The Daily News 4 - ICJS Radio program

Here is The daily news episode 4

or download file The Daily News episode 4

Welcome to the ICJS Daily News programme on 96.1 Lion FM . I'm Ralph. Ronit's away. Today I have someone who we hope will become a regular member of our team, Yitz. In this program Yitz and I will talk about "The way they did", as a metaphor for the whole argument about disproportionate force. We will aso be discussing the fluid and elusive definition of a refugee. And a little bit more about the UN and its role. And we'll try and dissect a piece on the ABC which makes Israel sound shocking for not accepting the Palestinian narrative.

We invite you to access our website at www.icjs-online.org.  That's www.icjs-online .org.  If you want to write us directly you can do so at lion@icjs-online.org. That's lion@icjs-online.org
You are listening to Lion FM 96.1

The way they did - disproportionate force

A listener to the program said to me this week talking about Israel's incursion into Lebanon in 2006: "Israel definitely should not have gone into Lebanon the way they did". deconstruct. Ostensibly listener concedes Israel under attack, justified in taking "some action" to stop rockets but not "the way they did". I ask: Do you know any other way they could have done it? Can you be sure it would have stopped the rockets? Suspect that our listener would have always said "not the way they did".
Brings me to "Israel used disproportionate force". Like listener above, the linguistic trick is that you are ostensibly onside - ie some kind of force was needed, but Israel used too much!

The whole concept of proportion comes from strictly measurable items. To apply it to a war is a nonsense. It's ludicrous. You'd need to be able to measure what amount of force your side and the other side are both using. And you'd also need to know what amount of force the other side is holding back on, that they aren't using yet. And you'd need a universally accepted conversion table to be able to measure your force against your enemy's

This all doesn't exist. Let's pretend that it does.

You now know exactly in measurable units how much force you have, he has, you have in reserve, and he has in reserve. You don't match the other side exactly because if you did, neither of you would win. Equally pitched battles draw out too long. It'd be a big waste of lives on both sides. Protracted warfare is a blight on human rights. So you need to use just enough more force than the other side that will result in you winning.

Israel finds it stacked up against it in the media. If they use decisive force to address the situation they are accused of starting an all out war, using "disproportionate force" . Whenever they decide to use use matching force, they are accused of promulgating the cycle of violence, tit for tat killings. There you have it: Cycle of violence or tit-for-tat. Take your pick.

Lesson 2: The need for a display of overwhelming force

A key factor in RAMSI's early success was its display of overwhelming force on deployment. RAMSI initially consisted of 2,225 police, military and civilian personnel. The police component consisted of 325 personnel, and the military component some 1,800 personnel, which included 450 combat troops, as well as logistics, engineering and medical personnel.

Now for a song. This is called wind and rain - by Crooked Still.
That was "Wind and Rain" - by Crooked Still You're listening to Lion FM 96.1

Definition of refugee

A person who "owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality, and is unable to or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country".[1]

DIGRESSION: COUNTRIES PROTECT THEIR CITIZENS

I overheard a conversation: "It's good to support a Kurdish restaurants. We all need to be very sympathetic with the Kurdish people coz of what they are going through. They are ALL refugees." I pricked up my ears. The Kurds are all refugees? Where does this come from? I asked the question: What makes them all refugees? Answer: They are refugees because they don't have a homeland. This needs to be unpicked. Ronit has already dealt with the definition of a refugee. Loosely, it is someone who faced persecution where they live, left the place, and wouldn't find it safe to return.
So I say, if so, then Jews were all refugees before 1948! Because they did not officially have a homeland. Maybe - but are Jews a religion or a nationality? Squirm, can't work it out.

I continue: If all Kurds are refugees then so are the Australian indigenous peoples. The Aboriginal and Torres Straits Islanders are, like the Kurds, in their homeland and have no chance of being granted autonomy by us. Stony silence.

So let me set things straight. All Jews were NOT refugees before 1948. All Aboriginal and Torres Straight Islander peoples are not refugees currently. All Kurds are NOT refugees curently. Some are. Typical example of Kurdish refugees are those who fled their country of birth, Iraq, in 1991 and could not return for fear of persecution. In fact there were safe havens set up in Iraq and most of the refugees returned.

I make the point that as soon as the safe havens had been set up, the Kurds who fled lost their refugee status - even though they may not have returned to Iraq. A bit over a decade ago most of them returned to safe havens in Iraq.

They are not treated well, and I'm certainly supportive of their aspiration to have a homeland of their own. They are the largest ethnic group in the world which doesn't have a homeland. BUT THIS DOES NOT MAKE THEM REFUGEES!

Why dwell on this issue? Because it demonstrates clearly the pervasive myth which has very effectively been promulgated by the Palestinians

It's time for a song - A very famous song from the great depression "Buddy Can you spare me a dime" - by Spanky and our gang

Hope you enjoyed the song "Buddy can you spare me a dime" by Spanky and our gang. This is 96.1 Lion FM