Jan 05, 2009
It may well be that in denouncing "Israel's" attack on Gaza one, in an
important way, unwittingly does a disservice to the cause of holding
the Bush Administration accountable for its crimes.
Is there any doubt that the Bush Administration approved this assault?
Is there any doubt that it could not have taken place without the Bush
Administration's approval?
Is there any doubt that it could not continue without the support of
the Bush Administration and the protective umbrella of its veto at the
UN Security Council? Is there any doubt that it will stop the very day
that the Bush Administration says that it must?
If so, is it in the interest of humanity that we Americans engage in
the charade that the Israeli government is an autonomous actor in this
matter?
All these observations are true in general, but we have plenty of
specific evidence in this case.
In August, Haaretzreported
that the U.S. had "rejected an Israeli request for military equipment
and support that would improve Israel's ability to attack Iran's
nuclear facilities."
The Americans viewed the request, which was transmitted
(and rejected) at the highest level, as a sign that Israel is in the
advanced stages of preparations to attack Iran. They therefore warned
Israel against attacking, saying such a strike would undermine
American interests. They also demanded that Israel give them prior
notice if it nevertheless decided to strike Iran.
In early September, Haaretzreported that
the request had included GBU-28 "bunker-buster" bombs.
In mid-September, the U.S. agreed instead to sell Israel 1000 GBU-39
"bunker buster" bombs which Israeli military experts said "could
provide a powerful new weapon" in Gaza, APreported.
These bombs have been used to bomb tunnels in Gaza in the current
offensive, the Jerusalem Postreports.
Israel claims that its goal in bombing tunnels is to stop the
smuggling of weapons, but tunnels are also used to bring in goods, so
blowing up tunnels has the effect of reinforcing the blockade on Gaza.
So: when Israel requested weapons that the U.S. expected would be used
for bombing Iran, the U.S. said no, and added explicitly that it did
not want to see an Israeli attack on Iran. And there was no Israeli
attack on Iran.
Instead, the U.S. provided bombs that it had every reason to believe
would be used for an attack on Gaza. And now there is an Israeli
attack on Gaza, using those very bombs.
And therefore, there is no reason to doubt the active approval of the
United States government for the current attack.
So, if one happens to be living in the United States, it seems clear
that one's complaints ought to be addressed to U.S. officials. You can
write to President Bush and your Congressional representatives here
and to President-elect Obama here.
Join Us: News for people demanding a better world
Common Dreams is powered by optimists who believe in the power of informed and engaged citizens to ignite and enact change to make the world a better place. We're hundreds of thousands strong, but every single supporter makes the difference. Your contribution supports this bold media model—free, independent, and dedicated to reporting the facts every day. Stand with us in the fight for economic equality, social justice, human rights, and a more sustainable future. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover the issues the corporate media never will. Join with us today! |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Robert Naiman
Robert Naiman is Policy Director at Just Foreign Policy. Naiman has worked as a policy analyst and researcher at the Center for Economic and Policy Research and Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch. He has masters degrees in economics and mathematics from the University of Illinois and has studied and worked in the Middle East.
It may well be that in denouncing "Israel's" attack on Gaza one, in an
important way, unwittingly does a disservice to the cause of holding
the Bush Administration accountable for its crimes.
Is there any doubt that the Bush Administration approved this assault?
Is there any doubt that it could not have taken place without the Bush
Administration's approval?
Is there any doubt that it could not continue without the support of
the Bush Administration and the protective umbrella of its veto at the
UN Security Council? Is there any doubt that it will stop the very day
that the Bush Administration says that it must?
If so, is it in the interest of humanity that we Americans engage in
the charade that the Israeli government is an autonomous actor in this
matter?
All these observations are true in general, but we have plenty of
specific evidence in this case.
In August, Haaretzreported
that the U.S. had "rejected an Israeli request for military equipment
and support that would improve Israel's ability to attack Iran's
nuclear facilities."
The Americans viewed the request, which was transmitted
(and rejected) at the highest level, as a sign that Israel is in the
advanced stages of preparations to attack Iran. They therefore warned
Israel against attacking, saying such a strike would undermine
American interests. They also demanded that Israel give them prior
notice if it nevertheless decided to strike Iran.
In early September, Haaretzreported that
the request had included GBU-28 "bunker-buster" bombs.
In mid-September, the U.S. agreed instead to sell Israel 1000 GBU-39
"bunker buster" bombs which Israeli military experts said "could
provide a powerful new weapon" in Gaza, APreported.
These bombs have been used to bomb tunnels in Gaza in the current
offensive, the Jerusalem Postreports.
Israel claims that its goal in bombing tunnels is to stop the
smuggling of weapons, but tunnels are also used to bring in goods, so
blowing up tunnels has the effect of reinforcing the blockade on Gaza.
So: when Israel requested weapons that the U.S. expected would be used
for bombing Iran, the U.S. said no, and added explicitly that it did
not want to see an Israeli attack on Iran. And there was no Israeli
attack on Iran.
Instead, the U.S. provided bombs that it had every reason to believe
would be used for an attack on Gaza. And now there is an Israeli
attack on Gaza, using those very bombs.
And therefore, there is no reason to doubt the active approval of the
United States government for the current attack.
So, if one happens to be living in the United States, it seems clear
that one's complaints ought to be addressed to U.S. officials. You can
write to President Bush and your Congressional representatives here
and to President-elect Obama here.
Robert Naiman
Robert Naiman is Policy Director at Just Foreign Policy. Naiman has worked as a policy analyst and researcher at the Center for Economic and Policy Research and Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch. He has masters degrees in economics and mathematics from the University of Illinois and has studied and worked in the Middle East.
It may well be that in denouncing "Israel's" attack on Gaza one, in an
important way, unwittingly does a disservice to the cause of holding
the Bush Administration accountable for its crimes.
Is there any doubt that the Bush Administration approved this assault?
Is there any doubt that it could not have taken place without the Bush
Administration's approval?
Is there any doubt that it could not continue without the support of
the Bush Administration and the protective umbrella of its veto at the
UN Security Council? Is there any doubt that it will stop the very day
that the Bush Administration says that it must?
If so, is it in the interest of humanity that we Americans engage in
the charade that the Israeli government is an autonomous actor in this
matter?
All these observations are true in general, but we have plenty of
specific evidence in this case.
In August, Haaretzreported
that the U.S. had "rejected an Israeli request for military equipment
and support that would improve Israel's ability to attack Iran's
nuclear facilities."
The Americans viewed the request, which was transmitted
(and rejected) at the highest level, as a sign that Israel is in the
advanced stages of preparations to attack Iran. They therefore warned
Israel against attacking, saying such a strike would undermine
American interests. They also demanded that Israel give them prior
notice if it nevertheless decided to strike Iran.
In early September, Haaretzreported that
the request had included GBU-28 "bunker-buster" bombs.
In mid-September, the U.S. agreed instead to sell Israel 1000 GBU-39
"bunker buster" bombs which Israeli military experts said "could
provide a powerful new weapon" in Gaza, APreported.
These bombs have been used to bomb tunnels in Gaza in the current
offensive, the Jerusalem Postreports.
Israel claims that its goal in bombing tunnels is to stop the
smuggling of weapons, but tunnels are also used to bring in goods, so
blowing up tunnels has the effect of reinforcing the blockade on Gaza.
So: when Israel requested weapons that the U.S. expected would be used
for bombing Iran, the U.S. said no, and added explicitly that it did
not want to see an Israeli attack on Iran. And there was no Israeli
attack on Iran.
Instead, the U.S. provided bombs that it had every reason to believe
would be used for an attack on Gaza. And now there is an Israeli
attack on Gaza, using those very bombs.
And therefore, there is no reason to doubt the active approval of the
United States government for the current attack.
So, if one happens to be living in the United States, it seems clear
that one's complaints ought to be addressed to U.S. officials. You can
write to President Bush and your Congressional representatives here
and to President-elect Obama here.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.