Israel & Palestine 2006 by Mazin Qumsiyeh

[Wordie]

Qumsiyeh discusses the differences in US media coverage of Arafat's death (the media predicted it would move the peace process forward; we now know this was inaccurate or exaggerated.) He points out that Arafat's mysterious illness received little attention (still no diagnosis to date)and how also missing from the coverage was any mention of the well-wishing sent to Arafat by world leaders. He says most critical stories featured only Israeli critics; the picture painted of him was not balanced. Qumsiyeh has observed how different is the coverage of Sharon - he sees a dramatic difference, which he explains by a double standard relating to overall US foreign policy and credibility.

Israel & Palestine 2006
by Mazin Qumsiyeh
January 05, 2006

...Arafat, while derided as an obstacle to peace and for his cronyism, was imprisoned in his compound in Ramallah by Israeli forces that controlled even his access to food and water. Arafat was actually challenged by nearly half of the Palestinian people for moving away (starting in the 1970s and culminating in Oslo in the 1990s) from national liberation to unbalanced and unfair "negotiations" leading to agreements that failed to protect Palestinian human rights as codified by International law.

Sharon sat as a leader of the fourth or fifth strongest military power in the world (with extensive weapons of mass destruction and significant violations of International law). But Sharon was also responsible for massacres as Qibya in 1953, in Gaza in 1971, in Sabra and Shatila in 1982 (for details, see http://www.indictsharon.net/), and more recently for large scale demolition of Palestinian homes and for targeting civilians (see reports by Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Physicians for Human Rights, and Israeli Human Rights organizations like B'Tselem). He was even held "personally responsible" for Sabra and Shatila massacres by Israel's own investigative commission. More recently legal proceedings were brought against him under Belgium's Universal Jurisdiction laws and a huge pressure from Israeli and US governments were put on the judiciary in Belgium to drop the case.

Most of the world understood that the major obstacle to peace is Israeli colonization and oppression of a native Palestinians in contravention of International law and over 60 UN Security Council resolutions. Most of the world also recognizes that the support by the US government to Israel was critical in its evasion of International law (e.g. about the need to let Palestinian refugees return to their homes and lands). This support was buttressed by the influence of the Israeli lobby in DC and in some media outlets. Most of the world knows it is mere distractions and delays the approach of peace to personalize issues (around Arafat or Sharon), to focus on the violence of those resisting occupation and colonization (but not the violence of the occupier/colonizer), and to speak of unilateral "solutions" that involve walls and Bantustans as advancing peace. Such distractions were attempted in Apartheid South Africa and failed.

Yet, many in the US media persist in trying to use these fig leafs. It is not easy to understand who benefits from vilifying Arafat and making Sharon's policies of dictating unilateral "solutions" look good. Why would one discuss the withdrawal of Israeli troops and settlers from Gaza without explaining that per International Law, Gaza remains occupied or that in exchange for withdrawing the 2% of total settlers (from Gaza), Sharon added 4% settlers in the West Bank? One can understand the media's concern for the health of an Israeli Prime Minister but what should never be excused is shabby journalism and hypocrisy in covering illnesses of leaders like Arafat versus Sharon.

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=107&ItemID=9467

The article concludes with this sentence: Dare we hope that 2006 will be a pivotal year when the avalanche of information and public activism become so large that the fig leafs of misinformation, diversions and double-standards will be swept aside?

[adriennui]

1. if i remember correctly

mrs. arafat and his aids shut down any possibility of an inquiry into the cause of arafat's death.

however, there were rumors.