[Charlie Rose's TV show last night presented the liberal extreme of the US media's analysis of the Middle East. Speakers were former US Ambassador to Israel Martin Indyk -- an Australian and creature of the Israeli lobby, whom the Clinton administration installed in the basement of the White House to oversee US ME policy; former US "special envoy" Dennis Ross, as vague and inconsequential as Rose is himself; and, for balance, Walid Kahlidi of the University of Chicago. The theme was set by Indyk: the Palestinians are responsible for starting the violence. Here's a comment from some months ago by Noam Chomsky on this line, often repeated by the US government.]
"There is an official US position ... reiterated ... by US ambassador Martin Indyk. He said we do not believe in rewarding violence. That was a stern admonition to the Palestinians ... , and there are many others like it. And it's easy to assess the validity of that claim. So let's assess it just in the obvious way. The Al-Aqsa Intifada, the violence that Indyk deplores, began on September 29th. That's the day after Ariel Sharon, now prime minister, went to the Haram Al-Sharif, the Temple Mount, with about a thousand soldiers. That passed more or less without incident, surprisingly. But the next day, which was Friday, there was a huge army presence as people left the mosque after prayers; there was some stone throwing and immediate shooting by the Israeli army and Border Patrol, which left about a half a dozen Palestinians killed and over a hundred wounded. Thats September 29th. On October 1st, Israeli military helicopters, or to be precise US military helicopters with Israeli pilots, sharply escalated the violence, killing two Palestinians in Gaza. On October 2nd, military helicopters killed 10 people in Gaza, wounded 35. On October 3rd, helicopters were attacking apartment complexes and other civilian targets. And so it continued. By early November, the helicopters were being used for targeted political assassinations.
"And how did the US react? Well, the US reaction is interesting -- and that's us remember; we can control this if we choose. In mid September, before the fighting started, the US sent a new shipment of advanced attack helicopters to Israel. Also in mid September, there were joint exercises of the US Marines and elite units of the Israeli army, the IDF -- training exercises for re-conquest of the occupied territories. The role of the Marines was to provide new advanced equipment that Israel didn't have and training in usage of it and techniques. That's mid September.
"On October 3rd -- that is the day that the press was reporting that military helicopters were attacking apartment complexes and killing dozens of people -- on October 3rd, the Israeli press announced and then the international press repeated that the US and Israel had reached a deal the biggest deal in a decade -- for dispatch of US military helicopters to Israel. The next day leading military journals reported that this included new advanced attack helicopters and parts for the former helicopters, which would increase the capacity to attack civilian targets. Incidentally the Israeli defense ministry announced that they cannot produce helicopters. They don't have the capacity so they have to get them from the United States. On October 19th, Amnesty International issued a report calling on the United States not to send military helicopters to Israel under these circumstances -- one of a series of Amnesty International reports.
"[On February 19] the Pentagon announced that Israel and the United States had just made another deal, a half billion-dollar deal, for advanced Apache attack helicopters..."
--CGE