A major Finnish newspaper is calling
Israel's campaign in Gaza a genocide. Not only that, but it compares operation Cast Lead to the First Chechen War
(during which maybe even a hundred thousand
civilians died). I may be wrong, but isn't the comparison quite disproportionate
? The article then states that those in Finland who're backing Israel are mostly the kind of people who're doing it for religious reasons. (Israel is a very secular country by the way, which is quite an achievement in the middle of all that religious extremism.) In other words, those who support Israel in Finland are apparently idiots. So, I take it the smart ones don't support Israel?
The article then claims that Israel is an artificial creation. But if Israel is an artificial creation, then what is Palestine? And how exactly is Israel any more artificial than, say, Finland? Just as we, the Finns, have our roots in Finland, a region historically occupied and settled by Finns, so do the Jewish people have their roots in Israel. Hell, the Jews had a culture and a history in Israel long before we even existed as a people.
Of course Muslims have their roots in the "Holy Land" as well. When the UN proposed to divide the British Mandate of Palestine into two states the idea was that both Jews and Muslims could settle in and around an area that has such a huge historical meaning to both groups. Muslims rejected the plan out of principle simply because they opposed the idea of Jews acquiring any piece of that land. Seeing how many Muslim leaders sided with the nazis only a few years before the plan I could go even further and argue that Muslims simply hated Jews.
In all fairness, there is a mention in the article that some of Israel's actions may be justified on the grounds that Hamas has launched more than 7000 rockets over the border to Israel during the past two years. The article also states the fact that Hamas wishes to see Israel destroyed. However, since the article condemns Israel's campaign against Hamas I'm not sure what the writer thinks should be done. There is a proposition that the international community should arrange a ceasefire but as I argued earlier, a ceasefire is simply a way for Hamas to catch a breath and rearm.
After this the article goes on to repeat the usual "both sides are wrong" and that "violence won't solve a thing" arguments.
But violence has solved things for Israel. With these "excursions" into Gaza, Lebanon and the West Bank Israel can keep herself safe while waiting for a change in the Middle East that'd push the region forward. No doubt Hamas, Hezbollah and others will continue to attack Israel from time to time but considering the alternative, the destruction of Israel (not by Hamas or Hezbollah but by Iran, Syria and others who'd love to see Israel severely weakened), this is something Israel can manage. After all, despite all the recent attacks on Israel it is still a relatively safe country to live in.
So, the media has been at it again. In case you're a European, keep your eyes on Israellycool
for it as the best Middle East blog) for a comprehensive account of the situation including links to relevant articles, Youtube videos and so on. The fact that Israel is mostly backed by religious nuts in Finland is no doubt a result of the never-ending media campaign against Israel and the fact that most people, even those with an access to the internet, rely on local newspapers.