Opinion Editorials, October 2003, www.aljazeerah.info
Human Price of the Israeli Occupation of Palestine
Israeli daily aggression on the Palestinian people
Mission and meaning of Al-Jazeerah
Cities, localities, and tourist attractions
Politicians are the same all over - they like to lie
Linda S Heard
| Special to Gulf News | 28-10-2003
Stumbling across a career politician who says it like it is - or at least as he thinks it might be - is as difficult as finding an ice-vendor in the North Pole. They are either concerned to maintain their elevated status and their even more elevated pensions or they are professional party line merchants fearful of rocking the boat even while it is on the rocks.
Many of us are so used to politicians being sparing with the truth - and that's putting it politely - that when they deviate from the straight and narrow our eyebrows stay firmly above our irises.
A perfect example is Tony Blair's ongoing insistence that Iraq is still hiding WMD, or a blueprint to destroy the world (as the weapons morphed into being), when even his right-wing partners across the pond have openly expressed their doubts.
Then there was the British Prime Minister's announcement to the Hutton Enquiry that he had no prior knowledge that Dr. David Kelly's name would be made public when subsequently we learn that he actually chaired the meeting, which decided Kelly's fate.
Porky pies
Is the Labour Party outraged that its blue-eyed leader told porky pies (Cockney rhyming slang for… well, you know)? In a word… No!
Its members' disapproval is instead reserved for a man who has been a Labour Party devotee since his humble beginnings, a person unschooled in sophisticated doublespeak; a self-educated man; a person who wears his passions on his sleeve and who has worked unstintingly for the underdog throughout his life - Member of Parliament for Glasgow and Kelvin, George Galloway.
Until October 23, Galloway was a Labour stalwart. A party member for 36 years, Galloway was peremptorily kicked out after what he described as a kangaroo court hearing bent on punishing honest opponents of the Iraqi invasion.
Ian McCartney, the Party chairman, explained that Galloway's ousting was due to his refusal to apologise for going on "an international television programme and inciting forces to cross the border and kill our brothers and sisters in the British army."
Naturally it couldn't have been because Galloway referred to both Blair and Bush as "wolves" or that he encouraged Allied troops to desert rather than comply with illegal orders - an international law precedent set down in the Nuremberg trials.
The fact that Blair sent British troops to their death on what is now believed by many, including former Blair cabinet members Robin Cook and Clare Short, as a false premise is of little consequence to McCartney and his judgmental pals.
Galloway has to be stripped of his membership because he urged Arabs to unite and defend themselves against invaders. In short, he followed his conscience and now, due to his lack of diplomatic finesse, he faces the probable demise of his career.
In retrospect, Galloway might have sought advice from another anti-war politician, France's suave Dominique de Villepin. De Villepin became an international celebrity after his emotional plea to the Security Council last February.
"War is always the sanction of failure," he said while backing Blix and El Baradei's request for more time. De Villepin refrained from using such words as "wolves" or "liars" and his reward was a standing ovation. His convictions weren't that different from Galloways'. He simply said it like it is in a more palatable way.
An accomplished diplomat, De Villepin was disarming during a lecture he gave on the BBC. He began with "We French love giving lectures, with the sense of humility and modesty which… we share with you." Clever man. The British lap up sarcastic self-deprecation.
Sharing Galloway's leitmotiv, he said: "We share the despair of the Palestinian people who see no future … we cannot resign ourselves to a policy solely driven by security. The time has come for us to ask ourselves the right questions: Is it constructive to blame all the difficulties on Yasser Arafat? Is the building of the present security fence acceptable? Does all this strengthen Israel's security? The answer is no - for the simple reason: the security of Israel and the sovereignty of the Palestinians cannot be dissociated."
However, where Galloway would have raged, albeit grandiosely and eloquently, De Villepin got his message across without ruffling feathers. He then proceeded to the subject of Iraq.
"Let us not underestimate the ability of the Iraqi people to take responsibility for their destiny. Let us not repeat the mistakes made in the past.
Let us not consider, as all occupying forces have always done, that an occupied country is never ready to recover its sovereignty. We ourselves made this mistake and paid the price in our de-colonisation wars," he said. Galloway would have simply called the invaders unflattering names and bellowed at them to get out toute suite.
The real coup de grace could be found between the lines of the Foreign Minister's parting words: "…I have come to you this evening as a Frenchman, as a European, as a member of our family. Nothing, neither tea nor the channel will ever be able to separate us. I beg you, stay British. I promise - we shall stay French. Together let us be Europeans because as Europeans, we are strong."
Challenging head
Eat your heart out oh ye architects of the Project for a New American Century, one in which no other power would be allowed to rear its challenging head. Interestingly, both France and Germany are pushing for a European force separate from Nato much to the chagrin of the US.
The Malaysian leader Mahatir Mohammed would have profited from taking a leaf out of De Villepin's book too. His references to "Jews, ruling the world by proxy" could have been better phrased to read "Israelis" instead of "Jews".
In this way he would not have left himself vulnerable to charges of anti-Semitism. Whatever one thinks of Galloway, Mohammed, or De Villepin there is no doubt that all three hold to their own beliefs and shoot from the hip.
The first has been shot down, the credibility of the second challenged while the latter gains kudos.
In the final analysis, it's not what they say, but the way that they say it. Stark reality is destined to forever straddle between the lines as long as taking off our rose-coloured spectacles is too painful to bear.
Linda S. Heard is a specialist writer on Middle East affairs. She can be contacted at lheard@gulfnews.com
 |
| Earth, a planet hungry for peace |
 |
| The Israeli apartheid (security) wall around Palestinian population centers (Ran Cohen, pmc, 5/24/03). |
 |
| The Israeli apartheid (security) wall around Palestinian population centers in the West Bank (Ran Cohen, pmc, 5/24/03). |
 |