The worst type of mental delusion is described as the inability to grasp,
cope with, or comprehend concrete reality"hence the construction of
a non-existent, mythical, or totally fictitious reality that exists only
in the delusional mind.
An objective observer of the drastic deterioration in conditions and
the lethal breakdown governing Palestinian-Israeli realities may safely
draw the conclusion that the definition of this type of "insanity"
applies.
Among its discernable symptoms and manifestations are the very concrete
and willful insistence on dealing with a fictitious "reality"
that seems to bear no relationship to the world or to the components of
the escalating crisis.
First"there seems to be an insistence in the minds of Israeli decision
makers that the Israeli occupation of Palestinian lands does not actually
exist, but is a figment of the twisted imagination of some Palestinians
who insist that their collective victimization is a direct result of their
enslavement by the Israelioccupation.
These same Israeli officials also are at odds with the "misguided"
or "biased" positions of the international community, international
law, and UN resolutions that somehow "perversely" keep insisting
on the usage of such terminology as "belligerent occupant" in
describing Israel,s role in the Palestinian territories.
Hence the Israeli coinage of alternative "unreal" terms such
as "disputed" rather than "occupied" territories. "Homeland
for the Jews" or "greater Israel" has also been employed
as verbal substitutes for historical Palestine, despite the fact that Palestinians
have accepted the term "Israel" as applicable to the state that
now exists on 78% of historical Palestine.
Second, "the whole concept of "defense" has been turned
on its head to apply only to the Israeli occupation whereby Israel is engaged
in "self defense" when it shells Palestinian homes and turns
them into piles of rubble. The "reason," of course is that Palestinians
were firing from these homes (often despite the absence of any evidence),
thereby transforming them into impersonal and banal "structures"
that had to be "removed" for the proper "defense" of
the Israeli "Defense" Forces.
Similarly, civilians who are torn to bits by shells fired from Apache
gun ships or Israeli tanks are not "assassinated" according to
the Israeli lexicon. They are "eliminated" as part of Israel,s
"active self-defense" policy. Any referencem to "extra-judicial
killings" or "cold-blooded murder" must be expurgated from
the pc (politically corrupt) dictionary of "Israelese."
When Israel besieges the Palestinian territories and turns each village,
camp, or town into an isolation prison, the territories are "closed"
in defense of the Israelis who are "besieged" by the Palestinians
(and, at times, Arabs) in their "beleaguered" state. The fact
that the Israeli army is the strongest in theregion, and that it has total
control over the lives and lands of the Palestinians, seems to have vanished
from official Israeli consciousness and discourse.
Third, "a new concept of "humanity" seems to have evolved
in the imagination of Israeli political and religious ideologues. The term,
of course, does not seem to apply to Palestinians at all"having been
described variously as "vipers, cockroaches, crocodiles, an evil curse,
etc." The most appropriate Israeli term for any Palestinian human
being is, of course, "terrorist." Such a convenient label, in
one fell sweep, serves to deprive the Palestinian of his/her humanity as
some form of a genetically-violent species, thereby unfit for human treatment
or rights, hence fully deserving of any form of brutality exercised against
him/her in the course of Israel,s struggle for "self-defense."
"Terrorism," of course is never applicable to any Israeli individual
or policy regardless of the massive targeting of a captive civilian Palestinian
population that has been deprived of all forms of security or rights.
While the delusional mind has proven to be very fertile ground for a
whole variety of "dehumanization" exercises in relation to the
Palestinian human species, the most striking and warped depiction has been
firmly rooted in the biological area. It seems that Palestinian mothers
and fathers are born missing the parenting gene, hence they deliberately
and cold-bloodedly send out their children to "intercept" the
free passage of Israeli bullets and shells. Not only do they find a convenient
way of getting rid of their children by such devious means, even more insidiously
Palestinian parents also succeed in giving the Israeli army a bad name
such as "child killers" thereby scoring free media points.
In the same vein, Palestinians cynically transform their children into
"human shields" in some weird form of metamorphosis whereby infants
killed in their mothers, arms or children shot on their way to/from school,
or playing in their back yards, or indulging in such abnormal/delinquent
behavior as playing soccer or shopping, or daring to take naps in their
own beds"are all part of an adult conspiracy to utilize (through procreation)
a unique form of protective gear for their own survival.
Thus, the 165 Palestinian children who were murdered by Israeli troops
and settlers since October 2000 were actually non-human forms of "shields"
and "media ploys" invented by the Palestinians for the sole purpose
of giving the Israeli delusional mind a bad name.
Fourth, "conceptual distortions also generate self-defeating strategies,
particularly when applied to the Israeli concept of "Security."
The term, somehow, has become the exclusive domain of Israel with no reference
or applicability to the Palestinians or to the Arab world. The Palestinians,
therefore, have no right to feel "insecure" when their homes
are being shelled or their children killed or their crops and trees uprooted
or their lands "confiscated" or their livelihoods destroyed or
their freedoms negated or theirvery lives "targeted."
Somehow, such a distorted view of reality gives itself license to conceive
of a "safe," or "secure," or "normal," or
even a "pleasant" occupation. The most elementary conclusion
that the occupation itself is the most pervasive form of cruelty and provocation
seems to escape the grasp of such a world- view. Thus, Israeli discourse
is always characterized by perpetual "surprise" at the lack of
docility of the Palestinians who have failed historically to appreciate
the virtues of a "benevolent" or "benign" occupation.
By a strange twist of logic, it demands guarantees for the "security"
of the occupier from any retaliation or resistance by the occupied, while
enjoying full immunity and impunity.
The fact that the occupation itself lies at the root of all "insecurity"
has not crossed the minds of Israeli policy makers who persist in their
futile search for causes among their victims instead of looking within.
Fifth, "in addition, the Israeli fictional world of politics has
spun numerous myths and imaginary versions to deal with the "reality"
of negotiations. The most prevalent version is that of the "generous
offer" that the previous Israeli prime minister Barak had offered
the Palestinians out of the generosity of hissoul" probably having
been inspired by the pastoral American Camp David setting and the irresistible
charm of the then American president Bill Clinton. Unfortunately, the Palestinians
proceeded to behave like "ungrateful natives," biting the hand
that feeds them, with no appreciation of the white man,s burden of Barak
(and even Peres) who had been trying to teach them the rudimentary elements
of statehood.
By refusing to fragment the West Bank and accommodate settlement clusters,
by insisting on "territorial contiguity" (the DOP, or Oslo Agreement)
instead of fragmented native reservations, by maintaining their commitment
to international law and UN resolutions, by refusing to relinquish the
Palestinian refugees, right of return, and by not handing occupied Jerusalem
over to the Israelis on a silver platter, the Palestinians proved to be
"unrealistic and inflexible." After all, Barak knew not only
what was best for Israel, but also what was good for the Palestinians.
The "unprecedented Israeli concessions" that sought to maintain
Israeli control while annexing Palestinian land and resources and devaluing
Palestinian rights were somehow "inexplicably" rejected by Arafat
(the archetypal villain) who all along had harbored evil designs for the
"destruction of the state of Israel" and had never mended his
"terrorist" ways. With one imaginative sweep, the Israeli mind
transformed Arafat from a "peace partner" to "the terrorist
enemy" without so much as a by your leave.
Such a miraculous transformation, by necessity, had to be accompanied
by a deliberate "demonization" if the illogic is to be maintained.
Thus Arafat became the convenient "scapegoat" to be burdened
with all the failures of Israeli policy and with the sins and extreme provocation
of a brutal occupation for the sake of a convenient Israeli catharsis.
The "disappointment" of the fair-weather Israeli "peace
camp" could then be justified with an easy conscience. The "betrayal"
then would not be theirs"as having betrayed the principles and integrity
of a just peace"but would be the "failure" of the Palestinians
to abide by the rules and roles designed for them by the all-knowing, superior
Israeli mind.
The debate then shifted as to whether Arafat was a "suitable"
Palestinian leader or not"i.e. whether he met the Israeli definitions
of proper Palestinian leadership or whether he failed the "test of
legitimacy" Israeli-style.
Hence the sixth delusional symptom that finds its expression in Israel's
god-given right to shape not only Palestinian territoriality, but also
the requirements of leadership legitimacy and suitability.
The "seal of approval" syndrome is a typical expression of
power intoxication, particularly applicable to situations of colonization.
By extension, it applies to a whole people as well. Its most frequent
manifestation is in such formulations as the "push button" people
and the "control" controversy.
The schizophrenic aspect of the delusional mind can accommodate several
contradictory and equally false versions of reality, including:
1. Arafat is "in control," hence he "issued orders"
to his "push button" people who immediately "complied"
by resorting to "violence and terrorism" that were the Arafat
"hidden agenda" all along. He must be removed.
2. Arafat is not "in control," hence he cannot "order"
his people to "stop the violence" thereby making it imperative
for Israel to create "alternative leadership" that is more "flexible
and reasonable," capable of being compliant and of carrying out Israel,s
bidding as a test of "pragmatism." He must be removed.
3. Arafat is in "partial control," hence he must be "strengthened"
against his more "radical" opponents who reject any peace with
Israel. He must be brought to sign.
4. Arafat is in "partial control," hence he must be "weakened"
enough to feel sufficiently threatened in his "authority" to
accept the Israeli version of reality as his lifeline. He must be made
to sign.
The variations and permutations are endless.
Seventh "national liberation movements can be "crushed"
and "subdued" if sufficient force is used. Concomitant with this
delusion is the myth that the escalation of Israeli violence and brutality
will not only "teach the Palestinians a lesson," but will also
bring them to their knees in search of respite and Israeli approval. The
perception of the Palestinians as "inhabitants of the territories"
rather than a nation with inalienable rights, particularly in the exercise
of their nationhood, lies behind Israeli military efforts at subduing the
"restless natives."
Thus the lessons of history are never part of the delusional mindset.
The fact that no colonized people had ever been brought to their knees
or forced to abandon their quest for freedom, dignity, and independence
as a result of increased violence and oppression skips notice altogether.
More specifically, throughout decades of occupation, Israel had persistently
attempted"and failed"to subdue the Palestinian people by brute
force, succeeding only in generating more volatility and aggravating existing
conditions of instability and conflict. The will to resist subjugation
and the yearning for freedom and dignity have never been broken or defeated.
Such a willful "blindness to history and experience" is also
indicative of a serious rift between reality and awareness producing dysfunctional
and dangerous policies.
Eighth, "many of these policies can be traced back to another disconnection
from reality. According to the Sharon lexicon, the situation is one of
"war" rather than occupation, hence all Palestinians are potential
"combatants""i.e. legitimate targets for his policy of "targeted
killings""hence the objective is to achieve a state of "non-belligerency"
rather than achieving peace by withdrawing from the occupied territories
and recognizing Palestinian rights. In plain language, the Palestinians
must not express any hostility towards their occupiers and must reconcile
themselves to a perpetual state of enslavement by coercion.
Thus the term "ceasefire" was forcibly imposed on the discourse
of Israel, the US, and the international community as a whole. The victim
must not be allowed to fight back, however feebly, while the conqueror
will not stop shelling and shooting until the "target" surrenders
or is destroyed.
The oft-repeated dictum that "Israel will not negotiate under fire"
applies only to Palestinian "fire" or attempts at self-defense.
While Israel must be left unhampered in its fire-shell-assassinate at will
policy, the Palestinians must maintain "zero violence" leading
to a "cooling off period" that would prepare the way for "confidence-building
measures" and ultimately award the Palestinians the coveted "prize"
of resuming negotiations with their occupiers.
Rarely, if ever, has the world witnessed such an aberration whereby
the victim is placed "on probation" and asked to demonstrate
"good behavior" in order to be granted the "privilege"
of negotiating with the oppressor. The racist, patronizing attitude of
the Sharon government constitutes yet another set of blinders that distort
its perceptions of reality.
Ninth, "once delusional concepts take over, both discourse and
policy enter the realm of the absurd. The issue of Jerusalem is one of
the most glaring examples of such an incongruous condition. On the one
hand, Israel claims to have "liberated" (rather than occupied)
Jerusalem in 1967 and to have guaranteed full "access" to the
city while assuring members of all three monotheistic faiths their "freedom
and right to worship."
In reality, Jerusalem under occupation is a city under siege, totally
closed off to all Palestinians"both Christian and Muslim"who
do not carry the blue ID,s issued by Israel to Palestinian Jerusalemites.
At times, even those are classified by gender and age where men (only)
who are forty or older are allowed into the Aqsa Mosque. West Bank and
Gaza Palestinians can no more attend services in the churches and mosques
of Jerusalem than they can fly to the moon.
They are banned from their capital, and are forbidden to conduct any
kind of personal, social, economic, cultural, educational or any other
type of human activity there. "Religious tolerance" and all manifestations
of "freedom" have gained a surrealistic significance in their
application by Israel.
Tenth, "while such a warped mentality may find endless expressions,
the most "creative" forms are those that are used to distinguish
between Palestinians and Israelis. Among those is the depiction of every
Palestinian victim of Israel's state terrorism as a "ticking bomb,"
thereby rendering his/her assassination as a dispassionate and impersonal
exercise tantamount to the "dismantling" of an explosive device.
The 48 "dismantled" Palestinians so far (along with the "unfortunate
bystanders") are part of Israel's policy of "interception"
and "self-defense" that has gained approval even from such high
western officials as the American vice-president himself (who found it
"justifiable" or "reasonable").
Israel's publication of seven names on its hit list of Palestinians
slated for "elimination," has compounded the confusion. The "targets"
all have first, father's, grandfather's, family, and even clan names indicating
a genealogy and a distinctly biological/human continuity.
On the other hand, all Israelis are "civilians," including
vigilante settlers who are armed to the teeth and who regularly terrorize
whole Palestinian communities, often with Israeli army cover and protection.
Settlements are, of course, harmless and defenseless "Jewish neighborhoods"
that deserve "protection" and require more Palestinian land for
"natural growth." Ancient Palestinian villages and towns not
only do not require room for "natural growth" on their own land,
the strangling siege does not give them room to breathe since they are
inhabited by potential "terrorists" and non-human "objects"
that occupy "structures" that can be "surgically" removed
by an equally impersonal missile fired from an American Apache gun ship.
Their crops and trees are, by that logic, entirely superfluous and Israel
is entirely within its rights to destroy them.
The more sinister aspect of such "mental incompetence" is
the conscious inducement of this state, deliberately invoked as an instrument
for the manipulation of the perceptions of others. Such a unique form of
"insanity" will ultimately be exposed and dealt with in a manner
appropriate to the malady.
Such is the message that Sharon must hear from the Belgian courts for
his persistent war crimes, that Carmi Gillon must hear from the Danish
courts for his systematic policy of torture, and that General Mofaz and
all his cohorts who have devised a demonically hysterical solution to the
Palestinian intifada and to Palestinian human reality as a whole must hear
from the rest of the world.
Otherwise known as "military mania," when delusions of unbridled
power and control are transformed into actual policy, the need for protection
becomes paramount.
If this is Israel's policy of "restraint," as Sharon boasts
publicly and often, then many policy makers in Israel need to be "restrained."
In this context, "International protection" gains a new meaning
and an added urgency.
