// you're reading...


CNN en Español’s interview with Pedro Brieger on Brazil’s possible involvement on Gaza

We just got DirecTV Latino (hbb loves soccer), which includes CNN en Español. I’ve never watched it much before, but my friend Alvaro and I turned it there in time for the evening news show, “Panorama Mundial,” which he promised was actually pretty good. The first story, of course, was Gaza.

And Alvaro was right. Five minutes in, and I couldn’t believe I was actually hearing analysis tonight. Tonight’s show featured a lengthy, in-depth story about the Free Gaza movement’s boat attack, without skirting around the “accosting” vs. “ramming” issue. Ugh. Fuck you, Israel.

It also featured an interview with Argentinian professor and sociologist, Pedro Breiger, where they discussed Brazil’s plans to intervene in the current massacre, as the UN is useless due to US veto power. I’ve translated it below:

PATRICIA JANOIT (Anchor): To talk about this new chapter of Israel-Hamas relations, the attacks which have been condemned by many world capitals, and of what might be Brazil’s role in mediating through convening an emergency UN meeting, joining us from Buenos Aires is Pedro Brieger, an international politics analyst. Thanks for being with us Mr. Brieger.

PEDRO BRIEGER: Good evening.

PJ: What would be the conditions that would bring about a truce – a cease fire – between Israel and Hamas?

PB: I think that it depends, first of all, on what Israel does because it is the most powerful party. It is clear we are not talking about two forces of similar strength. The Israeli government has said that, for now, it will not accept a truce although there seems to be differences between what the Prime Minister has put forth – that Israel will continue forward until it accomplishes all of its objectives – and what it looks like the Israeli defense establishment is currently planning which is a truce within the next 48 hours. However, there exist many ministers within the Israeli cabinet who suggest continuing forward, to enter Gaza, and to abolish Hamas. Hamas, for its part, holds that there will be no truce as long as the blockade continues on the Gaza Strip and as long as Israeli bombardment continues.

PJ: In case of a ground attack, is it possible that Israel could decide to continue forward with that before there could be a truce?

PB: It’s difficult to know. It appears to me that Israel’s intention right now is to enter the Gaza Strip in order to destroy the government of Hamas – but this is just a hypothesis. One must try to read between the lines of what Israeli military leaders say: the possibility of cutting the Gaza Strip into two; of cutting it into various portions in order to control each of the portions within that tiny territory that is barely 60 kilometers long and 15 kilometers wide. But it is not yet known what Israel is going to do because it hasn’t become clear what Israel’s objectives are militarily, and what it’s objectives are politically. That’s why it’s not known if it will accept a truce, if it’s objective is to abolish Hamas – because the objective it first stated was that it was trying to prevent more rockets into Israeli territory, launched by Hamas. Not only have they not succeeded, the rocket fire has intensified. From this point of view, Israel’s first objective has failed to this day. But we must also take into account that Israel’s occupation of the West Bank is part of the problem. This problem is not one isolated to the Gaza Strip despite that Palestinians are divided between the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. There exists a central problem which continues to be the Israeli occupation of the West Bank in spite that those governing the West Bank – these are the Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas – reject terrorism and condemn Hamas.

PJ: We are seeing many countries coming together – Arab and non-Arab – uniting to support Hamas. Do you think the group is becoming stronger in spite of Israel’s intention to debilitate it through this bombardment?

PB: I don’t think it’s a support directed to Hamas. What it is, is a great condemnation of Israeli politics. As the president of Brazil, Lula da Silva, has said, if we compare the two forces, on one side we have a bomb, and on the other side a match. In other words, the forces are highly unequal. What the world is seeing is one of the largest armies on the planet bombing a very small area and killing tens of civilians. This is what provokes a world reaction. The problem is that the UN is not intervening, which is why Brazil’s president is proposing an urgent necessity to assemble a mediation that will include Brazil, France, and other countries. The UN is not intervening. The US’s president-elect, Barack Obama, is not intervening either.

PJ: Well, and other countries, like Brazil’s Lula da Silva, think that the UN doesn’t possess sufficient anger to take a firm stance over the area. Is this opinion increasing?

PB: It’s what President da Silva put forth today, in a discussion as he said that the UN is controlled by the United States, therefore, a mediation cannot be achieved; a solution cannot be achieved. You can also read between the lines there that the US obstructs the condemnation of Israel not only in regards to the bombings of Gaza – one must read between the lines a little further than that and must see the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza since 1967 and recall the infamous UN resolution 242 of 1967 which demands that Israel withdraw to its pre- 1967 War boundaries, which Israel has not realized. This is why I believe we must not see the Gaza Strip as isolated even if today, concretely, the strongest military confrontation is seen in the Gaza Strip, but in the West Bank there have been protests against the Israeli occupation and there have been dead Palestinians. This is why we must take the Gaza Strip and the West Bank as part of the same problem.

PJ: We would like to thank you very much, Mr. Pedro Brieger, for your collaboration in Panorama Mundial, directly from Buenos Aires.

[Translator’s note: This Pedro Brieger guy sounds pretty cool.]

Filed Under  , ,


8 Responses to “CNN en Español’s interview with Pedro Brieger on Brazil’s possible involvement on Gaza”

  1. It’s what President da Silva put forth today, in a discussion as he said that the UN is controlled by the United States

    Just goes to show the US isn’t the only country that elects stupid people to be President, right? lol.

    Posted by programmer craig | December 30, 2008, 9:54 pm
  2. if Brazil plans to intervene in any way similar to the way in which brazilian military police “pacify” favelas then we are headed for more destruction… the brazilian military police and BOPE emulate israeli tactics when it comes to controlling working class areas where there is armed resistance.

    Posted by Anonymous | December 31, 2008, 7:10 am
  3. Doubtful that the Brazilian government would intervene through force. They reserve that for those they hate most: their poor.

    That said, it seems to me they could be useful intervening at the political level somehow perhaps through boycotts for example. Brazil’s economy is massive and it’s not inconceivable that they could get their current political allies China, Russia, South Africa, etc on board as well — all governments who have denounced Israel because of the current massacre, and all countries in the G20 (the G8 stopped being relevant when Bush invited the other “emerging markets” in the G20 to meet regarding the financial crisis in November).

    We shall see, however, This could all be wishful analysis on my part.

    Posted by QuiQui | December 31, 2008, 7:35 am
  4. PC,

    I’m not sure anyone doubts that the US ‘controls’ the UN. It funds 22% of the UN’s budget, 3% more than the second-largest funder, Japan, a US ally. The UN is headquartered in the US, was founded by the US, and the US has veto power as a security council member. It may not have absolute control but certainly the UN has never done anything the US vetoed.

    You can only respond through a semantic re-working of “control.”


    Posted by Will | December 31, 2008, 7:55 am
  5. Will,

    I’m not sure anyone doubts that the US ‘controls’ the UN.

    Right. That explains why the US always gets its way at the UN. Like, when Russia invaded Georgia recently, for instance :O

    It funds 22% of the UN’s budget, 3% more than the second-largest funder, Japan, a US ally.

    What a shocker! That the world’s largest economies contribute the most to the UN! The real question is, are we getting our money’s worth? I don’t think so! And the other real question, is where are the massive contributions to the UN from China, India and Europe?

    The UN is headquartered in the US, was founded by the US, and the US has veto power as a security council member.

    Well, teh Un can get the hell out of the US anytime it wants to as far as I’m concerned. I wouldn’t mind a whole lot if the US got the hell out of the UN, either! And I think most Americans are with me on that… in fact, I’m sure that they are, because they’ve been saying so since the 1980s. If the US really “controlled” the UN, seems like Americans wouldn’t hate the UN so much, right?

    Or am I missing something that only radical leftists can see?

    It may not have absolute control but certainly the UN has never done anything the US vetoed.

    The US has the only veto in the UN, now? When did that happen?

    You can only respond through a semantic re-working of “control.”

    Really? And did I respond as you ordered me to? 😛

    The only breason people like you believe the US controls the UN is because the US has the money, the manpower and the will to actually DO SOMETHING when the UN passes a resolution that is important to us. Other countries get resolutions passed and then they just wave the piece of paper in the air and whine and cry. Not our fault. Resolutions get passed that the US is opposed to every single day. You should know, you quote UN resolutions against Israel often enough 😛

    Posted by programmer craig | December 31, 2008, 11:56 am
  6. We're hoping to dedicate as much time as we possibly can towards the completion of stable versions of geospatial tools for Drupal. We have a few sponsors helping us out already, but need some more help to fully realize our goals.

    Posted by trang chủ | October 9, 2013, 4:53 am
  7. I just stumbled upon your blog and wanted to say that I have really enjoyed reading your blog posts. Any way I’ll be subscribing to your feed and I hope you post again soon.

    Posted by máy tập cơ bụng | October 13, 2013, 11:20 pm
  8. Valuable info. Lucky me I found your website by accident, and I’m surprised why this accident did not
    took place in advance! I bookmarked it.

    Posted by LawerenceNRundstrom | June 18, 2015, 10:13 am

Post a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Posts

question mark
Ever wonder what Bashar Al-Trump would look like?
December 17, 2015
By Guest
[John Locher / AP]
Top 5 Missing Things: The GOP Debate
December 16, 2015
By Guest
Jesus, Jesus was hot.
What Jesus Really Looked Like
December 15, 2015
By Guest
Israeli pigs
Zionist Pigs… Literally
December 14, 2015
By Guest
Worst New Syrian Tax Ever
December 11, 2015
By Guest
hate crime
Possibly the Most American Hate Crime of All Time
December 10, 2015
By Guest
What Anti-Muslim Rhetoric is Missing: Reality
March 23, 2015
By admin
Assad - Syrian Monster2
Oh the Horror of the Syrian Regime…
September 25, 2012
By Nabil
So, Who’s the Threat to America Again?
August 20, 2012
By Guest
So where do we keep Islamophobia?
Where Do We Keep Islamophobia?
August 15, 2012
By Shubnum
 Source: http://bilgrimage.blogspot.com/2011/12/usccb-political-lobbyists-or-advocates.html
Lobbying Versus Advocacy
August 1, 2012
By Mehrunisa
Jesus Is Alive At Speaker's Corner
On the destruction of Speaker’s Corner
July 17, 2012
By Abubakr
Picture 1
Stateless & Speechless, A Palestinian Regains Speech
July 12, 2012
By Hanitizer
Tyrone in a position of traditional Black prayer
White, Black American groups ‘swap’ summer interns
July 10, 2012
By Guest
The Costs of Stripping
June 25, 2012
By Mehrunisa