How Innocent are 'Innocent' Civilians?

How Innocent Are “Innocent” Civilians?



One hears the phrase “innocent civilians” a lot these days, especially in regards to the victims of “terrorist” attacks. It goes something like, “how can these terrorists rationalize the wilfull killing of innocent civilians…” or “Terrorist target innocent civilians because they have no value for human life…” …”Terrorists are evil and they only want to kill innocents…” For some reason, state violence against another state (such as US Shock and Awe campaign which opened the current US war against Iraq, or our support of Sadam Hussein prior to 1992) which over the years has killed infinitely more civilian don’t often solicit the same condemnation…However, this double standard is not the focus of this post, rather how innocent are “innocent” civilians is.

First of all, are these civilian’s innocent as in not being guilty of a crime, as in not being corrupted, or as in being ignorant of something? This more than likely than not depends on the context. Of course, children who get killed in state authorized bombing campaigns or via a suicide bomb are innocent in all three areas. However, to use a particularly loaded example, in what ways were the victims of 9-11 innocent? Are civilians by definition “innocent”? Of course, the people who where murdered that day did not deserve that fate, but that does not necessarily mean that they are “innocent.”?

The main gripe of those who carried out the attacks of 9-11, was US intervention in Muslim, (often oil-rich countries). They do not hate (or particularly embrace) our freedoms, rather they “hate” US foreign policy—political, economic, and military intervention both overt and covert that has been ongoing since the end of WWII. Intervention, by the way, that has resulted in much civilian suffering and death, via sanctions and US fueling of civil and other strife in (see Iran, Afghanistan, Turkey, Indonesia), US support of un-democratic regimes and rulers as long as they were “friendly” to our Oil interests etc in their countries, US bases in Saudi Arabia, the US’s carte blanche support of Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories (Israel receives more US aid than any other country, most in military grants, and US consistently vetoes any UN resolutions that are critical of Israel’s treatment of Palestinians…), and the US’s media and intelligencia’s continuous construction of Muslims and Muslim society en masse as backward , barbaric, infantile, and in need of “civilizing.”

Now, normally in today’s neo-realist dominated international relations ideology, a country’s foreign policy is structured to promote the country’s self-interest, however currently constructed, by limiting as much as possible actions of other States that are seen as possibly negatively impacting that country’s pursuing its self-interest. Now, whether or not this self-interest is actually for the benefit of the public in general, or in fact more about imperial expansion which benefits primarily the power elite at the expense of both the majorities within and without the borders, while in need of more critical engagement, is not within the scope of this post to address here (See Noam Chomsky, Lilly Ling, Howard Zinn, Cornel West, Robert Frisk, bell hooks, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Francis Fukoyama etc). The question is how culpable are the citizens for their country’s foreign policies? Again, this is context specific. One should not hold the citizens, of say Afghanistan, North Korea, or Columbia to account the same way we would the citizens of say the USA, Great Britain, or Israel. Actual functioning democratic societies whose population enjoy a relatively good standard of living and who enjoy historically unprecedented access to information (if one bothers to look for it), in my opinion, can and should be held to greater account for the actions of their governments then those citizens who are mostly impoverished and repressed with little or no access to information and who have no institutionalized way of holding their rulers to account.

By this standard, the US populace of voting age, especially those who are either aware of the underside of their government’s policies and opt for either nihilism, support, or feigned ignorance, or those who don’t bother to Socratically engage the myths spun by (most ) politicians and pundits and continue by either participation or non participation in the democratic process to support these actions (which in part construct this “terrorist” threat we are so freaked about) cannot be correctly labeled as innocent.

The current rationale for Iraq is that by fighting there the US is safer. So by this rationale our security is being in large part paid for with Iraqi (mainly civilian) blood and well-being. Are those who go along (either willingly or with resignation) with this rationale innocent? Would it not be fair for Iraqis (or others) to hold US citizens’ accountable for the price they are paying?

Much of the West’s wealth and power has been cultivated by the oppression and exploitation of the rest of the world for the past 400 plus years and this continues and it continues to breed resistance that is becoming more and more radicalized and violent and more dedicated to share with the civilians of the West what many of the civilians of the Rest have and continue to experience by the hands of Western powers and their foreign client regimes…insecurity, instability, and yes, terrorism.

If one benefits, in anyway from the injustice born upon others, and does nothing in work or deed to change the status quo can they be said to be innocent? This is a philosophical and moral question that needs to be addressed, especially by citizens who enjoy relative freedom and the ability to hold to account those who inflict injustice in our name and with our resources.

Response to Alan Dershowitz's Huffington Post Post

In his post Dershowitz claims that occupation is a response to terrorism and not one of its causes etc..


Hmm. As much fun as the what came first argument...the chicken or the egg...terrorism or occupation is...I'd say that terrorism, defined by the US Department of Defense as: The calculated use of violence or the threat of violence to inculcate fear; intended to coerce or to intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological, is something that Israel has and continues to employ often in its 35 plus year military occupation of recognized Palestinian Territories. And it is also something Hamas, Hezbollah etc use as part of its resistance to this occupation. Thus neither came first nor can be used as the an exhaustive excuse for the actions on either side. The only thing relatively unique about this situation is that it’s the weaker group, the sub-altern if you will, that has appropriated the tactics of the oppressor with the means available to them.

Moving on, you asked in your article "What should Israel do..." when its citizens are harmed/killed... Why is it that it’s okay for Israel to respond violently to violence against its people, but it is "terrorism" when the other side does? Besides, way way way more Palestinian children have died at the hands of the IDF then Israeli children via attacks from Hamas type groups... In addition, events have precedence, even if you don’t like what some or all of that precedence is or if it doesn’t match the picture in your mind. Hamas just didn’t emerge one day and for no reason or for reasons only based on old European ideas regarding the Jewish decide to start sending suicide bombers! Prof, you need to do more homework and peer beyond the surface of things. I wonder if you except such weak arguments form you r students?

I know you want to portray Israel as the victim and as the good neighbor who is reluctantly pushed into "defending itself," but, unfortunately that doesn't match the facts. To be a victim one must be at a power disadvantage. In what dimension do the Palestinians have power-over Israel (answer none) In what dimensions does Israel exert power over Palestine (answer: every)...

I am a white middle-class American citizen who worked (taught high school and lived in Gaza for two years (2002-2004). And I can tell you that Israel is not a nice neighbor, colonial master, or landlord. The occupation is violent and humiliating and ever present. The group punishment, the destruction of infrastructure, agriculture, and residences plus the land grabs and control of water resources does not make one a victim, but a victimizer.

I don't support Hamas's/Hezbollahs tactics which target civilians (anymore than I support Israel’s willingness to kill civilians who are guilty by proximity), nor do I support their desire to set up an Islamic state (bad for women). However, if I had been born Palestinian and raised under this Israeli occupation, I can honestly say that I would likely support groups like them which fight back...humans can only take so much oppression before they meet violence with violence.

Have you ever been to Gaza or the West Bank Sir, do you know the ways and means of this occupation? There are groups who sponsor those interested (especially Israelis and Jewish from other places) and show them what life is like under Occupation. As a Prof, I am sure you realize the value in verstehen, and not excepting everything that comes out of Israel’s Public Relations (aka propaganda machine) as Truth.

To end, I agree with your nemesis N. Chomsky, in that the best way to reduce one’s risk to terror is for them to stop terrorizing and emasculating their “security threats.”

Peace, Propaganda, and the Promise Land

Watch this documentary:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7828123714384920696

Letter From Lebanon

A LETTER FROM BEIRUT

Beirut, August 7th 2006>>

We are fine Because our mind is not under siege by the brutal force. Because those burned, riddled and shredded bodies are for us the exact reason for expression and solidarity that are worth hoping for. Because each time a murderer discharges his fury, he exhausts the power >within himself as soon as he releases it, whereas his victims' escapes to his cruelty and blends with the universal tragedy of Man, from Hecube to Nesrine Salloum, the one that dilates irrepressibly, fills the void left behind by the warlike stupidity and claims the all mighty assertion that there is something else to do than what is happening. We are not fine...Because the massacres, the bombing raids, the destructions, the forced >displacements of people have taken the rhythm of a banal routine, a little more insignificant each day. Because the Mediterranean, from Byblos to Tyr, is in mourning, and will >hold on to its black suit of fuel for years, Because the Bekaa milk, eggs and vineyards were the shameful targets of the most coward soldiers of the planet, Because the war of Lebanon, with its spectacular side, conceals another one, more serious, more horrible, the one of Gaza that dehumanizes a humiliated people, with no work, no water, no electricity, no rights, >regularly massacred, locked up in what is becoming a huge concentration camp, Because the reports, the articles, the documentaries, the calls and the denouncements engulf in the putrid UN marsh, dilute themselves in the "anergia" of the suit and tie gentlemen who's babbling gabs immediately stop at the first wrath of the Big Boss with his despising, peremptory and irrevocable "veto".

(Between 1972 and 2003, 39 Security Council resolutions against Israel were >vetoed by the United States. 39 times the "right" of one party alone has >won over the will of the international community.>>Of those 39 denials of justice, 11 were about the Israeli aggressions on >Lebanon)

Because Bush's "smart bombs" carry on their undisturbed journey thanks to the good care of their British clerk, and because yesterday, August 6th was the anniversary of the bomb over >Hiroshima>>"... on top of the usual sifting lesions due to shrapnel the wounded have similar burns on the head and the arms, on the uncovered parts of the body. Also, the wounded members are very deteriorated, as if torn by a land mine. All this seems like the effect of fragmentation bombs ignited by drones with delayed-action bombs..." (Régis Garrigues - Médecins du monde)>"... Due to air strikes, some people carry severe wounds that doctors are unable to determine the causes. The chest remains intact, while the face and the four members of the body's muscles have literally melt at some parts. A true horror. No metallic splinter or fragment allows to indicate >what kind of weapon could cause these wounds... " (Jean-Paul Delain - Médecins sans frontières)"

... Information like this is serious enough to be the object of a significant international investigation that would be able to stop the rumor, if it is one; On the other hand it could bring this war crime to international authorities able to judge, or, in the absence of being able to do so for lack of constraining texts, would put a point of honor to condemn it clearly......"

But we are fine, what about you?

~Roger Assaf, Issam Bou Khaled, Kamal Chayya, Rawya El Chab, Zeina Saab De >Melero, Said Serhan, Fadi el Far, Tarek Atoui, Hagop Der Ghougassian, Abdo >Nawar, Hanane Hajj Ali, Abder Rahman Awad, Zeinab Assaf, Bernadette >Houdeib, Ibrahim Serhan, Nehmat Atallah.

What is Terrorism

US Department of Defense Definition for Terrorism


The calculated use of violence or the threat of violence to inculcate fear; intended to coerce or to intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological.

Questions:

Can't this definition be applied both to 9/11 and to the US "Shock and Awe" campaign in Iraq?

Can't this definition apply both to Hamas and Hezbollah AND to Israel's military occupation and actions over the past 30 plus years?

Can't this definition also apply to: US actions in Afghanistan during the 1980's, US actions in Philippineslipines, Japan, much of South and Central America, and etc during the last 60 or so years?

------
It seems that when the powerful hold the guns it's not terrorism, but when the weak do its "terrorism." The West has killed and terrorized WAY more people than all the "terrorist" groups combined and multiplied by 100, but for some reason when we do it its justified. Looks like might still very much equals right...