ZNet Commentary
As in Tiennamen square April 02, 2004
By Tanya Reinhart
Yediot Aharonot. An extensive discussion has already taken place in Israel
regarding the cost-benefit ratio of Yassin's assassination. But the question of
justice has hardly been raised.
According to international law, the execution of any person in an occupied
territory is not allowed. The Geneva convention, born out of the horrifying
experience of the second World War, sets limitations on the use of force even in
times of war. The convention distinguishes between war and a state of
occupation. Its fundamentals are, first, that occupied people are "protected",
and that the occupier is responsible for their safety. Second, it determines
that the occupied people have the right to fight for their liberation.
International conventions are one of the means people have developed for
self-preservation. Without them, there is a danger that the human race would
annihilate itself - first the strong would wipe out the weak, and then each
other.
During its 37 years of occupation, Israel has already violated every article of
the Geneva convention. But what it did now is unprecedented. As Robert Fisk
stated it in the British Independent, "for years, there has been an unwritten
rule in the cruel war of government-versus-guerrilla. You can kill the men on
the street, the bomb makers and gunmen. But the leadership on both sides -
government ministers, spiritual leaders were allowed to survive." Even when the
leader advocates violence and terror, the norm has been that he may be
imprisoned, but not killed.
Ahmed Yassin viewed himself as struggling against the occupation. As reported in
Yediot Aharonot, his demand was a full withdrawal of the Israeli army from the
occupied territories, back to the borders of 1967. In 1993, Hamas agreed to the
principles of the Oslo accords, but did not believe that Rabin would translate
these principles into action, and urged the Palestinian people to remember that
the occupation was not yet over. During the iron-fist period of Barak and
Sharon, Yassin proposed a long term 'hudna' (cease fire), but he also believed
that Israel would never end the occupation of its own will. "The enemy
understands only the language of war, bombs and explosives" - he preached to his
followers, and declared that "every Israeli is a target for us".
The Geneva convention recognizes the right of the occupied people to carry out
armed struggle against the occupying army, but not to use terror against
civilians. Terror has no moral justification, and is not defended by
international law. But it is necessary that we Israelis examine ourselves in
this regard as well. What other way do we leave open for the Palestinian people
to struggle for their liberation? Along the route of the wall in the West Bank,
a new form of popular resistance has been formed in the last few months.
Palestinian farmers whose land is being robbed sit on the ground in front of the
bulldozers, accompanied by the Israeli opponents of the wall - the veterans of
the Mas'ha camp. What could be more non-violent than this? But the Israeli
army shoots at sitting demonstrators, like in Tiennamen square.
The Israeli army blocks all options of non-violent resistance from the
Palestinians. With the arrogant elimination of a leader and a symbol, as he
was leaving a mosque, the army knowingly created a new wave of violence and
terror. It is hard not to get the impression that terror is convenient for
Sharon and the army. It enables them to convince the world that the Geneva
protections do not apply to the Palestiians, because they have terrorists in
their midst, and that, therefore, it is permitted to do anything to them.
Since September 11th, as part of its "war against terror," the U.S. has Been
pushing to destroy all defences provided by International law. But even the U.S.
has not yet dared to publicly execute a spiritual-religious leader (of, for
example, the Taliban in Afghanistan). Now Israel has determined, with the U.S.
blessing, that even this is permitted. Under the military rule, Israel has
become a leading force in the destruction of the very protections that humankind
has established, out of World War Two, for its own preservation, protections
that we too may need one day, as history has already shown us.
As in Tiennamen square April 02, 2004
By Tanya Reinhart
Yediot Aharonot. An extensive discussion has already taken place in Israel
regarding the cost-benefit ratio of Yassin's assassination. But the question of
justice has hardly been raised.
According to international law, the execution of any person in an occupied
territory is not allowed. The Geneva convention, born out of the horrifying
experience of the second World War, sets limitations on the use of force even in
times of war. The convention distinguishes between war and a state of
occupation. Its fundamentals are, first, that occupied people are "protected",
and that the occupier is responsible for their safety. Second, it determines
that the occupied people have the right to fight for their liberation.
International conventions are one of the means people have developed for
self-preservation. Without them, there is a danger that the human race would
annihilate itself - first the strong would wipe out the weak, and then each
other.
During its 37 years of occupation, Israel has already violated every article of
the Geneva convention. But what it did now is unprecedented. As Robert Fisk
stated it in the British Independent, "for years, there has been an unwritten
rule in the cruel war of government-versus-guerrilla. You can kill the men on
the street, the bomb makers and gunmen. But the leadership on both sides -
government ministers, spiritual leaders were allowed to survive." Even when the
leader advocates violence and terror, the norm has been that he may be
imprisoned, but not killed.
Ahmed Yassin viewed himself as struggling against the occupation. As reported in
Yediot Aharonot, his demand was a full withdrawal of the Israeli army from the
occupied territories, back to the borders of 1967. In 1993, Hamas agreed to the
principles of the Oslo accords, but did not believe that Rabin would translate
these principles into action, and urged the Palestinian people to remember that
the occupation was not yet over. During the iron-fist period of Barak and
Sharon, Yassin proposed a long term 'hudna' (cease fire), but he also believed
that Israel would never end the occupation of its own will. "The enemy
understands only the language of war, bombs and explosives" - he preached to his
followers, and declared that "every Israeli is a target for us".
The Geneva convention recognizes the right of the occupied people to carry out
armed struggle against the occupying army, but not to use terror against
civilians. Terror has no moral justification, and is not defended by
international law. But it is necessary that we Israelis examine ourselves in
this regard as well. What other way do we leave open for the Palestinian people
to struggle for their liberation? Along the route of the wall in the West Bank,
a new form of popular resistance has been formed in the last few months.
Palestinian farmers whose land is being robbed sit on the ground in front of the
bulldozers, accompanied by the Israeli opponents of the wall - the veterans of
the Mas'ha camp. What could be more non-violent than this? But the Israeli
army shoots at sitting demonstrators, like in Tiennamen square.
The Israeli army blocks all options of non-violent resistance from the
Palestinians. With the arrogant elimination of a leader and a symbol, as he
was leaving a mosque, the army knowingly created a new wave of violence and
terror. It is hard not to get the impression that terror is convenient for
Sharon and the army. It enables them to convince the world that the Geneva
protections do not apply to the Palestiians, because they have terrorists in
their midst, and that, therefore, it is permitted to do anything to them.
Since September 11th, as part of its "war against terror," the U.S. has Been
pushing to destroy all defences provided by International law. But even the U.S.
has not yet dared to publicly execute a spiritual-religious leader (of, for
example, the Taliban in Afghanistan). Now Israel has determined, with the U.S.
blessing, that even this is permitted. Under the military rule, Israel has
become a leading force in the destruction of the very protections that humankind
has established, out of World War Two, for its own preservation, protections
that we too may need one day, as history has already shown us.
