Showing posts with label representation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label representation. Show all posts

Sunday, January 18, 2009

war scenes

--
For the last 23 days I've come home every night for more news on Israel's war on Gaza and the Palestinian people. Burnt into my memory are the white phosphorus blasts, like upside down fireworks, shot over Gaza households; children and old women, blood streaming down their faces, treated in the hallways of hospitals with no free beds or rooms; Israel's military spoke people and their mechanical chain of responses: "Hamas is a terrorist organization. Hamas fired rockets. Hamas hides under civilians."


The numbers tell part of the story. Since Dec. 27th: at least 1,300 Palestinians killed, at least 850 of them civilians (civilians are women and children in these numbers- every male over 18 is cynically labeled non-civilian), at least 400 Palestinian children killed. While the cease fire is officially called, they continue to pull more bodies from the rubble of Gaza's 4,000 destroyed buildings. In the same amount of time, 13 Israelis have been killed. 3 civilians, 10 military, and of those 10 military 4 were killed by their own tank fire. Hamas rockets accounted for only 4 deaths, 3 civilians and one soldier, meaning Israel's own tank fire has killed as many Israelis as Hamas rockets since Dec. 27th, the start of this so-called war.

Hamas rockets can't justify this death toll, which includes the bombing of hospitals, UN schools, and UN humanitarian storage facilities in Gaza (the later 2 sites both presenting clear evidence that no Palestinian combatants were using them).

The role of the United States in these events has been shameful. In the first week of Israel's campaign, the U.S. blocked security council resolutions calling for a ceasefire. Then on January 8th the U.S. was the only security council member to abstain from the vote. Afterwards, now in clear defiance of the U.N., Israel increased the intensity of its warfare, counting on U.S. approval against international opinion and international law.

On January 11th the U.S. House passed resolutions (390 to 5) supporting Israel's right to defend itself. That is, for the 4th largest military force in the world (Israel) to carry out war in one of the most densly populated areas of the world with a civilian population of 1.5 million, 55% of which is children, in search of homemade rockets. Defense indeed.

Real defense of Israel would mean calling for an immediate ceasefire, one that Hamas had been observing at least as well as Israel before the beginning of Israel's recent campaign. Before the July 2008 ceasfire, Hamas had shot 179 rockets per month into Israel. After the ceasfire, in the four months before Israel sparked agressions again, Hamas was shooting an average of 3 rockets a month.

Both Hamas and Israel deserve our condemnation, not only for their lack of regard against civilian populations (they both are and have been committing war crimes), but also for their short-sighted politics. If the goal of Israel was to weaken Hamas, they've done the opposite. If the goal of Hamas has ever been to represent or protect the Palistinian people, then their tactics have failed and continue to fail.

But the international community and the U.S. (they are distinct here because they have been more seperate than ever on this issue in particular) already agree on the condemnation of Hamas. Meanwhile the list of Israel's atrocities are covered in U.S. media and politics (this seemingly includes Obama) by the words "Hamas, terror, rockets." More than just the civilian death toll, they gloss over the barring of international journalists to the Gaza strip by Israel and Israel threatining the safety of international aide workers on multiple occasions.

Now we have a cease fire. And for peace the U.S. needs to be involved in rational humanitarian dialogue. This includes moving as far as possible from Bush's simple proclamations, like his Jan 15th farewell nod to Israel and Iraq: "Good and Evil exist in this world, and between the two, there can be no compromise."

Against that quote I want to end with Fares Akram, a Palestinain journalist whose father, an unmarked civillian, was killed on January 3rd:

"My grief carries no desire for revenge, which I know to be always in vain. But, in truth, as a grieving son, I am finding it hard to distinguish between what the Israelis call terrorists and the Israeli pilots and tank crews who are invading Gaza. What is the difference between the pilot who blew my father to pieces and the militant who fires a small rocket? I have no answers but, just as I am to become a father, I have lost my father."
--

Wednesday, October 29, 2008

am i alive?

this morning i hopelessly clicked on my tüpbebek shortcut and actually found my block. (glory be!) then i read the news. blogger has been temporarily unbanned, waiting for "missing evidence." to temporarily celebrate, i'm going to post some missing content: pictures from fall in Erzurum. but i also want to write a bit more about the ban and my thoughts, especially as it relates to Cumhuriyet Bayramı- Republic Day in Turkey, October 29th.

We must liberate our concepts of justice, our laws and our legal institutions from the bonds which, even though they are incompatible with the needs of our century, still hold a tight grip on us. -Mustafa Kemal Atatürk

digi-turk, a large Turkish cable provider, sued over blogger sites linking to free football games and a local court in Diyarbakir province (South-Eastern Turkey) made the ruling, which banned access to all blogger sites in Turkey. there are a few issues for the legal system to iron out here, like why a provincial court can make a ruling that bans access to internet for the whole country, and why the entire blog hosting service is banned instead of the specific sites breaching intellectual property rights (something that could be done with just a bit more work). but because of these anomalies, the bans can't represent the majority of the Turkish people or the Turkish courts.

in discussion boards about the banning of blogspot, i saw a lot of Turkish people very upset. but i asked my students about the banning and they seemed indifferent or apathetic. most answered by saying that they know how to get around banned sites with proxy servers, and they all know that youtube was banned because of attacks/criticism/satire on/of/about the founder of the modern Turkish Republic: Kemal Atatürk. but i was thinking, especially now that it is the Republic Holiday, of the countries the founder of modern Turkey was looking to as models of his Republic. for better or worse, he looked at Europe and The West when structuring the Turkish Republic (France especially influenced the political system and language). the list of countries that censor internet include Iran, North Korea, and Saudi Arabia. and i wonder what Atatürk would think about censorship and to find his Republic in this company on this issue today, even when the censorship is done in attempts to preserve his own legacy from defamation.

to be clear, i'm not trying to write for anyone, although i am trying to make an argument towards the release of censorship on certain grounds. and i'm finding myself more vocal on this topic since it has affected me personally. not only do i host this site on blogger, but i host 2 other sites for my students, one on American Cultural Studies and the other on Introductory Phonetics. much content like this gets caught up in the bans and inhibit the population from information and perspective.

----

by the way, i found an interesting Turkish group doing some action on this issue and others: meet the Young Civilians.