 |
 |
                |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In Defense of Hezbollah  See also: MEMRI Nazis (How MEMRI doctored Finkelstein's 06.21.2006 interview on Lebanese TV)  American Political Scientist Norman Finkelstein: "Israel Has to Suffer a Defeat" Clip #1676 Broadcast: January 20, 2008 | FUTURE TV (Lebanese TV station; edited & put online by MEMRI TV (their video clips work on Windows PC only)) | YouTube.com (for all users) To view this video, please download Flash player.
MEMRI transcript: Following are excerpts from an interview with American Political Scientist Norman Finkelstein, which aired on Future TV on January 20, 2008. The questions were posed in Arabic, and Finkelstein’s responses are in English. Norman Finkelstein: I was of course happy to meet the Hizbullah people, because it is a point of view that is rarely heard in the United States. I have no problem saying that I do want to express solidarity with them, and I am not going to be a coward of a hypocrite about it. I don’t care about Hizbullah as a political organization. I don’t know much about their politics, and anyhow, it’s irrelevant. I don’t live in Lebanon. It’s a choice that the Lebanese have to make: Who they want to be their leaders, who they want to represent them. But there is a fundamental principle. People have the right to defend their country from foreign occupiers, and people have the right to defend their country from invaders who are destroying their country. That to me is a very basic, elementary and uncomplicated question. My parents went through World War II. Now, Stalin’s regime was not exactly a bed of roses. It was a ruthless and brutal regime, and many people perished. But who didn’t support the Soviet Union when they defeated the Nazis? Who didn’t support the Red Army? In all the countries of Europe which were occupied – who gets all the honors? The resistance. The Communist resistance – it was brutal, it was ruthless. The Communists were not... It wasn’t a bed of roses, but you respect them. You respect them because they resisted the foreign occupiers of their country. If I am going to honor the Communists during World War II, even through I probably would not have done very well under their regimes... If I’m going to honor them, I am going to honor the Hizbullah. They show courage, and they show discipline. I respect that. Interviewer: That is an accurate description of the situation before 2000, but after 2000, the Israelis withdrew from South Lebanon. There was a rift within Lebanon between the Lebanese political players on the issue of the future of the weapons and the issue of the resistance. This rift, which has taken place... You are now taking sides. After all, you are saying that you are only visiting Lebanon, but you don’t see the ramification of the July war for the people. Norman Finkelstein: Listen, if you want to close your eyes and believe it was all over in May 2000, you can do so. You can play that game. But the reality was – and everyone understood it – that the Israeli attitude was: We are going to knock out Hizbullah. They began planning for a new war right after they were forced to leave in 2000. They found their excuse, their pretext, in July 2006, but there is no question among rational people that Israel was never going to let the Hizbullah victory go by. They were determined to teach their... Interviewer: The war could have been avoided. Norman Finkelstein: It could not have been avoided. There is no way that the United States and Israel are going to tolerate any resistance in the Arab world. If you want to pretend it can be avoided, you can play that game. But serious people, clear-headed people, knew there was going to be a war sooner or later. [...] Do you think there is not going to be another war? Do you think Israel is going to allow that defeat in July 2006? Do you want to pretend it is Hizbullah that is causing the trouble? No, there will be another war, and the destruction will probably be ten times worse – maybe even more – than July 2006, because Israel is determined, with the United States, to put the Arabs in their place and to keep them in their place. Now, how can I not respect those who say no to that?  You know, during the Spanish Civil War there was a famous woman – they called her “La Pasionaria” – Dolores Ibárruri, from the Spanish Republic. She famously said: “It’s better to die on your feet than to walk crawling on your knees.”Interviewer: But that is up to the Lebanese people in its entirety. Norman Finkelstein: I totally agree. I am not telling you what to do with your lives, and if you’d rather live crawling on your feet, I could respect that. I could respect that. People want to live. How can I deny you that right? But then, how can I not respect those who say they would rather die on their feet? How can I not respect that? [...] Israel and the United States are attacking, because they will not allow any military resistance to their control of the region. That’s the problem. If Hizbullah laid down its arms, and said: “We will do whatever the Americans say,” you wouldn’t have a war – that’s true, but you would also be the slaves of the Americans. I have to respect those who refuse to be slaves. Interviewer: Is there no other way than military resistance? Norman Finkelstein: I don’t believe there is another way. I wish there were another way. Who wants war? Who wants destruction? Even Hitler didn’t want war. He would much prefer to have accomplished his aims peacefully, if he could. So I am not saying that I want it, but I honestly don’t see another way, unless you choose to be their slaves – and many people here have chosen that. I can’t really say... I can understand it – you want to live. I can’t really say I respect it. You know, so many dead, so much destruction... Before the bodies are even buried, before the buildings are even rebuilt, the person who is responsible for it all – you can’t wait to welcome him. You can’t wait to roll out the red carpet. I can’t respect that. In that respect, I like the Jews much more. I like their attitude. Do you know what the Jewish attitude is? Never to forgive, never to forget. I agree with that. Who roll out the red carpet less than two years after your whole country was destroyed by them? The Secretary of State said it was the birth pangs of a new Middle East. That’s the statement of a freak. A human freak would compare the birth of a child with the destruction of a country, and yet, there are people here who are so anxious to welcome her. They are trying to figure out what the Americans are thinking. They can’t wait for their banquets. How can anyone respect that? I respect the Jews a thousand times more - never to forgive, never to forget. All the death and all the destruction – and you can’t wait to welcome him. Interviewer: Norman... Norman Finkelstein: It’s disgusting! [...] Who the hell cares if Bush is coming? Interviewer: But you say there will be another war. Norman Finkelstein: You should have declared him persona non grata. He’s not welcome here. He destroyed your country. He was responsible for the war. You know full well that resolution could have been passed three weeks earlier. He destroys your country, and you can’t wait to greet him. You have no self-respect. How can you expect other people to respect Arabs, if you show no respect for yourselves? [...] If the Lebanese people overwhelmingly vote to let the Americans and Israelis have their way, I guess you have to accept that. I could see that. I couldn’t possibly say that they don’t have the right to make that choice. Listen, in Nazi-occupied Europe, you have to remember, most of the populations made the choice to live under the Nazis. All this talk about a French Resistance is just a joke – it never happened. The French Resistance... About 20% of the French population read the Resistance’s newspaper. There were maybe 10% of the French who resisted. The rest said: “Don’t resist,” because the Nazis were ruthless. You resist – four hundred are killed for each soldier who’s killed. That’s how the Nazis operated. So most of the French said, like you: “We want to live.” “Don’t resist.” But now I have to ask you, in retrospect: Who do we honor? Do we honor those who say: “Let us live,” or do we honor those who said: “Let’s resist”? [...] Leaders come last. There will be a leader who comes to power in Israel, who is willing to make the concessions, after the conditions have been created – namely, Israel has to suffer a defeat. [Editor's note: on why "Israel has to suffer a defeat," see part 6 of Breaking Down the Wall (Jousor interview)] Reader letters Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 14:09:34 -0700 To: normangf[at]hotmail.com Subject: La Pasionaria didn't say that - It's better to die upon your feet than to live upon your knees! *Dear Prof. Finkelstein, I am one of your fans. Thank you for all you courage when debating the topic of Israel/Palestine. I was just listening to your youtube discussion on Hezbollah, when you misquoted La pasionaria. * * *It's better to die upon your feet than to live upon your knees!* /ˇPrefiero morir de pie que vivir siempre arrodillado! belongs to Emilio Zapata, not La Pasionaria./ * http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Emiliano_Zapata I also made the mistake once of attributing this to El Che - I did indeed enjoy your interview, but just thought I would let you know about the quote. Take care. and, hasta la victoria.... Linda  From: ilya[at]msur.org (Corrected version:) Dear Norman It may be late to go back to the polemics about your visit to Lebanon and your defense of “solidarity with Hizbullah”, but I feel compelled to do so. Let me start by telling you that I disagree with you on the support Hizbullah deserves. After several trips to Lebanon, I understand the admiration many people feel for Hizbullah and why its leader, Hassan Nasrallah, is the most valued leader in the ‘Arab World’ (1), but personally I feel myself more inclined to the opinion of that Lebanese peasant who told me, back in 1999, when Southern Lebanon was still occupied by the Israeli Army: “Hizbullah is provoking Israel’s attacks and thus brings more suffering to the people, they gain power by the confrontation but it would be better to resist in a peaceful way”. Of course this is a feature that Hizbullah shares with any other armed movement in history. That being said, I think it should be explained why nearly all insults directed at you, including the Fox News article But has Hizbullah really engaged formerly in armed activities outside Lebanese territory? This is not clear. The organisation denies it. There are only three foreign-based actions which are described often as “linked to Hizbullah” (6): the skyjacking of TWA Flight 847 in 1985, one attack against the Israeli embassy in Buenos Aires, Argentine, and another against the Jewish association AMIA in the same city, in 1994. Hizbullah denies any involvement (7) and the case has never been solved (8). It is quite usual to attribute Hizbullah the responsibility of the terror attack against the US embassy and the attack against the American military barracks, both in Beirut in 1983, but Hizbullah proper did not exist at this stage, not being founded officially until 1985 (9). It is supposed that the groups which carried out the attack had close links to those who established Hizbullah two years later, but this is a very open subject. Even if it was true, it would not qualify Hizbullah for being called terrorist today, much as Israel does not qualify for being called terrorist for having been run between 1977 and 1992 by Menachem Begin and Yitzhak Shamir, former leaders of the armed zionist group Irgun which is commonly described as terrorist (10). As opposed to Israeli politicians, Hizbullah renounces today any credit for its possible early-days attacks (11). Usually, any terrorist organisation in the world does proudly claim responsibility of the attacks they carry out (if they didn’t, their attacks wouldn’t be useful to show their strength and to bargain for their goals). So Hizbullah’s denial of involvement is not a typical feature for a terrorist organisation and could well be true. Another hint ist that Hizbullah is not carrying out terrorist attacks inside Israel, which we must assume they could do if they wished, given that they are far better organised, trained and equipped than any Palestinian organisation. Taking prisoners among the soldiers of an enemy country, being at war, is clearly not a terrorist act. Hizbullah violated Israeli sovereignty when stepping over its frontier to capture the soldiers in July, 2006, but prior to that there were “persistent and provocative Israeli air incursions (...). The air incursions violate Lebanon’s sovereignty and territorial integrity”, according to United Nations (12). The second accusation is that of Hizbullah trying to establish a strictly islamic state in Lebanon, where people like you or your supporters wouldn’t wish to live. I’m strongly against any use of religion in politics but I must admit that, unlike Hamas, Hizbullah shows great respect for the opinions of non-religious citizens and explicitly renounce to impose by force the islamic Sharia law in Lebanon, saying that there is no way you could enforce Sharia, except if chosen freely by the people (13, 14). Hizbullah did strongly condemn the publication of the Danish Muhammad-cartoons –as did Christian authorities– , but was not involved in the protests that set the Danish embassy on fire in Beirut and condemned that kind of turmoil as “dangerous for the unity of the people” (15). The leaders of the Lebanese Gay Rights movement Helem – the only one existing in the Arab world, being homosexuality prosecuted and heavily punished in American-friendly countries as Egypt, Saudi Arabia or Kuwait - acknowledge that Hizbullah never has tried to interfere with their campaign for their rights and that Hizbullah’s Al Manar TV station even > adopted a more respectful wording when speaking about homosexuals, avoiding the term ‘perverted’ which is used in the biggest part of the Arab press worldwide (16). In short, I cannot agree with Hizbullah’s vision nor can I support its actions, but among all armed groups in the Middle East it is clearly the one which a) refrains from terrorist acts and b) is tolerant on religious issues even if contrary to its own beliefs. Best wishes Ilya U. Topper 1) Haaretz 2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hezbollah 3) AFP, quoted in www.lebanon.com/news/local/2003/3/20.htm 4) Robin Wright in The Washington Post 5) Nabil Qawuq, personal interview, 1999. 6) Council on Foreign Relations http://www.cfr.org/publication/9155/#6. 7) AFP, quoted in www.lebanon.com/news/local/2003/3/20.htm 8) BBC 9) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Hezbollah 10) The Times 11) Hizbullah spokesperson, personal interview, 1999. 12) Report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon, S/2006/560 - http://daccess-ods.un.org/TMP/6867256.html 13) Nabil Qawuq, 1999. 14) Hussein Naboulsi, spokesperson for Hizbullah, personal interview, 2005 15) Hussein Naboulsi, published in La Clave, 8.2.2006 16) George Azzi, personal interview, published in La Clave, 29.2.2008 Dear Norman, I saw your interview on memritv July 20 2008, and disagree with justifying violence; it is far better to promote boycotts and other forms of non-violent resistance. Gandhi defeated the British with a boycott of salt, today, now that corporations are global, the most vulnerable product to a boycott is Coca-Cola, attacking their share price will give a clear signal that activists have monetized dissent, just as Muslims had monetized their dissent with the boycott Danish produce after the publication of those cartoons of the prophet Mohamed in Danish newspapers. Coca-Cola is part of the Berkshire Hathaway portfolio which had invested $4 billion in the Israeli company ISCAR (a precision engineering firm) just before the July 2006 war in Lebanon, ISCAR supply Pratt and Whitney who in turn do business with Lockheed Martin and Lockheed Martin, as you know have a joint venture with Israel building the SUFA F16 fighter jet. Yours Sincerely, Philip Scott Fox News letters I would like to assure for you that you are a hero in all what the word means and you were very courage on future tv ( the telivision that is made for attacking Hizbolla) and you said what you thinks without any hesitation . I really think you must teach some people braveness and about she accusing you to be on a side I think that she was the one desperately defending USA friends or slaves as you like to call them and I assure to you that the people suportin Hizola are more than them but thier cheating on hezbolla especially Waleed Jumblat let the took the parlement and I just wanted to tell you that your expression were great going out of a great person . With my regards, Mohamed Dear Mr.Finkelstein, Yesterday I had the pleasure of watching your recent and moving interview on Future TV, however I only watched an edited piece provided by MEMRI TV so I hope that what I say below has not already been discussed in the interview. If there is anyway I can get a hold of the full interview please advise as I felt it was a rather special piece of televisioin. Over the last couple of years, I have kept your email address safely in my contact sheet, I don't believe you remember me, but we met at the University of Toronto's first Israeli Apartheid Week in 2004 , where you were invited as a guest speaker, I briefly coordinated your trip and we had a brief discussion at the Duke of York pub where you also, I remember, expressed your respect for Hizballah. I also respect Hizballah however I feel in your interview on Future TV you oversimplified matters which is not where I believe the Lebanese situation currently lies. For one thing, I believe you ignored that there are people from the 'other side' who are willing to die for what they believe in. In your framework of analysis it would mean 'they are willing to die standing' in order to 'grovel at their feet' which would mean a contradiction in terms. And you also ignored that there are people willing to be Syria and Iran's slave. I think you put the nail on the head when you said it was 'disgusting' that Rice (as well as Blair) were invited a few weeks after the war ended. However I don't think you were as precise with the Nazi analogy and the French Resistance. In the Lebanese case, the French Resistance (in a country the size of Luxembourg) have kicked out the Nazis from their land, but the Nazis however remain as strong as ever on the borders and the French Resistance's two main allies, one of whome actually borders Nazi Germany in this analogy, are pushing the Resistance to liberate all of Germany (through Luxembourg!) while only willing to supply arms and political support - and possibly fire a missile in the distant future - for the cause. Despite all that, I still personally think the Resistance in Lebanon should stay, I think it should stay and it should be given full defensive autonomy in the case of an Israeli attack. However when it comes to offensive measures, such as those that sparked the July War, I think such measures should be under the command and decision making orders of the Lebanese Army. I personally think pretexts can be avoided and therefore I believe the war could have been avoided. Then we come to the issue of Syria, which is Lebanon's other big problem and which I don't think can be ignored in any debate on Lebanese policy towards Israel - because both Israel and Syria use Lebanon to play each other off. In the case of Syria I frankly think we should simply not recognize it as a state until they set up an embassy in Lebanon. For me that seems to be the only policy for Lebanon I can fathom that will give it an opportunity to avoid the two dreaded options of slavery (to the Americans/Israelis or the Syrians) or civil war while also give it an opportunity for independent peace and stability. My point about all this is that despite what I may think about the Future TV lady who interviewed you, I think she was right in saying you have taken a side in the Lebanese case, because (at least according to MEMRI TV :) you completely ignored the Syrian aspect of the debate, which I repeat cannot be ignored because Israel and Syria use Lebanon to play each other off. Lastly another point I would like to make based on the above explanation is that if somebody cares about the interest of the Lebanese people as a whole they have to combine aspects from both sides of the political equation. As a Lebanese, taking one aspect only - though it may be good - is a recipe for civil war. I hope you are able to read this from what little time you have as I would greatly appreciate a response from you and would be honoured to hear your thoughts on the above, Best Regards Sulaiman Beydoun Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2008 11:46:08 +0100 From: newsletter[at]j-korte.de To: normangf[at]hotmail.com Subject: Your remarks concerning Hisbollah Hello, I just read a transcript from your interview on Future TV and have to admit, that I'm more then astonished. Even if you don't agree with Israels policies you shouldn't subscribe to terrorism. And, I may add, I'm so fed up with this liberation movements in the arab world, because they don't give a damn for the people they pretend to "liberate" (btw. a kind of freedom I definetly don't want to enjoy) from imperialismen, zionismen or whatever. Israel is the only country in that part of the world with decent livingstandards, they have build up a country very successfull. And I guess that is the true reason for all this liberation talk: envy, being poor and unable to anything proper (apart from killing each other and foreign people). And finally I add, your life span would be very limited in "Hisbollah-Country". Joachim Korte-Bernard Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 21:29:41 +0000 From: ejbarbaro20[at]optonline.net Subject: Hezbollah To: normangf[at]hotmail.com Mr. Finkelstein, I saw your rant on a video on the subject of the "noble" Hezbollah in Lebanon. Your disdain, no, hate, for Bush is so virulent, I was waiting for the drool from your mouth. You need professional care, Mr. Finkelstein. But what do I know? I'm not a professional. But I believe I'm old enough to recognize a fool when I see one. So, Mr. Finkelstein, from your mouth to the tush of Hezbollah. Fortunately, with "useful idiots" like you on the side of Hezbollah, Hezbollah doen't have a chance. From: maxillagardens1118[at]hotmail.co.uk SHARE THIS POST:     |
|
|
|
  What we can do:
Video: On the place of civility in academic life (10.18.2007) Finkelstein's talk at the academic freedom conference Tenure Denial Letters (June - November, 2007) On How Actual Survivors Were Cheated by Jewish Organizations:
Communication for Middle East Journal. (02.19.2006) Alleged Errors in Beyond Chutzpah. (2005) MEMRI NAZIS (again) (10.23.2006)  New evidence of old lies (2005) Under the heading DIABOLICAL PLOTS, I stated in Beyond Chutzpah...    Articles and Reviews Related to The Holocaust Industry  Preface to German edition of The Rise and Fall of Palestine Postscript to German edition of The Rise and Fall of Palestine The Dershowitz File:
|
|