Lunatic Fantasies, Beginian Public relations: Israeli unreality and the Freedom Flotilla

 Over the next few days we will be hearing - or at least noticing the conspicuous absence of- reports concerning international civil society’s latest attempt to breach Israel’s blockade over the Gaza strip. In the light of last year’s attack, the blatant manipulation of events by the Israeli media machine and the ramping up of international diplomatic pressure from Israel and the US on various Mediterranean governments and their own citizens to dissuade any cooperation with the project, it is worth considering the peculiar internal dynamics of the current situation.

There are several things that need to be noted, if we take Israel’s collective punishment of a civilian population for its democratic preferences as an acceptable given –which of course it isn’t- and just look at the issue of breaching the siege. Firstly there does not seem any reason why the Israeli navy could not have negotiated inspections of the flotilla ships as they arrive, Israel’s navy is an advanced military machine, it could inspect the ships thoroughly and confiscate what it considers to be dangerous contraband. Of course the Israeli government will maintain that it cannot conduct such a search with the violent opposition it faces. This might be convincing if we consider violent opposition the norm. However there were several reasons that violence erupted on the Mavi Marmara, and -as Israeli military spokesmen noted- not on other vessels.

Arriving at 5am, little or no prior communication with the vessels, firing rubber bullets from helicopters, -there were injuries on board before a single commando had abseiled onto the deck- this kind of greeting is going to incite a problematic reaction. The vast majority of passengers did not fight back, some did, which given the reputation of the Israeli military was foolish, but it hardly takes an Islamic extremist to defend one’s self in deliberately destabilized circumstances. Other vessels passengers reacted passively, they were still truncheoned and handcuffed in stress positions in the summer heat for hours, they were still arrested, had their belongings confiscated and were then deported.

The exercise of confiscating aid destined for Gaza is a political act, and has little to do with pragmatism under exceptional circumstances. It is Israel saying to Gaza and the rest of international civil society; “We are in charge, we will deal with this at our discretion, with impunity”

Much was made in both Israeli government press releases –which the BBC, ITV, FOX, CNN and co transcribed verbatim- and in discussion in the UK the US and elsewhere of the extremist character of  passengers aboard the Mavi Marmara. We were told that they were ‘The terrorists’, the language of discussion slipped so easily into such terminology an ignorant observer would assume that these were heavily armed individuals in Kevlar, wrapped in ammunition belts, RPG’s atop shoulders, rather than slingshots and whatever came to hand. This is of course the point; fling enough shit, some of it sticks. Substitute Palestinian boys with rocks, to Turkish boys with sticks and you’re there.

What was removed from mainstream discourse was that there were a number of Nobel Laureates on board, and several members of the Israeli Knesset. Are we to assume that they would be happily consorting with heavily armed terrorists? It would seem absurd, but if one looks at the way Israel has dealt with criticism in the past, a familiarity with absurdity is in fact a key technical practice.

In the 1980’s when settler practice was attracting considerable criticism from within Israel as well as from without, Meacham Begin, Yitzhak Shamir and Moshe Dayan had some interesting advice for demagogic advocates of religious nationalism.  Shamir advised that activists “should refuse to respond rationally to arguments” as such reasonable responses would “imply that some sort of conditionality was attached” to the future shape of Israel. This is the classic ‘straw man’ tactic for avoiding reasonable debate on a subject. It is adopted today in numerous situations. Therefore Alan Dershowitz can scream anti-semitism at any and all who criticise the state of Israel, his statement that Norman Finkelstien, would be an anti-Semite, if only he weren’t Jewish, is a particularly stark example of the tactical lunacy of Zionist activism.

In relation to the flotilla this kind of disinformatory tactic is applied across the board, and is now being applied in the discussion of the present situation. There are conventional acts of disinformation, where reality is subverted to suit the Israeli agenda. Israeli’s UN envoy recently cited a precedent for Israelis hysterical behaviour, that of the Victoria, a ship impounded by the navy, that was carrying hundreds of weapons, which is all well and good until we see that this ship had nothing to do with the flotilla, it was destined for Egypt, but the flimsiest of ‘evidence’ is all that is required of Israeli ‘scatter-gun’ disinformation.

In a recent interview with The Real News, Israeli naval spokeswoman Sgt Anital Leibowitz  stated that the IDF would be seeking “as little physical contact as possible [..] with those passengers”. Now we could initially assume that this is in fact a positive development, that the navy has perhaps learned some self restraint and international self awareness over perceptions of its actions, but Leibowitz later elaborates that this is not for reasons of humanitarian consideration or international perceptions, rather it is a matter of life and death; “we don’t want to endanger our lives as soldiers”. This flotilla must be some adversary indeed, even the Israeli navy, the most powerful Middle Eastern maritime force, is cautious of engagement!

There is the very real concern that as nationalist indoctrination in Israel –let alone the armed forces- is so severe it can only help to put naval forces in a mindset that makes brutalising activists the norm. If we consider, as Robert Fisk does, that Israel’s armed forces are not the purveyors of ‘purity of arms’ but rather just another  “indisciplined rabble of an army – as "elite" as the average rabble of Arab armies” we would do well to worry about the outcome of this next encounter with its imaginary enemies.

The fantasy of the freedom flotilla –the hate flotilla as it has been dubbed by the Israeli establishment- as a military threat is reaching considerable levels. Mr Netanyahu has been lobbying for Ban Ki Moon to call on Mediterranean governments to do what they can to prevent vessels leaving from their ports; (the Audacity of Hope at present seems to be stalled in Greece.) Mr Moon has not used quite the same hyperbole in his pronouncements, rather framing the project as a threat to Israel-Palestine negotiations, but the effect seems much the same; the flotilla is dangerous to stability, even the worlds preeminent international organization –who’s human rights council backed its own fact finding mission, which reported that activists aboard the Mavi Marmara were in fact murdered- is coming out against a gesture of solidarity as if it were some latter day act of piracy.

The US has warned its citizens against involvement, particularly damming as the same government has to date refused any investigation into the murder on one of its citizens, and denied numerous freedom of information requests from lawyers working for the family of Furkan Dogan.

The current flotilla will feature politicians from Ireland, nationals from numerous democratic states throughout the world, many older Jewish Americans and even a Reagan and Bush confidant, ex-CIA officer Ray Mcgovern. Israel has stated that it intends to make no distinction between journalists and activists, to prevent footage and reports reaching the world. When these activists are slandered as hate mongers and terrorists and when this is shamelessly reported as fact by demagogues and lazy journalists in our countries, do our governments expect us to believe it?