[Air-L] Difficult Discussion: What's Missing -- Digest, Vol 234, Issue 29

[Ben-Collins Ndinojuo]

Based on the comments of Marcela, until a state is created, Hamas is free
to kill as many Israelis as they can, and Israel has no rights whatsoever
to defend it's citizens.

Ndinojuo, Ben-Collins Emeka
BA, MA, PhD
Faculty of Humanities
Department of Linguistics and Communication Studies,
University of Port Harcourt.
Nigeria.
Researchgate -     https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ben_Collins_Ndinojuo
Google Scholar -
https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=AobhKnYAAAAJ&hl=en
Academia Link  - https://uniport-ng.academia.edu/ChukwuemekaCollins



On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 10:58 PM Marcela Canavarro via Air-L <
air-l at listserv.aoir.org> wrote:

> It looks like many people forget that the only part in this conflict that
> is a NATIONAL STATE is Israel.
>
> I wonder how israelis wish the world to hold Hamas accountable otherwise
> than through war and genocide against palestinians...
>
> Let me be clear: there must be a STATE to be held accountable so the
> international community can do so. International laws apply to States and
> formal representatives, not unofficial militias...
>
> It is as simple as that.
>
>
>
> Em segunda-feira, 22 de janeiro de 2024, Nils Zurawski via Air-L <
> air-l at listserv.aoir.org> escreveu:
>
> > Dear list and participants of this debate,
> >
> > I may come a little late to this thread, but it took me a while to read
> > through all posts. I have to say that I support Sam’s arguments, if I had
> > to take sides here in the debate. But I would like to share some further
> > thoughts on this, hoping not to repeat arguments that have already been
> > made, but rather commenting on the debate itself, which I feel is like so
> > many others – flawed and in parts very boring, particularly from a
> > scholarly viewpoint
> >
> > But first let me make myself clear, where I come from: I am German, have
> > friends in Israel, I am involved in teaching peace building courses at
> the
> > University of Hamburg and work as a mediator. I am a pacifist of sort,
> hate
> > violence and promote peaceful conflict resolution. I can comprehend what
> > Isreal is acting the way it does, but do not support it. It puts me in a
> > dilemma that has brought me to think about the situation more.
> >
> > I am used to be more active on this list, however this was years ago.
> > Being German makes me a target of being accused to have something of a
> > guilt, therefore I (we Germans) are deemed unable to criticise Israeli
> > politics - well mostly we should criticise Israel as a whole. And this is
> > where it starts for me to become fuzzy and boring already.
> >
> > I have a lot of sympathy for anyone opposing violence, war, atrocities
> and
> > genocide. No question. But I was surprised not to read something on the
> > Hamas attack on Israel in the original mail of this thread. And I was
> less
> > surprised to read all following arguments as to why this can be omitted.
> > Debates and arguments like this want to take a side. You are either for
> or
> > against something – and then follows a list of arguments. In the case of
> > omitting the Hamas attack, or against the critique to do so, the
> following
> > is said: Well, yes there was an attack, but it was not the start, the
> > Israeli started it before, with their polics, there history of violence,
> > the occupation and so forth. Israel become the colonial settler state
> that
> > has to be opposed. Hamas becomes a freedom fighting group, depending on
> how
> > far this narrative is taken. The game played here is tit for tat. WE did,
> > yeah, but only because you did….. going back years, decades, centuries if
> > needed. It does not lead anywhere and it indeed a boring debate, given
> that
> > we as scholars of various perspectives should be able to discuss much
> > better, far more differentiated. To add to Sam’s list in this context: We
> > could add the US as a colonial settler state, one that many on this list
> > live in or came to, that has not been boycotted and one that can be
> > criticised for various wrong doing, false wars and horrific policies over
> > the years. Somehow Israel seems to be the prototype of this kind in the
> > debates. If we would be asking why Israel, we would need to go back
> > centuries to start with and end in 1933, when the Nazis with the help of
> a
> > good portion of the German people tried to finish a job, that had been
> > coming for some years. Anyway that is not my point, even if it would be
> > giving some context in a game of tit for tat. It simply does not end.
> >
> > I would like to propose something else for a debate here. I want to
> > uncouple threads of argumentations to generate a better debate and to
> > really discuss the various issues in this conflict, the situation in
> > general and in specific debates. It is one thing to ask to take a side.
> Any
> > debate and argument ends here.
> > Side A, against side B. Both sides are fine with their place, but will
> > never capture the complexity of what is at stake. I often ends with
> > frictions in the debate, also here, when the Israeli left was brought in
> > and they were the taken on the good side, and another exception and
> another
> > one. Why, because taking sides makes arguments difficult and in the end
> > flawed,
> >
> > What does it mean to decouple threads? It means to discuss the problems
> > and phenomena at hand for their own sake. I cannot uncouple all arguments
> > here, but to give you an example.
> >
> > The Hamas attack on Oct. 7th and the pain it has brought to Israeli
> > people. You can discuss the Hamas strategy, their role, the violence,
> show
> > empathy, condemn the way Hamas has acted, acted in the past and may be a
> > authoritarian force that is rather an obstacle to Palestinian peace than
> a
> > great help.
> > You cannot discuss the attack by saying, yes but…. But is the word that
> > has to be deleted from all those debates.
> >
> > You can very well discuss the scope to the Israeli counter attack and
> with
> > it the pain inflicted on Gaza. With it you can discuss Netanyahu’s
> politics
> > over the years, maybe even the settler issue of the West bank and its
> role
> > in preventing peace in the area over the years. Not but. Just this.
> >
> > Within Israel, as I understand it, there are discussions and arguments
> > against the Gaza strikes, for the hostages, for a change in politics and
> so
> > forth. From what I see quite a vivid public sphere there, given that it
> is
> > a country fighting a bloody and disputed war. Not „but“ here.
> >
> > We can also discuss the role of the Arab states and Palestine, not
> because
> > Israel is worse, or better or different, but for what this relationship
> is
> > like.
> >
> > I hope you get the idea. The arguments of genocide, we do, because they
> > do, this or this violence is justified, because… but look at them, are
> > flawed and will bring us nowhere. We as scholars should be able to
> discuss
> > on a higher level, with more information, so much information that simply
> > makes it harder to take a side in a game of „we-do-because-they-did“.
> >
> > And as Sam demonstrated, there are always aspects that could brought
> > forward, good points, if a debate does not want to fail, because of blind
> > spots, which have become necessary to uphold one’s own position of
> support
> > against the other side.
> >
> > Maybe this all does not make sense. Maybe it does. I only want to promote
> > the idea of a better way to discuss these issues, as threads of their
> own,
> > without falling prey to argumentative shortcomings due to blind spots by
> > being on a particular side and blaming the other for the violence that
> has
> > been inflicted upon them. You cannot blame the victims of violence for
> the
> > suffering. Anyways, this post has gotten longer than I wanted. If it does
> > not make sense, simply delete it, if it does, think about it some more.
> > Maybe we need another petition in the end, once that does justice to the
> > highly complicated context and geopolitics in the middle east, not simply
> > blaming one side with all the effects that may follow from that (e.g.
> > boycott).
> >
> > Peace
> >
> > nilz
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 22 Jan 2024, at 12:59, Sam Lehman-wilzig via Air-L wrote:
> >
> > The call for some sort of “response” to Israel’s actions might have some
> >> legitimacy if:
> >>
> >>   1.  Previously we heard similar calls against China’s cultural
> genocide
> >> against the Uighurs.
> >>   2.  Ditto: any call to stop the slaughter of HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of
> >> Africans in the Sudan.
> >>   3.  Some mention of Hamas’s Oct. 7 atrocities, VIDEO-documented by
> >> THEIR OWN FIGHTERS.
> >>   4.  Some mention of the fact that in contravention of all
> international
> >> law, Hamas abducted and is holding hostage for over 3 months Israeli
> >> civilian women, men, and children.
> >>   5.  Hamas hid massive amounts of armaments in hospitals, schools,
> >> kindergartens, and private civilian homes (e.g., under baby cribs!!) –
> >> again, against Geneva Convention laws of warfare. Thus, where exactly is
> >> Israel supposed to fight? Just on roads or parks?
> >>   6.  Israel sent messages (flyers and phone calls!) to all Gazan
> >> civilians in North Gaza to get out and move south in order NOT to be in
> the
> >> line of fire when the IDF attacked Hamas soldiers. This is the very
> >> opposite of intended genocide.
> >>   7.  If already people here mention “genocide”, then what do you call
> >> Hamas’ Charter that calls for the elimination not of Israelis but of all
> >> JEWS? And after Oct. 7, their spokesman said that they will do it (Oct.
> 7)
> >> again and again. So who exactly is “genocidal” here?
> >> Given that this forum is for academics, one would expect a bit more
> >> “context” in respondents’ posts – not to mention understanding and
> noting
> >> ALL the facts involved.
> >>
> >> Prof. Sam Lehman-Wilzig
> >> 3 Yitzchak Sadeh St.
> >> 4423918 Kfar Saba
> >> ISRAEL
> >> 052-3410163
> >> www.ProfSLW.com<http://www.profslw.com/>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list
> >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org
> >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at:
> >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
> >>
> >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers:
> >> http://www.aoir.org/
> >>
> >
> >
> > PD Dr. Nils Zurawski
> > Universität Hamburg
> > FB Sozialwissenschaften
> > 20146 Hamburg
> > Germany
> > https://www.surveillance-studies.org
> > Podcast: http://www.panoptopia.de
> >
> > Aktuell:
> >
> > - Nadja Maurer / Annabelle Möhnle / Nils Zurawski (Hg.). Kritische
> > Polizeiforschung. Reflexionen, Dilemmata und Erfahrungen aus der Praxis.
> > 2023 Bielefeld: transcript, open access, https://www.transcript-verlag.
> > de/978-3-8376-6557-4/kritische-polizeiforschung/
> >
> > - N. Zurawski: Welt ohne Abweichung? Soziale Kontrolle, Konsum und der
> > digitalisierte Alltag. In Soziale Probleme, Nr. 2/2023, Bd 34.
> >
> > - N. Zurawski: Überwachen und Konsumieren. Kontrolle, Normen und soziale
> > Beziehungen in der digitalen Gesellschaft. 2021 Bielefeld: transcript.
> open
> > access, https://www.transcript-verlag.de/978-3-8376-5606-0/ueberwach
> > en-und-konsumieren/
> >
> > - N. Zurawski: Proximity, Distance, and State Powers: Policing Practices
> > and the Regulation of Anonymity. In Anon Collective: The Book of
> Anonymity.
> > Punctum 2021, https://punctumbooks.com/titles/book-of-anonymity/
> >
> > - N. Zurawski: „Früher war alles … sicherer?“ Gesellschaftliche
> Sicherheit
> > und die Sensibilisierung von Gesellschaft gegenüber Gewalt und deviantem
> > Verhalten bei Jugendlichen. Ein Einwurf. In Jahrbuch Pädagogik 2019
> > (erschienen 2021): https://www.peterlang.com/file
> > asset/Journals/Jp/JP012019e_book.pdf
> >
> > - weitere Publikationen: http://www.surveillance-studies.org/zurawski
> > _______________________________________________
> > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list
> > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org
> > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at:
> > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
> >
> > Join the Association of Internet Researchers:
> > http://www.aoir.org/
> >
> _______________________________________________
> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list
> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org
> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at:
> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
>
> Join the Association of Internet Researchers:
> http://www.aoir.org/
>