Proportionality
Proportionality is the operative word of many commentators and critics when they write or discuss the actions of Israel in their war with Hamas in the Gaza strip. Newspapers throughout the world are filled with comments at how disproportionate is the Israeli response to the rockets from Gaza and in fact how few Israeli lives have been lost, and how little the damage has been inflicted by Hamas, but the issue of proportionality has many facets, some more important than others, and all not exclusive of one another.
Footage of air strikes with the ensuing photogenic explosions and dramatic plumes of smoke, quickly followed by shots of collapsed buildings and enraged mourners, makes far better copy than a rational discussion of the motives of both sides.
I think it is worthwhile to discuss what led up to the present situation. Israel unilaterally left Gaza to the Palestinian people with the hope it would be the start of the formation of the first part of a state. There immediately began a rain of thousands of rockets on Israel and the cry by Hamas that the state of Israel had to be removed. Not a very proportional response!
Hamas sends their rockets indiscriminately into residential areas of the south of Israel. Their aim is to kill Israelis. They send these missiles from residential areas of Gaza fully expecting the Israelis to retaliate on the site of the launch but Israel tries to be very careful not to hit schools or hospitals. The Palestinian people must know that there will be a response, but they have no say in the matter because, in fact, a dead Palestinian civilian is nearly as important as a dead Israeli for propaganda purposes. If the Israelis’ tactics were to purposely send their bombers into residential areas, the carnage would be far greater than it is. There is no proportionality in the attitude to civilian deaths between the Israelis and Hamas.
What about the question of the blockade of Gaza by sea and land? When Israel left Gaza it was prudent to see how the Palestinians would use this freedom. If they had started to govern like a responsible administration, the Israeli control of immigration and of imports would have ceased. In hindsight the Israelis are happy at how they handled the situation as it is doubtful that allowing free imports would have left the region trouble-free. There would have been more armaments brought in resulting in more deaths among the Israelis and Palestinians.
Proportionality is in the eyes of the beholder. Recently a group, considered a terrorist organization by the Canadian government, was defeated in Sri Lanka. Their last stronghold was overrun and they were bombed into submission by air and land forces. Over the years 65,000 people have been killed in the war with the Tamils, mostly civilians. There was not a single rally on campuses world-wide in support of the Tamils. Jewish leftists have not demanded an end to the war of aggression against the Tamils, no European government has said the acts of the Sri Lankans were out of proportion, and the BBC did not call the Tamils “activists”.
I quote from a Globe and Mail editorial on January 13, 2009 entitled “Selective on rights”:
In a world of cruelty and barbarism, the United Nations Human Rights Council and its predecessor organization have long opted to make one small democracy, Israel, their major obsession. On Monday the council lived up to its reputation for bias with its overwrought condemnation of Israel’s “grave violations” in Gaza while soft-pedaling the role of Hamas in precipitating the crisis with rocket attacks on Israeli civilians.
Canada was the only one of the 47 member countries to vote against the unbalanced resolution. Canada’s was a diplomatically brave, and correct vote, at odds with the abstentions of other Western countries that were unwilling to defend outright, the principle of fairness, to say nothing of the role of the Arab, African, Asian and Latin American countries, including such human-rights abusers as China, Cuba and Saudi Arabia (all, shamefully, members of the council) in singling out Israel for condemnation.
The European Union on Wednesday November 11 set new guidelines requiring that Jewish settlements clearly label export products as coming from the occupied territories. The measures mean that farmers, vintners and manufacturers in east Jerusalem, the West bank and the Golan Heights-even those employing Palestinian workers- may no longer issue a “Made in Israel” label for Europe -bound goods. Instead they must tell the consumers that the products come from a settlement in the territories. Fifty-six years ago China took over Tibet, forty -one years ago Turkey overran Northern Cyprus and forty-five years ago Morocco conquered the Western Sahara. Not a word from the Europeans about special labels from these countries
It is so obviously true that Israel is held to a different standard of proportionality than any other country in the world.
