પગલે ઇઝરાયેલ‘s massive assault on heavily populated civilian areas of the Gaza Strip earlier this year, Amnesty International called for the યુનાઈટેડ સ્ટેટ્સ to suspend military aid to ઇઝરાયેલ on human rights grounds. Amnesty has also called for the United Nations to impose a mandatory arms embargo on both Hamas and the Israeli government. Unfortunately, it appears that President Barack Obama won’t be heeding Amnesty’s call.
During the fighting in January, Amnesty documented Israeli forces engaging in "direct attacks on civilians and civilian objects in ગાઝા, and attacks which were disproportionate or indiscriminate." The leader of Amnesty International’s fact-finding mission to the Gaza Strip and southern ઇઝરાયેલ નોંધ્યું how "Israeli forces used white phosphorus and other weapons supplied by the યુએસએ to carry out serious violations of international humanitarian law, including war crimes." Amnesty also reported finding fragments of U.S.-made munitions "littering school playgrounds, in hospitals and in people’s homes."
માલ્કમ સ્માર્ટ, જે મધ્ય પૂર્વ માટે એમ્નેસ્ટી ઇન્ટરનેશનલના ડિરેક્ટર તરીકે સેવા આપે છે, અવલોકન in a press release that "to a large extent, ઇઝરાયેલ‘s military offensive in ગાઝા was carried out with weapons, munitions and military equipment supplied by the યુએસએ and paid for with યુએસ taxpayers’ money." The release also noted how before the conflict, which raged for three weeks from late December into January, the યુનાઈટેડ સ્ટેટ્સ had "been aware of the pattern of repeated misuse of [its] weapons."
Amnesty has similarly condemned Hamas rocket attacks into civilian-populated areas of southern ઇઝરાયેલ as war crimes. And while acknowledging that aid to Hamas was substantially smaller, far less sophisticated, and far less lethal — and appeared to have been procured through clandestine sources — Amnesty called on Iran and other countries to take concrete steps to insure that weapons and weapon components not get into the hands of Palestinian militias.
During the fighting in early January, the Nobel Peace Prize-winning organization initially called for a suspension of યુએસ military aid until there was no longer a substantial risk of additional human rights violations. The Bush administration summarily rejected this proposal. Amnesty subsequently appealed to the Obama administration. "As the major supplier of weapons to ઇઝરાયેલ, યુએસએ has a particular obligation to stop any supply that contributes to gross violations of the laws of war and of human rights," said Malcolm Smart. "The Obama administration should immediately suspend યુએસ માટે લશ્કરી સહાય ઇઝરાયેલ."
Obama’s refusal to accept Amnesty’s call for the suspension of military assistance was a blow to human rights activists. The most Obama might do to express his displeasure toward controversial Israeli policies like the expansion of illegal settlements in the occupied territories would be to reject a planned increase in military aid for the next fiscal year and slightly reduce economic aid and/or loan guarantees. However, in a notable departure from previous administrations, Obama made no mention of any military aid to ઇઝરાયેલ તેના માં રૂપરેખા of the FY 2010 budget, announced last week. This notable absence may indicate that pressure from human rights activists and others concerned about massive યુએસ માટે લશ્કરી સહાય ઇઝરાયેલ is now strong enough that the White House feels a need to downplay the assistance rather than emphasize it.
ઓબામા જમણે ઝુકે છે
Currently, Obama is on record supporting sending up to $30 billion in unconditional military aid to ઇઝરાયેલ over the next 10 years. Such a total would represent a 25% increase in the already large-scale arms shipments to Israeli forces under the Bush administration.
Obama has thus far failed to realize that the problem in the Middle East is that there are too many deadly weapons in the region, not too few. Instead of simply wanting ઇઝરાયેલ to have an adequate deterrent against potential military threats, Obama insists the યુનાઈટેડ સ્ટેટ્સ should guarantee that ઇઝરાયેલ maintain a qualitative military advantage. Thanks to this overwhelming advantage over its neighbors, Israeli forces were able to launch devastating wars against ઇઝરાયેલ‘s Palestinian and Lebanese neighbors in recent years.
If ઇઝરાયેલ were in a strategically vulnerable situation, Obama’s hard-line position might be understandable. But ઇઝરાયેલ already has vastly superior conventional military capabilities relative to any combination of armed forces in the region, not to mention a nuclear deterrent.
However, Obama has failed to even acknowledge ઇઝરાયેલ‘s nuclear arsenal of at least 200-300 weapons, which has been documented for decades. When Hearst reporter Helen Thomas asked at his first press conference if he could name any Middle Eastern countries that possess nuclear weapons, he didn’t even try to answer the question. Presumably, Obama knows ઇઝરાયેલ has these weapons and is located in the મધ્ય પૂર્વ. However, acknowledging ઇઝરાયેલ‘s arsenal could complicate his planned arms transfers since it would place ઇઝરાયેલ in violation of the 1976 સિમિંગ્ટન સુધારો, which restricts યુએસ military support for governments which develop nuclear weapons.
Another major obstacle to Amnesty’s calls for suspending military assistance is Congress. Republican leaders like Representatives John Boehner (OH) and Eric Cantor (VA) have long rejected calls by human rights groups to link યુએસ military aid to adherence to internationally recognized human rights standards. But so have such Democratic leaders, such as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, who are outspoken supporters of unconditional military aid to ઇઝરાયેલ. Even progressive Democratic Representative Barney Frank (MA), at a press conference on February 24 pushing his proposal to reduce military spending by 25%, બરતરફ a question regarding conditioning ઇઝરાયેલ‘s military aid package to human rights concerns.
ખરેખર, તેમના લશ્કરી કાર્યસૂચિને ટેકો આપવા અને બિન-લશ્કરી લક્ષ્યો સામે વ્યવસ્થિત ઇઝરાયેલી હુમલાઓનું દસ્તાવેજીકરણ કરનારા પ્રતિષ્ઠિત માનવાધિકાર જૂથોને બદનામ કરવાના દેખીતી પ્રયાસમાં, આ કોંગ્રેસના નેતાઓ અને તેમના મોટા ભાગના દ્વિપક્ષીય સાથીદારો રેકોર્ડ પર ગયા છે. પ્રશંસા "Israel’s longstanding commitment to minimizing civilian loss and…efforts to prevent civilian casualties." Although Obama remained silent while ઇઝરાયેલ was engaged in war crimes against the civilian population of ગાઝા, Pelosi and other congressional leaders જવાયા થી ઇઝરાયેલ‘s defense in the face of international condemnation.
નાગરિકો પર ઇઝરાયેલી હુમલાઓ અંગે ઓબામાનું સંરક્ષણ
2006માં ઇઝરાયેલી સશસ્ત્ર દળો અને હિઝબોલ્લાહ મિલિશિયા વચ્ચેના સંઘર્ષ બાદ, જેમાં બંને પક્ષોએ વસ્તીવાળા નાગરિક વિસ્તારો સામે હુમલા કરીને યુદ્ધ અપરાધો કર્યા હતા, તત્કાલીન સેનેટર ઓબામાએ ઇઝરાયેલની કાર્યવાહીનો બચાવ કર્યો હતો અને હિઝબુલ્લાહની ટીકા કરી હતી, તેમ છતાં ઇઝરાયેલ વાસ્તવમાં વધુ નાગરિકો માટે જવાબદાર હતું. મૃત્યાંક. નાગરિક વસ્તી કેન્દ્રો પર ઇઝરાયેલી બોમ્બ ધડાકાને ન્યાયી ઠેરવવાના દેખીતા પ્રયાસમાં, ઓબામા એવો દાવો કર્યો હતો હિઝબુલ્લાહે "નિર્દોષ લોકોનો ઢાલ તરીકે ઉપયોગ કર્યો હતો."
This charge directly challenged a series of reports from Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch. These reports found that while Hezbollah did have some military equipment close to some civilian areas, the Lebanese Islamist militia had not forced civilians to remain in or around military targets in order to deter ઇઝરાયેલ from attacking those targets. I sent Obama spokesperson Ben LaBolt a copy of an exhaustive 249-page હ્યુમન રાઇટ્સ વૉચ રિપોર્ટ માનવ ઢાલનો ઉપયોગ કરીને હિઝબોલ્લાહના - તપાસ કરાયેલા 600 નાગરિકોના મૃત્યુમાંથી - એક પણ કેસ મળ્યો નથી. મેં તેમને પૂછ્યું કે શું ઓબામા પાસે આ તારણોનો વિરોધ કરતા કોઈ પ્રયોગમૂલક પુરાવા છે.
જવાબમાં, લાબોલ્ટે મને ઇઝરાયેલી ગુપ્તચર સેવાના ભૂતપૂર્વ વડાની આગેવાની હેઠળની ઇઝરાયેલી સરકાર સાથે ગાઢ સંબંધો ધરાવતી જમણેરી ઇઝરાયેલી થિંક ટેન્કના ટૂંકા અહેવાલની નકલ પ્રદાન કરી. એમ્નેસ્ટી ઇન્ટરનેશનલ અને હ્યુમન રાઇટ્સ વોચના અહેવાલોથી વિપરીત, આ અહેવાલમાં ફક્ત ઇઝરાયેલના સરકારી સ્ત્રોતોનો ઉપયોગ કરવામાં આવ્યો હતો, જે ફોરેન્સિક પુરાવા તેમજ હુમલા હેઠળના વિસ્તારોમાં રહેતા લેબનીઝ તેમજ અનુભવી મોનિટર (અનુભવી મોનિટર) બંને દ્વારા બહુવિધ ચકાસાયેલ પ્રત્યક્ષદર્શી એકાઉન્ટ્સ પર આધારિત હતા. જમીન પર કોઈપણ સરકારી અથવા રાજકીય સંગઠન સાથે અસંબંધિત. વધુ વિશ્વસનીય સ્ત્રોતો માટે પૂછતી અનેક ફોલો-અપ ઇમેઇલ્સ હોવા છતાં, LaBolt ક્યારેય મારી પાસે પાછો આવ્યો નથી.
Not Good for ઇઝરાયેલ
The militaristic stance by Congress and the Obama administration is hardly doing ઇઝરાયેલ a favor. Indeed, યુએસ military assistance to ઇઝરાયેલ સાથે કોઈ લેવાદેવા નથી ઇઝરાયેલ‘s legitimate security needs. Rather than commencing during the country’s first 20 years of existence, when Israel was most vulnerable strategically, major U.S. military and economic aid didn’t even begin until after the 1967 War, when Israel proved itself to be far stronger than any combination of Arab armies and after Israeli occupation forces became the rulers of a large Palestinian population.
જો બધા યુએસ માટે મદદ ઇઝરાયેલ were immediately halted, ઇઝરાયેલ wouldn’t be under a significantly greater military threat than it is today for many years. ઇઝરાયેલ has both a major domestic arms industry and an existing military force far more capable and powerful than any conceivable combination of opposing forces.
Under Obama, U.S. military aid to Israel will likely continue be higher than it was back in the 1970s, when Egypt’s massive and well-equipped armed forces threatened war, Syria’s military rapidly expanded with advanced Soviet weaponry, armed factions of the PLO launched terrorist attacks into Israel, Jordan still claimed the West Bank and stationed large numbers of troops along its border and demarcation line with Israel, and Iraq embarked on a vast program of militarization. Why does the Obama administration believe that ઇઝરાયેલ needs more military aid today than it did back then? Since that time, ઇઝરાયેલ has maintained a longstanding peace treaty with ઇજીપ્ટ and a large demilitarized and internationally monitored buffer zone. સીરિયા‘s armed forces were weakened by the collapse of their former Soviet patron and its government has been calling for a resumption of peace talks. The PLO is cooperating closely with Israeli security. જોર્ડન signed a peace treaty with ઇઝરાયેલ with full normalized relations. And two major wars and a decade of strict international sanctions have devastated ઇરાક‘s armed forces, which is in any case now under close યુએસ દેખરેખ.
Obama has pledged continued military aid to ઇઝરાયેલ a full decade into the future not in terms of how that country’s strategic situation may evolve, but in terms of a fixed-dollar amount. If his real interest were to provide adequate support for Israeli defense, he wouldn’t promise $30 billion in additional military aid. He would simply pledge to maintain adequate military assistance to maintain ઇઝરાયેલ‘s security needs, which would presumably decline if the peace process moves forward. However, ઇઝરાયેલ‘s actual defense needs don’t appear to be the issue.
According to late Israeli major general and Knesset member Matti Peled, — who once served as the IDF’s chief procurement officer, such fixed amounts are arrived at "out of thin air." In addition, every major arms transfer to ઇઝરાયેલ creates a new demand by Arab states — most of which can pay hard currency through petrodollars — for additional યુએસ weapons to challenge ઇઝરાયેલ. ખરેખર, ઇઝરાયેલ announced its acceptance of a proposed Middle Eastern arms freeze in 1991, but the યુએસ government, eager to defend the profits of યુએસ arms merchants, effectively blocked it. Prior to the breakdown in the peace process in 2001, 78 senators wrote President Bill Clinton insisting that the United States send additional military aid to Israel on the grounds of massive arms procurement by Arab states, neglecting to note that 80% of those arms transfers were of U.S. origin. Were they really concerned about Israeli security, they would have voted to block these arms transfers to the Gulf monarchies and other Arab dictatorships.
The resulting arms race has been a bonanza for યુએસ arms manufacturers. The right-wing "pro-Israel" political action committees certainly wield substantial clout with their contributions to congressional candidates supportive of large-scale military and economic aid to ઇઝરાયેલ. But the Aerospace Industry Association and other influential military interests that promote massive arms transfers to the મધ્ય પૂર્વ and elsewhere are even more influential, contributing several times what the "pro-Israel" PACs contribute.
The huge amount of યુએસ aid to the Israeli government hasn’t been as beneficial to ઇઝરાયેલ as many would suspect. યુએસ માટે લશ્કરી સહાય ઇઝરાયેલ is, in fact, simply a credit line to American arms manufacturers, and actually ends up costing ઇઝરાયેલ two to three times that amount in operator training, staffing, maintenance, and other related costs. The overall impact is to increase Israeli military dependency on the યુનાઈટેડ સ્ટેટ્સ — and amass record profits for યુએસ arms merchants.
The U.S. Arms Export Control Act requires a cutoff of military aid to recipient countries if they’re found to be using American weapons for purposes other than internal security or legitimate self-defense and/or their use could "increase the possibility of an outbreak or escalation of conflict." This might explain Obama’s refusal to acknowledge ઇઝરાયેલ‘s disproportionate use of force and high number of civilian casualties.
તેમના મતવિસ્તાર સાથે દગો
ઇઝરાયલી લશ્કરવાદને ટેકો આપવા માટે કરદાતાના ભંડોળમાં $30 બિલિયન એ ઇરાક યુદ્ધ, મોટી બેંકો માટે બેલઆઉટ અને વિવિધ પેન્ટાગોન બૂન્ડોગલ્સની સરખામણીમાં મોટી રકમ નથી. તેમ છતાં, આ નાણાં વધુ નફાકારક રીતે ઘરની જરૂરિયાતો માટે જઈ શકે છે, જેમ કે આરોગ્ય સંભાળ, શિક્ષણ, આવાસ અને જાહેર પરિવહન.
It’s therefore profoundly disappointing that there has been so little public opposition to Obama’s dismissal of Amnesty International’s calls to suspend aid to ઇઝરાયેલ. Some activists I contacted appear to have fallen into a fatalistic view that the "Zionist lobby" is too powerful to challenge and that Obama is nothing but a helpless pawn of powerful Jewish interests. Not only does this simplistic perspective border on anti-Semitism, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. Any right-wing militaristic lobby will appear all-powerful if there isn’t a concerted effort from the left to challenge it.
Obama’s supporters must demand that he live up to his promise to change the mindset in વોશિંગ્ટન that has contributed to such death and destruction in the મધ્ય પૂર્વ. The new administration must heed calls by Amnesty International and other human rights groups to condition military aid to ઇઝરાયેલ and all other countries that don’t adhere to basic principles of international humanitarian law.
સ્ટીફન ઝુન્સ, એ ફોકસ માં વિદેશી નીતિ senior analyst, is a professor of politics and chair of Middle Eastern Studies at the યુનિવર્સિટી of સાન ફ્રાન્સિસ્કો.
ZNetwork ને ફક્ત તેના વાચકોની ઉદારતા દ્વારા ભંડોળ પૂરું પાડવામાં આવે છે.
દાન