Freedom for Palestine - A great song and video

The lyrics and the images are fabulous.  I need say no more.




Khaled

Crossing the line for sake of justice

I came across this on a very decent Israeli blog called +972 Magazine that Michael W, and occasional reader and commenter on this forum has brought to my attention few months ago.

This exemplifies the inadequate recognition of the beautiful human beings (in this case, Just and peace loving Jews and Jewish Israelis) who cross the line of tribalism and religious clannish tendencies to seek and support justice for everyone.

My deep respect and admiration to people of all faiths and ethnicity whose universal sense of justice makes the world worth living in.

Something caught my eye when looking through photos on The Atlantic of the Nakba day demonstrations which engulfed the West Banks and Israel’s border areas last Sunday.

Image 16, reprinted below, carries the following caption: Two Palestinian men struggle after being overcome by tear gas fired during clashes with the Israeli police on May 15, 2011 at Qalandiya checkpoint near Ramallah, West Bank. (Uriel Sinai/Getty Images)

Actually one of the men is an Israeli from Tel Aviv named Jonathan Pollak. I suppose The Atlantic was not aware that Israeli supporters joined the Nakba demonstrations throughout the West Bank on Sunday. Maybe the editors have not heard of the Israelis that have gone to jail or been injured resisting their country’s repression of unarmed Palestinian demonstrations. Perhaps they should have a look at the definitive account of the joint struggle and the new Israeli left which Noam Sheizaf and I wrote for the Nation in March 2011.

I think that the photo is much stronger seeing an Israeli and a Palestinian side by side suffering from Israeli tear gas…don’t you?

We have been very lucky in St. Louis to have many of those that cross those ethnic and religious lines, and dedicated their time, effort and money, and risked their lives in some cases to support causes alien to them, be it the Palestinian cause or the injustices against Muslims, Arabs, Blacks, Hispanic or any other minority in this area.
May God bless them all.

Khaled

Check the rest of the impressive Photo-Essay by the Atlantic on Nakba Day protests (May 15 2011) at the borders of Israel and its 44-year occupied territories.

Palestinian Protests on Israel's Borders - Alan Taylor - In Focus - The Atlantic

Links:

• The Atlantic has not heard of the joint struggle in the West Bank 
•  +972 Magazine: Independent commentary from Israel & the Palestinian territories

Local Activists and groups I am proud to know:

• A Witness In Palestine: Anna Baltzer, Jewish-American Activist
• The Saint Louis Palestine Solidarity Committee 
• Hedy Epstein

Our Forgotten allies - Part 2: Christian Arabs struggle for Palestine

In a previous posting I presented my opinion that the Islamization of the Palestinian cause was harmful to Palestinians on one hand, and to all Arabs and Muslims on the other. I strongly believe that it was a short-sighted measure, tactically and strategically.

The major beneficiary of that mistake was Israel and its Arab- and Muslim-hating supporters who found a great comfort in presenting it to the Western world as a fight between progressive, liberal, egalitarian, and democratic ‘tiny’ Jewish state, and a ‘repressive fundamentalist Islamic ideology’ that controls fifty some states and over a billion Muslims who are ready to launch Holy War on Israel and its Western supporters.

To a much lesser extend, Muslim fundamentalists also benefited from using the Palestinian slogan as a convenient rallying call to which they give lip service, then turn around to carry on their other agendas (Remember Osama Bin Laden and AlQaeda, invoking the Palestinian issue in speeches, then going on killing Muslim Afghani and Iraqi civilians?).

Judging from the state of affairs of the world today, it is not difficult to see who actually benefited more from the Islamization paradigm.

Forgotten in the midst of all the screaming was the Christian Palestinian (as well as Christian Arabs). If you were not from Egypt, Palestine or Lebanon, you probably would not remember that Palestine was nearly 30% Christian in 1948 (1400 years after it came under Arab Muslim control), and is no more than 5% Christian now after 60 years only of Israeli control. You would probably not be aware of the significant contributions many Palestinian Christians and other Arab Christians provided for the Palestinian cause in effort, blood and money.

Another totally forgotten (and frequently intentionally ignored) aspect of the Christian Palestinian struggle, it the on-going Political involvement of Christian Arabs in the Israeli Palestinian issue. I will highlight here two only of the many examples .

The first is really an amazing example from Egypt. Since the early 80’s the Camp David Accords have paved the way to some sort of luke warm peace between Egypt and Israel. The people of Egypt in general still find the Israeli presence awkward, and very few have taken the chance to visit Israel. The issue is more complicated for Egyptian Christians, with their holy sited under Israeli control. And since the peace agreements were signed, the Egyptian Church (Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria) under the leadership of Pope Shnouda III has consistently refused to permit Egyptian Christians to visit the Christian Holy sites in occupied Palestine.

In the first week of this May, the Pope of Alexandria church in a his Cairo weekly sermon re-stated the long-held opinion of the church barring Copts from visiting Israel.

قال البابا: إن في مصر الكثير من الأماكن المقدسة التي يمكن التبرك بها، أما القدس المحتلة فيجب ألا نندفع عاطفيا نحو زيارتها دون النظر إلى البعد الوطني والسياسي، موضحا أن السلام غائب في تلك المناطق وما زال شعبها الفلسطيني يعاني من ويلات الاحتلال الإسرائيلي وقهره وأشار البابا إلى أنه من الصعب التراجع عن قرار الحظر في المرحلة الراهنة ما لم يتم التوصل إلى السلام الشامل والعادل، لأن السماح للأقباط سيدفع بمئات الآلاف منهم إلى زيارة الأراضي المقدسة خاصة في عيد القيامة، ما يروج للاقتصاد الإسرائيلي ويؤدي إلى إساءة للعلاقات بين الأقباط والأشقاء العرب والفلسطينيين

Pope Shnouda III said: “There is many [Christian] Holy places in Egypt that can be visited to be blessed with. As for occupied Jerusalem; we should not in an emotional way rush to visit it without considering the political and patriotic dimension”. He elaborated that “peace is absent from those territories, and its Palestinian people are still suffering from the horror of the Israeli occupation and its oppression”.
The Pope pointed out that "it is very difficult to retract the prohibition [against visiting the holy places in Palestine] at this time unless comprehensive and just peace is achieved. This is because retracting prohibition will lead to hundreds of thousands of Egyptian Christian Copts to visit the holy land, especially for Easter thus supporting Israeli Economy, and leading to harming the relationship between Copts and the Arab and Palestinian brothers."

For the Pope, boycotting the Holy sites while they are still under Israeli control is an act of resistance. He refuses to provide Israel with the economic benefit and the moral recognition of its authority over occupied holy sites that Israel is so eager to get. for him, the pain of keeping his followers away from their beloved Holy sites is a small price to pay in order to help liberate Palestinians from the evils of Israeli occupation.

And closer to the heart of the battle field, Palestine, Palestinian Christians are not silent either. Take for example the recent political document "Moment of Truth" released by Kairos Palestine. The document is modeled along an earlier document from Kairos South Africa that aimed at accelerating the fall of the apartheid regime in South Africa. The parallels here are not so subtle. This is a big16-page documents, but it is worth reading. Here are some excerpts:

A word of faith, hope and love from the heart of the Palestinian suffering
“This document is the Christian Palestinians’ word to the world about what is happening in Palestine. It is written at this time when we wanted to see the Glory of the grace of God in this land and in the sufferings of its people. In this spirit the document requests the international community to stand by the Palestinian people who have faced oppression, displacement, suffering and clear apartheid for more than six decades. The suffering continues while the international community silently looks on at the occupying State, Israel.”
As Palestinian Christians we hope that this document will provide the turning point to focus the efforts of all peace-loving peoples in the world, especially our Christian sisters and brothers. We hope also that it will be welcomed positively and will receive strong support, as was the South Africa Kairos document launched in 1985, which, at that time proved to be a tool in the struggle against oppression and occupation.

The Moment of Truth document about realities on the ground:

The separation wall erected on Palestinian territory, a large part of which has been confiscated for this purpose, has turned our towns and villages into prisons, separating them from one another, making them dispersed and divided cantons. Gaza, especially after the cruel war Israel launched against it during December 2008 and January 2009, continues to live in inhuman conditions, under permanent blockade and cut off from the other Palestinian territories.

Israeli settlements ravage our land in the name of God and in the name of force, controlling our natural resources, including water and agricultural land, thus depriving hundreds of thousands of Palestinians, and constituting an obstacle to any political solution.

Reality is the daily humiliation to which we are subjected at the military checkpoints, as we make our way to jobs, schools or hospitals.

It has a message to Muslims and to the Christian world, defending Muslims:

Our message to the Muslims is a message of love and of living together and a call to reject fanaticism and extremism. It is also a message to the world that Muslims are neither to be stereotyped as the enemy nor caricatured as terrorists but rather to be lived with in peace and engaged with in dialogue.

And it concludes with this very strong message to churches and Christians of the world, praising some, and asking others to repent for what they did to Palestinians:

6.1 Our word to the Churches of the world is firstly a word of gratitude for the solidarity you have shown toward us in word, deed and presence among us. It is a word of praise for the many Churches and Christians who support the right of the Palestinian people for self determination. It is a message of solidarity with those Christians and Churches who have suffered because of their advocacy for law and justice.

However, it is also a call to repentance; to revisit fundamentalist theological positions that support certain unjust political options with regard to the Palestinian people. It is a call to stand alongside the oppressed and preserve the word of God as good news for all rather than to turn it into a weapon with which to slay the oppressed. The word of God is a word of love for all His creation. God is not the ally of one against the other, nor the opponent of one in the face of the other. God is the Lord of all and loves all, demanding justice from all and issuing to all of us the same commandments.

We ask our sister Churches not to offer a theological cover-up for the injustice we suffer, for the sin of the occupation imposed upon us. Our question to our brothers and sisters in the Churches today is: Are you able to help us get our freedom back, for this is the only way you can help the two peoples attain justice, peace, security and love?

What I am trying to bring up in this posting is not that there are good Christians, because to question that is ignorant and immoral. I am trying to show how silly it is to present the Israeli Palestinian conflict as an Islamic issue only. Our Christian Arabs are not only as harmed by the on-going conflict as Muslims are but also they are a tremendous and resourceful ally. Their involvement can extend the reach of Palestinian pleas for support and justice to most of the world Christians with a more resounding impact than Muslim could do on their own.

We need to remember that Israel did not grow to be what it is today relying only on its own people and resources. Israel managed to play the religion and anti-Muslim card very well and capitalized on it in the media and in all its public relations campaigns over the years. Without Israel getting the undeserved sympathy of the Western world Christians, the playing field could have been more balanced for all Palestinians; Muslims and Christians.

It is about time to realize that in this fight for justice we need all the allies we can get. Arab Christians have been much of a victim in this conflict as Arab Muslims have been. And they are an asset that Muslims should acknowledge and cherish.

Khaled

Coming next:
The Forgotten Allies - Part 3: Arab Christians produce the best ‘Art of Return’.

Our Forgotten Allies - Part 1: Is The Palestinian Problem An Islamic Cause?

For a large number of people, merely raising the question, whether the Israeli Palestinian conflict is a Islamic ‘religious’ issue or not, may raise eye brows. Many take it for granted that the conflict is a religious one.

Well. That has not been always been the case. And for several decades, Palestine liberation from Israeli occupation and oppression was an Arab national cause, not an Islamic cause. Actually, until recently, non-Arab Muslim countries were not at all seriously concerned about the Middle East conflict, except for a supportive vote in the UN every now and then.

Of course Islam, both as a religion and as a dominant Arab cultural backdrop, was influencing the formulation of the ‘lingo’ of the conflict. But that was in the context of Islam being the major element of Arabic cultural foundation, even for many Arab Christians.

The frequent use of Islamic terminology was therefore not out of the perception that the conflict was a religious one. And for over 40 years after the Palestinian Nakba (Arabic term for the Palestinian disaster in 1948), both Muslims and Christians were intensely involved as Arabs in all the military conflicts, resistance, negotiations, etc. Some of the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) figures were Christians, and one of the most militant Palestinian groups was founded by George Habash, a Palestinian Christian.

Of course that does not mean that the early (and short-lasting) involvement of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood group in the 1948 war did not have religious reasons, but for most Arabs, that is not how the conflict was viewed.

It was an issue of millions of fellow Arabs suffering from oppression and grave injustice, their culture was being destroyed, and their own existence as people was being denied. It was about Arab land robbed without any legitimacy – just because the other side could achieve land theft and population transfer by force – never effectively opposed.

I wish the conflict remained as secular as it was in the early decades. But, for different reasons, it was more practical for both Arabs on one hand and Israelis and their supporters on the other, to turn it into a religious conflict.

That was a grave mistake and to the detriment of Arab and Palestinian position in my opinion. And, consequently, it was to the great benefit of the pro-Israel crowd.

On the Arab/Muslim side, the transformation of the Palestinian cause from secular to religious started in the early 1980’s. Secular Arab governments have proven to be total failure in solving Arab world problems and, moreover, many of them started taking initiatives to surrender emotionally and materially to the US and Israeli demands.

And while that was happening, Islamic Warriors in Afghanistan were being hailed by the West as defenders of the World against the Soviet Union evil empire. The American and Arab propaganda machinery raised the stature of the ‘Mujahideen’ and their ideology to mythical heights casting them as saints. That was, incidentally, financed by Saudis and Americans, pumping the zealous religious emotions of Arabs and Muslims all over the world.

At a different level, Arab people were impressed by the success of another religion-based national liberation movement in Iran. The Iranian people succeeded in kicking out Reza Bahlavi’s regime, a bloody and very oppressive regime. And their ability to resist the pressure of military and economic war by Iraq and the West during the protracted Iraq-Iran war did not pass unnoticed in Arab Street.

It was not difficult to put the two together: success was based on how profound the religious feelings are, and how great the will to sacrifice was.

For Israel and its creators and supporters, religion has never been out of the picture from day one. After all, it was early secular Zionists that used the myth of God’s promise to his chosen people to promote their desire for a homeland. A promise that is laughable as backward unless you base it on religious ideology. But the surroundings were ripe for the plausibility of that silly claim of the Jewish people to a Jewish state the land of Palestine.

Secular Jews got the land that they felt would protect them for more destruction by Europeans. And religious Jews got what they thought was a fulfillment of God’s promise.

For Western Christian supporters (many with a long history of anti-Jewish sentiments) some saw it as a way to resolve the ‘Jewish problem’ but for others waiting for the second coming of the messiah to establish the kingdom of heaven, it was a step closer to making the end of times happen.

More recently, the pro-Israel voices, both Jewish and Christian Zionist, have taken a more explicit and advantageous religious direction with the ‘Islamization’ of the Palestinian /Israeli conflict by Arabs and Muslims. And over the last 10-15 years, the conflict has been framed by pro-Israel voices as a clash of religions. Fighting ‘Radical Islam’ real and imagined became the new hub of the pro-Israel policies.

At present, it is almost certain that enthusiastic pro-Israel voices would be fervently and irrationally anti-Muslim and explicitly Islamophobic.

Zionist Christians and fundamental Zionists have managed to create a powerful media network that regularly defends the blind support of Israel while foaming at the mouth about the dangers of Islam and Muslims in general.

For Muslims living in the West, most of the hatred and insults they face (in person, and in media pits like Fox News Network and Wall Street Journal, as well as a variety of Islamophobic online outlets) comes from the pro-Israel crowd while they are promoting Israeli points of view.

Framing the Israeli Palestinian conflict as a conflict between Islam and a ‘Judeo-Christian’ culture (whatever that means) has been very convenient for Israel and its advocate, and in my opinion has been extremely detrimental to Muslims, Arabs, and Palestinians. But Muslims themselves take a lot of the blame for not resisting redefining the conflict in religious terms.

For Muslims, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict must be ‘re-redefined’. It is about seeking justice for Palestinians, a legitimate Islamic cause. It is not a conflict about defending Islam, because it is not.

Making it a war to defend Islam made us lose a very important and critical ally, but that will be the topic of another posting. In the mean while, your thoughts and opinions about this topic are appreciated.

Khaled

Horror and mental anguish in a photo

This posting is not about how US 'dismay' at Israeli wrong-doing would ever straighten up anything, because it would not. The US can express dismay till the cow come home, and Israel would not even blink - they know it is the game of politics as usual.

This posting is truly to get you to put yourselves in the shoes the poor man in the photo.

Think for a second what may make you steal from you own brother, or kill the future of your own children?

Think what kind of mental torture would let you promote death of you own nation, or strangle what you and everyone around you have been dreaming of every moment of your lives.

Think what poverty would make you sell your soul to feed your children?

Think... what would make a praying Palestinian Muslim earn a living by building homes in an Israeli settlement on the land of capital of Palestine - his own homeland, the settlement designed to kill the nationhood of his fellow Muslim and Christian Palestinians?

I feel pity on the poor man - it is as if he is building the scaffold to hang his own flesh and blood.

As for those who created the situation we are witnessing: those who steal the land, strangle the people into despair, and take comfort in thinking that God sent them as light unto the nations. How would you describe them?

And do you really think they are shaking in their boots because the US expressed dismay at their deeds?

Khaled

Post publishing note:

Initially I just wanted this to reflect my emotions towards the horrible situation symbolised by the photo, but to give it context and factual background for some viewers, see this article from the BBC with real life stories

• Dilemma of Palestinian settlement builders

Seven Jewish Children - A Play for Gaza

First time I heard about it was in an article titled: Tell Her the Truth in The Nation. That article made me envy London, New york and Chicago a little. Those places were where the 'playlet' was showing. And now it is here: in St. Louis.

During the murderous Israeli assault on Gaza earlier this year, many progressive and liberal forces in Europe were very active and outspoken in their support for Palestinians and in their denouncement of Israel. These forces included writers, singers and artists of all faiths.

One of those was Caryl Churchill, a renowned British playwright (You can read her NYT profile here), a supporter of Palestinians and an activist with the International Solidarity Movement. She put together a short ‘play’ called "Seven Jewish Children”.

The play stirred a lot of controversy with some Jews and pro-Israel groups calling it anti-Semitic, and even blood libel. Many other Jews (in Israel and elsewhere including the new J Street, political action groups opposing the ardent pro-Israel lobbying political action committee, AIPAC) see the play through very different eyes. (The links at the end of the posting lead to a collection of such articles)

The play is composed of seven short scenes and is usually produced as a 10 minute production. In each scene, two Jewish parents talk about their child; debating and arguing what to tell and what not to tell the child about events around them.

First scene seems to take place about holocaust time, while the seventh scene is about what to tell the Jewish child about the latest assault on Palestinians in Gaza. This is probably the scene that riles opponents of the play as one Jewish parent is speaking like a fanatic anti-Arab Jew in the occupied lands.

The play is open to interpretations, and the two productions I have watched have their own unique feel. You can find them on YouTube here and here (each is made of 2 videos, the link takes you to part one).

The British author dedicated the play to Palestinians, and decided to go the unusual route by offering the play without any royalties or licensing fees to presenter that want to produce it. She had one condition though: the presenters should request audience contributions for the London-based relief organization Medical Aid for Palestinians.

And considering the charges of anti-Semitism hurled already at the author, most of the productions of that play have so far been by big and established groups (like the Royal Court Theater in Britain) or by progressive Jewish groups in Europe, Canada and the United States.

This special play is going to be in St. Louis this Sunday, Monday and Tuesday (April 26, 27 and 29, 2009) at two different locations.

The play is very interesting and, as one critic described it, ‘intently elusive’. It is open to interpretations. In my mind, it also raises issues beyond Jews, Israel and Gaza war. Most parents would see themselves in one scene or the other.

They may even empathize with the Jewish parents at some level, realizing the dilemma parents find themselves in when it is time to tell children about something unpleasant: either being done to them, or being done by the parents' own people unto someone else.

It is worthwhile to read the full text here (it will take 10 minutes of your time), and to watch at least one of the renditions found on YouTube.
-------

-------
But more importantly, I do recommend attending one of the FREE productions on April 26, 27 and 28. The panelists will include 2 Jewish pro-Palestinian activists: Hedi Epstein, and Anna Baltzer.

Hedi is in her eighties and is a holocaust survivor. She is a dedicated pro-Palestinian activist that recently raised fund for 2 ships that challenged the Israeli navy siege of Gaza shores (and, she was on board one of the ships).

Anna runs the most impressive web site Anna in the Middle East. chronicling her experience in Palestine, and has given hundreds of presentations in defense of the Palestinian people. The event on April 26 will also include a very moving presentation by Anna about her latest trips to Palestine.

Both Hedi and Anna are very vocal on the Israeli Palestinian issue, and both have credible first hand knowledge of the occupied land of Palestine, and real life experience that few of us will ever have a chance to experience for themselves.

Their perspective would be authentic and invaluable.

I hope you will have a chance to see that thought provoking play, and listen to those impressive women.

Khaled

Links:

• 'Tell Her the Truth' - Tony Kushner & Alisa Solomon, The Nation
• Readings and Talks for Pro-Gaza Playlet - New York times
• SOME CALL IT 'BEAUTIFUL,' OTHERS 'BLOOD LIBEL' SEVEN JEWISH CHILDREN COMES TO CANADA - Globe and Mail (Canada)
• J Street Letter of Support on Discussing 7JC - The Theater J Blog
• Is Caryl Churchill's play Seven Jewish Children antisemitic? - The Guardian, UK
• By seeking to label criticism of Israel in Caryl Churchill's play as 'antisemitic', his critique feeds the very prejudice it decries - Jaqueline Rose, The guardian, UK

A Chrisitian Palestinian Cartoonist, and the Hysteria of the Anti-Anti-Israel crowd.

The double 'Anti' in the title is not a typo. Following the horror of the Gaza war, a lot more voices were heard harshly - and correctly so - criticizing Israel and its pattern of brutal handling of the Palestinians (in Gaza as well as the West Bank). Coinciding with that is usual the increase in charges of 'antisemitism' by the blindly Pro-Israel chorus, and regardless of what Israel ever does.

A group that is usually mostly ignored in this ongoing conflict is the Christian Palestinians. Their marginalization in the product of framing of the Israeli Palestinian conflict as a 'anti-Jewish Islamic endeavor', thus blurring the reality that it is a territorial conflict in which the harmed parties are, and have always been, Christians as well as Muslims.

One of the Christian American Palestinians effective voices is that of Ray Hanania, and journalist, political cartoonist and a radio talk host of stature. I thought this cartoon summarizes the usual situation after a scenario like what the world witnessed in Gaza a couple of month ago, and the subsequent revelation about Israeli army behavior against civilians, as admitted by Israeli soldiers.
The denial came from the Israeli Military chief of staff, and was reviewed by the American Jewish journalist Richard Silverstein, who usually gets more than a fair share of insults from the pro-Israel chorus for his balanced presentation of the Israeli-Palestinian issues. As most of you know, the slanderous scream 'antisemites' does not stop if the 'accused' is Jewish. And many liberal Jews have suffered from that slanderous accusation, as well as the usual charge of being a self-hating Jews. But as you see below, it can get even worse.

The Israeli Newspaper Haaretz was the first to published the damning reports of the IDF morality problems in Gaza, and thus suffered from even a more grave slander: being an accomplice to blood libel against Israel.
This is a serious insult (and for those not familiar with the term, see here and here).

If you click on the article title, you can read it on Haaretz web site. It is worth reading. Also, take a look at Ray Hanania activities. He is a very funny Stand up comedian i addition to his many talents as a journalist, talk-show host, cartoonist and an activist for Justice for Palestinian
Check this video from on of acts in a Reform Synagogue.



I am hoping to talk about the activism of Christian Palestinians in this conflict, but that will have to wait for another posting.

Khaled

Willful ignorance, like eternal victimhood, is a bliss - Part 1

Gaza war of 2009 is not a very well-kept secret.

The number of victims may be disputed, but very few will deny that a large majority of the 1500 Palestinian killed by Israel were innocent children, women and men. Most of the world have seen the Israeli military exercising a campaign of vengeance against Gaza people.

What may be a sliver of hope - if you are still capable of seeing anything positive in that blood bath - was that all over the world, anti-Israel sentiments were flaring. The world (East and West) is gradually coming to see Israel as the aggressor and oppressor in the puddle known as the Israeli-Palestinian (I-P) conflict.

Even in the traditionally 'cold-blooded' Northern Europeans, anti-Israel feelings are growing rapidly. From Amsterdam where an visiting Israeli officer was shoe-pelted (after which the paranoid officer said ''Today shoes, tomorrow guns'') to Sweden where the Israeli ambassador was also shoe-pelted, and where Davis Cup matches in Malmo - Sweden's third largest city - could not be held with fans in the stadium as the city was boiling with demonstrations against Israel, calling for boycotting Israel and protesting the presence of the Israeli tennis team.

One Israeli tennis player expressed his shock after demonstrators tried to disrupt Sweden-Israel tennis match. According to Haartz, he said "Sweden protest was first time I felt anti-Israel hate".

But to express shock at the civilized world reaction to massacres of innocent Palestinians by one's own country is truly confusing. Is it naïveté, childish innocence, or ignorance? Or does it represent a more profound pathology that pervades the Israeli collective memory and perception?

It is hard to feel confused as to why the European street is unhappy with Israel. The European protesters over the last several months were not very subtle. They explicitly say why they are unhappy with Israel. In Sweden, they did not mince words:

' 7,000 people gathered at a square in downtown Malmo to hear speeches condemning Israel's offensive in Gaza and urging support for Palestinians. Sweden's Left Party leader Lars Ohly told the crowd that the European Union and the rest of the world "should boycott the racist regime in Israel." Chanting anti-Israel slogans, the protesters then marched toward the Baltic Hall arena, where some of them tried to break through the police barrier.' [Full article here]

Still, some old and wise Jewish community leaders insist that the real reason is not that simple.

The leader of the European Jewish Congress said Wednesday the main blame for growing antisemitism across the continent was the economic crisis, not the Gaza war.
[European Jewish] Congress President Moshe Kantor said that what he believes anti-Semitism levels unseen since World War II had nothing to do with Middle East issues.

And as usual, the Defamation League, aka Anti-Defamation League (ADL), foams around the mouth accusing the Malmo City council of using the tennis matches "as a device to express anti-Israel bias."

The political ignorance of a tennis-centered athlete is understandable. But the ' leader of the European Jewish Congress' ? This wise leader and the eternally-angry Foxman of the ADL are never tired of the same slogan: It has nothing to do with what Israel does. They hate us because they will always hate us for one reason or the other.

This sounds like circular logic to me, but for a lot of other people, it is the undisputed truth. And in some sick sense, it is a handy justification for having absolutely no critical appraisal of what Israel does. If, in that kind of traditional wisdom, the conclusion is known [they will always hate us], then what is the point wasting energy trying to find another reason [for example, Israel is doing something that is really so bad that people get angry at Israel]?

True antisemitism is the hate of Jews for no reason other than their being Jewish. If Israel occupies land, oppresses people and kills innocent Palestinians, I think some civilized humans have the right to be angry, or even mad, at Israel and its supporters for what Israel is are doing.

Are there true anti-Semites? Certainly. But nine times out of ten, that charge is hurled at someone who dares to criticize Israel (unless they are Jewish, then they get charged with being self-hating Jews).

But, let us go back to the perception gap between what Israel does, and what its supporters see.

Israeli as well as pro-Israel media in January and February of 2009 were studded with articles trying to understand the unusual 'public relation failure' of Israel in recent months. Some articles reached the conclusion that 'no matter how you sweeten it, Israel was the villain in that fight, and thus the world reacted appropriately'. Others blame the propaganda failure on the usual and eternal suspect: antisemitism.

Gideon Levi wrote recently a very interesting article about the Tennis Match events in Sweden, titled "Has anyone in Israel asked why the Swedes hate us?". It is a must-read, and it discusses the reason for pervasive and unreal sense of innocence some Israelis have, and the real anger the world outside Israel feels.

A more pointed article by Akiva Eldar has an even more provoking title: "Is an Israeli Jewish sense of victimization perpetuating the conflict with Palestinians?". It reviews an academic research done in Israel on that sensitive topic: perpetual victimhood. the principal researcher is Daniel Bar-Tal, one of the world's leading political psychologists - probably soon to be pronounce a self-hating Jew.

The article concludes with specific statistics about the 1948 partitioning and the lack of awareness of objective facts about that era by a large portion of Israeli society.
[For sake of brevity, reviewing these 2 articles was moved to Part 2 of this posting - see below]

The articles by Gideon Levi and Akiva Eldar are excellent assets for anyone that has interest in the psychology of the Israeli Palestinian conflict. This psychological aspect of the conflict is, in my opinion, the single most important obstacle to the resolution of the problem. From it stems ALL the evils chronically afflicting that sad part of the world.

A quote I heard once in a conversation about Israeli Palestinian issues is an illustrative example of the short link between victimhood and criminality. A defender of the Israeli position thought that the following statement that he attributed to an Israeli politician summarized the wisdom of his stance:

"I hate Palestinians because they make us kill their children".

Wow. In ten words he expressed hate, admitted murder, dumped all the blame on the ones whose children he murdered and came out with clean conscience feeling like a victim.

Brilliant..

Khaled

I presented a brief review of these 2 articles here:

Willful ignorance, like eternal victimhood, is a bliss - Part 2

Links to original articles:

• Is an Israeli Jewish sense of victimization perpetuating the conflict with Palestinians? - Haaretz - Israel News
• Gideon Levy / Has anyone in Israel asked why the Swedes hate us? - Haaretz - Israel News

Willful ignorance, like eternal victimhood, is a bliss - Part 2

Part 2 is a brief presentation of two excellent articles mentioned in Part 1 of this posting

Gideon Levi wrote recently a very interesting article about the Tennis Match events in Sweden, titled "Has anyone in Israel asked why the Swedes hate us?". It is a must-read, and it discusses the reason for pervasive and unreal sense of innocence some Israelis have, and the real anger the world outside Israel feels.

The world is always against us, period. But the world is not against us - to the contrary: The truth is that there is no other nation toward which the world is so forgiving, even today. Yes, today. Granted, world public opinion is very critical, sometimes in a way that's unique to Israel, but most governments (except Venezuela and Turkey, but including Egypt and Sweden) are far from being in sync with the public opinion in their countries. The official world continues to be sympathetic to Israel, regardless of its actions. The rise of Hamas, the increase in hatred for Islam in the West, the American hegemony - all this helps in strengthening the support, and we know how to make the very most of it.

And in a scathing criticism of the role of media manipulation in manufacturing the apparent sense of innocence amongst Israelis, he adds:

What's the difference between national tennis player Andy Ram and national tennis player Thomas Johansson? Johansson and his angry fans saw real pictures from Gaza; Ram and his complacent fans never did. Had Ram seen them, maybe he, too, would demonstrate. But he, like most Israelis, was spared this discomfort, thanks to the gung-ho Israeli press.

He is not shy of recognizing that the truth about what Israel does would lead normal people to protest the horror of what they witnessed Israel doing to the Palestinians.

Can we and Ram really criticize those who were horrified by the pictures from the war? Can we reproach those who dare to protest against the people responsible for those scenes? Are we demanding that the world remain silent once again?

A more pointed article by Akiva Eldar has an even more provoking title: "Is an Israeli Jewish sense of victimization perpetuating the conflict with Palestinians?". It reviews an academic research done in Israel on the sensitive topic of perpetual victimhood by Daniel Bar-Tal, an eminent Israeli political psychologists - probably soon to be pronounce a self-hating Jew.

Israeli Jews' consciousness is characterized by a sense of victimization, a siege mentality, blind patriotism, belligerence, self-righteousness, dehumanization of the Palestinians and insensitivity to their suffering.

"Most of the [Israeli] nation retains a simplistic collective memory of the conflict, a black-and-white memory that portrays us in a very positive light and the Arabs in a very negative one," says the professor from Tel Aviv University. This memory, along with the ethos of the conflict and collective emotions such as fear, hatred and anger, turns into a psycho-social infrastructure of the kind experienced by nations that have been involved in a long-term violent conflict..."

That study goes back in history to assess the collective memory of Israelis about what happened in 1948.

"The study demonstrated that widespread support for the official memory testifies to a lower level of critical thinking, as well as belief in traditional values, high identification with Jewish identity, a tendency to delegitimize the Arabs, and support for taking aggressive steps against the Palestinians."

Bar-Tal, while also critical of the violence committed by Hamas, sees the stance of the average Israeli as "[relying] primarily on prolonged indoctrination that is based on ignorance and even nurtures it."

In his opinion ... the general public is not interested in knowing what Israel did in Gaza for many years; how the disengagement was carried out and why, or what its outcome was for the Palestinians; why Hamas came to power in democratic elections; how many people were killed in Gaza from the disengagement until the start of the recent war; and whether it was possible to extend the recent cease-fire or even who violated it first.

The context of the Holocaust memory is a central part of the Israeli psyche:

"Nets-Zehngut and Bar-Tal find a close connection between the collective memory and the memory of "past persecutions of Jews" ("the whole world is against us," and the Holocaust). The more significant the memory of persecution, the stronger the tendency to adopt Zionist narratives. F"

The article concludes with specific statistics about the 1948 partitions and the lack of awareness of objective facts about that era by a large portion of the Israeli society.

The articles by Gideon Levi and Akiva Eldar are excellent assets for anyone that has interest in the psychology of the Israeli Palestinian conflict, and both have implications for Jewish culture outside Israel as well. This psychological aspect of the conflict is, in my opinion, the single most important obstacle to the resolution of the conflict.

From it stems most if not all the evils chronically afflicting that sad part of the world.

Khaled

Par1 1 of this posting can be found here.

Links to cited articles:

Is an Israeli Jewish sense of victimization perpetuating the conflict with Palestinians? Akiva eldar - - Haaretz - Israel News

Has anyone in Israel asked why the Swedes hate us? - Gideon Levy - Haaretz - Israel News

The mystery we call the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and do nations have the right to exist by a divine decree?

A good friend of mine is half Jewish by birth, but has for the last 5-6 years been more aware of her Jewish identity. Recently I received an email from her after she read some of my latest blog postings. I felt that it may be worthwhile to share with you part of her email in blue (with her permission), and my response in red to it.

A major part of the wide gap between pro-peace Israeli and pro-peace Arabs is that despite being united by goal, they hardly understand each other. There is a lot of raw visceral emotions that influence how we feel about the Israeli-Palestinian (IP) conflict on all sides.

Many of these emotions are deeply rooted in history, religion, culture, upbringing and many other unexplainable influences. No matter how we try to understand the 'other', it always seems an incomplete understanding. We can never be in their shoes, not matter how hard we try.

So, here is her email commenting on some of my recent postings on the Israeli operation in Gaza, and how our politicians stood in line to please the pro-Israel crowd. I highlighted parts of the email that are relevant to this posting :

"Don't get me wrong, I completely got the joke and thought it was funny. I also agree with what you said. Some right wingers in this country scare the pants off me with their support of Israel because their line of thinking is that if Israel exists the Messiah will come. It will be the first time for the Jews and the Second Coming for the Christians. Truly a scary way to dream up foreign policy.

My point was that the concept of the Jewish state is so central to the religion of Judaism that it's hard to separate the two. I almost have to work at not being a Zionist. So making light of Israel is blasphemy for a lot of Jews.

But I think it's important to step back from the religious view of the state of Israel and look at ours and Israel's current policies because we live in the here and now and people are dying NOW."

The emphasized sentence is really the part that makes me wonder if a non-Jew can ever put themselves in the shoes of a Jew. That form of empathy is not a luxury. It is impossible to resolve long standing problems if you cannot even imagine yourself in the other person's shoes.

When you are unable to do that, anything harmful to you from the other side will always be attributed to their evil nature, and moral bankruptcy, because you cannot see the emotional pressure leading to that behavior toward you.

And the sentence below would help make my point clear as she states:

"I wish the Palestinians would stop lobbing rockets into Israel though. Hard to argue that Israel doesn't have a right to defend itself."

Our response to this argument is usually "with their land occupied, borders closed off, food in short supply, fuel running out, and nobody willing to listen to Palestinian concerns, what do you want them to do? If you imagine yourself in that position, you may do the same thing you are criticizing them for."

This is EXACTLY the point I was trying to make earlier. You and I, as Arabs or Muslims, will be trying to put our opponents (my poor friend in this case) in a position where they should feel like a Palestinian: occupied, oppressed and besieged. You are asking the other to put themselves in the Palestinians shoes.

My response to my friend puts emphasis on an earlier point in her message: the centrality of Israel and the Land of Palestine to Judaism and Jews. And here is my response:

"To me, it is simply not understandable that any religion would have political and military domination over a piece of land as a central issue of faith. When I talked in the past to a self-admitted 'atheist' Jew who still thinks that he or she is entitled to a piece of land there, it confuses me even more.

On NPR many months ago, an American man was talking fondly about his beautiful and cheap house in a settlement in the West Bank. The funny part was that the man was NOT a Jew till less than a decade before that. And, of course, he did not relinquish his home in the US, or his citizenship by converting to Judaism.

He just became entitled to another piece of land, and another home with no consideration for who was there before he 'decided' to adopt his new religion that came with the rights to someone's else land, and cheap housing.

That should not sound right, feel right, or judged to be right."

I doubt many, if any, of my Muslim or Arab readers would disagree with my statement, or find any logic flaws with it.

But I also know that very few Jews, if any, even amongst the most dovish and peace loving Jews would agree completely with me. They simply cannot see it through my eyes because, for them, it is a matter of faith, emotions, culture and upbringing.

And we, Muslims and Arabs, have to agree these are the same factors that shape our vision of what is right and what is just.

There is, of course, absolute truth and justice no doubt, but only God can be certain what they are. For us, mere mortals, we have to admit that truth and justice are always in the eye of the beholder. So, defending your position from the the angle of 'absolute truth and justice' leads no where.

Practical and pragmatic solutions will have to do, not absolute justice. And, that, as well got expressed by my good friend in her last sentence when she wrote

"But I think it's important to step back from the religious view of the state of Israel and look at ours and Israel's current policies because we live in the here and now and people are dying NOW. "

My final statement was more pointed:

"I do not believe that God gives land to people. Nations are political and historic entities that come and go, and using religion to assume control over a piece of land by some form of 'divine authorization' is not legitimate in my view, and regardless of what religion practices it."

But I also conclude that only practical and realistic solutions are the answer, not absolute positions.

"Israel is a de facto state now, and calling for its destruction is absurd. But so was the call for its creation.
Little can be done about it now, and reversing it is not an option, but that does not make the initial decision any more right or legitimate."

So I do not think Palestinians, or anyone, need to be brain-washed or re-programmed to accept that establishing Israel was legitimate or fair in order to qualify as peace partners. But also, calling for its destruction does not seem like a valid or even legitimate strategy either.

Israel would do itself a great favor if it acknowledges the historic injustices done to the Palestinians by its establishment, and even apologizes for the unimaginable harm it inflicted on Palestinians and neighboring Arabs for decades.

Palestinians and other Arabs, on the other hand, need not to forget what befell them, but need to accept Israel in its June 4 1967 borders, negotiate reasonable compensations and move one.

Anything else will just prolong the agony, and keeps the rivers of blood running.

Khaled

Arabs - or at least some of them - may still be human

With the term PTSD becoming a popular term these days, it is hard to have 1-2 weeks go by without some program or a news clip on NPR talking about PTSD, or post-traumatic stress disorder.

The context is always that of the difficulties facing our soldiers coming from Iraq and Afghanistan. The adaptation to civilian life, once the adrenalin flow is over, is not easy. Many of them face all the difficulties resulting from what used to be called 'shell shock' during first and second world wars. Many will suffer from increased tendency for violence, depression, suicidal tendencies, spousal abuse problems, addiction, and even homicidal tendencies.
The cost of psychiatric care for many years to come is staggering, and the life time lost until the PTSD resolves, if it ever does, is not replaceable. Another place to find a lot of talk about PTSD is Israeli newspapers when they discuss the psychological support to their citizens after a terror attack or a Kassam rocket on Sderot in Israel, or even PTSD in the Israeli soldiers after serving in the occupied territories.

I remember one article discussing the stress IDF soldiers suffer from while patrolling the land they occupy and the people they oppress. A soldier was reported talking about how stressful it is when one feels that he could be attacked by the locals at any time. I guess the 'occupied' people are not civilized enough to know that they should welcome the occupiers, not threaten them!

Without belittling the seriousness of those situations, I always had some bitter smile on my face when I listened to something like that: what about those on the receiving end? How about Arabs? Do they have PTSD, or are even vulnerable to getting it? Or is it that the well-cared-for soldiers on the offense are the only ones that could be human enough to be traumatized by combat stress?

Iraqi and Palestinian adults and children are on the receiving end of the horror. Low flying supersonic jets and night raids are routine over many Palestinian areas. American gunships roaming over Iraqi villages are no rare events. Thousands of civilian Palestinians have been killed in Israeli raids. The tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of Iraqis that are killed but are not even worthy of counting by our military and are reported as non-countable collateral damage.

For the 'survivors' in those areas: how does life feel? Do they suffer from PTSD? But forget about the sophisticated psychiatric jargon: how do they feel?
That is a question that one rarely ever hears on our media, even on intellectual outlets like NPR or PBS. I guess it is not our problem to worry about them, although being the cynic I usually am, I suspect the 'benign negligence' of the issue is not that benign.

Anyway, I came across this video on the Guardian web site today. It shows some of the local effort in Gaza to confront the issue. A Palestinian psychotherapist has committed her time and effort for the last 8 years to help traumatized Gaza children. She runs one of only 2 clinics of that kind that handle 800,000 children in Gaza. The video also shows how the children approached the parents of a child colleague of them that was killed during an Israeli Rocket strike.

Rarely ever you see the sadness of a Palestinian mother or father mourning a child lost at the hands of the 'Israeli Defense Forces'. More often than not we hear the stupid, racist and ugly comments of the propaganda machine and its 'Arab culture' expert telling us that Arab mothers teach their children to be suicide bombers, and celebrate when their children kill themselves.

A remarkable thing about the psychotherapist is that her own son was also killed in an Israeli rocket attack in Gaza 8 months before the video was recorded.

The 5-minute video is worth your time. Hope you would watch it.

Read the article accompanying the video on the Guardian web site.
The video page can be found here: 'There is no normal childhood'.

The Guardian page has a series of several videos covering aspects of the life of Palestinians in Gaza under unspeakable circumstances.

These are some of the titles:

• 'They say they have the right to shoot at us and kill us'
• Meet the Bakrs ... a middle-class family from Gaza
• Who'll look after my little ones when I'm gone?
• The blockade and the smugglers

Khaled

Part 1: 'Jewish Question' then - 'Palestinian Question' now : Sixty years and counting

"Palestine: Liberation Deferred" - A Palestinian perspective

This week Israel celebrates its sixtieth year of existence. This week the Palestinians commemorate their sixtieth year of suffering. The 'world leaders' are racing each other to participate in the joyous event on the Israeli side. On the other side, millions of Palestinians remember the day that marks the beginning of their 60 years of exile, statelessness, and life in the refugee camps they call home.

But among Israelis, not all are ecstatics. Many are deeply aware of the problems their own countries creation has caused. Many have conscience that is sore as their own people's problem was solved at the Palestinians expense. Even the more arrogant among them are very conscious that the existence of their own nuclear and high tech superpower will not be secure until the Palestinians - a people many of them even deny existed - are secure and accepting of Israel.
In the latest issue of the Nation, there are several article related to issue.
An excellent one is by Columbia University professor Rashid Khalidi, an American-born historian and of Palestinian origin. His article is titled: Palestine: Liberation Deferred.
The second great article is by Avi Shlaim, an Israeli-British history professor from Oxford University who is of Iraqi Jewish Descent. His article is titled: A Somber Anniversary is presented here.

Rashid Khalid starts by wondering if 60 years of Israel's statehood have brought the centuries old 'Jewish Question' to a satisfactory answer. He also mentioned the sense of many Israel's supporters unhappiness linking the birth of Israel to the Nakba (Catastrophe) that befell the Palestinians.

"Palestinians presumably do not have the right to recall, much less mourn, their national disaster if this would rain on the parade of celebrating Zionists everywhere."

Sweeping the Palestinian feelings under the rug helps make us all forget that "... the obvious fact that it would have been impossible to create a Jewish state in a land nearly two-thirds of whose population was Arab without some form of ethnic cleansing."
While the Jewish people have suffered tremendously over the centuries, the Western guilt -while deservedly felt -has targeted the wrong people to pay the price of the West's historic injustices. Not only that, it may have also harmed many Jewish communities in Khalidi's opinion:

"... these same developments should have led to the uprooting of the world's oldest and most secure Jewish communities, which had found in the Arab lands a tolerance that, albeit imperfect, was nonexistent in the often genocidal, Jew-hating Christian West."

Having a 'Jewish state' claiming to speak for all the Jews, may also inadvertently be detrimental to many Jews in the long run.

"... [asserting] that all Jews are part of a national body whose nation-state is Israel, it has linked the status and circumstances of Jews everywhere not only to the fate of that state but to every facet of that state's policies and actions."

He then cites few of the many causes that progressive and liberal Jews in Israel and allover the world acknowledge and cite in their criticism for Israeli policies: rank discrimination against the 1.4 million Arab citizens of Israel, the collective punishment inflicted on the 1.5 million people of the Gaza Strip imprisoned for months on end; and the systematic humiliation inflicted on the hundreds of thousands of Palestinians who have passed through the Israeli prison system.
The already distant, even unattainable, solution to the problem is getting more complicated by the day. Systematic fragmentation of Palestinian land in the West Bank by settlements, and progressive state-sponsored colonization of East Jerusalem are creating 'facts' on the ground that will make absurd even a two-state solution. Yet, he recognizes that the one state solution is even a worse option for every one.

"How can most Israelis and Palestinians be persuaded to forgo their aspirations for a state of their own, and to overcome their dislike of each other such that they can contemplate living together in one state, whether binational, federal, cantonal or unitary? "

Khalidi's then goes on to detail some of the obstacles he sees on both Israeli and Palestinian sides accepting a one-state solution.
Rashid Khalidi is explicitly critical of the flaws of Palestinian tactics and strategy. The lack of unity over strategy is a major flaw that has unfortunately plagues Palestinians for many decades. In inability to mount sustained non-violent resistance is another major flaw he lists.

"In particular, Palestinians lacked clarity about the moral, legal and political disadvantages in the use of violence against an Israeli polity able to mobilize in defense of its actions, however unspeakable, the most powerful tropes of victimhood in modern Western culture. This confusion among some Palestinians exists although farsighted thinkers like Edward Said and Eqbal Ahmad understood decades ago that nonviolent resistance was integral to Palestinian success; although the greatest successes of the Palestinians were won by the unarmed popular protests of the first intifada; and despite widespread (but underreported) peaceful joint Palestinian-Israeli protest movements against Israel's illegal wall inside the West Bank. "

While he is very critical of Israeli policy and of its blind supporters in the West with their super powerful propaganda machine, he reserves the harshest criticism for the current "feeble clueless Palestinian leadership".

"Today we are witness to the spectacle of two feeble and clueless Palestinian political movements, both lacking strategic vision and bereft of the selfless patriotism that would lead them to bury their petty differences, fighting like two cocks on a garbage heap, as the Arabic expression has it. "
"... The Fatah-dominated Palestinian Authority has abandoned any idea of popular mobilization, any last shred of an ethos of service to the people, any sense of the vital importance of national unity if even minimal Palestinian objectives are to be achieved, any respect for the democratic process, ... "
" The blindness of Hamas is as bad: neither able to fight nor to negotiate effectively, neither able to compromise with Fatah nor to govern on its own, and no more able to break free of the clutches of its external backers than is Fatah vis-à-vis its own foreign backers, Hamas has lurched from disaster to disaster since its unexpected victory in the 2006 elections. "

He starts his concluding paragraph by this very strong statement, imposing on the Palestinians and their supporters a daunting task:

"If there is to be a resolution of the Palestine problem, it depends on the Palestinians' understanding the massive disadvantages they labor under in fighting a struggle for liberation against the heirs of the victims of the Holocaust, in the growing shadow of worldwide Islamophobia. It depends on their unity and on their adopting the appropriate strategy and tactics for this difficult task, in mobilizing the powerful moral force of their cause and the remarkable strengths of Palestinians under occupation and in the diaspora who have withstood extreme pressures but have neither submitted nor despaired. "

Khaled

Part 2 of this posting presents the second article "A Somber Anniversary" by Avi Shlaim, and some links to Israeli newspapers discussing the not-so-joyous aspect of Israel's 60th birthday.

Part 2: 'Jewish Question' then - 'Palestinian Question' now : Sixty years and counting

"A sombre anniversary" - A Jewish Perspective

This is part 2 of the posting presenting a Jewish/Israeli perspective of Israel's 60th birthday. It is not totally aligned with Rashid Khalidi's perspective, but shares many of the concerns Khalidi has. It also expresses the sense that it is not 'all joyous' as some of those drunk with Israeli successes would like the world to believe.
Avi Shlaim starts by expressing how divided the Israeli society is about the festive nature of the occasion which he calls "A sombre anniversary".
"Zionism has been a brilliant success" he states, citing Israeli achievements in science, technology, industrialization, commerce, finances as well as politically (Jewish democracy, multi-party polity, independent judiciary), and socially (reviving a dead language, instilling sense of statehood in very diverse Jewish communities, providing a homeland to a people that were near extermination just few years before that homeland was established). Undeniably, these are major successes. But the birth of the success was the beginning of a tragedy:

"Israel's War of Independence was the Palestinians' catastrophe, al-Nakba in Arabic."

He even makes a very strong statement that

"... there is no denying that the establishment of the State of Israel involved a massive injustice to the Palestinians. Sixty years on, Israel still has not arrived at a reckoning of its sins against the Palestinians, a recognition that it owes the Palestinians a debt that must at some point be repaid."

The extent of Israeli denial of those sins could be illustrated by Golda Meir in 1969 "... denying that a Palestinian people existed at all." Avi Shlaim reminds the reader of the early right-wing Zionist leader Ze'ev Jabotinsky, the spiritual father of the Likud Party, who in 1923 recognized that:

"... the Palestinians were a nation and that they could not be expected to renounce voluntarily their right to hold on to their patrimony. It was, he argued in two seminal articles in 1923, therefore pointless at that early stage in the Zionist enterprise to hold a dialogue with the Palestinians; the Zionist program could only be executed unilaterally and by force."

Zabotinski, however, accepted eventual negotiations with Palestinians, but only after convincingly conquering them militarily so that they "recognize that they were in a position of permanent weakness; that would be the time to enter into negotiations with them about their status and national rights in Palestine". Until they are conquered, Israel should be behind an "iron wall" that local Arabs cannot break.

Shlaim admits that history vindicated Jabotinski's strategy, but that the 'less sophisticate' right wing leadership after Jabotinski enjoyed the 'iron wall' status, backed by invincible military machinery, so that they forgot phase 2 or the plan: negotiation for a final status with the Palestinians at some point. That is, until Isaac Rabin came to power, and the Oslo accords were signed.

"By signing the agreement, the Palestinians conceded the legitimacy of the Jewish state over 78 percent of what had been the British Mandate of Palestine. What they expected to get in return--though this was not written down in the agreement--was independence over the remaining 22 percent: the West Bank, the Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem."

While many, he argued, blame the Oslo accord's failure on its inherent weaknesses and contradictions, and that it "fell a long way short of the Palestinian aspiration to full independence and statehood", he on the other hand blames the peace process failure on Israel, that "under the leadership of the Likud, reneged on its side of the original deal". He states that Netanyahu "spent his three years in power, from 1996 to 1999, in a largely successful attempt to arrest and subvert the peace process. By subverting it, he inflicted serious damage not only on the Palestinians but on his own country and on the Middle East as a whole".
He is clear in his mind that the Palestinians are not to blame for the failure.

"As far back as 1988, the Palestinians had made their choice. They offered Israel recognition and peace in return for a minimal restitution of what had been taken away from them by force. Since then the ball has been in Israel's court. Israel had to choose."

Following Netanyahu, Barak, and Sharon did not seem, in Shlaim's opinion, genuinely interested in any peace. The measures they took were largely a cover: to avoid fulfilling Israel's peace obligations, to keep expanding the settlements, and to move toward expropriating more and more Arab land, and as he says "Land-grabbing and peacemaking do not go well together".

"Sharon" he also argues, "personified the most xenophobic, aggressive, expansionist and racist brand of Zionism".

"[Sharon's] objective was to set aside the Oslo Accords, to fragment and mutilate the Palestinian territories, to reassert total Israeli control over the West Bank and to deny the Palestinians any independent political existence in Palestine. His long-term aim was to redraw the borders of Greater Israel. "
"Sharon will therefore go down in Israel's history not as a peacemaker but as the proponent of the doctrine of permanent conflict."

As he get to the conclusion of the article, Avi Shlaim declares that there is no way to end the conflict by force. Justice it the only hope for a lasting peace.

"During the past forty-one years Israel has tried every conceivable method of ending the conflict with the Palestinians except the obvious one: ending the occupation. The occupation has to end, not simply because the Palestinians deserve no less but in order to preserve the values for which the State of Israel was created. In any case, whether Israelis like it or not, an independent Palestinian state is inevitable in the long run--when the game is no longer worth the candle.
The moral, political and psychological cost of the occupation cannot be sustained indefinitely. Just as Israel withdrew under duress from southern Lebanon in 2000 and from Gaza in 2005, so, eventually, will it be compelled to relinquish all but a tiny fraction of the West Bank."

And despite a predominantly non-festive tone of the article, his final sentence carries some hope that Israel will at some point shoulder the burden of moving towards a solution:

"It is not beyond the bounds of possibility that the Israelis will one day learn from their mistakes and elect leaders who recognize the need for a genuine two-state solution. Nations, like individuals, are capable of acting rationally--after they have exhausted all the alternatives."

Khaled

Read the full article on The Nation web site:

• A Somber Anniversary-by Avi shlaim

Similar Articles for Israeli newspapers:

• Moving on to 'stage-two Zionism - Jerusalem Post
• Sixty years of Nakba, 60 years of nothing - Haaretz
• British Jews: Don't celebrate Israel's 60th birthday - YNet
  

Click below to read part 1 of this posting - the Palestinian Perspective:

• Part 1: 'Jewish Question' then - 'Palestinian Question' now : Sixty years and counting - A Palestinian Perspective

Jewish and Christian extremists must vigorously be exposed

A bit over 2 weeks ago I posted about about a fundamentalist Rabi inciting hate against Arabs in Palestine (see Jewish 'Mullah' Issues a racist 'Fatwa'). As usual, Becky Zoole contributed a very informative comment with useful links that I hope some of you followed. Part of her comment stated that

"... proper response is to refuse him the attention he desires, but to keep a close eye on his supporters. What's wrong is that whenever an equally lunatic fundamentalistic cleric who happens to be Muslim acts according to his nature, the Western world over-reacts."

I am completely in agreement with the spirit of her statements, but unfortunately, from a Muslim point of view, Extremist Jewish (and Christian) individuals and organizations need to be continually exposed as much as possible. They need to be held in the faces of the media and public as strongly as possible. Otherwise, the world view of the reality and the nature of extremism will continue to be what it is right now: unequivocally one-sided, and told only from an anti-Muslim point of view. And as I was contemplating how to approach a posting on the subject, I came a across an article in the New York times that 'broke the camel's back'.

The whole premise of the relentless anti-Muslim campaign is that Muslims are evil because they do things other humans (especially Christians and Jews) would not do. Moral supremacy of 'Judeo-Christian' culture is not, therefore, a racist concept; it is simply the fact of life.

The proof is out there for all to see: look at the 'news' every day: angry Screaming Mullahs, Evil Palestinians kidnapping innocent IDF soldiers, brain-washed Muslim children hurling stones at peaceful settlers. Muslims do all the bad things. The other side is civilized, well-versed in the rules of conduct, share the 'Judeo' part of out Judeo-Christian heritage, and more or less are, well ... like us.

Well, what do you think? Don't we need a balancing point of view?

• Rabbi Eliyahu: Life of one yeshiva boy worth more than 1,000 Arabs
• Rabbi endorses Jewish revenge attack
• In the newsletter, which was distributed to synagogues around the country, Eliyahu proposes "hanging the children of the terrorist who carried out the attack in the Mercaz Harav yeshiva from a tree."
• Safed's chief rabbi: State should have hanged 10 sons of terrorist
• Dichter to police: Demolish home of Jerusalem yeshiva terrorist
  

Some of you may think the bold red text color is 'too loud'. Of course it is loud, and loud we should be when be bring up Jewish and Christian fundamentalist to the spot light. So far, that have a free ride. They could get away with murder, but they never get the blame.
That pile of violent, uncivilized, racist statements did not catch the attention of many people. To most Americans, Israeli Jews have the right to get extremely angry at Arabs when 8 students are killed by a lone man. The call for revenge in the most horrible ways, inflicted on Arabs other than the murderer, is understandable even from a Rabbi; a man with official training and accreditation to interpret and advise the Jewish people. And that brings me to the New York times article that got me worked up.

What caught the attention of the NYT reporter was not what the fundamentalistic Jewish clerics have been saying and teaching in the occupied Palestinian lands and in Israel. what got the NYT attention was how Gaza people reacted to the massacre of 120 of their own in February 2008, over half of them civilians and children.
The title of the NYT article published on April 1, 2008 was to put it simply: obnoxiously annoying.

In Gaza, Hamas's Insults to Jews complicate Peace.

It is as if Palestinians do not even have the right to feel angry. Talking bad about Israel will not be tolerated by the civilized NYT journalist. To the NYT reader, this is yet another proof how Arabs and Muslims are 'so not cool'. No one, of course is claiming that the journalist is racist, bigoted or has blind and unconditional love for anything Israeli. And, because he is not an Arab nor a Muslim, no one will ever accuse him of having a hidden agenda. To most readers, he is just seeking the truth, and is just worried about prospects of peace.

The esteemed NYT journalist is worried because a Hamas guy is calling Israeli Jews “They have been traitors to all agreements ". The journalist states that "Incitement against Israel and Jews was supposed to be banned under the 1993 Oslo accords and the 2003 'road map' peace plan". He does not mention though that the worlds, including the US government complain repeatedly - but do not do anything more- about Israel not fulfilling term of these same agreements he is citing. He does not seem concerned that killing hundreds in Gaza over the last few months could be worse than 'incitement'. The media professional in the most influential newspaper in the world is concerned that Hamas may have "control over propaganda and education there, breeding longer-term problems for Israel, and for peace".

And I thought it could be that the occupation of the West bank is what complicates peace.
Or could it be that the siege of Gaza, and the lack of food and electricity is what complicates peace?
I even thought, in my little simple mind, that it may be the low flying fighter jets breaking sound barrier over small Arab towns by night, and the ongoing abuse of Palestinians at useless checkpoints in the west bank, or the on-going settlement expansion promised to the religious fundamentalist Shas party, or the thousands of the new houses advertised (for Jews only) in Arab East Jerusalem - I thought, all this may complicate peace. Stupid me!
But now that the wise man of the NYT has spoken, I can see the light.

With this kind of perception problems, putting one side's sins under the microscope, and sweeping the other side's sins under the carpet, do you think Muslims should stop paying attention to the other side's extremists?
As far as I am concerned, we should make every effort to show that our 'terrorist' extremists are not much worse than their government-tolerated, IDF-protected extremists.

Khaled