Ceasefire? America's Generals Prefer a 'Slow Genocide'
The New Arab courageously highlights Gaza’s ongoing struggle with what it terms 'slow genocide'—a direct consequence of blockades, disease, and starvation, even during supposed lulls in direct combat. Meanwhile, US media outlets frame cyclical violence in Gaza as an inevitable 'conflict,' conveniently omitting the historical pattern of Israel’s 'mowing the lawn' strategy or the bipartisan US
political consensus that actively underwrites it. This framing ignores decades of warnings from UN reports and human rights organizations detailing conditions in Gaza, predating even the current escalation. This 'slow' approach is, perhaps, strategic. OpenSecrets.org shows that in the 2022 election cycle alone, pro-Israel groups, including AIPAC, spent over $23 million influencing U.S. elections,
contributing directly to legislators who consistently approve unfettered aid to Israel. For instance, Senator Lindsey Graham, who openly suggested bombing Gaza 'like Hiroshima and Nagasaki,' received $26,000 from AIPAC in 2022. One might wonder how many 'ceasefires' are needed before the slow grind of attrition yields maximum strategic advantage and, of course, maximum return on investment for
defense contractors and political donors.