Very Important Rockets

I don’t appreciate it when Arab bloggers and media agencies report and cover the Gaza blockade merely through the death of children and women – not sure why Palestinian men's lives don’t count. It is as if the problem is not in death itself but in the death of children. So the counter argument by Israelis would be by starting to count Palestinian children who have died due the siege and support their arguments with the lack of resources:

"More Muslim mendacity. If children were indeed starving, why are there no photos of their swollen bellies?"

According to this logic, one can argue that since there are no photos of the Holocaust gas chambers in which the Jews were collectively massacred by the Nazis, then I guess the gas chambers did not exist.

To get back to my point, the argument to oppose the Israel’s apartheid policies against the Gazans and Palestinians, in general, should not be through counting/demonstrating dead children and women or even merely focusing on the inhumane conditions that the Palestinians are going through. The argument should in fact address the apartheid racist logic that produced such inhumane practices. My problem is not by bringing up the victims in the Gaza blockade coverage but rather making it the argument to oppose Israel as a counter argument. Death and shortage of food, medicine and fuel are only the visible practices of an Israeli apartheid state. They are not the problem of this state and hence they shouldn’t be our rhetoric and our defense against Israel.

It seems that we have the right to "speak", so loudly, against Israel when we have a picture of a child dying that without this child, we wouldn’t have a case against Israel's inhumane blockade of Gaza.

The Arab rhetoric should renew its arguments, which are again, bombastic and not strategically analytical in reading their own realities in relation to the enemy or in reading the enemy's strategy that constantly presents itself as a "prior" party in the "Palestinian-Israeli struggle." The thing that would damage the core of the Palestinian cause when readers support us merely as sympathizers with the dead children and not as supporters to Palestinians' right to live secure and equal to Israeli citizens.

Having said this, I have something to say about Israel’s right to 'self-defense' against Qassam rockets.

Before assuming there is an opponent struggle taking place between the Israelis and Palestinians, one should agree then that the two parties, equally, have the basic right to live peacefully and securely, and accordingly have the right to self-defense. But when Israel, supported by the UN, US and Europe, keeps prioritizing Israeli citizens at the expense of Palestinian citizens, one should not adhere to the term "Israel-Palestine struggle" since it suggests an adversary. In "Israel-Palestine struggle" there is one party - Israel - which has the right to exist, and hence the right of self-defense. And for that right, it has the right to control the other party's right to live peacefully: it decides on behalf of the Gazans how they should live: "not easily", and block their access to fuel, food and medicine and arbitrary night-raid their homes and bulldoze them on their heads.

This Israeli right to live and right of self-defense is embedded in every single report, with or against Israel’s complete closure of Gaza Strip:

“We all understand the security problems and the need to respond to that but collective punishment of the people of Gaza is not, we believe, the appropriate way to do that,” said John Holmes.

So while the world wholeheartedly backs the right of Israelis to live securely, the world is merely sympathizing with the Gazans lack of fuel, food and medicine. i.e. lack of life.

With Israel, the rhetoric is about its safety and its right to exist and for that, it has the right to defend this very existence and life. With the Palestinians, the rhetoric comes as the right to eat, have hospitals and be warm in winter. Palestinians don’t have the right to have a life, or to exist, and certainly not the right to defend themselves. Palestinians are not equal to Israelis – they are inferior. They have the right to be fed only. While Israelis are always remembered, the Gazans are only remembered when they are dead.

Again, the world prioritizes Israelis, even when they support the Gazans now.

And the Arabs celebrate this utterly biased stance with the right of Israelis to be secure when their mere opposition to the siege is dealt with on a humanitarian basis while they should be arguing for the right of Palestinians to live equally – just like the Israelis, securely and peacefully not just in regards to their basic needs to survive.

Furthermore, all the reports seem to be convinced that Israel’s siege on Gaza is a "reaction" to Qassam rockets when they recognize Israel's right to "self-defense but demand its attention to Gazans’ humanitarian rights. I find this rhetoric as apologetic to Israel’s terrorist policies against the Palestinians. Linking between Qassam rockets and Israel’s two-year siege on Gaza is dealt with on one level, as if the damages on both sides are similar. Let's take a look at Gaza's damages because of the siege:

68 Patients killed by Israeli Occupation due to Closure!

1562 patients in need of treatment outside Gaza Strip

322 patients are in serious danger and in need of urgent treatment

22 money holistic are suspended from work due to the siege

107 class of basic medicines are depleted from Gaza Strip

97 sorts of medicines on the verge of depletion

136 medical instrument are stopped or our of order

6 months, Gaza with closed crossings and borders

160 thousand workers are out of work

3000 fishermen become out of work due to siege

$370 millions are the costs of stalled construction projects

$14 million are the wastage of strawberry and flowers season

4500 strawberry farmers become out of work

470 cancer patients are likely to die

And on the Israeli side:

Homemade rockets have killed in a most updated report 12 Israelis, including three children, according to Israeli Defence Forces.

Yoram Schweitzer of Tel Aviv's Jaffee Centre for Strategic Studies comments:

"Qassams are very primitive missiles and their main effect on Israelis in the area is psychological torment - a kind of Chinese water torture."

So I wonder how can psychological insecurities be considered parallel to the blows mentioned above which the Palestinians have suffered, and how can two years of blockades be considered a "reaction" to such primitive rockets? Hence, the link that is meant to be apologetic to war crimes committed on civilians to maintain the security and not the lives of Israelis, only takes into consideration their psychological situation.

I find the argument in Betselem report on the closure of the Gaza Strip able to stand on its own in unfolding the truth behind the Israeli siege on Gaza:

"Israeli authorities often exploit security threats in order to advance prohibited political interests under the guise of security."

Indeed, Sderot is inhabited by"Mizrachi" Jews and not by Azhkenazis, and some of the inhabitants feel insecure not only from the Qassam rockets but from the racist Israeli government:

"The worst part of all this isn't the rocket fire - it's the fact that the government just doesn't care," says a Sderot settler.

While I reject the article altogether, I think it sheds light on something that can be useful to unfolding the Israeli government's lies in claiming its "need to protect" its settlers; they're not killing civilians for Sderot settlers but against Gazans' political reality - Hamas. So the siege is strictly practiced for political reasons and not for security reasons.

Why is Israel targeting Hamas now? This is where my amateur reading ends.