Jewish Forum for Justice and Human Rights

Saul Zadka: Programme Director at Spiro Ark and a press reviewer for BBC television. Formerly European correspondent for Haíaretz and commentator on Middle East affairs for Channel 4 and Sky

The trouble with human rights activists is that they detach themselves of political circumstances and military conditions on the ground and concentrate on isolated cases which make a grim reading, but do not tell the whole story. The Betzelem presentation is misleading because it ignores the broad picture.

But I would like to take an issue with the organizers for their over-focusing on Israel and diverting attention from other places where real abuses of human rights take place, even in Iraq by British and American occupation forces.

I could, of course, suggest other titles, involving other countries in the region: Syria’s habit of jailing political opponents, the role of Hezbollah in Lebanon’s politics after Israel’s pull out 6 and a half years ago, the Sunni-Shi’a blood-bath in Iraq, the persecution of minorities all over the Arab Middle EastÖAnd what about another debate, taking place today in Tehran, in which the Iranian government assembled a host of holocaust deniers? And how about the repeated calls by the Iranian president to eradicate Israel? Mind you, only at the weekend, the Palestinian Prime Minister, in a visit to Iran, hugged and kissed the same president and declared that he would never ever recognize Israel!

Which brings us to the Palestinians themselves? They continue to kill each other and only this morning one person and three children of an intelligence officer, Mr. Baha Balusha, a member of Fattah, were murdered by gunmen, probably belonging to Hamas. Would it cross our mind to run a panel under a similar title, questioning Palestinian commitment to the lives of their own people? Of course not. Another possible topic springs to mind after the most recent suicide bombing in Gaza could be: “Exploding grandmothers ñ is the Israeli-Palestinian conflicts turning geriatric?

But no, this would have made my task very easy. We take Arabs killing Arabs, or Arabs killing non-Arabs for granted and they do not deserve a debate. Therefore I don’t, seriously suggest, that we would deal with honour killing, enforced marriages, female circumcisions, street executions of collaborators, rampant anti-Semitism in the Arab media, harassments of gays and persecutions of Christians in Arab countries. I prefer to talk about the British, the Americans and other Western countries that violate human rights and would never have a hearing in Hampstead.

However, I don’t tell you ”don’t touch Israel”, nor do I criticize the repeated obsessive pre-occupation with that country. Beyond the phrase that Jews are news, I acknowledge also that Jews are only into Jews. (Forum). And the subject is being presented in a yellow tabloid-ish kind of way to attract attention. It’s sexy, it’s almost sleazy and why not. Organize a debate about the Chinese occupation of Tibet or that of Morocco in Western Sahara and you won’t fill up the town hallÖ.

So even before the debate started, you put Israel on the dock, by the title. It reminds me of another debate, held in London, under the headline: “Is Zionism a danger to the Jews?”, or Jimmy Carter’s new book, titled: “Palestine: Peace, not Apartheid”.

So, to the question presented to the participants, my answer could be “yes and no”, “no and yes”. “yes, butÖ” or “no, butÖ”. It could also be “yes, but every country doesÖ (Which is not an excuse) and it could be “no, but if it doesÖit’s the outcome of circumstances imposed on the country by its adversaries.

And I will choose the latter, simply because Israel has to deal with a vicious enemy that not only shows disregard to Israeli citizens, but demonstrated time and again its indifference to the lives of its own people. More than that, I will challenge everybody on the panel and the floor and tell them that the Palestinians are all the more interested to increase the number of their own civilian casualties inflicted by Israeli forces, as a policy. It helps the regime in Gaza to foster hatred, harden the views of the people and present the Israelis as blood-thirsty people who deserve worldwide condemnations, political pressure and military intervention. Otherwise why do they use their people as a human shield when launching rockets into Israel from Gaza which had been emptied from Israeli presence to the last soldier and settler? Otherwise, why do they provide refuge to suicide bombers and other serial killers who committed untold atrocities during the last 6 years?

The IDF, therefore, found itself sometimes under most terrible circumstances in which, in the process of eliminating terrorists, it harms civilians across the border. Refraining from attacking those violent organizations amounts to the human rights’ violations of its own innocent people. Israel cares about Palestinian lives more than the Palestinians themselves. The carnage in Bet Hanoun, for example, was a subject of a prolonged painful debate in the country. . And many people (myself included think that bombing the power station in Gaza was a war crime).
The fact that the Palestinians are militarily week is not a valid argument. With their weakness they killed more than 1200 Israelis since the start of the millennium: in buses, trains, cafÈs, restaurants, wedding halls, chess and bingo clubs, discothËques, schools and private homes.

Palestinians can not kill others and ‘cry wolf’ afterwards. They cannot have the privilege of not recognizing Israel’s right to exist (irespect of the occupation) and demand money from the Western World to keep them afloat. They can not be in the same bed with nasty Iran and expect sympathy from the International community. The Palestinian rulers are out of tune with their people and they proved time and again that they belong to the uncivilized part of the planet.

So, is Israel a violator, or a serious violator, or even a serial violator of human rights in the territories? My answer is: no, no, no!