Tag Archives: robert fisk

Syrian Ambassador to UK: “Israel behind Syrian Revolution.”

Sami Khiyami: "Israel could be behind any bad thing in world."

Sami Khiyami: "Israel could be behind any bad thing in world."

It was an almost comic exchange on BBC’s Newsnight (the exchange begins at 17 minutes) last night when Jeremy Paxman interviewed Sami Khiyami, the Syrian Ambassador to the UK, over who was behind the plot to destabilise Syria.

It went like this:

“Ambassador: Syria is not a one party state, it is not a one family state. It is the nicest and most beautiful state in the Middle East.

Paxo: Ok, now you’ve got that off your chest, tell us about this plot, who’s behind it?

Amb.: I think all those who thought Syria is at a time when it will cash in on the result of the revolutions in Egypt and Tunisia. The changes that occured in the Arab world were about to help the Syrian position a lot towards Israel and the expansionist policies of Israel.

Paxo.: Basically, it’s the Israelis behind it, is it?

Amb.: I’m sorry?

Paxo.: Is it the Israelis behind it, is that what you’re saying?

Amb.: Well, the Israelis could be behind it. They could be behind any bad thing in the world.”

As ever, Paxman looked in on disbelief.

Then again Khiyami was only parroting the line of President Assad of Syria who spoke of an “Israeli agenda” in his speech yesterday about the violence currently taking place in Syria.

The Times reports that a 14 year-old boy was yesterday shot in the head while carrying an olive branch. And many dozens so far have been murdered in cold blood at the hands of Assad’s forces (has anyone seen Judge Richard Goldstone lately?).

Some claim that Assad is basically a reformist President, but one who is kept in a straightjacket by hardline conservative elements in his Ba’athist administration.

Nevertheless, Syria hosts Hamas, supports Hezbollah in Lebanon and will do anything that Iran commands it to, especially considering that the Assads are Alawite, an offshoot of Shia Islam. The majority of Syria are Sunni Muslims.

I would have liked to have seen Paxman ask Khiyami whether there could be a repeat of events in Hama in 1982 when Assad’s father massacred up to 20,000 of his own people the last time they were impertinent enough to attempt a revolt against Assad totalitarian rule (Here is Robert Fisk reporting on his visit to Hama in June 2000).

But then we know what Khiyami would probably have replied: “Israel slaughtered them!”

Fisk/Hari

It was a good old Independent doubly-whammy to nicely finish off International Israel Apartheid Week.

Robert Fisk

Last Friday (12 March) Johann Hari had a piece Palestinians should now declare their independence.

On Saturday (13 March) Fisk recommended books to help you understand the Middle East.

Fisk recommends and quotes from George Antonius’s The Arab Awakening:

“The cure for the eviction of Jews from Germany is not to be sought in the eviction of the Arabs from their homeland …”

Fisk sees this as “the first truly eloquent warning of what was to come”.

He didn’t recommend Benny Morris’ The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem but he mentioned it in passing:

“Benny Morris was the most prominent Israeli researcher to prove that it was indeed Israel’s intention to evict the Palestinians from their homes in their tens of thousands in 1948 – the fact that Morris has since gone completely batty by claiming the Israelis didn’t ethnically cleanse enough of them does not detract from his seminal work.”

But Morris did not prove any such intention!

Morris, for starters, quotes Ze’ev Jabotinsky, leader of a right-wing Zionist movement, who said in 1931: “We don’t want to evict even one Arab from the left or right banks of the Jordan. We want them to prosper economically and culturally.”

If anything it was the 1937 Peel Commission, which was under the auspices of the British government, that first recommended transfer of the Arab population out of areas earmarked for the Jewish population on partition.

Morris’ view is that there was no specific Zionist policy of transfer although there had been unofficial “transfer thinking” that preceded the war. But it was only once the Arabs rejected the 1947 UN partition resolution, civil war between the Palestinian Jews and Palestinian Arabs and then the full-scale Arab invasion of Israel ensued that “Jewish hearts hardened towards the Palestinian Arabs who were seen as mortal enemies, and should they be coopted into a Jewish state, a potential Fifth Column”.

To be fair to Fisk has lived in the heart of Beirut for 30 years and so he is highly biased out of necessity.

Johann Hari does not live in the heart of Beirut and so has no such excuse for his bias (or is it just ignorance?).

Johann Hari

Hari suggests the Palestinians should declare their own state forthwith to concentrate the minds of the West and he narrates his own version of the Arab/Israeli wars including, like Fisk, that of 1948:

“Until 1948, the Palestinians were living in their own homes, on their own land – until they were suddenly driven out in a war to make way for a new state for people fleeing a monstrous European genocide.”

Again there is no mention of the total Arab rejection of UN partition resolution 181, the consequent civil war started by the Palestinian Arabs against the Jews and the Arab invasion after Israel declared independence on 14 May 1948.

For Hari one side is evil while the other side is totally innocent. He continues this theme throughout the piece.

He quotes Golda Meirs’ “there are no Palestinians”. Well to Meir there were no Palestinians 40 years ago just like there were no Palestinians as such to the Jews that came to Palestine 100 years ago because they did not view the Arabs living there as a nation. But that doesn’t mean to say there is no Palestinian nation now. There is and one deserving of a country.

But it is a common anti-Israel tactic to take an ancient quote of an Israeli or Jewish leader and put it in today’s context to make the speaker look evil.

Hari also writes of “some heroic Israelis who argue back”, so painting the rest of Israel’s citizens as weak, ignorant and cowardly.

But Hari thinks he has found the answer to why there are so few “heroic Israelis”:

“It may be that surviving the most horrific atrocities doesn’t make you compassionate, but more often makes you hard, and paranoid. It may make you see the ghost of your murderer even in your victims: Adolf Hitler in a Gazan child.”

For Hari Jews are still so obsessed by the gas chambers that every one of us, apart from his “heroes”, has turned into our own self-contained irrational killing machine.

Not for Hari do Israelis fight back against thousands of deadly Kassam rockets fired by Hamas from Gaza towards Israel’s southern towns or against Katyushas hitting nothern Israel from Hezbollah bases in southern Lebanon.

And Hari thinks that Hamas, “the ugly fundamentalist group”, tacitly accepts a two-state solution but how ignorant can one be.

Accepting a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza, as Hamas does, is not the same as accepting the existence of Israel.

But Hari has fallen for Hamas’ rhetoric hook, line and sinker.

Hari finishes off urging the Palestinians:

“They should declare independence. Then it is up to us – the watching billions – to pressure our governments to make it real, rather than a howl in the dark.”

Hari doesn’t understand that Palestinian society is in no state to declare independence. While building consruction is swiftly taking place in West Bank towns the hatred that persists between Hamas and Fatah will mean that civil war, bloodshed and revenge killings would not be far away.

Hari hasn’t thought the consequence of his logic through but, then again, for Israel’s haters the demonisation of Israel and Israelis far outweighs any concern they really have for the Palestinian people.