The Connotation Of "Occupation" Depends On The Context--And The Agenda (Updated)

Abe Greenwald notes how neutral words can become powerful accusations depending on the context--on who is being criticized and when.

The term occupation has become both loaded and meaningless over the past few years. If, for example, a single American soldier shows up somewhere with an ammo belt, someone’s bound to call it an occupation. And it doesn’t even have to be on foreign soil: Cindy Sheehan accused George W. Bush of militarily occupying the state of Louisiana when the National Guard went in after Hurricane Katrina.

But the truth is, like the word preemption, occupation is itself a neutral term and relies on political context for negative or positive connotation. Thank goodness the U.S. occupied Europe in the wake of World War II. Americans helped shape the post-war wasteland into a group of free and dynamic states with whom we could collaborate throughout the second half of the 20th Century. Similarly, the American occupation of Iraq (that ended December 4, 2007 with the approval of the Presidency Council of Iraq) was critical in enabling a decimated country to defend itself against saboteurs and rebuild. But in 1979, when the Soviet Union went into Afghanistan with 40,000 troops and installed Babrack Karmal as president, it embarked on a (failed) occupation to pursue the nakedly immoral and unjust goal of aggressive expansionism.

Forget about the word preemption--what about "Disproportionate Force"?

UPDATE: Abe Greenwald's fellow blogger at Contentions, J.G. Thayer, addresses another favorite term of Israel's critics: "chemical weapons". Thayer notes that this accusation

is a re-run — the same charge was made a couple of years ago against the United States and Fallujah. This is an argument born of tremendous ignorance — the type that can only be explained as deliberate. White phosphorus munitions have tremendous utility for the military. Due to White phosphorus’s unique properties, it serves two very useful (and contradictory) purposes. It burns very brightly, and it gives off a great deal of smoke. That means that if it’s used in midair, it lights up the area and makes it very hard for the enemy to hide. When it’s used on the ground, it puts out a lot of smoke that makes it very hard for the enemy to see.

In Gaza, Israel is primarily using it for the latter — to conceal its ground troops and allow them to get close enough to the enemy to engage them before they can find more civilians to hide behind. White phosphorus can be a very dangerous substance. It burns on contact and can cause fires if it lands on something suitably flammable.

But it’s rarely used as an incendiary weapon.

Thayer goes on to highlight two particular points of Israel's critics that illustrate the superficiality and arbitrariness of their claim:

Critics are also fond of calling white phosphorus a “chemical weapon.” This is also nonsensical. The specific laws and treaties governing chemical weapons are very specific on definitions: a chemical weapon is one that causes harm by a chemical process other than combustion. The mere fact that a substance is toxic doesn’t make it a chemical weapon; in sufficient qualities, a lot of things are poisonous. Indeed, lead itself is a toxic metal, but no one wants to call a bullet a chemical weapon.

The final argument is that weapons like white phosphorus are “inhumane.” That particular argument holds great emotional sway — until you question the fundamental presumption behind it. If white phosphorus is an inhumane weapon, what is a “humane” weapon? [emphasis added]

The point of Israel's critics, of course, is too use the most loaded and incendiary terms possible. People will respond viscerally to terms like 'chemical weapons,' just as they do to the term 'disproportionate force.' In addition to terms such as 'occupation' and 'settlements,' Israel's critics are building up their rhetorical arsenal.

At some point, someone should hold these critics responsible back up their claims with facts.

Technorati Tag: Israel and Gaza and Hamas and Operation Cast Lead.