Why Shiraz was only half right
Shiraz Maher thinks British Muslims should condemn Hamas, not Israel in the Telegraph. I don’t doubt for a second Shiraz’s sincerity, his judgement or his concern for the people of Gaza, when he makes this statement.
At its core, this is the straightforward decision that British Muslims will have to make: between Hamas, a terrorist group committed to destroying a sovereign state and its people – and Israel, the region’s only democracy which is responding to that threat.
And the justifications he puts forward are fact:
1) Hamas ia a gang of murderous thugs which has carried out some 30 or more extra-judicial killings of its own citizens
2) Hamas has legitimised the killing of Israeli civilians
One would have to be quite ignorant or stupid to dispute the points Shiraz furnishes. But the tragedy unfolding in Gaza, the deaths of over 800 people, mostly civilians, crushed under debris, mutiliated, children starved to death near the decomposing body of their parents has shown, in the starkest terms possible, that Shiraz only manages to go halfway
Britain’s Muslims should condemn the theocratic extremism of Hamas, uncocnditionally and in its entirety *AND* the war crimes against humanity committed by Israel in the last 3 weeks.
Condemning Hamas while Israel receives not even an upbraid for its bombing campaign, signals a grotesque dereliction of moral responsibility to the Palestinians and indeed to peace. If Hamas is a terrorist organisation because it targets civilians and perpetrates extra-judicial killings, then it is only by a failure of judgement that we excuse Israel, which is guilty of the same crimes, and in even greater numbers.
But the right to condemn comes with a great price. If British Muslims are to condemn anyone, they must condemn with parity.
I don’t think British Muslims should be speaking as one on this issue anyway. Ideally whatever needs to be said should be done under a universalist banner. Otherwise it encourages an us versus them mentality in which people find it extremely difficult to criticise Hamas.
Let Palestinian organisations speak. But if the only connection you have to the people of Palestine is that you are a Muslim then be inclusive rather exclusive.
There is an element of schizophrenia , speaking for a specific Pakistani context. At present parts of the country are being terrorised by militants ( read http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=156098 ) and yet there are no demonstrations by civil scoiety against whats happening.
Shiraz’s core statement that:
“Hamas, a terrorist group committed to destroying a sovereign state and its people – and Israel, the region’s only democracy which is responding to that threat.”
I agree that condemnation and parity need to be balanced. Israel for massacring so many innocent Gazans – that even the Red Cross and UN have now gone public with their condemnations – and Hamas’s pointless rocket attacks.
Shiraz STILL misses the central point that if he asserts that Hamas is committed to destroying the State of Israel, how can the “only” (ahem) democracy in the region, namely Israel, be any better? My reason for my statement? Israel, the US and EU all got the Gazans in the mess in the first place. Gazans elected Hamas in a fair, free and democratic election in 2006.Election monitors generally all agree on this. The point is not whether Hamas is palatable to us at this stage. It was because Israel, US, EU (and Fatah) did not want to acknowledge the results of the election that this DENIAL of a democratic result which started this current freefall. Both sides, Israel and Hamas, don’t want to acknowledge the other. The onus should not just be to blame Hamas.
Agree with Shariq -that by creating a them -v-us situation on the matter cannot be productive in terms of moving forward.
“… then it is only by a failure of judgement that we excuse Israel, which is guilty of the same crimes, and in even greater numbers.”
So you’re effectively saying Israel is worse than Hamas. Or at the very least its equal.
I agree that the international community should work to end the conflict and in a paradoxical way both sides are blameless: the brutality of both is as a result of historical forces largely beyond their control. So with respect to the conflict, I agree that arbitration should be even-handed. As the UN said: both sides (and all countries/ “militant” organisations) should be subject to international law concerning war crimes.
Personally however, I think as we need to be wary of affording Hamas moral equivalence with Israel.
Regardless of one’s opinions about Islamism, Israel has not called for the the murder of all Muslim children and it does not deny the right for a Palestinian state to exist (Hamas explicitly opposes a two-state solution).
Slightly off-topic, but what I believe we are seeing are two very different wars: the war of Hamas is an Islamist conflict against Jews (and the West). Ideologically I suspect it cares little for the Palestinian people except as pawns in its struggle. Events I think bear this out.
Israel is meanwhile fighting as a nation state for territorial security: it knew the next generation of Iranian and Syrian-supplied rockets would soon place the whole of Israel within range, making the country essentially un-viable.
It is true you could say Israel, the democracy, is not interested in democracy in Gaza. Ideologically, neither is Hamas.
Both are driven by other priorities – for Hamas the ideological war, for Israel state survival.
Given this it is unlikely either side will sue for peace. However, while one can ultimately negotiate over issues of land, ideological issues cannot be parlayed away.
Zak:
The disparity is probably due to the uncomfortable fact that if the violence is muslim on muslim then to a % of Muslims that seems to matter an awful lot less then if the perpetrator is a non muslim.
Not exactly clear as to why that is but there you go.
Much more condemnation of Hamas from Palestinian Groups would go an awful long way to sending a message to the rest of the world that ordinary muslims, whilst having clear issues with Israeli actions (as do we all) realise that Hamas are a bunch of murderous thugs as Shiraz states and unworthy of their support. The Palestinian and Israeli civilans on the other hand are extremely worthy of our support – caught between extremists on both sides now and for the foreseeable future.
Of course Muslims must condemn Hamas, just as Jews must condemn Israel for war crimes, the collective punishment of Palestinians, and what Desmond Tutu describes as Apartheid policies emanating from Israel (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/apr/29/comment)
Oh, and I liked the bit about the region’s only democracy, not, of course, if you are a Palestinian or an Israeli Arabs.
Repeating the rediculous mantra of war crimes by Israel does not make it true.
In fact, when this war is over, the leaders of Hamas should be led by the Israelis to a war crimes tribunal in Jerusalem.
There is ample recorded evidence of Hamas war crimes in using civilians as human shields, purposefully firing rockets into Israeli civilian populations centers, placing their mortars and rocket launchers in civilian buildings, schools, and mosques, and storing their ammunition and explosives in schools and mosques, and hospitals, and booby trapping schools (I saw footage of that on television just this afternoon).
We must demand that the Hamas leaders are tried in Jerusalem for their war crimes.
And there is ample evidence of War Crimes by Isreal and not a single person is led to the Hague are they?
I mean they elected one head of state after he was found guilty of some fairly nasty stuff.
In addition the activities in the West Bank are in violation of international law but hey lets bloody ignore that.
If as the wally in the Torygraph argues that Israel is a state and democratically elected which is always loved by Sid then that is a democracy that is denying the same to another people. That is a democracy that is violating international law and ignoring the molst UN resolutions but hey who gives a flying feck when you are a democracy.
So Sihraz thinks it is acceptable for his beloved Israel to deny another peole their freedom and keep them enslaved and trapped. To take their land, tell them what water they can and can’t have all because they are a democracy.
That really show what a stupid argument he has. So only democracies can decide what is right and wrong?
As I recall Lebanon is a democracy and the Palestinians held elections but Shiraz didn’t give a feck when they get bombed by a democracy.
Shiraz is just another wannabe journqalist who has to sell his own people to get a bit of work at the Israelgraph.
Hey Sid why don’t you tell Shirazael to check out:
http://www.aipac.org/
Not one word about peace, Palestinain self determination.
Just why Israel is right.
These people write the paychecks that send the bills that pay for the occupation and frankly Shirazael who is out of step poor lad with his paymaster at the Torygraph who has said enough is enough needs to understand that people have a right to freedom.
Tell Shirazael to let the Palestinains build a big bloody wall at his house and have check point and also he has to ask permission everytime he wants to get water and Shirazael will get some idea of what its like to be a Plaestinian but hey who gives a damn they are practically non-Human because they are mostly Muslims so why give a shit huh?
Hey Sid how come you didn’t quote old “Ed Hussein” who strangely came out in support of the Palestinians?
“But the right to condemn comes with a great price. If British Muslims are to condemn anyone, they must condemn with parity.”
No they mustn’t they must condemn what is wrong and screw parity. Who gives a damn about parity.
That like saying if a innocent Israeli is killed they have to wait for an innocent Palestinian to be killed before they can condemn.
Condemn both things.
A wrong is a wrong and doesn’t need parity. If Hamas kill an innocent person then that is to be condemned irrelevant of the situation. Nothing can justify that.
Secondly Hamas isn’t a theocracy it just pretends to be one. You shoudl know that the Prophet (pbuh) said don’t seek power or position.
Hamas isn’t a theocracy it just pretends to be one
Then let them change their charter to reflect their new reality.