*

TWITTER | @martingruner

    28.12.09

    Gazas liv i historiebøkene

    For litt under et år siden mottok jeg denne meldingen, videresendt fra Mads Gilbert, norsk lege på Gazastripen:
    De bombet det sentrale grønnsaksmarkedet i Gaza by for to timer siden. 80 skadde, 20 drept, alt kom hit til Shifa. Hades! Vi vasser i død, blod og amputater. Masse barn, gravid kvinne. Jeg har aldri opplevd noe så fryktelig. Nå hører vi tanks. Fortell videre, rop videre. Alt. GJØR NOE! GJØR MER! Vi lever i historieboka nå, alle!

    Mads G. 03.01.09 - 13:50 - Gaza, Palestina
    I dag, på ettårsdagen for angrepet på Gaza, "Operation Cast Lead" tikket denne meldingen inn, videresendt fra Gilbert:
    Ikke glem Gaza! Nådeløs blokade og utsulting. Palestinske kvinner, barn og gamle lider, menn likvideres. Utbomba boliger, skoler og gudshus fortsatt i ruiner. Ingen materialer slippes inn. Siste livsnerve kuttes når tunnellene sperres. Israel bryter ustraffet krigens lover. Vesten lukker øynene. USA lar Israel diktere. Storting og regjering investerer kynisk våre oljepenger i Israel. Dette skal ikke fortsette! Fortell det videre, rop det videre! Alle må gjøre noe, gjøre mer! Vi lever fortsatt i historieboka.

    Hilsen Mads G. 27.12.09
    Jeg har også gått og tenkt mye på Gaza de siste par månedene. Jeg har tilfeldigvis kommet til å lese meg opp på Gazabombingen i ukene som har gått, og jeg har gjenopplevd den følelsen jeg hadde mens det grusomme sto på.

    Den stemningen jeg husker best fra de tre ukene der var en irriterende følelse i brystet, nesten som halsbrann. Det var sinne. Den satte seg i overkroppen og halsen, helt fysisk. Som jeg sa til min venn Trygve når det hadde stått på noen dager: "Nå må de få orden på dette. Jeg er ikke vant til å være sint så lenge."

    Det er sant. Jeg er så å si aldri langsint. Men her gikk jeg i ukesvis og bar på et frustrert, overflommende raseri over det som skjedde. Og jeg er fortsatt rasende over det som skjedde. Jeg kan ikke forestille meg å leve under den formen for psykologisk terror over så lang tid når bare et par uker med fjernt, trygt raseri er nok til å rykke meg ut av min rytme.

    Egentlig var jeg ikke så mye rasende over det som skjedde -- slike massakrer er så sjeldne som de burde være -- men dels over at slikt skal ikke skje blant akseptert medlemmer av det internasjonale samfunn og dels over den fullstendige impotensen av policyresponsen til tross for massiv folkelig støtte. Hadde Kongo-krigen eller Sudan vekket det samme engasjementet ville de konfliktene trolig ha sett helt annerledes ut.

    Men det Gilbert sier om historiebøkene er like sant som det alltid har vært. Men nå er historiebøkene om Gazabombingen heldigvis begynt å komme ut: Goldstonerapporten kom ut i september i år. Den ble straks møtt med en storm av protester om dens disproporsjonalitet og favorisering av palestinerne.

    I motsetning til de fleste som kritiserer rapporten har jeg faktisk lest den. Det tok meg to måneder å komme igjennom den (den er 600 A4-sider lang, sånn ca. tre-bind-i-Min kamp-lengde). Som jeg har nevnt et par ganger tidligere på bloggen her er den ikke det spøtt disproporsjonal. Å kalle den det er en fullstendig misforstått kritikk, som bunner i en elementær logisk og moralsk misforståelse.

    Goldstonerapporten er en proporsjonal representasjon — av en grunnleggende disproporsjonal konflikt. Det er ikke sånn at alle parter skal fordømmes like mye når en part helt åpenbart er aggressoren. Det er ikke slik at Palestina skal fordømmes 1 enhet for hver enhet fordømmelse av Israel -- når Israel kan dokumenteres som overgriper.

    Rapporten ble derfor også møtt med et hylekor av motstand, den ene motstanderen mer grunnløs enn den neste. Hele nettsteder er satt opp bare for å rakke ned på rapporten og Goldstone. Det er latterlig, som om den systematiske dokumentasjonen fra fagfolk skulle bli mindre klar bare fordi merkverdige ideologer kan rikke ved en observasjon her, en kommentar der. Goldstonerapportens styrke er dens systematikk, dens dokumentasjon av den samme typen av overgrep på en rekke forskjellige steder og tider.

    Det som kommer entydig og klart fram i rapporten er et skandaløst og dypt umoralsk system av undertrykkelse, krigsforbrytelser og forakt for internasjonal lov. Det er en dokumentasjon av et angrep på ubevæpnete sivile med tunge våpen. På ødeleggelse på pur faen, utslettelsen av sivil infrastruktur: kyllingfarmer, melfabrikker, åkere moskeer og kloakkanlegg. Sivile som blir skutt ned på åpen gate til tross for at de helt åpenbart var ubevæpnete. FN-områder fulle av flyktninger som blir beskutt med fosfor i timesvis, til tross for at kontakt etableres med militæret.

    Det er ingen andre ord for det enn forbrytelser mot menneskeheten, og det mener jeg i den juridiske forstand av det begrepet. De ansvarlige bør fengsles, dømmes og straffes. Og det å samarbeide med Israel i disse dager bør regnes som et tegn på dyp useriøsitet eller ren kynisme.

    Det å forsvare Israels okkupasjon kan kanskje på et eller annet tidspunkt i historien ha vært et legitimt standpunkt med gode argumenter. Den tiden er for lengst forbi. Israel-"venner" forlater sin egen grunnleggende moralske legitimitet. Det moralske kompasset er lagt vekk til fordel for en politisk ensidighet som får folk drept.

    Gazabombingen og Goldstonerapporten er den siste tesen i et langt argument, hvis konklusjon er ubestridelig: Det å støtte Israels okkupasjonspolitikk idag er umoralsk. Det å støtte invasjonen i Gaza er å støtte forbrytere og massemordere.

    Oppdatering I: Jeg er for trøtt til å finne alle de interessante lenkene, men Ali Esbati har en flott samling lenker til videre lesning og ytterligere problematisering av Gazaangrepet.

    Oppdatering II: Erik Fosse, som var på Gaza samtidig med Gilbert, blir intervjuet i Dagsavisen [edit: av NTB] om Gaza:
    – Andre krigsområder følges opp, det jobbes for å få befolkningen på fote igjen. I Gaza har det ikke skjedd noe. Verden står og ser på, alt er på vent. Imens fortsetter Israel å herse med palestinerne. Det er en skam, sier han.


    Oppdatering III: Dagsavisen har en god dekning av Gaza. Min gamle kollega Espen Løkeland-Stai har også et intervju med Mads Gilbert, her.
    – Ingenting er bygget opp. Gaza ligger i grus og israelerne har en helt bevisst politikk på å skru krana så hardt igjen at folk flest ikke dør av det, men slik at de likevel lider. Det vi har sett det siste året er en omfattende kollektiv avstraffelse, som er forbudt etter Genèvekonvensjonene, sier Gilbert.

    Det er ifølge Gilbert et alvorlig nederlag for Vestens humanistiske plattform: At menneskerettighetene er globale og for alle.

    – Palestinerne er fratatt menneskerettighetene, de er ikke inkludert. De er «de andre», «undermennesker», jihadister, terrorister, kall dem hva du vil, du kan gjøre hva du vil med dem, og det er nettopp det Israel gjør, uten at verdenssamfunnet stanser dem. Det er dette som opprører meg mest, sier Gilbert, som denne høsten var tilbake i Gaza og møtte mange av dem han behandlet under krigen.
    Les også leder i Dagsavisen, her, og sterk sak av Mohammed Omer, her.

    Les også min egen avis, Klassekampen. Sissel Henriksen skriver sak her, og flott leder fra Anders Horn, her.

    Labels: , , , , ,

    1.11.09

    Crimes of War

    Despite being written in semi-legalese, The Goldstone report [warning: 600-page PDF] never ceases to be an interesting read. I keep finding these dry little statements of fact that are either heartbreaking or pithy wordings that somehow encapsulate the breadth of the crimes committed. Here are a couple of the ones I found today.

    First off, the account of the shelling of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) compound in the southern Rimal area of Gaza City, on January 15th of this year. It's interesting reading. You find it on page 162 to 174 of the PDF.


    (photo by Flickr user blhphotography CC-BY)

    Basically what happened here was that the Israeli forces, despite having GPS coordinates and despite at least forty telephone calls from UN leaders in Gaza and Palestine to Israeli authorities through established channels on that morning and provable contact between those authorities and the field personnel of the army, they repeatedly shelled a United Nations compound where 700 Palestinians were taking refuge, with illegal white phosphorous grenades.

    The report is blistering in its dismantling of the Israeli arguments defending this attack, summed up in this paragraph:
    The question then becomes how specialists expertly trained in the complex issue of artillery deployment and aware of the presence of an extremely sensitive site can strike that site ten times while apparently trying to avoid it.
    They also note that the area struck by the shells was within one football pitch of one another, and coincidentally, the incendiary weapons all happened to strike near the enormous fuel depot of several hundred thousand litres of fuel on the site. The entire site was two football pitches in size.



    Another paragraph that struck me deals with the equally horrific attack on the Al-Quds hospital, in direct violation of Geneva Convention IV §18 and §19. The Israeli military also used illegal white phosphorous shells here. The story that really struck me was this one:
    596. The doctors with whom the Mission spoke all occupied senior positions but also witnessed the events that occurred throughout that day. The Mission was impressed with their objectivity and the genuine distress several of them showed at being unable to help or protect the sick and wounded who had come to the hospital. Throughout that day many of the staff, including the doctors, took exceptional risks to stop fire spreading, including by removing white phosphorous wedges from near diesel tanks. One doctor in particular showed remarkable courage. He left the hospital to drive an ambulance through artillery shelling as he sought to bring an eight-year-old girl to al-Shifa hospital for treatment which he was no longer able to provide in al-Quds. Having taken the girl there, he drove back to the hospital in the same conditions to continue assisting the efforts to fight the fires.
    The 8 year-old girl, who had been shot in the jaw by an Israeli sniper (since the snipers prepare their shots, presumably while she was engaged in launching terror rockets against Israeli settlements or other military activities), later died from her injuries. The report concludes that she would not have died had the attack on the hospital not occurred and considers the Israeli military responsible for her death.

    *


    Longtime readers of this blog have probably noticed that I will occasionally write about human rights, international humanitarian law, crimes of war or crimes against humanity, which are all topics I've been interested in since at least high school. For two years in high school and on and off afterwards I was an active member of my school Amnesty Youth group. It was a great time, and I learned most of what I know about international law and human rights -- which isn't a lot compared to most of the wonderful activists I met in Amnesty -- during those two years. Then, just as I was starting university and entering my last time in Amnesty, I bought a book called Crimes of War: What the Public Should Know. I think more people should do themselves the favour of reading that book. It is by far the best introduction to the topic I know of.

    If I'm completely honest, I pretty much bought it impulsively because it's an uncannily well-designed, physically beautiful book: it is printed on high-quality smooth paper and bound in a strange, tall and narrow format, with a gorgeously simplistic cover and a magazine-like layout. It is thoroughly illustrated with stunning black and white photographs from war zones all over the world taken by some of our time's leading photojournalists, including many from the Magnum group.

    But the book turned out to be a remarkable book which I am constantly coming back to. It is basically an illustrated A to Z guide to war crimes and international humanitarian law written by legal scholars and other experts. I know that sounds dry, but it is quite simply relentlessly readable. I read it from cover to cover (it is ingeniously laid out so that if you read it in this order, it proceeds more or less from basic rules to more complex issues). It is meant as a guide for people requiring a basic working knowledge of the laws of war. In this day and age, I'm afraid that means everyone who follows the news, but particularly journalists, commentators, teachers, activists, aid workers, anyone working with international issues and politicians.

    I still find myself constantly returning to this book to look things up -- if my brother hasn't stolen it, that is -- and refind my footing when Israel or the US or some other beligerent power tries to relativise what they have done or try to give rhetorical cover to their crimes. It is one of the most useful books I have ever read, and while I have read many other books later on these topics, this one must be the most influential one. I have made a habit of recommending it to everyone over the past couple of years.

    So imagine my delight when I discovered yesterday that the entire book has been made availably online for free along with numerous other extra materials, commentary and articles not in the book.

    Though you will have to miss out on the great layout on the web, I hope that at least a few of my literally tens of readers will take the time out to read a few articles or maybe even the whole thing over a few days. It's a book that taught me a lot proportional to the amount of work I had to put into it. I can only second the blurb on the back, from W. Pfaff of the International Herald Tribune: "A reference work that has no counterpart ... civilization is in debt to all [its contributors]."

    Labels: , , , , ,

    26.10.09

    What came first? The chicken — or Protocol I Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949?


    Commenter Alex thinks my concern about the killing of chickens belonging to Palestinian civilians during the bombing of Gaza doesn't really capture the gravitas of the Gaza situation:
    with all do respect to the atrocity of killing 31,000 chickens: it is horrible and unmoral but it is not a humanitarian crime or a crime against humanity. We can protest, but we can't trial people for that
    And since I think this might be a common misconception, I did some legwork and dug up the relevant legal points for you, gentle reader.

    You might not think that killing chickens could be a crime against humanity, but it can be, and in this case, it is.

    What follows is my reply to Alex, lightly edited for clarity:

    As to your last point I must disagree in the strongest possible terms. International Humanitarian Law is crystal clear on this matter. The demolition of the chicken farm was completely and obviously illegal. It was a war crime, and quite possibly a crime against humanity.

    The first and most clear violation is of article 52 of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions, ratified in 1977. Which, notably, Israel has not ratified. However, it is now accepted throughout the world as being customary international law, and the IDF is completely bound by it.

    Art. 52 of Protocol I states that
    1. Civilian objects shall not be the object of attack or of reprisals. Civilian objects are all objects which are not military objectives as defined in paragraph

    2. Attacks shall be limited strictly to military objectives. In so far as objects are concerned, military objectives are limited to those objects which by their nature, location, purpose or use make an effective contribution to military action and whose total or partial destruction, capture or neutralization, in the circumstances ruling at the time, offers a definite military advantage.

    3. In case of doubt whether an object which is normally dedicated to civilian purposes, such as a place of worship, a house or other dwelling or a school, is being used to make an effective contribution to military action, it shall be presumed not to be so used.
    I don't seem to remember chickens having military applications, unless of course the Palestinians have somehow gotten hold of a "Blue Peacock" nuclear device. And foodstuffs that are also (indeed, primarily) used for civilian populations are not legitimate targets.

    Secondly, this is also a blatant violation of article 55 of the fourth Geneva Convention, ratified in 1949, and which Israel HAS ratified. Article 55 states that:
    To the fullest extent of the means available to it, the Occupying Power has the duty of ensuring the food and medical supplies of the population; it should, in particular, bring in the necessary foodstuffs, medical stores and other articles if the resources of the occupied territory are inadequate.

    The Occupying Power may not requisition foodstuffs, articles or medical supplies available in the occupied territory, except for use by the occupation forces and administration personnel, and then only if the requirements of the civilian population have been taken into account. Subject to the provisions of other international Conventions, the Occupying Power shall make arrangements to ensure that fair value is paid for any requisitioned goods.

    The Protecting Power shall, at any time, be at liberty to verify the state of the food and medical supplies in occupied territories, except where temporary restrictions are made necessary by imperative military requirements.
    In case you were wondering, "imperative military requirements" does not include "because we've blocaded Gaza again", "because we're busy bombing the civilian population" or "because we felt like it".



    The definition of "crimes against humanity" contained in the Rome Statute of the ICC is basically really bad things – including war crimes – being done in a systematic way. A system of oppression which derives a people of basic neccesities easily falls under this heading. The destruction of the chicken coops may have been tougher on the chickens than the people in the area. But it was also beyond a shadow of a doubt a crime of war and almost certainly part of a system of abuse which constitutes a crime against humanity.


    *

    (all photos by Flickr user Rafahkid, CC-BY-SA. The photos do not display the destruction of this particular chicken farm, but of another destruction of a chicken farm. You could almost think they were targeting chicken farms intentionally! Rafahkid has more photos of this incident in his photostream.)

    Labels: , , , , ,

    24.10.09

    Israel's chickens coming home to roost

    I'm reading the Goldstone Report (warning: relatively big PDF) a 600-page document that details the findings of a panel investigating the attack on Gaza last winter. It's an astounding document. Not only is it an interesting and immensely readable introduction to the contemporary situation in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the oppression of the Palestine people, it is also simply an exquisitely convincing argument. Meticulous, detailed and balanced. It is the objective document that critics on both sides have argued for. It doesn't hesitate to show the full force of Palestinian in-fighting and unlawful attacks on Israel by mortar and Qassam rockets, but it also does not hesitate to shove Israel's face in what they've done. And they have done so very, very much.

    It details and substantiates the allegations of deliberate attacks on civilians. I mean, some people might have gotten the impression that those allegations came from crazy, Kalashnikov-toting jihadists. No, those allegations came from so many credible sources that they can no longer be denied. The Goldstone Report documents a pattern of systematic attack on a defenceless civilian population. The Israeli army committed crimes against humanity, and war crimes. The people responsible need to lose their jobs, then they have to be tried and convicted and spend the rest of their lives in prison.

    I've read a few documents like The Goldstone report when I was a member of Amnesty and a couple of times afterwards, as well. There is always some detail that gets you. Some ridiculous little piece of information or a telling story that is the convincing detail in the argument being made. It might be the story of how a political activist was shot in front of his children in Chile or the story of how the police routinely administered beatings to 12-years in the US. In the Goldstone Report, for me, it was the chickens:
    The chicken farms of Mr. Sameh Sawafeary in the Zeitoun neighbourhood south of Gaza City reportedly supplied over 10 per cent of the Gaza egg market. Armoured bulldozers of the Israeli forces systematically flattened the chicken coops, killing all 31,000 chickens inside, and destroyed the plant and material necessary for the business. The Mission concludes that this was a deliberate act of wanton destruction not justified by any military necessity and draws the same legal conclusions as in the case of [a similar destruction of a flour mill a few days before].
    For some reason the image of Israeli soldiers bringing the roof down on 31.000 chickens, for no good military reason other than just to fuck with the civilian population of Gaza; for spite, out of malice, is the detail that really got me.

    The Goldstone Report is, in short, mandatory reading for anyone looking for an understanding of the contemporary situation in Gaza and Israel/Palestine. It is readable, well-documented and convincing. As Klassekampen's reviewer Espen Stueland said of another recently published book on Gaza, I know of no words of greater significance that could be read right now.

    (Norwegians will find that Mads Gilbert and Erik Fosse's book Øyne i Gaza (Gyldendal, 2009) makes a wonderful supplement to the report.)

    Labels: , , , , , , , , ,