Once upon a time, 27 years ago today, a terrible massacre that is rarely remembered took place. On the 16th of September 1982, the Lebanese Christian Phalangist militia entered two Beirut refugee camps called Sabra and Shatila which were inhabited by Palestinian refugees. Their mission was authorised by the IDF (Israeli Defense Force), under the command of Defense Minister Ariel Sharon, that held the territory around Beirut at that time as a result of the June 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon.
The Phalangists, whose Maronite Christian president, Bachir Gemayel, had just been assassinated on the 14th of September, entered the camps on the afternoon of the 16th and carried out a 62-hour rampage of rape and murder until Saturday morning, September the 18th. They were motivated by revenge for the Gemayel killing, which they attributed to the PLO (Palestine Liberation Organisation). Later, information revealed that Gemayel was assassinated by the Syrians, who opposed his alliance with the Israelis, and not by the PLO. The exact number killed by the Phalangists is disputed, with estimates ranging from 328 to 3500, according to Wikipedia.
The Phalangists, whose Maronite Christian president, Bachir Gemayel, had just been assassinated on the 14th of September, entered the camps on the afternoon of the 16th and carried out a 62-hour rampage of rape and murder until Saturday morning, September the 18th. They were motivated by revenge for the Gemayel killing, which they attributed to the PLO (Palestine Liberation Organisation). Later, information revealed that Gemayel was assassinated by the Syrians, who opposed his alliance with the Israelis, and not by the PLO. The exact number killed by the Phalangists is disputed, with estimates ranging from 328 to 3500, according to Wikipedia.
The killing attracted international attention, especially because the gates of both refugee camps were under the control of the IDF. The Israeli government set up the Kahan Commission to investigate, which held Israel indirectly responsible for the murders of Sabra and Shatila. Amazingly, it went as far as to bear Ariel Sharon personally responsible for "ignoring the danger of bloodshed and revenge" and for "not taking appropriate measures to prevent bloodshed." The Commission even demanded Sharon's resignation as Defense Minister, which he did reluctantly, probably forced by the international outcry that had erupted. The US, of course, didn't waste the opportunity to praise the government of its mercenary state. Here is an extract of what former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger said of the Kahan Commission:
"[It was] a great tribute to Israeli democracy... There are very few governments in the world that one can imagine making such a public investigation of such a difficult and shameful episode."
"[It was] a great tribute to Israeli democracy... There are very few governments in the world that one can imagine making such a public investigation of such a difficult and shameful episode."
What was really surprising was the media coverage of the event. Instead of investigating how the killing had come to happen, they centred their attention on the number of victims, trying to get the world to see how what had happened in Beirut wasn't really a massacre, but a standard, everyday killing...
When does a killing become an outrage? When does an atrocity become a massacre? Or, put another way, how many killings make a massacre? Thirty? A hundred? Three hundred? When is a massacre not a massacre? When the figures are too low? Or when the massacre is carried out by Israel’s friends rather than Israel's enemies? If Syrian troops had crossed into Israel, surrounded a Kibbutz and allowed their Palestinian allies to slaughter the Jewish inhabitants, no Western news agency would waste its time afterwards arguing about whether or not it should be called a massacre.
But in Beirut, the victims were Palestinians. The guilty were certainly Christian militiamen, but the Israelis were also to blame. Even though the Israelis had not directly taken part in the killings, they had certainly sent militia into the camp knowing that they were seeking revenge and that surely a bloodshed would happen. They were coldblooded enough as to sit back and watch how refugees were being slaughtered. This happened 27 years ago. Today we have a wall along the Gaza strip separating it from Egypt which, although it has been compared on several occasions with the one in Berlin, hasn't received half of the attention. The question today shouldn't be how many deaths it takes for a killing to become a massacre, but how many massacres and how many walls will it take for the world to react.
But in Beirut, the victims were Palestinians. The guilty were certainly Christian militiamen, but the Israelis were also to blame. Even though the Israelis had not directly taken part in the killings, they had certainly sent militia into the camp knowing that they were seeking revenge and that surely a bloodshed would happen. They were coldblooded enough as to sit back and watch how refugees were being slaughtered. This happened 27 years ago. Today we have a wall along the Gaza strip separating it from Egypt which, although it has been compared on several occasions with the one in Berlin, hasn't received half of the attention. The question today shouldn't be how many deaths it takes for a killing to become a massacre, but how many massacres and how many walls will it take for the world to react.
This is a terribly sad story, and it's been going on for so long... It's so hard to have hope. But as Chomsky says, one has to have hope, because if enough of us persevere, things do happen---he usually cites the example of the civil rights movement of the 50's in the US. So, keep up the excellent posting, maybe we can bring the issues to the attention of enough people to make a difference.
ReplyDeleteI love you!
ReplyDeleteH