INDIFFERENCE TO WORDS THAT COULD MAKE A DIFFERENCE
The fate of two million blameless, miserable, often terrified civilians in Gaza came down to which variation of words diplomats and politicians in safe places could agree on. The answer was: none. The next “negotiating session” should open with the words of the leader whose name is synonymous with wisdom: “Words kill, words give life; they’re either poison or fruit – YOU choose.”
Since King Solomon won’t have a place at the negotiating table, maybe it would help if the next round of haggling and nit-picking was done sitting in the open in the middle of a refugee camp in Gaza. With the same amenities and food available as its residents are enjoying.
That sounds like a simplistic way to deal with what is anything but a simple situation. Unless you look at it from the point of view of the civilians of Gaza, whose needs have been reduced to simple in the extreme: the bare basics of life in the form of water, food, sanitation, medical supplies, a roof instead of a tent or plastic sheeting to live under and an assurance that they and their children won’t be air strike “collateral damage” in the next five minutes.
Or through the eyes and tortured psyches of Israelis and others whose loved ones are held hostage by Hamas in who knows in what conditions. Or if they’re still alive, come to that.
Instead, five days of posturing, arguing, to-and-froing and word games to keep the U.S. happy and fingers off the “VETO” button produced what, to be generous, can be termed a “watered down” resolution.
The irony of the characterisation was obvious in a Gaza hospital visited by a World Health Organisation (WHO) emergency medical team, where patients “were crying out in pain, but they were also crying out for us to give them water” and medical staff were struggling to cope with “no food, no fuel, no water”.
As for Hamas, it’s a good bet that by now their poll numbers – if they permitted such a luxury on their turf – would be worse than President Joe Biden’s, courtesy of their position of “a rejection of negotiations while under fire”.
If the group’s leaders shouted that in the tunnels they’re hunkering in, the echo they’d hear could easily be mistaken for the U.S. vetoing a Security Council resolution, or the Israeli government trumpeting its aim of complete victory, like Joshua at the walls of Jericho, but with less chance of attaining his level of success.
MEANWHILE
During the five days world powers spent trying to hone a resolution to make it modestly easier for relief supplies to enter Gaza, the situation in the beleaguered enclave reached the point where “the entire population…faces an imminent risk of famine”, and “only nine out of 36 health facilities are partially functional…”.
Gaza is being twice reduced; physically to the rubble produced by tens of thousands of tonnes of bombs, philosophically to the reducto ad absurdum of haggling over words which in terms of what is actually needed, are little more than the sound of hand-wringing.
The message from the would-be Good Samaritans is basically: so sorry for your troubles, innocent civilians, but you must understand we had to go through a lot of words to find a few that we might, or might not, veto or argue about some more.
SO WHO’S TO BLAME
Responsibility for letting those who can make a difference get away with what amounts to indifference to suffering lies in part with journalists, and I say that as a member of the tribe. Too often words, from the apocalyptic to the mundane and ridiculous, are accepted under the excuse of fairness and objectivity, rather than questioned, or having their real meaning made clear.
Israeli politicians and military spokespersons decry Hamas as an “existential threat”, (cabinet minister Benny Gantz: “The war here is for our existence and for Zionism…”) which means there’s there is no room for compromise, or peace.
In fact, “existential” in a military context means “a threat to a people’s existence or survival”, which is a lot more applicable to Gazans than Israelis at the moment.
As for the level of threat Hamas represents, how can what considers itself a resistance movement and is a terrorist organisation by any definition, possibly overcome what is touted as the most powerful army in the Middle East and then take over a recognised, organised, modern state. Gaza isn’t a powerful armed nation. It’s not an even economically viable one.
It ought to be a journalistic principle to never report claims by politicians that are patently and demonstrably false or misleading without labelling them as such.
Otherwise, as the comic artist Walt Kelly’s character Pogo paraphrased a famous line from the War of 1812: “We have met the enemy and he is us.”
That includes you, UN word-hagglers.
Comments are welcomed. Click CONTACT on the site header.
To receive e‑mail alerts to new posts, Click SIGN-UP on the header.
One thought on “INDIFFERENCE TO WORDS THAT COULD MAKE A DIFFERENCE”
Great piece Piz