FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Ariel Sharon’s Subjugation Strategy

by Neve Gordon

JERUSALEM. Israel recently agreed to withdraw its forces from Bethlehem and populated Palestinian areas in the Gaza Strip while the Palestinian Authority takes on the responsibility of policing residents there.

Israeli soldiers and tanks moved to the outskirts of Bethlehem, allowing the residents who have been under curfew for nine weeks to leave their homes.

But the tight military blockade around the city continues, cutting it off from other parts of the West Bank. Bethlehem has been transformed into an island.

But even this small gesture, initiated by Israeli Defense Minister Benjamin Ben-Eliezer, has little to do with his concern for the Palestinians, 2 million of whom have been imprisoned in their homes for nearly 70 days.

Rather, the appearance of Haifa Mayor Amram Mitzna on the political scene — as a contender for leading the Labor Party in the next national elections — seems to have induced Mr. Ben-Eliezer to finally negotiate with the Palestinians. Mr. Mitzna, who is part of Labor’s dovish wing, has, according to the polls, a 60 percent lead over Mr. Ben-Eliezer.

While Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has not opposed Mr. Ben-Eliezer’s initiative, he has a few ideas of his own.

On Aug. 20, only hours after Israeli and Palestinian forces began implementing the Gaza-Bethlehem First withdrawal plan, he authorized the arrest of Mohammed Saadat, the brother of Ahmed Saadat, who is the current leader of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP). The elite military unit that was sent to do the job killed Mohammed, the young brother.

As the news of Mr. Saadat’s death spread, violence once again flared in the occupied territories following nearly two weeks of relative quiet.

The PFLP also vowed to avenge the assassination, and if the past is any indication of the future, it will make good on its promise.

Mr. Sharon, though, is not a man to make arbitrary decisions. Killing Mr. Saadat was just part of his ongoing attempt to subjugate the Palestinians.

The closures and curfews have not worked, nor have the extra-judicial executions, the demolition of homes and the deportation of family members. So perhaps arresting and killing brothers of political leaders — “as a potential deterrent” — will.

But what is Mr. Sharon’s goal?

After an F-16 jet dropped a one-ton bomb on a crowded residential area in Gaza on July 22, killing 17 people — nine of them children — and wounding more than 140 others, Mr. Sharon exclaimed that the attack had been one of Israel’s “biggest successes.”

Despite harsh international criticism, Mr. Sharon remained unrepentant.

The Israeli press suggested that his triumphant cry had less to do with the operation’s formal objective — the extra-judicial execution of Hamas leader Salah Shehadeh — than with the successful destruction of a unilateral cease-fire agreement formally finalized by different Palestinian military factions a day before the massacre.

Predictably, the cease-fire was annulled and a series of Hamas attacks followed, killing nearly 30 people and wounding many more. Among them was the bombing of the Hebrew University cafeteria, where nine people died, including five Americans.

Not unlike the bombing of Gaza, killing Mr. Saadat on the eve of the implementation of Gaza-Bethlehem First was meant to add fuel to the violence. It is still too soon to tell how many Israelis will die this time.

Again and again, Mr. Sharon has chosen the battleground as the arena of action because he does not believe in a diplomatic solution to the bloody Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

His overall objective, though, is not to wipe out the Palestinian Authority, as some commentators seem to suggest, but rather to forcibly change its role.

Regardless of whether Yasser Arafat remains in charge, if Mr. Sharon gets his way, a “reformed” Palestinian Authority will no longer serve as the political representative of an independent state.

Rather, it will operate as a subcontractor for the Israeli government — a civil administration of sorts, responsible for education, health, sewage and garbage collection, and for policing the streets, as Gaza-Bethlehem First appears to entail.

The strategy is clear: confer on the Palestinians the costly role of managing civil life, but eliminate their political freedoms while controlling them from afar. South Africans called them Bantustans.

To accomplish this vision, Mr. Sharon needs to break the spirit of the Palestinian people, hoping that at a certain point they will bow. This, it seems, is exactly what he has been trying to do. The Gaza-Bethlehem First plan does not undermine his objective because it prolongs the strangulation and humiliation of the Palestinians, even while it allows them to leave their homes.

Neve Gordon teaches politics at Ben-Gurion University in Israel. He can be reached at ngordon@bgumail.bgu.ac.il

 

Neve Gordon is a Leverhulme Visiting Professor in the Department of Politics and International Studies and the co-author of The Human Right to Dominate.

More articles by:

CounterPunch Magazine

minimag-edit

bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550

zen economics

Weekend Edition
February 17, 2017
Friday - Sunday
David Price
Rogue Elephant Rising: The CIA as Kingslayer
Matthew Stevenson
Is Trump the Worst President Ever?
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Flynn?
John Wight
Brexit and Trump: Why Right is Not the New Left
Diana Johnstone
France: Another Ghastly Presidential Election Campaign; the Deep State Rises to the Surface
Neve Gordon
Trump’s One-State Option
Roger Harris
Emperor Trump Has No Clothes: Time to Organize!
Joan Roelofs
What Else is Wrong with Globalization
Andrew Levine
Why Trump’s Muslim Travel Ban?
Mike Whitney
Blood in the Water: the Trump Revolution Ends in a Whimper
Vijay Prashad
Trump, Turmoil and Resistance
Ron Jacobs
U.S. Imperial War Personified
David Swanson
Can the Climate Survive Adherence to War and Partisanship?
Andre Vltchek
Governor of Jakarta: Get Re-elected or Die!
Patrick Cockburn
The Coming Destruction of Mosul
Norman Pollack
Self-Devouring Reaction: Governmental Impasse
Steve Horn
What Do a Louisiana Pipeline Explosion and Dakota Access Pipeline Have in Common? Phillips 66
Brian Saady
Why Corporations are Too Big to Jail in the Drug War
Graham Peebles
Ethiopia: Peaceful Protest to Armed Uprising
Luke Meyer
The Case of Tony: Inside a Lifer Hearing
Binoy Kampmark
Adolf, The Donald and History
Robert Koehler
The Great American Awakening
Murray Dobbin
Canadians at Odds With Their Government on Israel
Fariborz Saremi
A Whole New World?
Joyce Nelson
Japan’s Abe, Trump & Illegal Leaks
Christopher Brauchli
Trump 1, Tillerson 0
Yves Engler
Is This Hate Speech?
Dan Bacher
Trump Administration Exempts Three CA Oil Fields From Water Protection Rule at Jerry Brown’s Request
Richard Klin
Solid Gold
Melissa Garriga
Anti-Abortion and Anti-Fascist Movements: More in Common Than Meets the Eye
Thomas Knapp
The Absurd Consequences of a “Right to Privacy”
W. T. Whitney
The Fate of Prisoner Simón Trinidad, as Seen by His U. S. Lawyer
Brian Platt
Don’t Just Oppose ICE Raids, Tear Down the Whole Racist Immigration Enforcement Regime
Paul Cantor
Refugee: the Compassionate Mind of Egon Schwartz
Norman Richmond
The Black Radical Tradition in Canada
Barton Kunstler
Rallying Against the Totalitarian Specter
Judith Deutsch
Militarism:  Revolutionary Mothering and Rosie the Riveter
Nyla Ali Khan
Kashmir Evoked a Lot More International Attention in the 1950s Than It Does Now
Adam Phillips
There Isn’t Any There There
Louis Proyect
Steinbeck’s Red Devils
Randy Shields
Left Coast Date: the Dating Site for the ORWACA Tribe
Charles R. Larson
Review: Bill Hayes’ “Insomniac City”
David Yearsley
White Supremacy and Music Theory
February 16, 2017
Peter Gaffney
The Rage of Caliban: Identity Politics, the Travel Ban, and the Shifting Ideological Framework of the Resistance
Ramzy Baroud
Farewell to Doublespeak: Israel’s Terrifying Vision for the Future
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail