bled under the passive gaze of the bureaucrats of the Palestinian authorities and of course of the reactionary Arab regimes that have never lifted a finger to help their Palestinian brothers and sisters.
They have not even threatened to cut off the supply of oil to the West, something they could do right now, but won’t. It has also happened under the gaze of those on the Left who run around shouting Implement Oslo! Two State Solution!
They ignore the fact that Oslo represented an ideological, political and military defeat for the Palestinians. The PLO accepted its role as puppet, administrator of a small urban city-like council and as chief repressor of those who continued to fight for Palestinian freedom.
A look at the Oslo II Accord, signed in September 1995 and spelling out in detail the mutual rights and duties of the contracting parties to the 1993 agreement, suggests what loomed largest in the minds of Palestinian negotiators.
Whereas four full pages are devoted to “Passage of [Palestinian] VIPs” (the section is subdivided into “Category 1 VIPs,” “Category 2 VIPs,” “Category 3 VIPs,” and “Secondary VIPs”), less than one page—the very last—is devoted to “Release of Palestinian Prisoners and Detainees,” who numbered in the many thousands…
The barely disguised purpose of Oslo’s protracted interim period was not confidence building to facilitate an Israeli-Palestinian peace but collaboration building to facilitate a burden-free Israeli occupation.(2)
However, Israel is now militarily weak. Finkelstein points to a number of attacks where it has shown its weakness. Its predilection is for attacks on the civilian population that can’t fight back.
In 2006, it opted to bomb civilians in Lebanon rather than engage in a proper fight with Hezbollah “terrorizing Lebanese civilians appeared to be a low-cost method of “education.”(3)
In Gaza in Operation Cast Lead in 2008/9, it followed a similar path of aerial bombardments of civilians rather than land invasions, that would see its troops face the wrath of Hamas and other armed organisations. So first they relentlessly bombed Gaza before any troops went in.
When the troops went in, the civilian population was their preferred target then as it is now. The murder of civilians is not new. It is part of an Israeli strategy of claiming easy victories.
An Israelicombatant remembered a meeting with his brigade commander and others where the “rules of engagement” were “essentially” conveyed as, “if you see any signs of movement at all you shoot.”
Other soldiers recalled, “If the deputyBattalionCommander thought a house looked suspect, we’d blow it away. If the infantrymen didn’t like the looks of that house—we’d shoot” (unidentified soldier); “If you face an area that is hidden by a building—you take down the building.”
Questions such as ‘who lives in that building[?]’ are not asked” (soldier recalling hisBrigadeCommander’s order);
“As for rules of engagement, the army’s working assumption was that the whole area would be devoid of civilians … Anyone there, as far as the army was concerned, was to be killed” (unidentified soldier);
“We were told: ‘any sign of danger, open up with massive fire” (member of a reconnaissance company); “We shot at anything that moved” (Golani Brigade fighter); “Despite the fact that no one fired on us, the firing and demolitions continued incessantly” (gunner in a tank crew).
“Essentially, a person only need[ed] to be in a ‘problematic’ location,” a Haaretz reporter found, “in circumstances that can broadly be seen as suspicious, for him to be ‘incriminated’ and in effect sentenced to death.”(4)
In all around 1,400 Palestinians were murdered in Operation Cast Lead, with 80% of them being civilians including 350 children. Israeli casualties were risible in comparison, just 10 combatants were killed, four of whom were killed by friendly fire.(5)
Then as now, Israel wheeled out the old trope of “human shields”. Amnesty International found no evidence of that,(6) in fact, it found evidence of Israel using children as human shields.(7)
It also found that Israel used then, as it does now, white phosphorous against schools, hospitals and even the UNRWA.(8) Furthermore, 99% of the air attacks were accurate.(9) If they murdered civilians, it is because the civilians were the target.
Following the operation, the Goldstone Report was published. It surprised no-one when it found evidence of Israeli war crimes and to a lesser extent of Hamas. It is a salutary lesson for those who now place their confidence in the International Criminal Court (ICC).
Goldstone made various recommendations.
Individual states in the international community were exhorted to “start criminal investigations in national courts, using universal jurisdiction, where there is sufficient evidence of the commission of grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 1949.
“Where so warranted following investigation, alleged perpetrators should be arrested and prosecuted in accordance with internationally recognized standards of justice.”(10)
We know that nothing of the sort happened. In fact, the western governments paid little heed to the report. Goldstone was forced to recant on the conclusions to his report.
Netanyahu for his part announced that he wanted to amend the rules of war leading to Israeli historian Zeev Sternhell asking “What is it that Israel wants … Permission to fearlessly attack defenseless population centers with planes, tanks and artillery?”(11)
Exactly.
And here we are today, with Israel unilaterally amending the rules of war, with the green light from the EU and the USA, amongst others. They murder civilians and no one proposes doing anything.
In Operation Cast Lead, the harshest sentence emitted by an Israeli court was seven and a half months to a soldier who had stolen a credit card!(12) Minor financial crimes are of greater concern than war crimes or crimes against humanity.
After this genocide in Gaza, we can’t expect much from the ICC.
Throughout its history the ICC has opened just 31 cases, including one for genocide. All of them against African leaders. This does not mean that those leaders did not deserve to be judged for their crimes, but that the ICC is just the legal arm of imperialism.
It has never attempted to put on trial the powerful in the West and despite everything even less so Israel. This year it issued a communiqué announcing that it would issue an arrest warrant for Vladimir Putin for war crimes and did so on its own initiative.(13)
In the case of Gaza, it will do nothing of the sort. Those who place their trust in the ICC or in the Palestinian Authority are fooling themselves. This situation is the result of turning a blind eye to Israel for many years whilst it commits all sorts of crimes.
It didn’t act before and it won’t do so now. Neither will the Arab regimes do much, unless their own populations force them. They fear the Palestinians and their own people as they know that the struggle against Zionism is also a struggle against them.
The more revolutionary Palestinian groups used to say that the path to Jerusalem went through Amman and Damascus. They were right, it does pass through those capital cities and also Beirut, Riyadh, Cairo and all the others and not through the ICC.
In fact, one day the judges and prosecutors of that body should be put on trial for their complicity in Israel’s war crimes and crimes against humanity through their inaction and omission.
It is beyond the scope of this article to deal with the role of Amnesty International in its own reports on Palestine.
They are what Finkelstein refers “as far from being the exception that proved the rule, Amnesty actually constituted a variant of the rule: instead of falling silent on Israeli crimes during Protective Edge, Amnesty whitewashed them.”(14)
I will leave it to the reader to look at the book for more information on that particular betrayal. Suffice to say, we can expect little from such organisations. At best they gather data we can sometimes use.
Notes
(1) Finkelstein, N. G. (2018) Gaza: An Inquest Into Its Martyrdom. California. California University Press. pp 6 & 7
Ambassadors generally don’t represent people but rather states. They report to their home state on attitudes at different levels in the country where they are based and on friendly and not-so-friendly contacts also.
Two ambassadors have been in the news recently and they are both from the same part of the world – one is Israeli and the other is Palestinian.
Individually ambassadors may be nice and friendly or, like the Israeli one, arrogant and aggressive but all that is really not the main thing to remember about them, which is that they represent the state that sent them. What you do or say to them, you do or say to their state.
The Israeli Dana Erlich is in the news because a number of political parties have tabled motions in the Irish Parliament for her expulsion.1 She is representing the Israeli State, a racist, Zionist colonial state which is at present carrying out a genocidal bombardment on the Palestinian people.
Dana Erlich, Israeli Ambassador to the Irish state (Photo sourced: Internet)
Wahba Abdalmajid is the Palestinian Ambassador in Ireland and, in the news mostly because she was warmly received at the recent Ard-Fheis (annual congress) of the Sinn Féin political party. A look at her “Embassy’s” website gives little indication of a people struggling for freedom.2
WHOM DOES THE PALESTINIAN AMBASSADOR REPRESENT?
Despite there existing formally a Palestinian state, in reality its people have been actively prevented from creating one. Wahba Abdalmajid’s real employer may be said to be the Palestinian Authority which functions somewhat like a state – but under the control of the Israelis.
In a recent interview, Norman Finkelstein commented that Israel had a great many spies in Gaza, most of them former employees of the Palestine National Authority, i.e the administration of which Al Fatah lost control when beaten in the 2006 legislative elections by Hamas.3
In the wave of imperialist pacification processes (incorrectly called “peace processes”4) that swept through anti-imperialist conflicts around the world, the Palestinian variant in 1993 seems to have been the first, which then spread like a virus to South Africa, Ireland, the Basque Country5 …
In the Oslo Accords of 1983, the leadership of the PLO recognised the ‘legitimacy’ of the Zionist colonial state of Israel and agreed to the idea of a Palestinian state on a part of Palestine, with the worst land and least water, forever to be under the guns of Israel.
No arrangement was made for the descendants of the 700,000 Palestinians expelled by Israel when the Zionist State was created in 1948, forbidden by Israel to return.
The attraction for the PLO’s leadership was getting to run their own administration and with that went a spiraling of the already-existing corruption and nepotism. And accompanying that, repression of dissent through the use of their ‘security force’ where they were in control.
Financial aid comes from the European Union and USA to the PNA (to the total of US$1 billion in 2005) and, despite 2006 elections won by Hamas, the funds are paid to the West Bank HQ, i.e to Mahmoud Abbas’ offices.
Mahmoud Abbas, imperialist and zionist stooge, glued to the presidential seat of the Palestinian National Authority. (Photo sourced: Internet)
The dissatisfaction of Palestinian youth and of much of society with Al Fatah and their agreement to the Oslo Accords broke out into the Second Intifada 2000-2005 and since then Palestinian resistance to Israeli occupation has been led by other organisations.
At a Tokyo meeting of foreign affairs ministers,6 USA’s envoy Blinken indicated that after Israel’s hoped-for defeat of Hamas (and cowing of Palestinians) they would favour the Palestine Authority administering Gaza again, to which PNA President Mahmoud Abbas indicated agreement.
Meanwhile, elections have not been held for the PNA since 2008, despite promises a couple of years ago. The reason is obvious: Al Fatah would again lose. Nevertheless, the western imperialist bloc recognises the PA as the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people!
The same bloc and the Irish State also supports the “2-state solution” which was no solution even when being mooted back in the 1970s and is visibly risible now7; furthermore surveys show that most Palestinians do not want that option.8
So who does represent the Palestinian people? Difficult to see how that question can be answered at the moment. There are a number of resistance organisations that can legitimately claim to represent sections of the Palestinian people while the PA can only represent collusion and repression.
End.
FOOTNOTES
1Unsuccessfully, so far, with the Government and its allies in opposition.
2And the most recent entry in the Embassy’s news section is dated 14 August of this year!
3That was the last election held for the PA, which remains under the control of Al Fatah, which did not accept the election results. In Gaza in 2007, Hamas had a short fierce conflict with Al Fatah and took the administration to which they had been elected but refrained from doing so in the West Bank.
4Inaccurate because they do not address the central issues and therefore do not at all bring peace.
5Also Turkish Kurdistan, Colombia … The only one where the people gained anything was South Africa, which got universal suffrage but under a neo-colonial corrupt and repressive regime whose police in 2012 murdered two score striking miners.
7Also supported by Sinn Féin in Ireland and by the Chinese Government.
8Gallup poll found “24% of Palestinians support a two-state solution, down from 59% in 2012.” Also, a Pew Research poll showed only 35% of Israelis think “a way can be found for Israel and an independent Palestinian state to coexist peacefully.”
A Palestine solidarity demonstration of around 10,000 in Dublin on Saturday the 11th included a bloc marching behind a banner bearing the legend Saoirse Don Phalaistín and another demanding the expulsion of the Israeli Ambassador.
Since the beginning of Israel’s bombardment of Gaza, Dublin has seen at least two large solidarity events every week, one mid-week and another on Saturdays, marching to the Israeli and USA Embassies or, like this one, to the Irish State’s Department of Foreign Affairs.
(Photo: Rebel Breeze)(Photo: Rebel Breeze)
In addition, there have been smaller more radical events, such as the 2-hour occupation of the offices of Qanta Capital, the landlord of the Israeli Embassy, also another of the Clarence Hotel, recently bought by an Irish company with a loan from an Israeli bank.1
Also the occupations of offices of the Irish Dept. of Transport and of the European Commission2 and a weekday evening rush-hour protest on the forecourt of Dublin’s Connolly Train Station, which hosts major east coast commuting and northern city destination lines.
Section of the march in Cuffe Street, many still behind in Aungier Street (Photo: Rebel Breeze)
On Saturday the march began as usual with a 1.00pm gathering in the city centre, the rear of the densely-packed marchers still in O’Connell Street as the rest had crossed the river into Westmoreland Street, swung into College Green and Dame Street underway to George’s Street.
At one point the march called by the IPSC3 stretched from George’s Street all along Aungier Street, the front had turned into Cuffe Street and was already marching towards Stephen’s Green. The Department of Foreign Affairs is located on the east side of the famous inner-city park.4
The front of the march marching along Stephen’s Green East while the rest is still in Cuffe Street and Aungier Street (Photo: Rebel Breeze)
The bloc marched along gathering people behind as it did so, shouting among others the slogan “Saoirse – don Phalaistín!” and “Zionist Ambassador – Out, out, out!” which was taken up by many, including those who seemed to be Palestinian or at least from the Middle East.
At a separate point, a few professionally-printed placards in Irish could be seen too, e.g “Stad an Slad” and a flag in Palestinian colours with “Saoirse don Phalaistín” printed upon it.
(Photo: Rebel Breeze)
The other slogans that have become standard were shouted also, including the one claimed to be ‘anti-semitic’, ‘terrorist’ and ‘against the law’ by the recently sacked UK Minister of Home Affairs, claimed to be “anti-semitic” and ‘against the law’: “From the river to sea, Palestine will be free!”
Mobbing and threats by British fascists to Palestine supporters5 on the gigantic solidarity march in London on Saturday6 that ended in scuffles with the police were linked by a number of senior politicians to Braverman’s extraordinary claims of police partiality to the demonstrators.
Braverman alleged that London Met police went softly on Palestinian solidarity demonstrations in allowing them to take place while some extreme right-wing mobilisations in the past had been sternly treated – a fantastic claim as any antifascist activist in London knows well.
Section of the crowd standing behind the Saoirse don Phalaistín banner (Photo: Rebel Breeze)
In Dublin on Saturday, upon reaching Stephens Green, the bloc stopped short of the rally outside the Dept. of Foreign Affairs where in any case the crowd was so large that the PA system of the organisers was of insufficient strength to convey to all the words of the scheduled speakers.
A large section of the march stopped behind them and a space cleared in front, at the fringes of which the people turned and joined in the bloc’s almost incessant slogans, at times applauding them. To the solidarity slogans that have become universal, those in the bloc added another two.
Section of the crowd who have turned to face the Saoirse don Phalaistín banner, many joining in the slogans. The speakers’ platform is further beyond outside the Dept. of Foreign Affairs building. (Photo: Rebel Breeze)
These were “There is only one solution – Intifada revolution!” and “Zionist Ambassador – Out, out, out!” Those slogans draw a line away from the liberal demands of “peace” and “negotiations” since the only “peace” that can exist in Israel is a pause before the next bombings.
(Photo: Rebel Breeze)
“Saoirse – Don Phalaistín” was repeated and “Stop the bombing – Now!” seemed at one point to be offered as an alternative to “Ceasefire Now!”7
They also called for serious political repercussions for Israel in the expulsion of its representative in the Irish state, its Ambassador. Currently seven states have expelled Israel’s ambassadors or recalled their own – but none of them are members of the European Union.
Section of the crowd outside the Department of Foreign Affairs (Photo: Rebel Breeze)
The Irish State IS a member of the EU and a symbolic act such as the expulsion of the representative of the Zionist state would have huge reverberations. On Wednesday motions on expulsion of the Ambassador will be debated in the parliament of the Irish State.8
Also, the Sinn Féin party, whose leadership recently reversed their opposition to the expulsion of the Zionist representative, will be calling on the Government to refer Israel to the International Criminal Court for investigation of war crimes.
While this might be of some use as a propaganda move, that Institution has never judged a state nor indeed anyone for war crimes who is part of the western imperialist coalition – which Israel most evidently is.9 The proceedings also tend to be very slow.
All in all, not only will such an action not be effective even if agreed, it will likely serve as a distraction from actions much more likely to be effective, such as expulsion of the Zionist Ambassador, along with arms and other trade sanctions.
(Photo: Rebel Breeze)
A rally has been called to take place outside the home of the Irish parliament, Leinster House, Kildare Street at 6pm on Wednesday10 and a national demonstration on Saturday, starting at 1pm from the Garden of Remembrance.
End.
Some demonstrators walk through Stephens Green after the march. (Photo: Rebel Breeze)
FOOTNOTES
1By activists of the Irish Anti-Imperialist Action group.
3The Ireland Palestine Solidarity Campaign, for decades the main Palestine solidarity organisation in Ireland.
4Which is coincidentally, a 1916 Rising battleground.
5One of the irritants to British fascist mentality was that the Palestine solidarity march was taking place on Armistice Weekend, an annual event including ceremonies commemorating the dead in battles of the UK’s armed forces, one major period which was ironically as part of the Allied forces in the War Against Fascism 1939-’45.
7A ceasefire usually means everyone stops firing where they are, which could be interpreted as binding the Palestinian resistance to leave the Israeli military in occupation of Gaza without retaliation, which some have criticised as favouring the Israeli Zionists.
8The Social Democrats party have tabled the motion, which will be supported by the Sinn Féin party and by People Before Profit party, along with a number of Independents. The Coalition Government of Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and the Green Party have stated they will oppose it. At this moment the leadership of the IPSC continues to abstain from making such a call
Today marks 184 years since the greatest armed rebellion in 19th-century Britain when Chartist workers fought bloody gun battles with the police and army in the heart of industrial Wales, writes STEPHEN ARNELL
A sketch of the huge crowd in Newport in 1839 as it surrounded the Westgate Hotel hoping to free captive Chartist comrades (via the People’s History Museum).
“Come hail brothers, hail the shrill sound of the horn For ages deep wrongs have been hopelessly borne Despair shall no longer our spirits dismay Nor wither the arms when upraised for the fray; The conflict for freedom is gathering nigh: We live to secure it, or gloriously die.” — Chartist song of the South Wales miners
UNLIKE our friends across the channel in France, the inhabitants of Britain appear a remarkably supine people in the main, usually preferring well-organised demonstrations to anything that whiffs of pre-planned armed revolt, no matter how righteous the cause.
Yes, there have been mass meetings, marches and spontaneous events that took a wrong turn and descended into riots, but we seem singularly ill-equipped by nature to contemplate anything more serious.
But this would be doing this island race a disservice; to paraphrase the emperor Tiberius, there was a time when the British were not a people “fit to be slaves.”
There’s a long and storied history of the working classes attempting to seek redress from a variety of wrongs, including poll taxes (the Peasants’ Revolt, 1381), government corruption (Jack Cade’s Rebellion, 1450), religion (the Pilgrimage of Grace, 1536) and the later Pentrich Rising in Derbyshire of 1817, a muddled affair which aimed to cancel the national debt and repeal the Corn Laws.
1839’s Newport Rising was a more coherent and dangerous challenge than Pentrich, in possessing both a specific democratic political manifesto and its unprecedented scale.
That’s not to say the revolt was a carefully co-ordinated business that worked to a timetable with a pre-planned outcome, but the numbers involved, the potential for encouraging similar risings and the essential justice of the Chartist cause gave Lord Melbourne’s Whig government a serious jolt.
Newport had its origins in both national and local events.
The House of Commons rejection of the People’s Charter of 1838 calling for universal male suffrage, secret ballots, salaries for MPs, equal constituencies, and the end of the property qualification for voting on July 12 1839, and the following conviction and imprisonment in Monmouth of the Chartist leader Henry Vincent for conspiracy and unlawful assembly, stoked the fires of rebellion in industrial southern Wales, a stronghold for the movement.
Combined with this were reasons that directly concerned the rising’s leader, John Frost (1784-1877), namely his six-month imprisonment resulting from a dispute regarding his uncle’s will with Newport town clerk Thomas Prothero, and the wealthy political enemies he made on the way to becoming mayor of the Monmouthshire burgh.
A sketch of Chartist leader John Frost on trial at Monmouth after the uprising.
Despite this, Frost was supposedly reluctant to lead a full-scale armed uprising, and doubtful of its prospects, but the zeal of his supporters forced his hand and preparations were made for the march on Newport.
On Monday November 4 1839, Frost led 4,000 followers to the town, his group including allied coalminers, who armed themselves with home-made pikes, bludgeons, and firearms.
The authorities in Newport got wind of the march and detained several known Chartists at the Westgate Hotel in the town centre. This added impetus to Frost’s mission which was presumably to take over the town in the hope of starting a nationwide insurgency.
At 9.30am, a crowd of anything from 8,000 to 20,000 Chartists (ironically including Allan Pinkerton, later founder of the infamous US strikebreaking detective agency known as “the Pinkertons”) filled the square in front of the hotel, demanding the release of their comrades.
The mayor had gathered a mixed force of around 60 soldiers of the 45th Regiment of Foot and 500 special constables to defend the Westgate, all equipped with weaponry superior to the relatively small number of Chartists possessing guns.
To this day no-one knows for sure who fired the first shot, but a heated exchange between the two sides began, with the engagement lasting approximately half an hour. The result was a total rout for the Chartists.
Up to 24 rebels were slain, with around 50 injured. Four of the defenders were wounded, as was the mayor of Newport Thomas Phillips (later knighted by Queen Victoria), when the attackers briefly succeeded in entering the building. So ended the greatest armed rebellion in 19th-century Britain.
In comparison, the better-known Peterloo Massacre of August 1819 saw 18 people killed and as many as 700 injured when army regulars, special constables and local yeomanry charged peaceful demonstrators calling for parliamentary reform.
Unlike the French, with the storming of the Bastille, the March on Versailles and the Paris Commune, the Newport Chartists appeared to lack the killer instinct of their Gallic counterparts, which may say something of the passive British national character relating to the ruling class.
The leaders of the rising were convicted of treason and were sentenced to be hanged, drawn and quartered, the last in England and Wales to be condemned with this ghoulish form of execution.
Their sentences were commuted by Queen Victoria to transportation for life to Tasmania. Frost was given an unconditional pardon in 1856 and returned briefly to Newport, where he received a rapturous welcome.
His two co-conspirators were also pardoned, but both opted to stay in Australia. Watchmaker William Price continued to ply his trade, but without success and died in poverty; in contrast, collier Zephaniah Williams (who at one point had planned to escape) discovered coal in Tasmania and became one of the richest men in the colony.
Note: the last people to be hanged, drawn, and quartered for treason in Britain are said to be David Tyrie in 1782, and in 1798, Father James Coigly; both were convicted of spying for the French (the Bourbon and revolutionary regimes respectively).
In 1977, John Frost Square, in Newport city centre, was named in the Chartist’s honour. But in 2013, Kenneth Budd’s mosaic in the square commemorating the Chartists was demolished at the behest of the Labour-run Newport council, prompting widespread outrage (from the likes of actor Michael Sheen and former Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams) and public demonstrations.
Comedian Jack Whitehall is a descendant of Welsh lawyer Thomas Jones Phillips, one of the chief opponents of the Newport Rising. Taking no pride in this fact, in 2019 he commented on BBC1’s Who Do You Think You Are, “What’s next? I suppose probably go and visit a mine our ancestor shut down or maybe an orphanage he burned to the ground.”
The Newport Rising also features in a graphic novel published in 2019, Newport Rising, written and illustrated by local artist Josh Cranton; the book was launched at the Westgate Hotel, which unlike Budd’s original mural still stands, recently reincarnated as a “live music, performance, arts and heritage venue.”
Rebel Breeze is grateful for this article about an instance in the long history of workers’ resistance to various features of capitalism.
The article would not have been diminished and might even be thought to be enhanced by mentioning the Irish diaspora’s contribution to the Chartists, both in rank-and-file membership and in leadership, with Bronterre O’Brien and Fergus O’Connor in the latter category.
Or to mention that despite the spying for the French charge against Fr. Ó Coigligh, the last man hanged, drawn and quartered by the civilised British Establishment, the real reason was his membership of and participation in the United Irishmen, an Irish revolutionary Republican organisation.
That organisation had also ‘infected’ the short-lived United Scotsmen and even shorter-lived United English, though in the latter case contributing to the leadership and organisation of the Spithead Naval Mutiny.
Revolt of the English sailors, On each ship they went to tackle, vintage engraved illustration. Journal des Voyage, Travel Journal, (1880-81).
Of course, such references might have tempted the writer to compare revolutionary uprisings in Britain with those in Ireland, rather than in France.
But then, the Communist Party of Great Britain, which owns The Morning Star where the article was published, has never been too fond of the Irish struggle for independence or the means we felt justified in employing.
There’s a new Wailing Wall … THERE’S A NEW WAILING WALL; It’s in Gaza, and here mothers and fathers wail at the bloody bodies of their children; children wail at the bloody bodies of parents; all wail over the bodies of friends and neighbours; the wailing rises and the tears fall.
At this Wailing Wall … AT THIS WAILING WALL, we wail the mendacity of Israel and the West, we wail the complicity of the media in the West; while rockets, shells and bombs rained down upon us the lies fell faster and thicker than rain, a torrent of lies that never stopped. To surge in flood over the bodies of our slain.
You come now with your flag of peace … YOU COME NOW WITH YOUR FLAG OF PEACE tramping along the bloodstained road and up the mountain of our bones and the rubble of our homes and offer us business as before or – bombardment once more.
Now that the bombs have stopped … NOW THAT THE BOMBS HAVE STOPPED we too stop and look around us: our schools gutted and bloodstained, mosques and hospitals in ruins, so many of our buildings rubble, or with gaping shell-holes, in the hell-hole you have made of Gaza.
We had so little and you destroyed so much. WE HAD SO LITTLE AND YOU DESTROYED SO MUCH!
In the days to come, more will sicken and die, of wounds on flesh and wounds on soul, of lack of medicine, fuel or food as even in pause you take your toll.
Many are numb, some try to forget … MANY ARE NUMB, SOME TRY TO FORGET, some try to live without forgetting, but there is a begetting, for in many hearts too, your phosphorus flakes are snowing, the embers of hate are glowing, their machine guns and bombs are mowing you and your children for generations to come.
Against your Goliath … AGAINST YOUR GOLIATH, our slingshots were of no use; yes, God was with you – he’s no longer Hebrew or English – He’s American now; you shot us down like fish in the shooting barrel you made of Gaza.
You wish us to recognise you? YOU WISH US TO RECOGNISE YOU? Of course we recognise you – the imprint of your boots are upon our necks; we carry them from cradle to the grave.
But we will never agree to accept or agree that you should keep what you have stolen and plundered the land you have sundered or that you can make us second-class citizens in our own land.
While we struggle to endure … WHILE WE STRUGGLE TO ENDURE and to ensure that you never defeat us let it be that we do not learn to treat others as you now treat us.
What did you learn from your oppressors? WHAT DID YOU LEARN FROM YOUR OPPRESSORS? If all you learned was how to also do so much of what they did, then truly have the six million died in vain and you mock their memory by invoking them.
Diarmuid, Feabhra 2009
I began to write this just as the December 2008- January 2009 bombardment of Gaza by Israel was coming to an end and I rounded it off in February.
That was the one they called “Operation Cast Lead”, which killed over 1,400 Palestinians, mostly non-combatants, including 400 children and injured over 5,300 — again, mostly non-combatants.
I little thought that so few years later Israel would unleash an even worse bombardment upon the beleaguered Palestinians in Gaza, as it did in July 2014, during which it killed over 2,300, again mostly non-combatants and that time nearly 500 children.
The damage to infrastructure is colossal and the Israeli-Egyptian blockade makes significant repair impossible.
The commentary above was written in 2014. Apart from killing in raids, there were more massacres to come: March 2018, more than 700 Palestinian refugees killed at the borders of the Israeli state and in 2021, over 260 Palestinians killed after Zionist provocation at the Al Aqsa Mosque, in Jerusalem.
In August 2022, over 30 Palestinians, including women and children, killed in Israeli missile attacks and this year, by August, Israel had killed 172 Palestinians. Now, over October-November 2023, they have killed 133 Palestinians in the West Bank and over 9,000 in Gaza, including 3,760 children.
There is no question that this is genocide: “the deliberate killing of a large number of people from a particular nation or ethnic group with the aim of destroying that nation or group.”
“Any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
Killing members of the group;
Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.”
Nor did that genocide begin in October this year, nor last year, nor the year before. It began in 1948 with the creation of the state of Israel and has been continuing since.
The roar of Palestinian solidarity slogans outside the Irish Parliament, Leinster House on Wednesday night must surely have reached the ears of the elected representatives as they debated a motion that “Israel has a right to defend itself”.
The motion is widely seen as part of a narrative, under the cover of self-defence, endorsing the Israeli State in its decades of racism, apartheid, genocide and war crimes and takes place during the Zionist state’s genocidal bombardment of Gaza.
Solidarity colours in the rain (Photo: D.Breatnach)
The rally, the third since last Saturday week1 organised by the Ireland Palestine Solidarity Campaign, attracted many hundreds willing to stand in persistent rain, listen to contributions from speakers and chant slogans, these led by voices in both Irish and Middle Eastern accents.
In fact, a strong trend increasing over recent years has been the presence of Palestinian voices at such rallies, both in speaking and in leading slogan chants, which the rally organisers have not hesitated to facilitate.
View late in the rally (Photo: D.Breatnach)
SLOGANS, SONG AND POEM
On Wednesday evening, some slogans were in Arabic also, such as I think “Tahya Filistina!” (long live Palestine) but sadly not the equivalent in Irish, such as “An Phalaistín abú!” or an alternative, for example: “Saoirse don Phalaistín!” However, one placard in Irish was present (see photos).
(Photo: D.Breatnach)
The slogans in English ran the usual range of call and answer: “Free, free – Palestine! From the river to the sea – Palestine will be free! One, two, three, four – occupation no more; five, six, seven, eight – Israel is a terrorist state! (I prefer “Israel is a fascist state!” myself).
In our thousands, in our millions – we are ALL Palestinians! Boycott — Israel! Irish Government – shame on you!
In 2009, as yet another Gaza bombardment came to an end, I had composed a poem I called The New Wailing Wall. On Wednesday I got it printed in a photocopying shop on my way to the event, by which time it was raining fairly heavily but I was glad to be permitted to read it out at the rally.2
A Palestinian woman sang in Arabic a “song of sadness”, i.e a lament the rhythm of which a lot of people got into, clapping in time. In Irish singing we often don’t like this, as it tends to drown out the words and the musical detail but it seemed to work well enough there.
Later she told me that she very rarely sings but felt she had to give voice to her feelings – and I know some of what she means.
Seen from behind, Palestinian woman singing a lament in Arabic at the rally (Photo: D.Breatnach)
MOTION DEBATED
Inside the home of the Irish Parliament,“the Dáil”3 a motion of support for the Zionist state proposed by the Government had run into problems even before Israel’s bombing of the hospital in Gaza, after which they intensified; the Government insists it will not condemn Israel to any degree.
It is likely that a majority-agreed motion amendment will pass but however will neither assert the right of the Palestinians to their land nor to resistance, nor to the return of refugees, much less condemn Zionism; it should be a cause of shame to all parties and individuals who support it.4
Section of the rally crowed after an hour (some had gone home) in front of the gates of Leinster House (Photo: D.Breatnach)
“Expel the Israeli Ambassador!”
In the street outside Leinster House, there were many calls for the expulsion of the Israeli Ambassador (Out! Out! Out!)
Truly that seems the most effective solidarity move of which we are capable currently.5 Sadly there seems no chance that the Government would even consider doing so.
Even among the Opposition, Sinn Féin these days looks unlikely to support such a move. This is so even though the party’s President, Mary Lou called for the expulsion of the Russian Ambassador in April last year6 and a decade ago, Gerry Adams, for the expulsion of the Israeli Ambassador.7
Some solidarity demonstrators as far back as Molesworth Street while most are in front of Leinster House (Photo: D.Breatnach)Rally supporters refuse to be squashed up on the pavements and spill over into the road. Once again the Gardaí have failed to close a road to avoid accidents and Dublin Bus has failed to instruct drivers to take alternate routes; the roof of a trapped bus may be seen in the far background. (Photo: D.Breatnach)
Colombia threatened to expel8 the Israeli Ambassador but the leaderships of the EU and the UK are securely tied to the war-chariot of the USA and there’s never any doubt about what the US wants, which is total support for its safe9 Middle Eastern foothold – Israel.
Colombia told the ambassador to behave himself or leave, after the Zionist publicly criticised Colombia’s President comparing the Israeli state’s discourse about and treatment of the Palestinians to that of the Nazis towards the Jews10 (but Israel is Colombia’s main weapons supplier).
A sentiment increasingly finding favour (Photo: D.Breatnach)
OUTLOOK FOR THE FUTURE
In the immediate future, the Zionist authorities have said they intend to invade Gaza to clear out “Hamas”, in which they will of course include all Palestinian armed resistance. Of course, solidarity demonstrations will continue or even intensify.
If Israel invades, it is difficult to imagine that the Palestinian guerrilla resistance movement, including Hamas, Islamic Jihad and PFLP11, will allow that without putting up a fierce struggle.
(Photo: D.Breatnach)
Israel has the tanks and planes but fighting on the ground in ruined urban landscapes, when every pile of rubble may hide a tunnel, a bomb or a rocket-launcher, is a different game.The 5-months-long Battle of Stalingrad comes to mind and an Al Jazeera contributor came to the same conclusion.12
Also, other elements such a Hizbollah may open up new fronts, in particular in the Golan Heights and Lebannon, as the PFLP has urged. Imperialism and complicit Arab regimes are extremely worried about a flame reaching their combustible possessions in the region.
Massive solidarity demonstrations marched through Yemen, Lebanon and Jordan and even the collaborator military regime in Egypt was obliged to open the Rafah crossing gates for humanitarian aid to reach Gaza (with which the Zionists and the US had to reluctantly agree).
Huge solidarity and protest demonstrations have also taken place in Athens, London and other European cities, while the French government banned any such demonstrations. Texas in the USA also saw a huge demonstration and 500 Israeli protesters were arrested demonstrating in Israel.
However the regimes have weathered such storms before and may do so this time again.
Possibly the West Bank will rise up too, although Al Fatah still has a lot of influence there, despite its discrediting by corruption, nepotism and signing the Oslo Accords and with its leadership deeply compromised as a result.13
The Palestinian Authority goons (there are 80,000 of them) fired on demonstrations demanding action in solidarity with Gaza, and in Jenin killed a 12-year-old girl and seriously wounded a first-year university student. 14
The military command of Al Fatah told collaborator Abbas to step down15 but their objective is still the discredited and impossible two-state “solution”.
The 2-State idea was bad in 1993 but …
… even worse in 2019 (Source image: Carnegie Council)
This “solution”, which the US and the rest of the Western states support, proposed to give the Palestinians less than 40% of their territory, the worst and least-watered, chopped into sections with narrow corridors through the Israeli lands and always under the guns of Israel.16
A Palestinian state would have neither true environmental, population, political nor civil control. Never a good choice instead of a secular state of Palestine for all, even this colonial option is clearly unworkable, sabotaged by the Zionists themselves with their settlements dotted all over it.
It is shameful to even propose it as any kind of solution.17
In the longer term, Israel’s consolidation of partnerships with a number of Arab states may have been harmed by the Zionists’ savagery and racist discourse towards the Palestinians but how deeply is difficult to predict.
Whether the Palestinian resistance and particularly Hamas is strengthened or weakened in the eyes of the Palestinian mass likewise remains to be seen.
The mostly imperialist western states of Europe and America show no sign of weakening their allegiance to the world imperialist leader, the USA and therefore, once they get over their weak criticisms of Israel’s genocide, will continue to support the Zionist state into the future.
Like many other problems on this Earth, workable solutions depend on changing some fundamental features in the world order.
end.
A historical reference to the Balfour Declaration of the Imperial Conference of British Empire leaders in 1926 giving European Jews rights to the British Mandate territory of Palestine, where approximately 10% of the population were Middle Eastern Jews at the time, the rest being Palestinian Muslims and Christians. (Photo: D.Breatnach)The rally, though thinning, is still ongoing behind photographer after perhaps two hours. Gardaí have FINALLY closed Kildare Street and a Dublin Bus has managed to turn around and exit. This has been the pattern in a number of Palestine solidarity rallies so far, when the Gardaí must have known the attendance would be large and the street should be closed for safety and traveler convenience sake. (Photo: D.Breatnach)
FOOTNOTES
1Another, last Monday week, had been organised by the Irish Anti-War Movement (effectively the People Before Profit political party).
3That is its name but there are those who refuse to call it that, saying that only an all-Ireland parliament deserves that title, such as the one founded during the War of Independence 1919-1921.
8It was reported that Colombia HAD expelled him and that was repeated at the rally but according to reports from there reaching now, he was only threatened with expulsion if he didn’t shut up.
9Probably the only state in the Middle East, because of its colonialist nature, that is safe from either national liberation uprising or Muslim fundamentalist revolution.
10This is a parallel so obvious that it occurs to a great many people across the globe but it is one that the Israeli authorities rejects and which it condemns as “anti-semitic” with the backing of many different authorities in the West.
17And the history of the Zionist colonisers shows that even with that, they would be forever pushing further, grabbing more land, killing more Palestinians in flare-ups (think the history of the European colonisation of the indigenous Americans in what is now the USA).
News & Views No.9: Chile Coup – Twin Towers – the Legacy Bill
Diarmuid Breatnach (Reading time: 5 mins.)
September 11th is the anniversary of the al Qaeda attack on the new World Trade Center in the USA known as “the Twin Towers” and also of the Pinochet Coup in Chile. The former caused the deaths of 2,996 people and the latter of over 40,000.
These are not happy anniversaries and US Imperialism bears a major portion of the blame for both events.
How so, one might ask? The coup in Chile, probably with CIA help, sure. But the Twin Towers? That was a Muslim jihadist attack AGAINST the USA! Surely we’re not expected to believe that stupid conspiracy theory that the USA ruling class actually staged the attack?
US proxy soldiers, Special forces Afghan National Army, 2021 (Photo sourced: Internet)Osama Bin Laden (10 March 1957 – 2 May 2011), Saudi-born founder and first general emir of Al Qaeda from 1988 until his assassination. (Photo sourced: Internet)
That is truly a crazy conspiracy theory but the historical truth does indeed involve a conspiracy. In 1997 the government of Afghanistan was socialist which was worrying for the USA, so in partnership with Saudi elements, they funded and even founded Muslim jihadist groups there.
These groups were to be encouraged to overthrow the socialist regime and when the USSR sent troops to support the government, to defeat the Russians too. Which they did.
But forget about fantasy stories of traditional tribesmen with ancient muskets fighting a world power’s army – these were jihadists, fundamentalists, armed with modern automatic weapons and mobile missile launchers including SAMs (Surface to Air Missiles).
Forget too about Rambo-led simple hill people – since the US achieved the overthrow of the socialist regime and invaded Afghanistan alongside their British allies, those jihadist groups have been squabbling over their share of the spoils, often murderously.
In fact, US imperialism is largely responsible for the world pestilence of not only jihadism of the Al Qaeda type, but the even more virulent Islamic State variety (which indicates Mary Wollstonecraft’s story of Frankenstein’s monster to be more prediction than fiction).
Explosion in one of the Twin Towers on 11th September 2001 in Al Qaeda attack. (Photo: Sean Adair/ Reuters)Frankenstein’s monster in Mary Wollstonecraft’s famous story; he returns to attack his creator (Image sourced: Internet)
Although US Imperialism had created Al Qaeda and although Saddam Hussein’s regime in Iraq was totally opposed to the jihadist group (and vice versa), US politicians used the attack on the Twin Towers to ‘justify’ the US military invasion of Iraq.
“Sweet are the uses of adversity” indeed when manipulated by US Imperialism for domestic consumption and for world public opinion, also when assisted by British Imperialism’s Labour Government, in particular by lying-through-his-teeth Tony Blair.
The US-led campaign against Iraq resulted in about 1.5 million deaths through economic sanctions alone followed by over 300,000 civilians in the Western military campaign. These figures do not include deaths and injuries of Iraqi military and of the invading allies under the USA and UK.
Nor do those figures include the many deaths, military and civilian, in internal conflicts since the invasion of Iraq which continue to mount.
The deaths resulting from the coup in Chile were overwhelmingly of civilians as the coup was carried out by the Army with little opposition within the military and the civilian population were mostly unarmed.
Most of the deaths occurred in succeeding days and years as the regime rounded up communists, trade union militants and others suspected of having supported Allende’s party, to torture and execute them, including most famously the renowned musician and singer-songwriter Victor Jara.
The anniversaries of both the Pinochet coup and the Twin Towers have been commemorated in various parts of the world with, it appears, the coup being remembered in most of them, not only in Latin America but also in many countries in Europe where Chilean political exiles found refuge.
In the USA, of course, the attack on the Twin Towers was officially commemorated and probably communally too much more so than the coup in Chile.
Another imperialist-generated disaster, the anniversary of which falls only a couple of days after those two, is that of the Oslo Accords, signed on 13th September 1993 and often also known as a stage in “the Palestinian Peace Process”.
At the White House, supervised by Bill Clinton, elected chief of US Imperialism at the time, Yitzak Rabin for the Israeli Zionist state and Yasser Arafat, for the Palestine Liberation Organisation, signed an agreement, as a result of which the PLO would be permitted to run their own statelet.
Oslo Accords, 13 September 1993, Washington: Yasser Arafat of the PLO shakes hands with Yitzak Rabin of the Zionist State under the stewardship of (then) US President Bill Clinton, representing US Imperialism. (Photo: Gary Hershom/ Reuters)
Hailed as a great breakthrough by most media at the time, the PLO, dominated by Arafat’s Al Fatah, got to have limited self-government within the Zionist State, with the borders of any future Palestinian state undefined and no mention of the millions of Palestinian exiles around the world.
Although the increasing encroachment on Palestinian lands by Zionist settlers was temporarily halted, the land already taken and built upon remained in Zionist hands, that issue and others ‘to be discussed later’ but the Palestinians were to give up the armed resistance immediately.
The South African pacification process had begun earlier and, though enfranchisement of non-white South Africans was not to come until 1994, it was clearly on the way. The ANC promoted pacification processes to Al Fatah and both parties promoted them to Provisional Sinn Féin.1
The Palestinian ‘Process’ was controversial among their people from the start and grew more so as it became clear how little the Palestinian cause had gained and how much had been set aside, along with the growing official corruption and nepotism growing among the Al Fatah organisation.
Though the pacification process was widely rejected in Palestine and failed to install a widely-recognised ‘official’ collusive leadership, it did achieve the fragmentation of the Palestinian leadership and helped to ‘justify’ the demonisation of Hamas, winner of the 2006 elections.
ALTERNATIVES
The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (sic) is quoted in the media as saying that there is no alternative to the UK’s legacy legislation, which proposes to prevent recourse in law for any crimes committed by its soldiers, colonial police, proxies or Government Ministers.
Secretary of State for the Northern Ireland (sic) colony, Chris Heaton Harris (Photo cred: PA)
The legislation in question is titled The Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Bill.
All political parties in Ireland on both sides of the British Border have vigorously opposed this legislation and THERE CLEARLY IS AN ALTERNATIVE, which is to abandon it. What the UK’s ‘colonial governor’ of the Six Counties means is: no alternative acceptable to the ruling class.
While we’re on alternatives, all liberation movements had and have the alternatives to embracing pacification processes, which is to maintain the path of resistance upon which they embarked until the day they win that for which their people and fighters have sacrificed their liberty and lives.
Allende and the communists in Chile had the alternative of arming the people and purging the Army but instead chose to put their faith in the ‘loyalty’ of Pinochet, ‘democracy’ and the opinion of the Western powers.
“The people armed cannot be harmed”, perhaps, rather than “The people united can never be defeated”.2 Allende’s error cost him his life but also the lives of hundreds of thousands of others.
Women on 11th September hold a candlelit commemoration at La Moneda, Santiago, Chile for the victims – in particular of sexual violence – of the Pinochet coup and dictatorship. (Photo: Adriana Thomasa / EFE)
Imperialists have the alternative of respecting the right to self-determination of the peoples of the world and to cease from exploiting, oppressing and repressing them.
But if they did that, they wouldn’t be imperialists, would they? And since they cannot change their nature, they have to be overthrown.
End.
FOOTNOTES
1Provisional Sinn Féin signed up to the Irish Pacification Process in 1998 and they and the ANC then moved on to promote a pacification process to the leadership of the Basque movement for independence, which also finally signed up to it without even obtaining release of the political prisoners. By that time the Palestinian Process had shown its empty promise and the Second Intifada (2000-2005) demonstrated its rejection by most Palestinian youth and the elections to the 2006 Palestinian Legislative Council were won convincingly by Hamas.
2An alternative slogan to “El pueblo unido jamás será vencido” was even then being promoted by a smaller communist group: “El pueblo armado jamás será aplastado!”, i.e ‘The armed people will never be crushed’.
The Petro government has reached the end of its first year in which it promised a lot, came through on some things and changed a lot of other things, particularly its position on certain issues.
Before taking a look at it, it should be pointed out that the Historic Pact (PH) is not the first left-wing government in Colombia. The country is still waiting for that. It is a remould of liberalism in the style of Ernesto Samper.
Even so, it is worth looking at its proposals and what it did in this year, as unlike Samper, it did give a lot of hope to the people.
It is generally accepted that Petro would not have been elected President if it were not for the big popular revolt that began on April 28th 2021, an uprising that cost the life of over 80 youths.
We don’t know the exact number of dead and disappeared and less still of the number of young women who were raped and sexually abused by the Police as part of the repression. Even the number of political prisoners is a matter of dispute.
Not due to the absence of the number of people detained but because the amongst Prosecutor’s Office, the press and sections of the PH there are those who seek to divest the detained youths of any political motivations.
They simply paint them as criminals and vandals, the last of these words having been covered in glory during those protests.1
The heroic ‘vandals’:Demonstrators clash with riot police during a protest against a tax reform bill launched by Colombian President Ivan Duque, in Bogota, on April 28, 2021. (Photo cred: Juan Barreto/ AFP). (Photo choice and caption by Rebel Breeze)
So, it comes as no surprise that Petro, like Boric in Chile, did not free the political prisoners from the revolt. He made a few lukewarm attempts to get a handful of them out, but a long way from all of them.
They are still in prison, despite his electoral victory being thanks to their struggle and actions that led them to prison.
It is perhaps the most symbolic transgression as it says sacrifice yourselves but don’t expect anything from me, not even when I owe you everything. Petro has defended himself by saying that it is not his decision to free or imprison anyone.
Recently he stated:
There are still many youths in prison and I get blamed, as if it were up to me to imprison or free them. State bodies and people inside them have decided that these youths should not be freed.
Not because they are terrorists, who would think protesting is terrorism? If not a dictator or Fascist. No, but because they want to punish the youths who rebel.2
Some may feel that he is right in a technical sense, i.e. that it is the Prosecution and the judges who imprison them. But that is to ignore reality.
He himself denigrated them when he referred to them as ‘vandals’ during the protests and since taking office, neither Petro nor the PH have been the visible heads of any initiative to free the prisoners. They washed their hands of the issue.
He didn’t even disband the specialised riot squad, the ESMAD. Unlike other proposals he didn’t even try to.
He changed its name and promised a couple of human rights courses for its members, as if the problem was their lack of attendance at a course or two given by some NGO and not a deep-rooted problem. The ESMAD is a unit that murdered many youths.
It is a body whose name is synonymous with violence, torture, sexual abuse and murder. A name change won’t wash away the blood.
… the promise to put an end to the ESMD was just lip service during the presidential campaign.It wasn’t carried out and the government will fail to carry through on its commitment to the youths who brought the president to power, through the existence of a repressive violent force like this one.
The temptations to infiltrate the marches in order to justify confrontations with the kids will continue to be part of the landscape.3
Petro gives his voters a clenched fist on his inauguration as President in August last year but many remain in jail and the rest get little or nothing. (Photo sourced: Internet) (Photo choice and caption by Rebel Breeze)
In economic terms the government promised a lot during the campaign, but once in power, it quickly softened its proposals and in some other cases they didn’t get a majority of votes in Congress.
The lack of votes in Congress is not a simple one of not coming through, nor is it due to betrayals by the PH nor manoeuvres by other forces that Petro can’t control.
The PH is a coalition of sectors of the right with sectors of what passes for social democracy in Colombia. It was not inevitable, but rather Petro actively advocated that it be like that.
It is worth recalling that at first, he wasn’t going to choose Francia Márquez as his vice-president but rather a right winger like Roy Barreras.
However there are economic aspects that are under his control, but for the moment they remain as just proposals, rather than real policies that have gone through Congress. On the land question, Petro proposes monocultures and agribusiness.
This was clearly to be seen in the proposal to buy three million hectares from the cattle ranchers.
Petro’s vision of the countryside is one of it being at the service of big money and the promotion of cash crops, despite some references to the production of foodstuffs for internal consumption and the so-called bio-economy.
Something similar can be seen with his proposals for clean energy. He spoke a great deal about it during the electoral campaign and some of his proposals, or outlines as they stand, look good.
That Colombia no longer depend on oil and coal is not a bad idea and that it be replaced with alternative energy sources such as solar and wind power looks good, until we actually examine the details.
One of his first stumbles, in that sense, was with the Indigenous people, as La Guajira is a poor area that has suffered the consequences of coal mining.
He did not take them into account and they reminded him that what is proposed for their territory should have their support, though legally it is not quite the case, and that it should also benefit them.
He partially rectified the case, but the big question is, if he wants an energy transition why does he have to seek out French and other foreign capital to finance it. Does he want to hand over the wind and solar power as they are still doing with oil and coal?
It would seem so. According to Petro:
We need investments that help us carry this out: we would have a matrix of foreign investment centred on the construction of clean energies in South America, with a guaranteed market, if we have direct link to the United States and by sea with the rest of the world.4
If you substitute oil and coal for clean energy, you begin to see the problem: the resources of Colombia in the service of big money and the countries of the North.
If we are to have a real change and energy transition, we must end the idea of Northern energy consumption regardless of where it comes from as sustainable and that countries such as Colombia must supply energy for a planet-destroying consumption model.
Neither have there been great advances on the issue of peace. He did reactivate the dialogue with the ELN, but stumbled with something that is still an integral part of his policy, the so-called Total Peace.
In his proposal he compared the insurgent group, the ELN to the drug gangs and paramilitary groups such as the Clan de Golfo. It was not a mistake, Petro really does see the ELN as a criminal gang.
He made it clear in his speech to the military and he reaffirmed it when he named the blood thirsty Mafia boss and former Murderer-in-Chief of the paramilitaries, Salvatore Mancuso as a Peace Promoter.
With that he placed the ELN leadership on the same plane as the paramilitaries. And they have implicitly accepted it for the moment.
In Petro’s discourse Colombia is a violent country and there is no way to understand it and peace has to be made with everyone as they are all the same, the insurgency and the narcos. Not even Santos was that creative in delegitimising the guerrillas.
Mancuso took on his role and once again spoke of the land they had stolen, the disappeared etc. He has been telling us for two decades now that tomorrow he will reveal all, but tomorrow never comes.
When Uribe invited Mancuso to the Congress of the Republic, Petro had a different attitude.
His response was blunt and he described Uribe as a president that was captured by the paramilitaries and that Mancuso manipulated the Congress stating that “if under this flag of peace, dirtied by cocaine what is essentially being proposed is an alliance with genocidal drug traffickers and political leaders… then we are not contributing to any sort of peace.”5
And we end the year with a scandal. I have on many occasions compared Petro and the PH to Samper and the Liberal Party of the 90s. But not in my most fertile delirium could I imagine that Petro and his son would give us another Process 8000.
Samper managed to reinvent himself as a statesman and human rights defender, despite his government’s dreadful record, following the outcry over drug money in his election campaign. He has publicly supported Petro and the PH.
Now he can advise them on how to deny what is as plain as day. Illicit funds went into the PH’s campaign as has happened with all election campaigns.
Petro finds himself in the eye of the storm due to the manoeuvres of his son in asking for and receiving money. His ambassador in Caracas has boasted about obtaining 15,000 million pesos [3.3 million euros] that were not reported to the authorities.
Those on the “left” who gave Petro unconditional support defend him, saying that it all happened behind his back.
The only thing left to say about that is, a little bit of respect for Samper please! He established his copyright, authorship of that expression in relation to dirty money. They will have to come up with another one.
For the moment Petro says, I didn’t raise him, which is true. But his son is the beneficiary of a type of political nepotism. As was the case with Samper, the only doubt is whether Petro knew or not.
That a government which is supposedly progressive has found itself entangled in such a storm is revealing of a government in which politics is a family business.
Something similar happened to the FARC commander Iván Márquez with his nephew who turned out to be a DEA informant.
On the drugs issue it is clear that the discourse and reality do not match at any point. Petro went to the UN to announce a new drugs policy. He put forward various aims for his government and criticised the war on drugs.6
It seems like a bad joke that the said policy has not yet been published. What we have seen is that the fumigations continue, the Yanks smile on and occasionally there is talk of going after the big fish, without saying who they are.
We know that he is not talking about the banks, and less still of the European companies that supply the precursor chemicals. The big fish will turn out to be middle ranking thugs in the cities of Colombia, at best.
So, it has been a year that wasn’t that different to others. Yes, there were changes, some proposal or other that was half interesting, but even the right wing does that occasionally.
The vote of confidence cast in the ballot box is still waiting to see the promised changes. But we increasingly see a government without a clear aim and reinventing old policies as new ones, with the same results as before.
End.
FOOTNOTES
1 See Ó Loingsigh’s article Long Live the Vandals – R.B.
