[Marxism] Robert Fisk: The world according to Dubya

Raymond Chase r_chase at sympatico.ca
Wed Apr 21 21:07:45 MDT 2004


The world according to Dubya
By Robert Fisk
The Cape Times on April 20, 2004

http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?click_id=22&art_id=vn20040421081917910C139546&set_id=1

So United States President George Bush tears up the Israeli-Palestinian
Peace Plan and that's okay. Israeli settlements for Jews and Jews only on
the West Bank. That's okay. Taking land from Palestinians who have owned
that land for generations, that's okay.

United Nations Security Council Resolution 242 says that land cannot be
acquired by war. Forget it. That's okay. What does this mean? That Bush
cares more about his re-election than he does about the Middle East? Or that
Bush is more frightened of the Israeli lobby than he is of his own
electorate? Fear not, it is the latter.

His language, his narrative, his discourse on history, has been such a lie
these past three weeks that I wonder why we bother to listen to his boring
press conferences. Ariel Sharon, the perpetrator of the Sabra and Chatila
massacre (1 700 Palestinian civilians dead), is a "man of peace" - even
though the official 1993 Israeli report on the massacre said he was
"personally responsible" for it.

Now Bush is praising Sharon's plan to steal yet more Palestinian land as a
"historic and courageous act".

Heaven spare us all. Give up the puny illegal Jewish settlements in Gaza and
everything's okay: the theft of land by colonial settlers, the denial of any
right of return to Israel by those Palestinians who live there, that's okay.

Bush, who claimed he changed the Middle East by invading Iraq, says he is
now changing the world by invading Iraq! Okay! Is there no one to cry "Stop!
Enough!"?

A few nights ago, Bush, talked about "freedom in Iraq". Not "democracy" in
Iraq. No, "democracy" was no longer mentioned. "Democracy" was simply left
out of the equation.

Now it was just "freedom" - freedom from Saddam rather than freedom to have
elections. And what is this "freedom" supposed to involve? One group of
US-appointed Iraqis will cede power to another group of US-appointed Iraqis.
That will be the "historic hand-over" of Iraqi "sovereignty".

And the result? Vast areas of the Palestinian West Bank will now become
Israel, courtesy of Bush. Land which belongs to people other than Israelis
must now be stolen by Israelis because it is "unrealistic" to accept
otherwise.

Is Bush a criminal? Can he be charged with abetting a criminal act? Can Iraq
now claim to Kuwait that it is "unrealistic" that the Ottoman borders can be
changed? Palestinian land once included all of what is now Israel. It is
not, apparently, "realistic" to change this, even to two percent.

Everything the US government has done to preserve its name as a "middle-man"
in the Middle East has now been thrown away by Bush. That it will place his
soldiers at greater risk doesn't worry him. That it goes against natural
justice doesn't worry him. That his statements are against international law
is of no consequence.

And still we have to cow-tow to this man. If we are struck by al-Qaeda, it
is our fault.

Bush legitimised "terrorism" last week - and everyone who loses a limb or a
life can thank him. And, I fear, they can thank Tony Blair too.

-- The London Independent

This article was originally published on page 3 of The Cape Times on April
20, 2004

Published on the Web by IOL on 2004-04-21 08:19:00

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
© Independent Online 2004. All rights reserved. IOL publishes this article
in good faith but is not liable for any loss or damage caused by reliance on
the information it contains.






More information about the Marxism mailing list