© Mohammed Saber/EPAAn Israeli army flare illuminating Gaza on 3 August.
The carnage unleashed on the Palestinians is part of a decades-old routine that depends on western supportGlobal revulsion at the mind-numbing carnage of Israel's onslaught on Gaza seems finally to have spurred some of the western political class to speak out. The resignation of Sayeeda Warsi, Britain's first Muslim cabinet minister, in
protest against her government's "morally indefensible" stance, emboldened Nick Clegg, the deputy prime minister, to demand the
suspension of arms export licences to Israel.
Last week it was Ed Miliband who condemned Israel's invasion and the prime minister's "
silence on the killing of innocent Palestinian civilians". Even the United States administration denounced its strategic protege's
"disgraceful" bombardment of a school, while Barack Obama described Palestinian suffering as " heartbreaking" - as if he had nothing to do with it.
Now that Israelis and Palestinians have arrived in Cairo to turn the ceasefire into something more long-lasting, perhaps it feels safer to take a stand. But a month of indiscriminate brutality in which 1,875 Palestinians and 67 Israelis have been killed is still presented, grotesquely, as a war of Israeli self-defence - rather than as a decades-long confrontation between occupier and occupied, in which western governments stand resolutely on the side of the occupier.
And while the overwhelming majority of Palestinian dead are civilians - 430 of them children - and 64 of the Israeli dead are soldiers, it is Hamas that is branded terrorist, rather than the Israeli armed forces armed with the most sophisticated targeting technology in the world.
It's only necessary to consider for a moment what the reaction would have been if the death toll had been the other way round to realise how loaded are the scales of western moral outrage and selective the appetite for action. And it's only by ignoring the entire history of the conflict that it can be portrayed as the result of some wearisome ancient ethnic hatred.
This week's centenary of the outbreak of the first world war should help. David Cameron claims it was fought for freedom.
In reality, it was a savage industrial slaughter perpetrated by a gang of imperial powers to carve up territories, markets and resources.Far from defending democracy or the rights of small nations, Britain and France ended the war divvying up the defeated German and Ottoman empires between them, from Iraq to Palestine. A century on, we're still living with the consequences.
Comment: See: