In today's Guardian, there is an interesting article about the possibility of the different Palestinian organisations indicting Israel for war crimes. Hamas is apparently in agreement with this, although the article raises the point that Hamas itself could be arraigned by a war crimes court. As the article says: "After the last major round of Israel-Hamas fighting more than five years ago, a UN fact-finding team said both Israel and Hamas violated the rules of war by targeting civilians."
To me, this goes to the neglected heart of the matter in the Gaza conflict - the fact that both sides have been prepared to inflict civilian casualties. Personally, I find the conduct of both sides in the Gaza conflict deplorable, but there is an issue of realpolitik here that is being overlooked. It is the fact that Hamas has been prepared to accept civilian casualties, which has enabled them to win a propaganda victory.
Now, as I have noted before, the Gaza conflict, and the wider Israel/Palestine issue of which it is a part, arouses intense emotions. This is understandable, but we should not let our feelings for the deaths of innocents in Gaza or Israel cloud our judgement or analysis of the underlying strategic achievements and blunders of both parties. It is very difficult to do this, I find, as any criticism of either side brings accusations of favouring the other side. The BBC has been accused, in the past, of being pro-Israeli and pro-Palestinian by partisans of both opposing camps. Nevertheless, I shall try.
At the risk of repeating myself, I have noted before that provocation is a standard tactic by what can loosely be described as "guerrillas". History, and especially modern history, provides many examples (9/11, of course, is the most outstanding "provocation" of recent times). Spanish partisans used it against Napoleon; the Irish rebels who rose up against British rule at Easter, 1916, were clearly seeking, and got, a heavy-handed (and counter-productive) reaction from the British authorities; Soviet partisans in "quiet areas" behind German lines in World War Two employed the same tactic; Zionist partisans used it against British forces during the British mandate in Palestine (Now, there's an irony!) after the Second World War; the Viet Cong exploited the My Lai massacre; the IRA exploited Bloody Sunday in 1972. A more recent example occurred during the fighting in Iraq, when a group of US soldiers massacred some Iraqi civilians in the city of Haditha, providing invaluable propaganda for the Iraqi insurgents. It is debatable whether or not provocation was employed at My Lai, or on Bloody Sunday, but the result was the same.
All these events discredited the more powerful occupying powers and gave propaganda victories to the weaker, "guerrilla" sides. Besides the publicity value of such actions, they provided a boost in recruitment to the guerrilla movements. After Bloody Sunday, for example, it is said that the IRA were turning away recruits.
Perhaps the most glaring example of this tactic came during the war for Algerian Independence, when, in 1955, the FLN resistance slaughtered over a hundred French civilians in the town of Philippeville. This provoked a ferocious French reaction during which, as the historian Alistair Horne noted in "A Savage War of Peace", up to 12 000 Algerians were killed. These reprisals took the lives of mostly innocent Algerian civilians, and discredited France in the eyes of the world. It also created even wider hatred of the French among Algerians, and led to more recruits for the FLN.
Now, if my analysis of resistance movements is correct, Hamas have learned the lessons of such previous conflicts very well. The present war (which is what it is) began when three young Israelis were abducted and murdered - provocation. Israel reacted with predictable heavy- handed anger and force leading to what we have seen happen in Gaza - reprisal. Hamas fought back with ambush and rocketing - heroic David/Goliath resistance (yet another irony). The brunt of death, destruction and suffering has fallen on innocent Gazan civilians, leading to widespread condemnation and opprobrium of Israel around the world. Result - an important propaganda victory for Hamas. Israel's stature with her friends has been eroded, and will doubtless erode further as long as the war goes on. The fact that Hamas has deliberately sited military posts near civilian targets - a tactic that would do credit to any previous guerrilla movement - has been ignored, as have Hamas atrocities against Israeli civilians and Palestinian "collaborators". The Hamas political leadership has cause for great satisfaction.
I am not taking sides here; I am simply trying to provide an analysis that I think is missing from the discussion about Gaza. The UN is right -any future war crimes trial should see both Israelis and Hamas in the dock.
How sad it is that Hamas and Israelis worship the same God, to whom they both pray for victory.
Hamas fighters pray.
Israeli soldiers pray.
Saturday, 23 August 2014
Thursday, 14 August 2014
The Trojan Horse, OFSTED and the Faith Schools Issue
Now that a suitable lapse of time has gone by, it's worth re-examining the Birmingham "Trojan Horse" schools issue, and the seemingly related issue of faith schools.
We are all familiar with the "Trojan Horse" story, and the divisions it has created, in Birmingham and beyond. Some say that it is a genuine issue, while others deny it. Wikipedia sets out the issue in simple terms:
"Operation Trojan Horse was an organised attempt by Islamists to covertly co-opt schools in England.[1][2] The name, based on the Ancient Greek legend, came from a leaked letter of questionable authenticity discovered in March 2014, alleged to be from Islamists in Birmingham, detailing how to wrest control of a school and speculating about expanding the scheme to other cities."
A subsequent investigation by my old friends at OFSTED found that there was some evidence of an attempt by Muslim extremists to take over schools, and several schools were placed in special measures (no easy option, as I know well). Birmingham City Council was accused by Ofsted chief Sir Michael Wilshaw of a "serious failure" in supporting schools in protecting children from extremism.
Peter Clarke, former counter-terrorism chief for the Metropolitan police, wrote, in a report for the Ministry of Education, that there had indeed been an organised attempt to introduce an "intolerant and aggressive Islamic ethos" into some Birmingham schools. The Daily Mirror set up a "sting operation" against Shahid Akmal, a governor of one of these schools, by sending an undercover reporter to interview him on a business matter. During the interview , Mr Akmal reportedly said that white women were lazy and that both gays and adulterers should be sent into exile. - but he did not admit to conspiring to radicalise any schools.
This was one side of the case. The other side was led by The Muslim Council for Great Britain, who described the report as a "witch-hunt". The former leader of Respect, Salma Yaqoob, an ex- Birmingham city councillor, organised a pressure group to challenge the findings of the report, and condemned the authors of the report as being carried away by "a climate of political and media hysteria." George Galloway, the MP who has appeared on this blog before, dismissed the report as "Trojan horse-shit", and "a dog whistle response to UKIP".
Now, I am no admirer of either OFSTED or George Galloway, and it pains me to be seeming to side with either. Instead, I will say that there appears to be no "smoking gun" evidence of a conspiracy, despite all the evidence presented. It seems to me that we will never know the whole truth of this matter - which perhaps is the best conclusion for both sides.
Instead, I think it worth examining what, to me (but not everyone!), is another issue completely - that of faith schools. I honestly do not know why the two topics became linked in the media, but it happened somehow. I remember an atheist commenting on the Jeremy Vine programme on BBC Radio Two, that he found all religious practices in schools to be "extremism" , and that all religious dogma should be banned from schools. I vaguely recall an article in The Guardian on this topic which said the same thing: that all British schools should be secular, in line with the rest of Europe, and faith schools should be abolished. To be fair, the proponents of this view do not wish to ban religion altogether. They simply object to paying taxes to fund schools which have a religious ethos they do not share. Religion, they say, should be a private matter. Perhaps the best exposition of this view is made by the British Humanist Association (BHA), whose views can be read HERE.
As a teacher with a special interest in Religious Education, and having taught it in both faith and non-faith schools, I think that it needs to be taught as a subject in order for different faith groups to learn about, and understand each other. Eliminating the study of religion as an academic subject will deprive British children of not only knowledge of each other, but also an understanding of our history - for good or bad.
As far as faith schools are concerned, I am prepared to admit that the BHA and others have a case, but that some secular criticisms are way over the top. I have taught in a number of Christian faith schools and have never encountered anything that a reasonable person might class as "extremism". One typical misplaced criticism is that of the atheist on the Jeremy Vine programme who I mentioned above. How anyone can equate the saying of prayers at the end of the school day to telling children that wives who do not have sex with their husbands will be punished by angels is beyond me. I also know that religion does not dominate the curriculum, and that other faiths are represented in RE lessons. I myself have taught about other faiths in faith schools. As a supply teacher, I often teach in a Roman Catholic Primary School not far from where I live. I know how important the school is to parents. Any attempt to close down faith schools will be fiercely resisted.
We are all familiar with the "Trojan Horse" story, and the divisions it has created, in Birmingham and beyond. Some say that it is a genuine issue, while others deny it. Wikipedia sets out the issue in simple terms:
"Operation Trojan Horse was an organised attempt by Islamists to covertly co-opt schools in England.[1][2] The name, based on the Ancient Greek legend, came from a leaked letter of questionable authenticity discovered in March 2014, alleged to be from Islamists in Birmingham, detailing how to wrest control of a school and speculating about expanding the scheme to other cities."
A subsequent investigation by my old friends at OFSTED found that there was some evidence of an attempt by Muslim extremists to take over schools, and several schools were placed in special measures (no easy option, as I know well). Birmingham City Council was accused by Ofsted chief Sir Michael Wilshaw of a "serious failure" in supporting schools in protecting children from extremism.
Peter Clarke, former counter-terrorism chief for the Metropolitan police, wrote, in a report for the Ministry of Education, that there had indeed been an organised attempt to introduce an "intolerant and aggressive Islamic ethos" into some Birmingham schools. The Daily Mirror set up a "sting operation" against Shahid Akmal, a governor of one of these schools, by sending an undercover reporter to interview him on a business matter. During the interview , Mr Akmal reportedly said that white women were lazy and that both gays and adulterers should be sent into exile. - but he did not admit to conspiring to radicalise any schools.
This was one side of the case. The other side was led by The Muslim Council for Great Britain, who described the report as a "witch-hunt". The former leader of Respect, Salma Yaqoob, an ex- Birmingham city councillor, organised a pressure group to challenge the findings of the report, and condemned the authors of the report as being carried away by "a climate of political and media hysteria." George Galloway, the MP who has appeared on this blog before, dismissed the report as "Trojan horse-shit", and "a dog whistle response to UKIP".
Now, I am no admirer of either OFSTED or George Galloway, and it pains me to be seeming to side with either. Instead, I will say that there appears to be no "smoking gun" evidence of a conspiracy, despite all the evidence presented. It seems to me that we will never know the whole truth of this matter - which perhaps is the best conclusion for both sides.
Instead, I think it worth examining what, to me (but not everyone!), is another issue completely - that of faith schools. I honestly do not know why the two topics became linked in the media, but it happened somehow. I remember an atheist commenting on the Jeremy Vine programme on BBC Radio Two, that he found all religious practices in schools to be "extremism" , and that all religious dogma should be banned from schools. I vaguely recall an article in The Guardian on this topic which said the same thing: that all British schools should be secular, in line with the rest of Europe, and faith schools should be abolished. To be fair, the proponents of this view do not wish to ban religion altogether. They simply object to paying taxes to fund schools which have a religious ethos they do not share. Religion, they say, should be a private matter. Perhaps the best exposition of this view is made by the British Humanist Association (BHA), whose views can be read HERE.
As a teacher with a special interest in Religious Education, and having taught it in both faith and non-faith schools, I think that it needs to be taught as a subject in order for different faith groups to learn about, and understand each other. Eliminating the study of religion as an academic subject will deprive British children of not only knowledge of each other, but also an understanding of our history - for good or bad.
As far as faith schools are concerned, I am prepared to admit that the BHA and others have a case, but that some secular criticisms are way over the top. I have taught in a number of Christian faith schools and have never encountered anything that a reasonable person might class as "extremism". One typical misplaced criticism is that of the atheist on the Jeremy Vine programme who I mentioned above. How anyone can equate the saying of prayers at the end of the school day to telling children that wives who do not have sex with their husbands will be punished by angels is beyond me. I also know that religion does not dominate the curriculum, and that other faiths are represented in RE lessons. I myself have taught about other faiths in faith schools. As a supply teacher, I often teach in a Roman Catholic Primary School not far from where I live. I know how important the school is to parents. Any attempt to close down faith schools will be fiercely resisted.
George Galloway
George's ex-comrade, Salma Yaqoob
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)