Flashpoints strives to provide the information needed to make informed judgements about the nature of specific violent political conflicts, the aspirations of the adversaries and the prospects for intervention or resolution. Above all, we try to remain impartial and present alternative viewpoints in the hopes of stimulating critical thought and informed debate.
MOST POPULAR
 |
 |
 |
 |
An Introduction to Violent Political Conflict
Democracy is not a mandate for domination by a political majority. To survive and prosper democracies must recognize and provide for the welfare and aspirations of all citizens. While people will consent to be governed, history shows they will not consent to perpetual domination and governments survive only with the consent of the people.
Democratic government, indeed every government, is challenged to provide reasonably equal opportunities for education, employment and economic welfare. Among the most fundamental abuses by oppressive governments are denial of religious and cultural traditions and practices including the right to worship, to speak one's native language, to educate children in their native culture, history and tradition and to prosper from their labor.
When governments deny basic human rights to groups of people, those people are justified in their attempts to reform or replace the government. There is no more difficult decision than the decision to kill and die for one's beliefs and the faint hope for freedom.
Yet, time and again uncompromising regimes force people into a position where they have nothing left to lose.Wherever and whenever, people make the difficult and terrible choice to resort to political violence, those who respect human rights, value freedom and desire peace must examine the circumstances carefully, objectively and critically, to penetrate the fog of propaganda and censorship that obscures truth and ultimately denies justice.
James F. Mattil
Managing Editor
-US Declaration of Independence: "...Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness...Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just power from the consent of the governed--That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of the ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it…"
|
SPECIAL REPORTS |
Crisis Updates
Monthly updates on deteriorating, improving, deteriorating and crisis situations in conflict zones, produced by the International Crisis Group. |
GLOBAL FOCUS
Open Source Inetlligence
CONTENTS
Country Briefings
Background information on the history and events
surrounding current conflicts and areas of future concern across
the globe.
Updating and revisions in progress, please excuse the chaos...
AFRICA
Algeria
Angola
Congo(Zaire)
Eritrea
Ethiopia
Liberia
Rwanda
Sierra Leone
Somalia
Sudan
Zimbabwe
THE AMERICAS
Colombia
Cuba
Guatemala
Haiti
Mexico-US Border Disorder
Peru
Venezuela
ASIA & PACIFIC REGION
Afghanistan
Indonesia
Kashmir: India-Pakistan
Korea
Burma-Myanmar
Philippines
Sri Lanka
Uzbekistan
EUROPE & BALKANS
Basque Country, Spain
Bosnia
Cyprus
Kosovo-Serbia
Northern Ireland
MIDDLE EAST & NEAR EAST
Abkhazia-Georgia
Armenia
Azerbaijan
Chechnya
Iran
Iraq
Israel-Palestine
Lebanon
Nagorno-Karabakh
Saudi Arabia
Syria
Turkey-Kurdistan
Yemen
Issue Briefings
Information on cross-cutting issues related to causes and impacts of violent political conflict in general.
Human Rights
Genocide & Ethnic Cleansing
Forced Migration & Refugees
Media, Reporting & Propaganda
Terrorism & Political Violence
Terrorism: Underlying Causes
Terrorism: Finance
Counter-Terrorism
Insight & Analysis
Editorial opinion and analysis related to current conflicts and related issues.
Al-Qaeda Dossier
What in the Name of God? Religion, Fear & Terrorism
Northern Ireland: Parades & Marching Season
From Belfast to Baghdad: Lessons from Northern Ireland
The GW Bush Middle East Road Map
The Mitchell Plan for Israel-Palestine
Weapons of Mass Destruction
Hamas Wins: The Inevitable Evolution Begins
Dispatches
Reports and commentary from the front lines of conflict areas that will give a feeling of the situation on the ground and in the streets.
WorldLinks
Links to additional from a wide range of online sources.
Government Resources
Mainstream Media
Alternative Media
Non-Government Organizations
Disproportionate Israeli Force - Do the Math
On September 11, 2001, 3,000 Americans were killed in the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington. That amounts to 3,000 deaths in a population of about 300,000,000. That death toll amounts to one death per 100,000 citizens. We have seen the psychological and emotional effects of that tragedy.
An attack of similar scale and impact would claim the lives of 72 Israelis (pop. 7,2 million) or 15 Palestinians in the Gaza Strip (pop. 1.5 million).
The current Israeli invasion of Gaza was precipitated by 1 Israeli death from Hamas rocket attacks. Israeli retaliation has killed 500 Palestinians. At the same proportion (33.3 killed per 100,000 citizens), this death toll is equivalent to 80,000 Americans being killed. This would be greater than the combined American death toll from the Vietnam War, the Grenada and Panama invasions, the 1991 Gulf War and the Iraq War,
Clearly, Israel’s retaliation is grossly excessive; it’s also likely to be totally counter-productive. Israel’s attacks will impact every family and every household in Gaza and it is not finished. Such actions serve only to provoke the anger and hatred that has fueled the Israel-Palestine conflict for tragic 60 years. Such actions provide ammunition for fundamentalist extremists to recruit new converts and expand their attacks on Israel, its allies like America who condone their actions, and the international community which remains silent and impotent to resolve the underlying issues.
SHOCK NEWS: HAMAS WINS!
The Inevitable Evolution Begins
James F. Mattil
Managing Editor
GlobalFocus.org
26 January 2006
GAZA – “The Islamic militant group Hamas swept to victory over the long-dominant Fatah party on Thursday in Palestinian parliamentary polls, a political earthquake that could bury any hope for peace talks with Israel soon. Hamas won an overwhelming majority in the 132-seat legislature, taking 76 seats to Fatah's 43 in Wednesday's election, the official vote count showed. It gives Hamas the power to shape and possibly even lead the next cabinet.” reported Reuters.
Reaction was swift and predictable.
Israeli politicians from across the political spectrum said there could be no relations with a group that has been responsible for scores of deadly attacks against Israelis and is listed as a terror organization by the United States and the European Union. Meanwhile, Benjamin Netanyahu remarked that, "Today Hamastan was formed."
The United States says it will not deal with Palestinian leaders who dispute Israel's right to exist. "If your platform is the destruction of Israel, it means you're not a partner in peace, and we're interested in peace," said George Bush. "You cannot have one foot in politics and another in terror," echoed US Secretary of State Rice.
Only Hanan Ashwari, a moderate Palestinian legislator, who won re-election seemed to have any perspective on the shocking results, calling the election “a dramatic turning point.” She added that she is concerned the militants could impose a fundamentalist social agenda and lead the Palestinians into international isolation. Adding some perspective, she said the outcome was a result of Fatah's corruption, Israel's tough measures and international indifference to the plight of the Palestinians.
The election results should also have been predictable.
Since taking office the Bush administration has turned its back on the Middle East problem, handing over a road map to nowhere and leaving Israeli leader Ariel Sharon in the driver’s seat. The Bush team demonized Yasir Arafat, castigated Fatah and the Palestinian Authority, ignored Palestinian representatives, and slashed foreign aid to Palestine.
The Israeli Defense Forces surrounded Arafat and denied him freedom of movement until his death, while Israel continued building a Zionist version of the Berlin Wall to formalize its claim to ownership of the West Bank, seized by force in 1967.
Ashwari is right; the world demonstrated indifference to the Palestinian’s plight and Palestinians obviously took notice. Apparently. they also realized that American aid was little more than a political lever to buy them off, while Hamas continued to provide much-needed social programs and humanitarian assistance.
Maybe, Palestinians have decided they’ve simply had enough international support or assistance from an America, portrayed as an honest peace broker. Maybe, they have decided to reward Hamas for its loyalty with their political support. And maybe, after all these tortuous years they’ve decided to serve notice that they will not be bought-off and manipulated any more.
It’s relatively easy to understand why Palestinians support Hamas. The real question is why Israel and the US are in a snit. After all, isn’t this how conflicts end?
Surely, no one expected Palestinians to turn their prayer rugs around a bow to the West in surrender. Protracted conflicts don’t end by forcing one side to surrender; conflicts begin to end when the most entrenched adversaries are finally brought into the political process.
That’s what happened with the ANC in South Africa, the IRA in Northern Ireland and with the rebels in East Timor (now Timor Leste). That’s why negotiations are continuing between the Sri Lankan government and the LTTE guerrillas. That’s why the US Military has opened dialogues with Iraqi insurgents.
The next months will become increasingly important for the Middle East. In an era when Arafat and Sharon are gone and as Israel struggles to chart its political footing, the international community has an opportunity for progress - if only they will recognize it as that.
While defending his association with confessed criminal Jack Abramof, President Bush acknowledged that one of his jobs is “to shake hands with people – and smile.” Hamas won a democratic election in the troubled Middle East; let’s hope Mr. Bush can now support the concept of democracy, shake hands and smile with the winners, and begin the inevitable, evolutionary process of inclusion, negotiation and compromise.
