This is also why it is so important to perceive the Zionist venture a paradigm of settler-colonialism, as Ilan Pappe points out. Because Pipes presents this as a mere 'war', and draws the logics from historical warfare philosophy. But this is not a war. It is colonisation. That's different. Ben Gurion recognised this duality when he said in 1938 that "When we say that the Arabs are the aggressors and we defend ourselves ---- that is only half the truth. As regards our security and life we defend ourselves. . . . But the fighting is only one aspect of the conflict, which is in its essence a political one. And politically we are the aggressors and they defend themselves." (In Morris, Righteous Victims). He did not say it outright at the point, but the translation of the 'political' aspect of the 'conflict', in which 'we are the aggressors', is unmistakably colonisation. It's coloialist aggression. Interestingly, the 1967 conquerings and occupation have offered us a renewed look at this colonisation. I heard Israeli historian Avi Shlaim regard this openly as colonisation in a lecture, so I asked him whether he did not also regard 1948 as such. He smiled, looked at his wife whom I later learned often asks him this question, and said 'you know what - I agree with you'. And added that 15 years ago he wouldn't have said that. But that also tells you that it's not necessarily about things changing on the ground - but about minds forming and newly appraising what was before. Israel thus continues to apply the colonialist dual logic, referred to by Ben Gurion, in its occupation. It says there's no occupation, it's just 'contested territory' (no other country in the world is in doubt though). At the same time it sticks to the definition 'occupation' so that it doesn't have to apply citizenship. It says it doesn't occupy Gaza, there's no siege. But no one else is in doubt. Even US State Department recognises Gaza is effectively 'occupied'. So the Palestinians obviously resist, and they have a right to do so under international law. But as Israel does not quite define them as 'occupied', it is just a 'war'. Gaza is just 'hostile territory', West Bank is 'contested'. And in this sea of 'ambiguity', the real agressors, the 'political aggressors' as Ben Gurion realised, continue their fight for the complete ethnic cleansing of Palestine, to realise Moshe Dayan's wishful thinking: "No more Palestine, finished!" - under our very noses.

by jonathan ofir

[The mother of all dead threads come back to life? - PP/moderator]