Showing posts with label Moshe Dayan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Moshe Dayan. Show all posts

Saturday, 9 October 2021

Che Guevara’s 54th Martyrdom Commemoration: The Revolution Continues

 October 8, 2021

See the source image

Source: Al Mayadeen

By Ahmad Karakira


54 years after his martyrdom, Guevara’s historic visit to the Palestinian Gaza in 1959 continues to stand as a token of resilience for liberation and resistance movements in Palestine and the world.

Visual search query image
Che’s visit to Palestine came in support of Palestinian national liberation and revolutionary movements against imperialism and colonization

Mohammed was 13 years old when Marxist revolutionary Ernesto Che Guevara paid his first visit to the Gaza Strip that was, at the time, administered by Egypt.

Little did he know that he will become a resistance icon and nicknamed “Gaza’s Guevara” for his tremendous role in the resistance against the Israeli occupation in Gaza and his continuous revolt against injustice and colonialism, as well as his ability to hide and confuse the enemy.

Originally, Mohammed al-Aswad, or “Gaza’s Guevara” was born in the coastal city of Haifa in 1946. Later, the boy and his family sought refuge after they were displaced from their city as a result of the 1948 Nakba and eventually ended up in a refugee camp in Gaza.

Al-Aswad grew up to become a resistance activist against “Israel,” and was jailed for two years. After his release in 1970, he joined the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and gradually got promoted to commander of the PFLP military wing in the Gaza Strip.

During that time, he focused on training and educating resistance forces, as well as organizing demonstrations and strikes against the occupation, applying Martyr Bassel al-Araj’s doctrine: “If you don’t want to be engaged (in fighting oppression), your intellect is pointless.”

His integrity made Moshe Dayan, former Israeli occupation Minister of Security, say, “We run Gaza by day, and Guevara and his comrades run it at night.”

Three years later, “Gaza’s Guevara” was martyred during a heroic battle in the Strip.


Ernesto Che Guevara’s visit to Gaza

Martyr Mohammed al-Aswad’s story is vivid proof of the significant and strong relationship between Che Guevara and the Palestinian cause, which Gaza has become the symbol of.

In fact, Che Guevara’s visit to the Strip on June 18, 1959, at the invitation of the late Egyptian President and leader Gamal Abdel-Nasser, came to establish a state of solidarity and harmony between Cuba and the Palestinian cause.

His visit to Gaza transformed the cause from regional to global and reflected his famous phrase: “Solidarity is a condition that must always be practiced.”

The Israeli occupation of Palestine and the systematic ethnic cleansing against its population triggered the establishment of Palestinian Resistance forces and the emergence of freedom fighters, legitimized by Abdel-Nasser, who was considered a leader against colonialism and imperialism.

To break the determination and resilience of the Resistance, Israeli occupation forces, led by Ariel Sharon, Prime Minister from 2001 till 2006, continuously attacked the Gaza Strip and its refugee camps, committing horrible massacres against many Palestinians and Egyptian soldiers, with no reaction from the international community that simply turned a blind eye to the Israeli atrocities.


A historic visit by all means

Che’s visit came in support of Palestinian national liberation and revolutionary movements against imperialism and colonization.

It was an exceptional visit that was met enthusiastically by resistance leaders and Palestinians.

He was accompanied to al-Bureij Camp, where Israelis committed some of the most horrible massacres, and saw the poverty and hardship that Palestinians were living in, advised Palestinian leaders to pursue the path of resistance, which they tread through their people’s resilience and steadfastness.  

During the visit, he addressed the camp leader Mustafa Abu Midyan, saying, “You should show me what you have done to liberate your country. Where are the training camps? Where are the arms manufacturing factories? Where are the people’s mobilization centers?” With these words, Guevara was trying to lay out the foundations necessary for any resistance movement. 

At the same time, he urged Palestinian refugees to continue their struggle in order to liberate their land from the occupation, offering to supply the Palestinian resistance with arms and training.

In an interview for Al Mayadeen, his daughter, Dr. Aleida Guevara, quoted her father as saying, “The Middle East is considered, with all of its contradictions, a region that is boiling, and it is not possible to predict how far the war between Israel – which is supported by imperialists – and progressive countries in the region will go.”


And the impact still echoes

Following the historic visit, Cuba offered scholarships, granted citizenships, and organized many conferences all in support of Palestine and the Palestinian people.

In addition, the island of Cuba was one of the first countries to recognize the Palestine Liberation Organization when it was founded in 1964.

Soon after his visit, the Marxist doctor became an icon for the Palestinian resistance and fighters and a symbol of revolution, especially for leftist movements.


Hasta Siempre

On this occasion, on the 54th anniversary of his martyrdom, it goes without saying that Che’s resistance, integrity, and solidarity is what we are in need of to liberate the oppressed nations, such as Palestine, Yemen, and any country in the world from Western imperialism, colonialism, and military occupation. His memory still brings forth devoted revolutionary resistance figures such “Gaza’s Guevara”, Mohammed al-Aswad. 

Armed with his forwardness and valor, he would have been on the frontlines in Gaza fighting the Israeli siege. He would have been digging, using a tool as simple as a spoon, alongside the other six, the freedom tunnel that liberates the whole of Palestine from the operators of the Gilboa Prison. 


Aleida Guevara to Al Mayadeen: “We Must Fight Alongside the Palestinians, as Che Believed”


The revolutionary commander’s daughter spoke about a multitude of subjects on her father’s 54th assassination anniversary, notably the Palestinian cause and the dangers of Arab division.

The revolutionary commander’s daughter spoke about a multitude of subjects on her father’s 54th assassination anniversary, notably the Palestinian cause and the dangers of Arab division.


Visual search query image
Aleida Guevara, daughter of Che

“My father would have always stood on the side of oppressed nations,” said Elaida Guevara, daughter of famed revolutionary Che Guevara on the 54th anniversary of his assassination.

In an interview with Al Mayadeen, Aleida revealed her belief that had her father remained alive, things would have been different in Bolivia and Argentina, as he most assuredly would not have surrendered due to his belief of “fight for the oppressed or die fighting.”

Che’s visit to the Middle-East was also recalled, with Aleida describing his conscious realization of the boiling nature of the region due to colonization, the harsh circumstances surrounding its populations, and the endless pressures performed by major powers trying to steal its resources, “notably its oil.”

Linking the current divisions of the Arab world with the Marxist revolutionary’s experience in Cuba, she stressed the importance of “people’s unification”, notably as the sectarian rifts sowed by European colonial powers are dangerously threatening the Arab World’s unity and ability to progress.


On Palestine

In this context, Aleida mentioned her father’s visit to Palestine in 1959. She decreed her love for Palestine, whom her father visited which she considers not only to be a historical nation but a major cause, as she decried “Israel’s” plan to colonize the whole of the Middle East and not simply the Palestinian lands illegally handed over by the UN.

Further diving into the cause, Che’s daughter assured that Lebanon, Syria, and Iran are the only regional countries actively championing a righteous stance towards Palestine, whilst the rest appear to apply a palliative treatment. She mentioned Cuba in this context, which despite being distant from the region, still recently severed all diplomatic relations with “Israel” in solidarity with the Palestinian people.

Regarding the 6 Palestinian prisoners who liberated themselves from the maximum-security Gilboa prison, Aleida considered the operation an “unusual heroism.”

“If you go to the South of Lebanon, you will find remains of Israeli prisons, where you can see with your own eyes what an Israeli prison means, let alone one with extreme security measures,” she added.

She called for the commandment of the prisoners, whose deed should be applauded, supported, and preserved given the historical nature of their struggle, notably under the occupation’s inhumane prison conditions.

Aleida Guevara concluded that the Palestinian people should be supported and that “we must fight with them side by side,” which is an extension of Che’s motto of “solidarity not only being the act raising our voices, but also coming to the aid of our comrades when they need us.”

El Commandante’s daughter has previously sent a letter to Al Mayadeen, on the occasion of the launch of its new website in English, in which she urged the world and the website to “defend the truth above anything else,” and stressing that “correct information, truthful information are essential, and that is what Al Mayadeen does with the stories it gives us every day.”



River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Wednesday, 8 September 2021

Israel-Palestine: ‘No war, no peace’ apartheid is Bennett’s best case scenario

The Israeli prime minister is first since Golda Meir to propose the racist status quo as a political platform

In March 2015, then Israeli economy minister Naftali Bennett during an election campaign gathering in Kibbutz Kfar Etzion in the Gush Etzion settlement in the West Bank (AFP)

By Meron Rapoport

Published date: 7 September 2021 13:02 UTC 

“There is no diplomatic process with the Palestinians, nor will there be one,” said a source close to Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett last week after his defence minister, Benny Gantz, met with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas.Biden-Bennett summit a meeting of wishful thinkers who oppose NetanyahuRead More »

Thus is Bennett’s spiritual world revealed: a world in which Israel, and only Israel, exists, and where the Palestinians will never, under any circumstances, even if they change their positions, be able to attain equality with Israelis and negotiate with them as equals. There is a word for that: racism.

Nearly a decade ago, Bennett entered national politics after serving as director-general of the Yesha Council, the leading settler institution, although he himself was never a settler and doesn’t live beyond the Green Line. In a now-famous interview, he said: “The Palestinian problem is like shrapnel in the butt.” 

Today, his approach has not changed, although as prime minister, he may express himself less bluntly, as he admitted just before taking office in early June.

Bennett expressed this approach in an interview he gave the New York Times ahead of his recent trip to Washington. “This government will not annex, nor establish a Palestinian state, everyone understands that,” he said. “Israel will continue the standard policy of natural growth [of West Bank settlements].” 

In saying this, Bennett became the first Israeli prime minister, with the possible exception of Golda Meir in the years prior to the 1973 war, to propose what amounts to apartheid as a political platform.

Permanent status quo

It is true that the policy of “managing the occupation” is almost as old as the Israeli occupation itself. In February 1973, for example, then-Defence Minister Moshe Dayan said, “We must plan ahead for our actions in the territories [conquered by Israel in June 1967] … so that a situation of ‘no war and no peace’ will not be unbearable for us… Authority for deciding on what happens from Suez to the [Mt] Hermon is in the hands of the Israeli government. We will not idly delineate boundaries for our settlements nor be threatened by smouldering embers.”

But the philosophy Dayan articulated then still exists and every prime minister since, except perhaps Yitzhak Rabin – whose assassination makes it impossible to know whether he meant to break the mould – has adopted it with different variations: “No war, no peace” or, in other words, a continuation of the status quo. Seven months later, the “smouldering embers” that Dayan dismissed had become the firestorm of the October 1973 war, with thousands killed on both sides, forcing Israel to subsequently return the Sinai Peninsula to Egypt. 

Bennett basically said that this status quo of ‘no war, no peace’ is not an interim situation, but rather the permanent situation

But Bennett has gone one step further. Even Dayan called the territories occupied by Israel a “deposit” to be returned in exchange for a peace agreement meeting Israel’s needs. Since the 1990s, Israeli prime ministers have been discussing, at least officially, support for the two-state solution, including Ariel Sharon and even Benjamin Netanyahu, who adopted the Palestinian state idea in his 2009 Bar-Ilan speech. In 2020, he also accepted former US President Donald Trump’s “deal of the century” which included the establishment of a Palestinian state, however crippled and fragmented. 

In his New York Times interview, however, Bennett basically said that this status quo of “no war, no peace” is not an interim situation, but rather the permanent situation to which he aspires.

In this situation, Israel, on the one hand, will continue its military rule over the Palestinians in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, and continue to accord Jewish citizens in the West Bank preferential rights as compared with Palestinians.

On the other hand, Israel will not accord Palestinians civil rights equal to those of their Jewish neighbours as would be necessitated by a partial or full annexation of the West Bank. This approach also has a name – apartheid – and Bennett believes it to be the only one possible.

‘Shrink the conflict’

We don’t know precisely what was said in Bennett’s discussions with President Joe Biden and Secretary of State Antony Blinken, but publicly at least no American reservations were heard about Bennett’s positions. Nor did the Jewish centre-left parties in Israel like Labor and Meretz, which are part of Bennett’s coalition, voice any protest. This is a dangerous precedent.

But it would be overly simplistic to say that the Bennett government will be more rightist or more violent toward the Palestinians. The opposite might be true.How Beita became a model of Palestinian resistance against IsraelRead More »

First of all, Bennett came into office from a position of political weakness. He heads a small party with six Knesset seats out of 120, and most of his coalition members are more leftist than he is – at least for Israel whose Labor Party positions toward the Palestinians would be considered right in Europe.

And there’s more. Bennett himself, along with his coalition partner, Gideon Saar, who had been a senior Likud figure and a leading candidate to replace Netanyahu, has changed his attitude considerably to the Palestinian question.

As the present government was being formed or immediately thereafter, both Bennett and Saar appeared to have relinquished the idea of Greater Israel and/or annexation, partially or wholly, embracing instead the new political concept of “shrinking the conflict”. The term originated with Micah Goodman, an Israeli of American extraction living in a West Bank settlement, whose books on the conflict have become bestsellers.

Goodman argues that the left in Israel has failed to bring an end to the occupation or to establish an independent Palestinian state, whereas the right failed with its idea of Greater Israel. Therefore, instead of talking about ending the conflict or continuing with the status quo, ways should be sought to “shrink the conflict”: to enable the Palestinians to manage their own affairs as independently as possible, while leaving “security” to Israel. After the conflict has been “shrunk,” says Goodman, it will be possible to discuss a permanent solution.

For a decade, Bennett pushed for annexation, but when the UAE and Bahrain signed the Abraham Accords in 2020, he realised it was impossible.

Goodman was an adviser to Saar and is considered to be close to Bennett. His influence was perceptible in an interview Bennett gave before taking office. “My approach is to shrink the conflict,” he said. “Where it is possible to have more crossings, better quality of life, more business, more industry, we will do it.”

For Bennett, this is a considerable shift. When he entered national politics in 2013, Bennett presented a detailed plan for the annexation of Area C, which is 60 percent of the West Bank. Over the years, he criticised Netanyahu and the Israeli army for not being aggressive enough toward the Palestinians and not “decisive” enough with Hamas. 

For a decade, Bennett pushed for annexation, but when the UAE and Bahrain signed the Abraham Accords in 2020, he realised it was impossible. He also understood that a “final resolution” of the conflict by achieving a victory over the Palestinian so crushing that they would relinquish their national aspirations was also impossible. Thus, his adoption of the idea of “shrinking the conflict” is coming from failure and weakness, even if he refuses to admit it.

Israeli right in crisis

Bennett, then, reflects the situation of the Israeli right. On the one hand, he sanctifies the status quo and has no desire or intention of relinquishing the occupation or ending apartheid. On the other hand, the right is gradually losing its faith in its own power to shape the Israeli-Palestinian reality as it sees fit. 

The fall of Netanyahu should be viewed in this context. Under Netanyahu, the right in Israel was united in a coherent, homogeneous bloc. The internal contradictions on the right, which Bennett represents, led to the fragmentation of this bloc and the establishment of a mixed government that contains elements of both right and left, including the United Arab List, an Palestinian-Islamist party headed by Mansour Abbas.Palestinian Authority losing control of West Bank, say insiders and activistsRead More »

Outwardly, all of these changes have not affected the situation on the ground. The occupation, and the settlements, continue. The political discourse in Israel remains stuck, in the best case, or else propounds Bennett’s thesis of “no peace, no war”. Israel is so strong – militarily and economically – that something significant would have to happen in order to threaten its control of the Palestinians and its power in the Middle East as a whole.

But at the same time, one cannot ignore the cracks. The ideological right in Israel is in trouble and the question is how and whether the radical left in Israel, or even more so the Palestinians, can turn that to advantage.

“Where there’s a crack, we have to make it a fissure, and where there’s a fissure, we have to make it a chasm,” a left-wing anti-occupation activist told me. Maybe that approach really will accomplish something.


River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!